11 -i 

### CHAPTER 11. NATIONAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

11.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 11-1

11.2 BASE

- CASE AND STANDARDS

- CASE FORECASTED EFFI CIENCY DISTRIBUTIONS, BALLAST STOCKS, AND AVERA GE EFFICIENCY ................. 11-1

11.2.1 Installed Ballast Stock

................................ ........................................................... 11-2

11.2.2 Average Ballast Efficiency in the Stock ............................................................... 11-7

11.3 NATIONAL ENERGY SAVI NGS .................................................................................. 11-9

11.3.2 National Energy Savings Definition ..................................................................... 11-9

11.3.3 National Energy Savings Inputs

................................ .......................................... 11-10

11.3.3.1 Unit Energy Consumption (UEC) ........................................................ 11-10

11.3.3.2 Ballast Stock ........................................................................................ 11-10

11.3.3.3 Site

- to

- Source Conversion Factors ...................................................... 11-11

11.3.3.4 Interactions with Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Systems ................................................................................................ 11-12

11.3.3.5 Rebound Rate ....................................................................................... 11-13

11.4 NET PRESENT VALUE ................................................................................................ 11-13

11.4.1 Net Present Value Definition .............................................................................. 11-13

11.4.2 Net Present Value Inputs .................................................................................... 11-14

11.4.2.1 Total Annual Installed Cost Increases ................................................. 11-14

11.4.2.2 Total Annual Operating Cost Savings ................................................. 11-15

11.4.2.3 Discount Factor .................................................................................... 11-15

11.5 NATIONAL ENERGY SAVI NGS AND NET PRESENT VALUE RESULTS ........... 11-16

11.5.1 National Energy Savings and Net Present Value Input Summary ...................... 11-16

11.5.2 National Energy Savings Results ........................................................................ 11-16

11.5.3 Net Present Value Analysis ................................................................................ 11-19

11.5.4 Net Present Value Results ................................................................................... 11-25

LIST OF TABLES

Ta ble 11.3.1 National Energy Saving Inputs ........................................................................... 11-10

Table 11.3.2 Site

- to

- Source Conversion Factors ..................................................................... 11-12

Table 11.4 .1 Net Present Value Inputs .................................................................................... 11-14 Table 11.5.1. National Energy Saving and Net Present Value Inputs ..................................... 11-16 Table 11.5.2 Cumulative National Energy Saving s for Ballasts Under the Existing, Shift Scenario (2014 –2043) .................................................................................................. 11-17 Table 11.5.3 Cumulative National Energy Savings for Ballasts Under the Emerging, Roll

Up Scenario (2014 –2043) ............................................................................................ 11-18 Table 11.5.4 Cumulative NPV Results for Ballasts Under the Existing Techno logies, Shift Scenario and Emerging Technologies, Roll -up Scenarios (2014-2043) ............. 11-25

LIST OF FIGURES11

- ii 

### Figure 11.2.1 Product Class 1 – Instant- Start (IS) and Rapid

- Start (RS) Ballasts That Operate Two 4

- Foot Medium Bipin (MBP) Lamps (Commercial): Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies Shift Scenario) ................................. 11-3 Figure 11.2.2 Product Class 1

– IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 4

- Foot MBP Lamps (Residential): Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies,

Shift Scenario) ............................................................................................................... 11-3 Figure 11.2.3 Product Class 1

– IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Four 4

- Foot MBP Lamps: Installed Ballast Stock (Ba se Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) ..... 11-4 Figure 11.2.4 Product Class 1

– IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 8

- Foot Sli mline Lamps: Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) ..... 11-4 Figure 11.2.5 Product Class 2

– Progra mmed

- Start (PS) Ballasts That Operate Two 4

- Foot MBP Lamps: Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) ............................................................................................................... 11-5 Figure 11.2.6 Product Class 2

– PS Ballasts That Operate Four 4

- Foot MBP Lamps: Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) .................. 11-5 Figure 11.2.7 Product Class 2

– PS Ballasts That Operate Two 4

- Foot Miniature Bipin (MiniBP) Standard Output (SO) Lamps: Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario)

................................ .......................................... 11-6 Figure 11.2.8 Product Class 2

– PS Ballasts That Operate Two 4

- Foot MiniBP High Output (HO) Lamps: Installed Ballast Stock ( Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) ............................................................................................................... 11-6 Figure 11.2.9 Product Class 3

– IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 8 -Foot H O Lamps: Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) .................. 11-7 Figure 11.2.10 Product Class 5

– Ballasts That Operate Four 8

- Foot HO Lamps in Cold Temperature Outdoor Signs: Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) ........................................................................................ 11-7 Figure 11.2.11 Average Ballast Efficiency in the Ballast Stock, Emerging Technologies, Roll Scenario, 2014 –2043 .............................................................................................. 11-8 Figure 11.2.12 Average Ballast Efficiency in the Ballast Stock, Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario, 2014 –2043 ............................................................................................. 11-8 Figure 11.5.1 Product Class 1

– IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 4

- Foot MBP Lamps (Commercial): National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at TSL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7

Per cent per Year ........................................................................................................... 11-20 Figure 11.5.2 Product Class 1

– IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 4

- Foot MBP Lamps (Residential): National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at TSL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year ........................................................................................................... 11-20 Figure 11.5.3 Product Class 1

– IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Four 4

- Foot MBP Lamps: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at TSL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Perc ent per Year ..... 11-20 Figure 11.5.4 Product Class 1

– IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 8

- Foot Slimline Lamps: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at TSL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year ..... 11-2111

- iii 

### Figure 11.5.5 Product Class 2

– PS Ballasts That Operate Two 4

- Foot MBP Lamps: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at TSL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year ................ 11-21 Figure 11.5.6 Product Class 2

– PS Ballasts That Operate Four 4

- Foot MBP Lamps: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at TSL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year ................ 11-22 Figure 11. 5.7 Product Class 2

– PS Ballasts That Operate Two 4

- Foot MiniBP SO Lamps: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at TSL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year ..... 11-22 Figure 11.5.8 Product Class 2

– PS Ballasts That Operate Two 4

- Foot MiniBP HO Lamps: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at TSL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year ..... 11-23 Figure 11.5.9 Product Class 3

– IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 8

- Foot HO Lamps: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at TSL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year ................ 11-23 Figure 11.5.10 Product Class 5

– Ballasts That Operate Four 8

- Foot HO Lamps in Cold Temperature Outdoor Signs: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at TSL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year

................................ ................................................. 11-2411 -1 

### CHAPTER 11 . NATIONAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS

11.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter of the notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) technical support document (TSD) describes the method for estimating the national impacts of trial standard levels ( T SLs ) for analyzed fluorescent lamp ballasts (hereafter “ballasts”)

. Because ballasts are designed to operate fluorescent lamps, the U.S. Department of Energy ( DOE ) cho se th e most common fluorescent lamp used with each ballast to develop representative lamp

- and

- ballast systems. Fluorescent lamps will not be regulated under the proposed amended energy conservation standards for ballast s ; however, the characteristics of complete lamp

- and

- ballast system s ( e.g. , energy consumption, installed cost) must be considered for estimating the national impacts of ballast T SLs

.

In the national impact analysis (NIA), DOE assesse d the cumulative national energy savings (NES) and the cu mulative national economic impacts of T SL s . DOE measure d energy savings as the cumulative quads of energy a T SL is expected to save the n ation. DOE measure d economic impacts as the net present value (NPV) in dollars of total customer costs and savings

expe cted to result from a T SL . The analysis period over which DOE calculate d the NPV and

N ES is from 2014 to 2043.

DOE determine d both the NPV and NES for each T SL and each representative product

class it select ed in the engineering analysis ( NOPR TSD chapter 5). In this rulemaking, DOE

considered up to three T SL s for each of the representative ballast product classes

.

DOE perform ed all NIA calculations using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, available at www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/fl uorescent_lamp_ballasts.html

. Appendix 11 A provides instructions for using the spreadsheet.

The following sections describe in detail the methodology and inputs for the NIA. Several NIA inputs, including per

- unit costs, per

- unit energy consumption, and nat ional shipments, are discussed in other analyses. In describing the inputs to the NIA, this chapter references those analyses and presents new information on installed stock. Section 11.2 discusses

DOE’s ballast shipment forecast s by T SL , the installed stock of ballast s, and the mix of

efficiencies of that stock. Section 11.3 discusses DOE’s calculation of national energy consumption in the base and standards cases, and the resulting difference in NES between these

cases. Section 11.4 discusses the NPV calculation. Section 11.5 presents the NES and NPV results by representative product class

.

11.2 BASE

- CASE AND STANDARDS

- CASE FORECASTED EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTIONS, BALLA ST STOCKS, AND AVERAGE EFFICIENCY

The characteristics of DOE’s shipment forecasts (such as equipment costs and operating costs) and projected ballast stocks (such as average efficiency and energy consumption) are key aspects of DOE’s NES and NPV estimates. This section describes these key characteristics of stock and shipments as they relate to the NES and NPV.11 -2 

### T he projected distribution of ballast efficiencies shipped and ballast efficiencies in stock are key factors in determining the NPV. Two inputs to the NPV are the per

- unit total installed cost and per

- unit annual operating cost. The per

- unit total installed cost often varies with the efficiency of ballasts shipped. Therefore, when higher efficiency ballasts are shipped, higher

installed costs are often incurred. NOPR TSD chapter 8 describes how per

- unit total installed costs vary as a function of efficiency for each lamp ballast

.

Per -unit annual energy consumption is a key input to the NPV (as an input to the per

- unit operating cost) and NES. The per

- unit annual energy consumption is a function of lamp

- and

ballast system characteristics in the installed stock. The total installed s tock of lamp

- and

- ballast

system s is used to determine total annual energy consumption, a key input into the NES and

NPV calculations.

Also important to determining NES and NPV is the average efficiency of the lamp ballast stock. The engineering analysis ( NOPR TSD c hapter 5) discusses the relationship between lamp

and

- ballast system design, system input power , and ballast efficiency . The energy use characterization ( NOPR TSD c hapter 6) describes how the per

- unit energy consumption varies as

a function of sy stem input power and market sector application for each lamp

- and

- ballast system design.

Sections 11.3.3 and 11.4.2 discuss inputs to calculation of the NES and NPV in further

detail.

11.2.1 Installed Ballast Stock

The installed ballast stock in a given year is the total number of ballasts shipped tha t year and in prior years that are still operating. The NES model tracks the ballasts shipped each year

, and ballasts are retired when they reach the end of their lifetime

. From this information and the shipments forecasts presented in c hapter 10 , DOE esta blished the installed ballast stock profile

for all analyzed ballast product classes. Figure 11.2 .1 through Figure 11.2 .10 show these ballast

stocks in the base case for the existing technologies shift scenario

. At TSL 3, the roll

- up and shift scenarios are the same: both scenarios assume that the entire market moves to TSL 3, or the highest efficiency level available for product classes that do not have an available TSL 3 efficiency level option.

For m ost types of ballasts, installed stock increases over time, particularly in the e xisting

t echnologies scenario. However, some ballast types experience a decline in stocks over the analysis period due to growing substitution for other ballast types

, as show n in chapter 10.11 -3 

### Figure 11.2.1 Product Class 1 – Instant

- Start ( IS ) and Rapid

- Start ( RS ) Ballasts That
Operate Two 4

- Foot Medium Bipin ( MBP ) Lamps (Commercial): Installed Ballast Stock
(Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario)

Figure 11.2.2 Product Class 1 – IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 4- Foot MBP Lamps
( Residential ): Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologie s, Shift Scenario) - 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800201420162018202020222024202620282030203220342036203820402042Millions

Baseline/EL1

EL 2

EL 3

Baseline(T12)

- 100 200 300 400 500 600 700201420162018202020222024202620282030203220342036203820402042Millions

Baseline/EL1

EL 3

Baseline(T12)11 -4 

### Figure 11.2.3 Product Class 1 – IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Four 4- Foot MBP Lamps:

Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario)

Figure 11.2.4 Product Class 1 – IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 8- Foot Slimline
Lamps: Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) - 50 100 150 200 250 300201420162018202020222024202620282030203220342036203820402042Millions

Baseline/EL2

EL 3

- 2 4 6 8 10 12201420162018202020222024202620282030203220342036203820402042Millions

Baseline/EL2

EL3

Baseline/EL111 -5 

### Figure 11.2.5 P roduct Class 2 – Programmed

- Start ( PS ) Ballasts That Operate Two 4- Foot
MBP Lamps: Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario)

Figure 11.2.6 Product Class 2 – PS Ballasts That Operate Four 4- Foot MBP Lamps:

Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) - 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80201420162018202020222024202620282030203220342036203820402042Millions

Baseline

EL 2

EL 3

- 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90201420162018202020222024202620282030203220342036203820402042Millions

Baseline

EL 1

EL311 -6 

### Figure 11.2.7 Product Class 2 – PS Ballasts That Operate Two 4- Foot Miniature Bipin
( MiniBP ) Standard Output (SO ) Lamps: Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing
Technologies, Shift Scenario)

Figure 11.2.8 Product Class 2 – PS Ballasts That Operate Two 4- Foot MiniBP High Output
(HO) Lamps: Installed Bal last Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) - 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800201420162018202020222024202620282030203220342036203820402042Millions

Baseline

EL 1

EL 2

EL 3

- 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180201420162018202020222024202620282030203220342036203820402042Millions

Baseline

EL 1

EL 2

EL 311 -7 

### Figure 11.2.9 Product Class 3 – IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 8-Foot HO Lamps:

Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies, Sh ift Scenario)

Figure 11.2.10 Product Class 5 – Ballasts That Operate Four 8-Foot HO Lamps in Cold
Temperature Outdoor Signs: Installed Ballast Stock (Base Case Existing Technologies,
Shift Scenario)

11.2.2 Average Ballast Efficiency in the Stock

As discussed earlier, the average efficiency of ballast stock s can be an indication of the energy consumption , and is an important input to both the NPV and NES calculations. Figure

11.2 .11 and Figure 11.2 .12 present the average efficiency forecasts of ballast stock s (as represented by ballast efficiency) in the base case and standards case for both the existing - 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200201420162018202020222024202620282030203220342036203820402042Thousands

Baseline

EL1

Baseline/EL 2

EL3

- 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90201420162018202020222024202620282030203220342036203820402042Millions

Baseline

EL 111 -8 

### technologies/shift and emerging technologies/roll

- up scenarios. Each figure presents the efficiencies at multiple TSLs.

Figure 11.2.11 Average Ballast Efficiency in the Ballast Stock, Emerging Technologies,

Roll

- Up Scenario, 2014–2043

Figure 11.2.12 Average Ballast Efficiency in the Ballast Stock, Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario, 2014–2043 85.00 86.00 87.00 88.00 89.00 90.00 91.00 92.00 93.002014201620182020202220242026202820302032203420362038204020422044Average BE Base Case

TSL 1

TSL 2

TSL 3

85.00 86.00 87.00 88.00 89.00 90.00 91.00 92.00 93.002014201620182020202220242026202820302032203420362038204020422044 Base Case

TSL 1

TSL 2

TSL 311 -9 

### 11.3 NATIONAL ENERGY SAVI NGS

11.3.2 National Energy Savings Definition

DOE calculate d annual national energy savings as the difference in energy consumption by lamp

- and

- ballast systems between the base case (without new standards) and the standards case (with new standards). Positive values of NES correspond to net energy savings following standards implementation ; i.e. , national annual energy consumption (AEC) with standards is less

than AEC in the base case.

RR HVAC AEC AEC NES std t baset t 

### ××

− = )

(

, , 

### Eq. 11.1

Where :

NES t 

### = national energy savings in year t

, AEC = annual national energy consumption each year (at the source) in quadrillion British thermal units (quads),

HVAC= heating, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC) factor

, RR = rebound factor, equal to one minus the rebound rate,

t = year in the forecast ( e.g. , 2014 to 2043),

base = base case , and

std = standards case.

Cumulative energy savings are the sum over a defined time period from the implementation of a standard forward ( from 201 4 to 2043 ) of the annual national energy savings multiplied by the

HVAC interaction factor and rebound rate.



# ∑

=

t t cum 

### NES NES Eq. 11.2

Where :

NES

cum 

### = cumulative national energy savings.

DOE calculated the AEC (in any year) by multiplying the number or stock of ballasts by the product of the annual unit energy consumption and the site

- to

- source conversion factor, shown by the following equation:

t bd

bd bdt t 

### conv srcUEC STOCK AEC

_ ×× = 

# ∑ Eq. 11.3

Where :

bd = ballast ID number,

STOCK bdt 

### = stock of ballasts for a given design surviving in the year for which DOE calculated AEC,

UEC bd



### = unit energy consumption (kWh per year), and11

- 10 

### src_conv t 

### = time

- dependent conversion factor to convert from site energy (kWh) to source energy (quads

, Btu/kWh).

11.3.3 National Energy Savings Inputs

Table 11.3.1 lists the inputs for the determination of NES.

Table 11.3.1 National Energy Saving Inputs

Input

Unit Energy Consumption ( UEC )

Ballast Stock by Design ( STOCK )

Site

- to

- Source Conversion Factor ( src_conv ) Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning Factor ( HVAC ) Rebound Rate ( RR )



### 11.3.3.1 Unit Energy Consumption (UEC)

DOE presented the per

- unit UEC for each lamp -and- ballast system design in the energy

use characterization ( NOPR TSD chapter 6). For the NES and NPV calculations, DOE used an average number of annual operating hours for each sector and ballast type in calculating the UEC

of each lamp

- and

- ballast system design.

California Utilities and the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance ( NEEA ) and Northeast Power Coordinating Council ( NPCC ) suggested that both individual ballast failure replacements and system installations for new construction/renovation could be normalized for light output at any given efficiency level. This could be acc omplished through foreseeable ballast design options and/or lighting system modifications ( e.g. , number of lamps, lamp type, or fixture reflector). NEEA and NPCC contended that DOE could then simplify its analyses by applying normalized system input power throughout. (California Utilities, No. 30 at pp. 3

- 5; NEEA and NPCC, No. 32 at pp. 6- 7)

In its preliminary analysis, DOE used both rated and normalized system input power in determining the annual unit energy consumption for the NIA. As in the life

- cycle cost ( LCC ) analysis, ballast shipments for failure replacements were assigned rated system input power, and this assumption was applied across the entire 30

- year analysis period. DOE agrees that the lighting system modifications noted by the California Ut ilities can have the practical effect of normalizing light output for individual replacement systems. Therefore, DOE believes that normalized system input power provides a reasonable basis for estimating future energy savings and used it to generate NIA re sults

.

11.3.3.2 Ballast Stock

T he ballast stock in a given year is the total number of ballast s shipped in prior years that

survive up to the given year . The NES spreadsheet model keeps track of the ballast s shipped each year. DOE discusses forecasted shipments for the base case and all standards cases in

c hapter 10. To generate the shipments that eventually compose the ballast stock, t he shipments analysis incorporates one set of base

- case scenarios and one set of standards

- case scenarios that11

- 11 

### can aff ect shipments

. The base

- case scenarios, e xisting and e merging t echnologies, dictate the penetration of other lighting technologies, and therefore affect the total volume of ballast shipment s and installed stock. The standards

- case scenarios are comp o se d of the r oll

- up and s hift

scenarios. The se scenarios dictate the inputs to the market

- share apportionments , and therefore affect the breakdown of the installed stock by ballast design from 2014 to 2043.

These standards

- case scenarios are compared to two separate base

- case scenarios ( e xisting

and e merging technologies), resulting in four possible sets of results. The s hift scenario generally

result s in higher energy savings than the r oll

- up scenario.

11.3.3.3 Site

- to

- Source Conversion Factors

The site

- to

- source conversion factor is the multiplier DOE use d for converting site

energy consumption into primary or source energy consumption. For electricity, the conversion factors vary over time due to projected changes in generation sources ( i.e. , the power plant types projected to provide electricity to the country). For this rulemaking , DOE calculated annual average site

- to

- source conversion factors based on the version of the National Energy Modeling Systems (NEMS) that corresponds to the Energy Information A dministration ’s (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook 2010 ( AEO 2010 ). Table 11.3.2 presents site

- to

- source factors used in the NES spreadsheet model. The average conversion factors vary over time, due to projected changes in electricity generation sources.

Please note that DOE calculated two conversion factors for emerging technologies and existing technologies because these two scenarios have different energy savings patterns.11

- 12 

### Table 11.3.2 Site

- to

- Source Conversion Factors

Ye ar Si te

- to

- Source

Conversion Factor f or Existing Technologies

Btu/kWh Site

- to

- Source

Conversio n Factor f or Emerging Technologies

Btu/kWh

2014 19,354 17,282

2015 19,354 17,282

2016 19,354 14,912

2017 16,493 13,186

2018 15,736 13,441

2019 14,248 12,038

2020 13,221 11,108

2021 12,550 9,976

2022 13,659 10,690

2023 14,193 10,764

2024 13,302 10,791

2025 11,635 10,189

2026 10,492 9,873

2027 10,265 9,755

2028 9,400 8,985

2029 9,377 9,084

2030 9,265 9,187

2031 9,275 9,265

2032 9,207 9,289

2033 9,165 9,208

2034 8,960 9,358

2035 10,174 9,875

2036 10,174 9,875

2037 10,174 9,875

2038 10,174 9,875

2039 10,174 9,875

2040 10,174 9,875

2041 10,174 9,875

2042 10,174 9,875

2043 10,174 9,875



### 11.3.3.4 Interactions with Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Systems

I nteractions HVAC systems in the commercial and industrial sectors are represented by an HVAC factor, as given in Eq. 10.3

. The HVAC factor reflects the extent to which the energy savings from more efficient equipment are offset by increased demands placed on heating and cooling equipment in the presence of more efficient equipment. Typically this takes the form of increased efficiency being achieved through less energy was ted as heat, increasing the burden on HVAC equipment in winter months.

In the previous research (the 2000 Ballast Rule ; 65 FR 56740; 10 CFR 430.23(m)(4) ) DOE found that rebound rate is highly dependent on the composition of building stock. Updating the HVAC factor would be desirable, but in this rule higher level uncertainty with regard to energy savings comes from the emerging technologies influence. The refore, an HVAC factor of 1 was used in energy savings calculations.11

- 13 

### 11.3.3.5 Rebound Rate

In its analysis, DOE considered the rebound effect that occurs after installation of energy

efficient lighting equipment. Under economic theory, “rebound effect” refers to t he tendency of a consumer to respond to the cost savings associated with more efficient equipment in a manner that actually leads to marginally greater product usage, thereby diminishing some portion of anticipated benefits related to improved efficiency. DOE examined a summary of the literature regarding the rebound effect in relation to lighting equipment. 1 

### Based on four studies, the summary estimated that for a 100

- percent increase in energy effic ien cy , “ take

- back ” or rebound values for residential light ing are between 5 and 12 percent of energy consumption savings. The summary estimated 0- to 2

- percent rebound values for commercial and industrial lighting. Therefore, in the calculation of national energy savings due to energy conservation standards on

li ghting, DOE calculated a rebound rate of 8.5 percent in the residential sector and 1 percent in

the commercial and industrial sectors.

However, t he take

- back in energy consumption associated with the rebound effect provides consumers with increased value ( e.g. , increased lighting hours, because the increased efficiency enables consumers to use their lighting equipment for longer periods of time). The impact on consumers is therefore the sum of the change in the cost of owning the lighting equipment ( i.e.

, LCC ) and the increased value of more lighting hours. DOE has not been able to monetize this increase in consumer value in the LCC analysis. If it were able to monetize the increased value to consumers of the rebound effect, this value would be equal to or greater than the value of the foregone energy savings. For this analysis, DOE estimates that this value is equal to the monetary value of the energy savings that would have occurred without the rebound effect. Therefore, while the assumed rebound rate affects the calculated energy savings from amended standards, it does not affect the calculated monetary value of those savings.

11.4 NET PRESENT VALUE

11.4.1 Net Present Value Definition

The NPV is the value in the present of a time series of costs and savings. The NPV is

calculated as follows:

PVCPVS NPV −= 

### Eq. 11.4

Where :

PVS = present value of operating cost savings

, and

PVC = present value of increased total installed costs.

The PVS and PVC are determined according to the following expressions:



# ∑ ×= tt 

### DFOCS PVS Eq. 11.5



# ∑ ×= tt 

### DF TIC PVC Eq. 11.611

- 14 

### Where :

OCS = total annual operating cost savings,

TIC = total annual installed cost increases,

DF = discount factor, and

t = year ( PVS and PVC are summed over 2014–2043 ).

DOE determined the contributions to PVC and PVS for each year from the effective date of the standard, 2014 to 2043 , discounted for the NOPR analysis to 20 11 . DOE calculated costs and savings as the difference between a standards case ( i.e. , with amended standards) and a base case ( i.e. , without amended standards). DOE calculated a discount factor from the discount rate and the number of years between the “present” ( i.e. , year to which the sum is being discounted ) and the year in which the costs and savings occur. DOE calculated the NPV as the sum over time of the discounted net savings (which is equivalent to the approach shown in Eq s. 10.4 through 10.6).

11.4.2 Net Present Value Inputs

Table 11.4 .1 summarizes the inputs to the NPV calculation.

Table 11.4.1 Net Present Value Inputs

Input

Total Annual Installed Cost Increases ( TICt ) Total Annual Operating Cost Savings ( OCSt )

Discount Factor (DF) Ballast Stock by Design (STOCK)

Ballast S hipments by Design (SHIP)



### 11.4.2.1 Total Annual Installed Cost Increases

DOE calculated the increase in total annual installed costs as the difference between the total annual installed costs in the standards case minus those in the base case. For each case, the

total annual installed cost s were equal to the product of the shipments and per

- unit installed cost (su mmed over each ballast design).

) ( ) (

, , 

# ∑ ∑

+ × − + × =

bd bd basebdt bd bd std bdt t



### installing price equipment SHIP installing price equipment SHIP TIC



### On February 22, 2011, DOE published a Notice of Data Availability (NODA, 76 FR 9696) stating that DOE ma y consider improving analysis by addressing equipment price trends. Consistent with the NODA, DOE examined historical producer price indices (PPI s ) for fluorescent ballasts and found both positive and negative real price trends depending on the specific time period examined. Therefore, in the absence of a definitive trend, DOE assumes in its price forecasts for this NOPR that the real prices of fluorescent ballasts are constant in time and that fluorescent ballast prices will trend the same way as prices in the economy as a whole. DOE is aware that significant changes have occurred in both the regul atory environment and mix11

- 15 

### of fluorescent ballast technologies during this period that create analytical challenges for estimating longer

- term product price trends from the product

- specific PPI data. DOE performed price trends sensitivity calculations to ex amine the dependence of the analysis results on different analytical assumptions. A more detailed discussion of price trend modeling and calculations is provided in a ppendix 8A of the NOPR TSD.

11.4.2.2 Total Annual Operating Cost Savings

As the LCC and payback pe riod ( PBP ) analysis ( NOPR TSD chapter 8) describes, DOE

calculate d total annual operating costs based on national average electricity prices

. DOE

calculate d total annual operating cost savings as the difference between total annual operating

costs in the b ase case minus those in the standards case

. (The c omponent s of annual operating cost for lamp

- and

- ballast system s that are different between the base case and the standards case

are the cost of electricity consumption and relamping costs. )

) ( ) (

, , , , 

# ∑ ∑

+ × × − + × × =

bd t std bd std bdt bd t bas e bd basebdt t



### relamping price y electricit UEC STOCK relamping price y electricit UEC STOCK OCS



### Eq. 11.7

DOE use d an average number of annual operating hours for each sector and ballast type in calculating the UEC of each lamp

- and

- ballast design.

DOE use d national average commercial electricity prices for commercial sector 4- fo ot

MBP , 8- foot slimline , and 4

- foot T5 MiniBP SO systems . DOE use d national average industrial prices for the 8

- foot recessed double contact ( RDC ) HO and 4

- foot T5 MiniBP HO systems

. For

4- foot MBP systems in the residential sector , DOE use d national average residential electricity prices for it s analysis

. DOE use d AEO 2010 to establish all electricity prices

. 2

, 3 

### Chapter 8 provides the electricity price forecasts DOE use d to calculate the NPV.

11.4.2.3 Discount Factor

DOE multiplie d monetary values in future years by the discount factor (DF) to calculate the present value. The following equation describes how to calculate the DF :



# ( ) ( )

p tt 

### r DF − 

### +=

11 

### Eq. 11.8

Where :

r = discount rate,

t = year of the monetary value, and

t p 

### = year in which the present value is being determined.

DOE estimate d national impacts with both a 3

- percent and a 7

- percent real discount rate as the average real rate of return on investment s in the U.S. economy. These discount rates were used in accordance with the Office of Management a nd Budget (OMB)’s guidance to Federal11

- 16 

### agencies on the development of regulatory analysis , provided in OMB Circular A -4, section E, “Identifying and Measuring Benefits and Costs .” 4 

### DOE defined the present year as 2011 for this

NOPR analysis.

11.5 NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS AND NET PRESENT VALUE RESULTS

The NES spreadsheet model provides estimates of the NES and NPV due to various

T SL s. The inputs to the NES spreadsheet are discussed in sections 11.3.3 and 11.4.2 . DOE generated the NES and NPV results using Microsoft Excel spreadsheet s , accessible at http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/fluorescent_lamp_ballasts.

html . Appendix 11 A provides instr uctions for using the spreadsheet s.

11.5.1 National Energy Savings and Net Present Value Input Summary

Table 11.5.1 summarizes the inputs to the NES spreadsheet model. A brief description of the data is given for each input

.

Table 11.5.1. National Energy Saving and Net Present Value Inputs

Input Data Data Description

Ship ments Annual shipments from the ballast shipment model . H istorical shipments

based on U.S. Census Bureau Current Industrial Reports data ( NOPR TSD chapter 10 ).

Stock of Ballasts Established based on historical and projected ballast shipments , the service

life of ballasts

, penetration of emerging technologies , growth rate

, and substitution among product classes

. Effective Date of Standard 2014

. Analysis Period 2014 to 2043

. Unit Energy Consumption (kWh/yr) Established in the e nergy u se c haracterization ( NOPR TSD chapter 6 ) by lamp

- and

- ballast design and sector.

Total Installed Cost Established in the m arkups a nalysis ( NOPR TSD chapter 7 ) and the LCC

a nalysis ( NOPR TSD chapter 8 ) by lamp

- and

- ballast designs.

Electricity Price Forecast EIA forecasts (to 203 5 ) from the AEO20 10 and extrapolation for beyond

203 5 ( NOPR TSD c hapter 9 ).

Electricity Site

- to

- Source Conversion Conversion varies yearly and was generated by NEMS

- BT (National Energy Modeling System

– Building Technologies) . Conversion factors beyo nd 203 5 are extrapolated.

HVAC Interaction Savings Negligible.

Rebound Effect 1% of total energy savings in the commercial sector

. 8.5% of total energy savings in the residential sector

. Discount Rate 3 % and 7 % real.

Present Year Future costs and savings are discounted to 201 1

.



### 11.5.2 National Energy Savings Results

The following section provides NES results for each T SL that DOE considered for

ballasts

. Results are cumulative to 2043 and are shown as primary energy savings measured in quads. As discussed earlier, DOE analyze d several shipment scenarios for ballasts . In this section11

- 17 

### DOE presents only upper and lo wer bound energy savings and NPV results (from the existing/shift and emerging/roll -up scenarios

, respectively)

.

Table 11.5.2 and Table 11.5.3 show the NES resu lts under the e xisting t echnologies s hift scenario, which reflects the upper bound of energy savings, and the e merging technologies r oll

up scenario, which reflects the lower bound, respectively. Due to a larger reduction in the

installed stock of ballasts affected by standards, the e merging t echnologies base

- case forecast results in lower energy savings than the e xisting t echnologies base

- case forecast. Finally,

because in the s hift scenario more consumers move to higher efficiency lamp

- and

- ballast

systems than in the roll -up scenario, the s hift scenario results in higher energy savings than the

roll -up scenario.

For this NOPR, DOE analyzed efficiency levels that could be met by a sufficient diversity of commercially available ballasts. In addition , DOE considered an alternative scenario in which manufacturers are assumed to have the capability to redesign certain representative ballast types to be more efficient than the products currently available in the market (see appendix 5F of the NOPR TSD) . This “ advanced technology scenario ” affects all representative ballast types in P roduct C lass 1 (IS and RS ballasts)

. Appendix 11B presents NES results for the advanced technology scenario.

Table 11.5.2 Cumulative National Energy Savings for Ballasts U nder the Existing, Shift
Scenario (2014–2043)

TSL Product C lass Undiscounted Discounted at

3% Discounted at

7%

1 IS and RS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (commercial) 1.415 0.784 0.397

Two 4

- foot MPB lamps (residential) 0.224 0.126 0.064

Four 4

- foot MPB lamps 0 0 0

Two 8

- foot slimline lamps 0 0 0 PS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.189 0.111 0.062

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.448 0.246 0.123

Two 4

- foot MiniBP SO lamps 0.366 0.194 0.094

Two 4

- foot MiniBP HO lamps 0.200 0.113 0.061 Ballasts that operate

Two 8

- foot HO lamps 0.00033 0.00025 0.00018 Sign ballasts that operate

Four 8

- foot HO lamps 0.900 0.545 0.307

Total 3.744 2.120 1.110

2 IS and RS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (commercial) 1.416 0.784 0.398

Two 4

- foot MPB lamps (residential) 0.229 0.128 0.066

Four 4

- foot MPB lamps 0 0 0

Two 8

- foot slimline lamps 0.021 0.012 0.007

PS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.189 0.111 0.062

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.553 0.304 0.152

Two 4

- foot MiniBP SO lamps 0.718 0.377 0.179

Two 4

- foot MiniBP HO lamps 0.359 0.200 0.10411

- 18 Ballasts that operate

Two 8

- foot HO lamps 0.00031 0.00024 0.00018 Sign ballasts that operate

Four 8

- foot HO lamps 0.900 0.545 0.307

Total 4.385 2.462 1.275

3 IS and RS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (commercial) 1.966 1.089 0.552

Two 4

- foot MPB lamps (residential) 0.229 0.128 0.066

Four 4

- foot MPB lamps 0.318 0.177 0.090

Two 8

- foot slimline lamps 0.021 0.013 0.007 PS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.216 0.126 0.070

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.553 0.304 0.152

Two 4

- foot MiniBP SO lamps 1.524 0.796 0.373

Two 4

- foot MiniBP HO lamps 0.523 0.289 0.148 Ballasts that operate

Two 8

- foot HO lamps 0.00058 0.00044 0.00031 Sign ballasts that operate

Four 8

- foot HO lamps 0.900 0.545 0.307

Total 6.250 3.466 1.765



### Table 11.5.3 Cumulative National Energy Savings for Ballasts U nder the Emerging, Roll

Up Scenario (2014–2043)

TSL Product C lass Undiscounted Discounted at

3% Discounted at

7%

1 IS and RS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (commercial) 0.002 0.001 0.001

Two 4

- foot MPB lamps (residential) 0.014 0.009 0.005

Four 4

- foot MPB lamps 0 0 0

Two 8

- foot slimline lamps 0 0 0 PS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamp s 0.091 0.056 0.033

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.222 0.128 0.068

Two 4

- foot MiniBP SO lamps 0.184 0.107 0.059

Two 4

- foot MiniBP HO lamps 0.187 0.104 0.055 Ballasts that operate

Two 8

- foot HO lamp s 0.00028 0.00021 0.00015 Sign ballasts that operate

Four 8

- foot HO lamps 0.681 0.415 0.235

Total 1.381 0.821 0.456

2 IS and RS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (commercial) 0.679 0.397 0.215

Two 4

- foot MPB lamps (residential) 0.214 0.118 0.060

Four 4

- foot MPB lamps 0 0 0

Two 8

- foot slimline lamps 0.001 0.000 0.000 PS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.091 0.056 0.033

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.288 0.166 0.089

Two 4

- foot MiniBP SO lamps 0.315 0.180 0.095

Two 4

- foot MiniBP HO lamps 0.319 0.175 0.089 Ballasts that operate

Two 8

- foot HO lamp s 0.00018 0.00014 0.0001011

- 19 Sign ballasts that operate

Four 8

- foot HO lamps 0.681 0.415 0.235

Total 2.588 1.508 0.816

3 IS and RS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (commercial) 1.020 0.597 0.323

Two 4

- foot MPB lamps (residential) 0.214 0.118 0.060

Four 4

- foot MPB lamps 0.166 0.098 0.053

Two 8

- foot slimline lamp s 0.020 0.011 0.006

PS ballasts that operate

Two 4

- foot MBP lamp s 0.107 0.066 0.038

Four 4

- foot MBP lamp s 0.288 0.166 0.089

Two 4

- foot MiniBP SO lamp s 0.712 0.398 0.205

Two 4

- foot MiniBP HO lamp s 0.491 0.267 0.134 Ballasts that operate

Two 8

- foot HO lamps 0.00048 0.00037 0.00026 Sign ballasts that operate

Four 8

- foot HO lamps 0.681 0.415 0.235

Total 3.699 2.136 1.143



### 11.5.3 Net Present Value Analysis

The NPV calculation attempts to calculate the total monetary costs and benefits of the

standard for all consumers of ballasts. This calculation relies primarily on two inputs: the NES

calculations described in the previous section, which are translated i nto a decrease (or in some cases increase) in operating costs ; and the increase (or in some cases decrease) in installed costs.

This section graphs both elements of NPV over time. Figure 11.5 .1 throu gh Figure

11.5 .10 present the discounted annual total installed cost increases and annual operating cost savings at the national level using a 7

- percent discount rate at TSL 3

. Both annual total installed cost increases and annual operating costs savings accumulate from 201 4 to 2043 . The figures also present the NPV , which is the difference between cumulative annual discounted operating cost savings and the cumulative annual discounted total installed cost increases.

- 50 100 150 200 250 300 3502014201720202023202620292032203520382041Millions

PC 1 Operating cost
savings

PC 1 Installed costs

increase

PC 1 Total NPV11

- 20 

### Figure 11.5.1 Product Class 1 – IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 4- Foot MBP Lamps
(Commercial): National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at

T SL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shif t Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year

Figure 11.5.2 Product Class 1 – IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 4- Foot MBP Lamps
( Residential ): National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at

T SL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year

Figure 11.5.3 Product Class 1 – IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Four 4- Foot MBP Lamps: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at T SL 3 (Existing
Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year - 10 20 30 40 50 60Millions

PC 1 Operating cost
savings

PC 1 Installed costs

increase

PC 1 Total NPV

- 10 20 30 40 50 60Millions

PC 1 Operating cost
savings

PC 1 Installed costs

increase

PC 1 Total NPV11

- 21 

### Figure 11.5.4 Product Class 1 – IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 8

- Foot Slimline
Lamps : National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at T SL 3
(Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year

Figure 11.5.5 Product Class 2 – PS Ballasts That Operate Two 4- Foot MBP Lamps: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at T SL 3 (Existing
Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Pe rcent per Year - 1 1 2 2 3 3 4Millions

PC 1 Operating cost
savings

PC 1 Installed costs

increase

PC 1 Total NPV

- 5 10 15 20 25 30 35Millions

PC 2 Operating cost
savings

PC 2 Installed costs

increase

PC 2 Total NPV11

- 22 

### Figure 11.5.6 Product Class 2 – PS Ballasts That Operate Four 4- Foot MBP Lamps: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at T SL 3 (Existing
Technologies, Shift Sce nario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year

Figure 11.5.7 Product Class 2 – PS Ballasts That Operate Two 4- Foot MiniBP SO Lamps:
National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at T SL 3 (Existing
Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year - 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Millions

PC 2 Operating cost
savings

PC 2 Installed costs

increase

PC 2 Total NPV

- 50 100 150 200 2502014201720202023202620292032203520382041Millions

PC 2 Operating cost
savings

PC 2 Installed costs

increase

PC 2 Total NPV11

- 23 

### Figure 11.5.8 Product Class 2 – PS Ballasts That Operate Two 4- Foot MiniBP H O Lamps:
National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Op erating Cost Savings at T SL 3 (Existing
Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year

Figure 11.5.9 Product Class 3 – IS and RS Ballasts That Operate Two 8- Foot HO Lamps:

National Annual To tal Installed Equipment and Operating Cost Savings at T SL 3 (Existing
Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per Year - 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Millions

PC 2 Operating cost
savings

PC 2 Installed costs

increase

PC 2 Total NPV

(1,000)

(500) - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,5002014201720202023202620292032203520382041Thousands

PC 3 Operating cost
savings

PC 3 Installed costs

increase

PC 3 Total NPV11

- 24 

### Figure 11.5.10 Product Class 5 – Ballasts That Operate Four 8-Foot HO Lamps in Cold
Temperature Outdoor Signs: National Annual Total Installed Equipment and Operating
Cost Savings at T SL 3 (Existing Technologies, Shift Scenario) Discounted at 7 Percent per

Year

In most cases the operating cost savings, installed costs increases, and NPV all trend toward zero over time, reflecting the impacts of discounting.

NPV results are cumulative and shown as the discounted value of these savings in dollar

terms. DOE use d national average s for key inpu ts

, such as electricity pricing and sector

- specific point values for operating hours

, in calculating operating cost savings and installed cost increases. Thus, the NPV results are discrete point values rather than a distribution of values as

in the LCC and PBP analyses.

The present value of increased total installed costs is the total installed cost increase ( i.e.

, the difference between the standards case and base case in a given year), discounted to the present, and summed over the time period in which D OE evaluate d the impact of standards ( i.e.

, from the effective date of standards, 2014 to 2043 ).

Savings are decreases in operating costs associated with higher efficiency ballasts purchased in the standards case compared to the base case. DOE calculated t otal annual operating cost savings as the difference between total annual operating costs in the base case minus those in the standards case. Eq. 10.7 gives the total annual operating costs in each case.

In general, the NPV results at each TSL largely ref lect the LCC savings at the corresponding efficiency levels. As discussed in c hapter 8 (LCC and PBP a nalyses) , for most ballast purchasing events and most baseline ballast designs , increasing efficiency levels generally result in increased LCC savings. Due to th e general cost

- effectiveness of higher efficiency ballasts, the e xisting t echnologies base

- case forecast (which increases the affected stock and (20)

- 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1602014201720202023202620292032203520382041Millions

PC 5 Operating cost
savings

PC 5 Installed costs

increase

PC 5 Total NPV11

- 25 

### shipments) and the s hift scenario (which results in the shipment of more high

- efficiency ballasts) represent the high

- range scenario for NPV.

11.5.4 Net Present Value Results

Table 11.5.4 lists the NPV results, including the e xisting t echnologies , s hift s cenario

, and

the e merging t echnologies r oll

- up scena rio. NPV is presented at both 7

- and 3

- percent discount

rates.

As with NES, the NPV results for the advanced technology scenario are presented in Appendix 11B.

Table 11.5.4 Cumulative NPV Results for Ballasts Under the Existing Technologies, Shift

Scenario and Emerging Technologies, Roll- up Scenario s (2014-2043)

Net Present Value billion 2009$ Existing Technologies, Shift Emerging Technolog ies, Roll

- U p
Trial

Standard

Level Product Class and Ballast Type 7 Percent

Discount

Rate 3 Percent

Discount

Rate 7 Percent

Discount

Rate 3 Percent

Discount

Rate

1 1

- IS and RS ballasts that operate:

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (commercial) 3.11 6.82 0.004 0.006

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (residential) 0.44 0.97 0.15 0.24

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 0 0 0 0

Two 8

- foot slimline lamps 0 0 0 0

2

- PS ballasts that operate:

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.48 0.93 0.27 0.50

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.97 2.10 0.58 1.16

Two 4

- foot MiniBP SO lamps 0.88 1.95 0.56 1.08

Two 4

- foot MiniBP HO lamps 0.32 0.66 0.32 0.66

3

- IS and RS ballasts that operate:

Two 8

- foot HO lamps 0.02 0.03 0.001 0.001

5

- Ballasts that operate:

Four 8

- foot HO lamps in cold temperature outdoor signs 2.72 5.12 2.33 4.27

Total 8.93 18.58 4.21 7.91

2 1

- IS and RS ballasts that operate:

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (commercial) 3.11 6.82 1.79 3.65

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (residential) 0.45 0.98 0.45 0.98

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 0 0 0 0

Two 8

- foot slimline lamps 0.06 0.11 0.01 0.01

2

- PS ballasts that operate:11

- 26 Two 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.48 0.93 0.27 0.50

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 1.15 2.50 0.71 1.45

Two 4

- foot MiniBP SO lamps 1.06 2.50 0.67 1.38

Two 4

- foot MiniBP HO lamps 0.26 0.60 0.26 0.59

3

- IS and RS ballasts that operate:

Two 8

- foot HO lamps 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04

5

- Ballasts that operate:

Four 8

- foot HO lamps in cold temperature outdoor signs 2.72 5.12 2.33 4.27

Total 9.31 19.62 6.51 12.88

3 1

- IS and RS ballasts that operate:

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (commercial) 4.52 9.84 2.84 5.73

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps (residential) 0.45 0.98 0.45 0.98

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.44 1.02 0.28 0.62

Two 8

- foot slimline lamps 0.06 0.12 0.06 0.12

2

- PS ballasts that operate:

Two 4

- foot MBP lamps 0.53 1.04 0.31 0.58

Four 4

- foot MBP lamps 1.15 2.50 0.71 1.45

Two 4

- foot MiniBP SO lamps 1.31 3.42 0.88 2.07

Two 4

- foot MiniBP HO lamps 0.25 0.63 0.25 0.63

3

- IS and RS ballasts that operate:

Two 8

- foot HO lamps 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.04

5

- Ballasts that operate:

Four 8

- foot HO lamps in cold

temperature outdoor signs 2.72 5.12 2.33 4.27

Total 11.43 24.71 8.13 16.4911

- 27 

### REFERENCES

1. Greening, L.A., D.L. Greene, and C. Difiglio. 2000. Energy E fficiency and Consumption–

T he Rebound E ffect : A S urvey

. Energy Policy . 28: pp. 389 –401.

2. U.S. Department of Energy

– Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030

. March 2009. (Last accessed February 28, 2011 .)

< http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf /aeo/aeoref_tab.html >.

3. U.S. Department of Energy

– Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030 . Updated r eference case. April 2009. (Last accessed February 28, 2011

. ) < http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/index.html >.

4. Office of Management and Budget. Circular A -4. September 2003. Washington, D.C.

< http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a004/a -4.pdf >.