### APPENDIX F. DETAILED LIFE-CYCLE COST OUTPUT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

F.1 INTRODUCTION

.............................................................................................................. ......... F-1 F.2 LCC RESULTS

............................................................................................................... ............ F-1 F.2.1 Equipment Category: Fully-Cooled, La rge Size, Indoor Only (A-L-IN)

........................ F-1 F.2.2 Equipment Category: Fully Cooled, Me dium Size, Indoor Only (A-M-IN)

................... F-6 F.2.3 Equipment Category: Fully Cooled, Small, Indoor Only (A-S-IN)

............................... F-11 F.2.4 Equipment Category: Zone Cooled, La rge Size, Indoor-Outdoor (B-L-IO)

................. F-16 F.2.5 Equipment Category: Zone C ooled, Medium Size, Indoor-Outdoor (B-M-IO)

...................................................................................................................... .. F-21 F.2.6 Equipment Category: Zone Cooled, Sm all Size, Indoor-Outdoor (B-S-IO)

................. F-26 F.3 LCC SENSITIVITY TO FUEL PRICE ESCALATION - RESULTS

...................................... F-31

LIST OF TABLES

Table F.2.1 Distribution of Li fe-Cycle Cost Savings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for A-L-IN

................................................................................. F-2 Table F.2.2 Summary of Payback Period Result s for All Efficiency Levels: A-L-IN

................. F-4 Table F.2.3 Distribution of Li fe-Cycle Cost Savings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for A-M-IN

................................................................................ F-7 Table F.2.4 Summary of Payback Period Result s for All Efficiency Levels: A-M-IN

................ F-9 Table F.2.5 Distribution of Li fe-Cycle Cost Savings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for A-S-IN

............................................................................... F-12 Table F.2.6 Summary of Payback Period Result s for All Efficiency Levels: A-S-IN

................ F-14 Table F.2.7 Distribution of Li fe-Cycle Cost Savings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for B-L-IO

............................................................................... F-17 Table F.2.8 Summary of Payback Period Result s for All Efficiency Levels: B-L-IO

................ F-19 Table F.2.9 Distribution of Li fe-Cycle Cost Savings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for B-M-IO

.............................................................................. F-22 Table F.2.10 Summary of Payback Period Result s for All Efficiency Levels: B-M-IO

.............. F-24 Table F.2.11 Distribution of Li fe-Cycle Cost Savings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for B-S-IO

............................................................................... F-27 Table F.2.12 Summary of Payback Period Result s for All Efficiency Levels: B-S-IO

................ F-29 Table F.3.1 Summary of Li fe-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: A-L-IN

.................................................................. F-31 Table F.3.2 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payb ack Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: A-M-IN

................................................................. F-32 Table F.3.3 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payb ack Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: A-S-IN

................................................................... F-32 Table F.3.4 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payb ack Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: B-L-IO

................................................................... F-33

F-i BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### Table F.3.5 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payb ack Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: B-M-IO

.................................................................. F-33 Table F.3.6 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payb ack Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: B-S-IO

................................................................... F-34 Table F.3.7 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payb ack Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: A-L-IN

.................................................................. F-34 Table F.3.8 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payb ack Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: A-M-IN

................................................................. F-35 Table F.3.9 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payb ack Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: A-S-IN

.................................................................. F-35 Table F.3.10 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: B-L-IO

.................................................................. F-36 Table F.3.11 Summary of Li fe-Cycle Costs and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: B-M-IO

................................................................. F-36 Table F.3.12 Summary of Li fe-Cycle Costs and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: B-S-IO

.................................................................. F-37

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure F.2.1 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for A-L-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

................................................................................... F-2 Figure F.2.2 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: A-L-IN

....................................................................................................................... F-3 Figure F.2.3 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Payback Period for A-L-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

......................................................................................... F-4 Figure F.2.4 Cumulative Chart of Payback Period s for All Efficiency Levels: A-L-IN

................ F-5 Figure F.2.5 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for A-M-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

.................................................................................. F-7 Figure F.2.6 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: A-M-IN

...................................................................................................................... F -8 Figure F.2.7 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Payback Period for A-M-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

........................................................................................ F-9 Figure F.2.8 Cumulative Chart of Payback Periods for All Efficiency Levels: A-M-IN

.................................................................................................................... F-1 0 Figure F.2.9 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for A-S-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

................................................................................. F-12 Figure F.2.10 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: A-S-IN

..................................................................................................................... F- 13 Figure F.2.11 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Payback Period for A-S-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

....................................................................................... F-14 Figure F.2.12 Cumulative Chart of Payback Peri od for All Efficiency Levels: A-S-IN

............... F-15 Figure F.2.13 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for B-L-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

................................................................................. F-17

F-ii BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### Figure F.2.14 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: B-L-IO

..................................................................................................................... F- 18 Figure F.2.15 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Payback Period for B-L-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

....................................................................................... F-19 Figure F.2.16 Cumulative Chart of Payback Peri od for All Efficiency Levels: B-L-IO

............... F-20 Figure F.2.17 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for B-M-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

................................................................................ F-22 Figure F.2.18 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: B-M-IO

.................................................................................................................... F-2 3 Figure F.2.19 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Payback Period for B-M-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

...................................................................................... F-24 Figure F.2.20 Cumulative Chart of Payback Peri od for All Efficiency Levels: B-M-IO

.............. F-25 Figure F.2.21 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for B-S-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

................................................................................. F-27 Figure F.2.22 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: B-S-IO

...................................................................................................................... F -28 Figure F.2.23 Effect of the Change in Effi ciency Level on Average Payback Period for B-S-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

....................................................................................... F-29 Figure F.2.24 Cumulative Chart of Payback Peri od for All Efficiency Levels: B-S-IO

................ F-30

F-iii BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### APPENDIX F. DETAILED LIFE-CYCLE COST OUTPUT

F.1 INTRODUCTION

This appendix contains detailed output fr om the life-cycle cost (LCC) analysis for beverage vending machines as developed using the LCC spreadsheet. LCC and payback periods (PBPs) are presented in terms of national aver age LCC, national average LCC savings from the baseline (Level 1) and national average PBP resu lts for each of the six equipment size categories in two equipment classes (A and B) at each effici ency level. In the LCC figures, market baseline (Level 0) is also shown for comparison. See Ch apter 8 of the technical support document (TSD) for an explanation of the tables and figures in this appendix. Th e LCC spreadsheet is available on the U.S Department of Energy’s web site at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/build ings/appliance_standards/comm ercial/beverage_machines.ht ml

.
F.2 LCC RESULTS

F.2.1 Equipment Category: Fully-Cooled, La rge Size, Indoor Only (A-L-IN)

Figure F.2.1 shows the variation of the LCC with the installed cost for each of the efficiency levels considered for the analysis. The installed cost is the sum of the equipment price and the installation cost of the equipment (w hich remains relatively flat). The increasing equipment price contributes to the increasing total in stalled cost as the efficiency level rises from Level 2–8 (with reduced energy consumption). The LCC results show that at most of the higher efficiency levels (Level 2–7), th e lifetime operating cost has more of an impact on the LCC than the total installed cost. In other words, the decrease in lifetime ope rating costs (because of reduced electricity costs) offsets the increase in to tal installed cost. As a result, the LCC at most efficiency levels is lower than that for the base line efficiency level (L evel 1) for this product category. Table F.2.1 shows the national distri bution of LCC savings above the baseline (Level 1) calculated for this product for higher e fficiency levels (2–7). For efficiency Level 8, the LCC was higher than the base line level (Level 1). Figure F.2.2 shows this distribution of LCC savings graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

Figure F.2.3 shows the effect on PBP as the efficiency level changes from Level 1 (baseline) to Level 8, on a national averaged ba sis weighted over all building types, energy prices, sales taxes, and instal lation costs. Table F.2.2 shows th e national distribution of PBPs calculated for most efficiency levels as well as the average payback and the percent of units with a payback of less than 3 years. Figure F.2.4 show this distributi on of payback results graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

F-1 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### Owner's Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Equipment= A-L-Indoor-Only, Fuel Price= AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012Life Cycle Cost $9,000

$8,000

$7,000

$6,000

$5,000

$4,000

$3,000

$2,000

$1,000

$0 $6,079

$2,859

Level 1 (Energy Star Tier 1) $6,028

$2,889

Level 2 $6,008

$2,931

Level 3 $5,986

$2,977

Level 4 $5,970

$3,010

Level 5 $5,966 $5,982 $7,742

$3,043 $3,078 $4,425

Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff



### Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.1 Effect of the Change in Efficien cy Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for A-L-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.1 Distribution of Life-Cycle Cost S avings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for A-L-IN Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 1) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Savings $

2 -1 32 46 55 65 73 83 95 111 137 3 -22 37 62 80 97 113 131 152 181 230 4 -45 42 80 106 132 155 182 214 257 331 5 -62 45 93 125 157 185 219 259 312 404 6 -83 39 94 132 168 201 240 286 348 454 7 -112 18 77 118 159 194 236 285 352 468 8 -1,886 -1,736 -1,664 -1,616 -1,568 -1, 541 -1,487 -1,445 -1,347 -1,215 201 349 509 624 708 744 -935 84 132 184 222 244 240 -1,481

F-2 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docA-L-IN Level 2 A -L-IN Level 3

A-L-IN Level 4 A -L-IN Level 5

A-L-IN Level 6 A -L-IN Level 7

A-L-IN Level 8 

### Figure F.2.2 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: A-L-IN

F-3 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docOwner's Installed Cost-Payback Tradeoff

Equipment= A-L-Indoor-Only, Fuel Price=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012Payback Period (Years) 120.0

100.0

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 2.9
$2,889

Level 2 3.9 $2,931

Level 3 4.4

$2,977

Level 4 4.6 4.9 5.5 100.0

$3,010 $3,043 $3,078 $4,425
Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-Payback Period Tradeoff

Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.3 Effect of the Change in Effici ency Level on Average Payback Period for A-L-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.2 Summary of Payback Period Resu lts for All Efficiency Levels: A-L-IN Efficiency

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.5 1.3 1.5 1.8 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.8 3.3 4.3 2.3 85 0.7 1.7 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.9 4.5 6.1 3.1 51 0.8 1.8 2.2 2.7 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.4 5.1 6.8 3.4 41 0.8 1.9 2.3 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.9 4.5 5.3 7.1 3.6 39 0.8 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.2 4.8 5.6 7.7 3.8 29 0.9 2.2 2.7 3.3 3.5 3.9 4.3 4.7 5.4 6.3 8.7 4.3 25 7.2 29.3 46.4 87.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 83.8 0

F-4 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docA-L-IN, Level 2 A -L-IN, Level 3

A-L-IN, Level 4 A -L-IN, Level 5

A-L-IN, Level 6 A -L-IN, Level 7

A-L-IN, Level 8 

### Figure F.2.4 Cumulative Chart of Payback Pe riods for All Efficiency Levels: A-L-IN

F-5 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### F.2.2 Equipment Category: Fully Cooled, Med ium Size, Indoor Only (A-M-IN)

Figure F.2.5 shows the variation of the LCC with the installed cost for each of the efficiency levels considered for the analysis. The installed cost is the sum of the equipment price and the installation cost of th e equipment (which remains relatively flat) and the increasing equipment price contributes to the increasing total in stalled cost as the efficiency level rises from Levels 2–8 (with reduced energy consumption). The LCC results show that at most of the higher efficiency levels (Levels 2–7), a nd the lifetime operating cost has more of an impact on the LCC than the total installed cost. In other words, the decrease in lif etime operating costs (because of reduced electricity costs) offsets the increase in total installed cost. As a result, the LCC at efficiency levels 2–7 are lower than that for the baseline efficiency leve l (Level 1) for this product category. For efficiency Level 8, the LCC was higher than the base line level (Level 1). Table F.2.3 shows the national distribution of LCC savings above the baseline (Level 1) calculated for this product for the higher efficiency levels (2–8). Figure F.2.6 shows this distribution of LCC savings graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

Figure F.2.7 shows the effect on payback period as the effi ciency level changes from Level 1 (baseline) to Level 8, on a national averaged basis weighted over all building types, energy prices, sales taxes and installation costs. Tabl e F.2.4 shows the nationa l distribution of PBPs calculated for all efficiency leve ls as well as the average payback and percent of units with a payback of less than 3 years. Figur e F.2.8 show this distribution of payback results graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

F-6 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docLife Cycle Cost $8,000

$7,000

$6,000

$5,000

$4,000

$3,000

$2,000

$1,000

$0 Owner's Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Equipment= A-M-Indoor-Only, Fuel Price=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012

$5,808 $5,708 $5,678 $5,680 $5,654 $5,659 $5,680 $7,188

$2,625 $2,676 $2,687 $2,749 $2,797 $2,831 $2,864 $3,986

Level 1 (Energy Star Tier 1) Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Installed Cost and Efficiency Level


### Figure F.2.5 Effect of the Change in Efficien cy Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for A-M-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.3 Distribution of Life-Cycle Cost S avings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for A-M-IN Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 0) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Savings $

2 1 64 91 108 126 142 160 182 212 3 5 85 118 140 162 182 206 233 271 4 -38 66 112 142 173 200 233 270 322 5 -62 74 134 174 214 250 293 342 410 6 -86 59 126 170 215 254 301 355 430 7 -117 35 104 152 200 241 290 348 427 8 -1,615 -1,464 -1,389 -1,331 -1,281 -1, 243 -1,190 -1,143 -1,035 263 334 410 525 557 562 -885 384 486 621 802 862 885 -575 162 207 235 296 305 295 -1,183

F-7 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docA-M-IN Level 2 A -M-IN Level 3

A-M-IN Level 4 A -M-IN Level 5

A-M-IN Level 6 A -M-IN Level 7

A-M-IN Level 8 

### Figure F.2.6 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: A-M-IN

F-8 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docOwner's Installed Cost-Payback Tradeoff

Equipment= A-M-Indoor-Only, Fuel Price=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012Payback Period (Years) 120.0

100.0

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 2.7
$2,676

Level 2 2.5 $2,687

Level 3 3.9
$2,749

Level 4 4.2 4.6 5.1 100.0

$2,797 $2,831 $2,864 $3,986
Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-Payback Period Tradeoff

Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.7 Effect of the Change in Effici ency Level on Average Payback Period for A-M-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.4 Summary of Payback Period Resu lts for All Efficiency Levels: A-M-IN Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.5 1.2 1.4 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.7 3.1 4.0 2.1 87 0.5 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.5 2.9 3.8 2.0 91 0.7 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.4 3.9 4.5 6.0 3.1 55 0.7 1.7 2.1 2.5 2.7 3.0 3.3 3.6 4.1 4.8 6.5 3.3 47 0.8 1.9 2.3 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.6 4.0 4.6 5.3 7.2 3.6 39 0.9 2.1 2.6 3.1 3.3 3.7 4.0 4.4 5.1 6.0 8.2 4.0 25 5.4 19.3 28.0 43.7 54.6 86.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 71.0 0

F-9 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docA-M-IN, Level 2 A -M-IN, Level 3

A-M-IN, Level 4 A -M-IN, Level 5

A-M-IN, Level 6 A -M-IN, Level 7

A-M-IN, Level 8


### Figure F.2.8 Cumulative Chart of Payback Pe riods for All Efficien cy Levels: A-M-IN

F-10 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### F.2.3 Equipment Category: Fully Cooled, Small, Indoor Only (A-S-IN)

Figure F.2.9 shows the variation of the LCC with th e installed cost for each of the efficiency levels considered for the analysis. The installe d cost is the sum of the equipment price and the installation cost of the equipment. Th e former is the largest contributor to the increasing total installed cost as the efficien cy level rises from Levels 2–8 (with reduced energy consumption). The LCC results show that at most of the higher efficiency levels (Levels 2–7), and the lifetime operating cost has more of an impact on the LCC than the total installed cost. In other words, the decrea se in lifetime operating costs (because of reduced electricity costs) offsets the increase in total installed cost. As a result, the LCC at efficiency Levels 2–7 are lower than that for th e baseline efficiency leve l (Level 1) for this product category. For efficiency Level 8, the L CC was higher than the baseline level (Level 1).

Table F.2.5 shows the national distribution of LCC savings above the baseline (Level 1) calculated for this product for the higher efficiency levels (2–8). Figure F.2.10 shows this distribution of LCC savings graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

Figure F.2.11 shows the effect on PBP as th e efficiency level changes from Level 1 (baseline) to Level 8, on a national averaged ba sis weighted over all building types, energy prices, sales taxes and installa tion costs. Table F.2.6 shows the national distribution of PBPs calculated for all efficiency levels as well as th e average payback and the percent of units with a payback of less than 3 years. Fi gure F.2.12 show this distribution of payback results graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

F-11 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docLife Cycle Cost Owner's Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Equipment= A-S-Indoor-Only, Fuel Price=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012

$7,000

$6,000

$5,000

$4,000

$3,000

$2,000

$1,000

$0 $2,206 $2,247 $2,294 $2,340 $2,368 $2,395 $2,425 $3,436

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Energy (Max Tech) Star Tier 1) $5,316 $5,236 $5,219 $5,202 $5,192 $5,195 $5,214 $6,652

Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.9 Effect of the Change in Efficien cy Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for A-S-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.5 Distribution of Life-Cycle Cost S avings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for A-S-IN Efficienc y

Level

% 0 10 Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 0) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$ 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Savings $

2 1 51 72 87 101 114 129 147 171 212 311 130 3 -26 50 86 109 132 153 177 206 245 312 471 179 4 -51 51 98 130 162 190 223 263 316 407 626 227 5 -67 51 105 142 180 213 251 297 358 465 718 255 6 -87 42 99 142 183 219 262 311 379 496 775 265 7 -114 19 79 125 169 206 252 304 375 500 796 255 8 -1,566 -1,412 -1,343 -1,291 -1,240 -1, 212 -1,157 -1,116 -1,011 -879 -603 -1,153

F-12 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docA-S-IN Level 2 A -S-IN Level 3

A-S-IN Level 4 A -S-IN Level 5

A-S-IN Level 6 A -S-IN Level 7

A-S-IN Level 8 

### Figure F.2.10 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: A-S-IN

F-13 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docOwner's Installed Cost-Payback Tradeoff

Equipment= A-S-Indoor-Only, Fuel Pri ce=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012Payback Period (Years) 120.0

100.0

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 2.7
$2,247

Level 2 3.8 $2,294

Level 3 4.3

$2,340

Level 4 4.5 4.8 5.4 100.0

$2,368 $2,395 $2,425 $3,436
Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-Payback Period Tradeoff



### Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.11 Effect of the Change in Effici ency Level on Average Payback Period for A-S-IN (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.6 Summary of Payback Period Resu lts for All Efficiency Levels: A-S-IN Efficiency

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.5 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.6 3.1 4.1 2.1 87 0.7 1.6 1.9 2.3 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.2 3.7 4.3 5.9 2.9 59 0.7 1.8 2.1 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.7 4.2 5.0 6.8 3.3 47 0.8 1.8 2.2 2.7 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.4 5.2 7.2 3.5 41 0.8 1.9 2.4 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.7 4.1 4.8 5.6 7.8 3.8 33 0.9 2.1 2.6 3.2 3.4 3.8 4.2 4.6 5.4 6.3 8.9 4.2 25 5.6 23.1 37.1 72.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 80.9 0

F-14 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docA-S-IN, Level 2 A -S-IN, Level 3

A-S-IN, Level 4 A -S-IN, Level 5

A-S-IN, Level 6 A -S-IN, Level 7

A-S-IN, Level 8


### Figure F.2.12 Cumulative Chart of Payback Pe riod for All Efficiency Levels: A-S-IN

F-15 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### F.2.4 Equipment Category: Zone Cooled, La rge Size, Indoor-Outdoor (B-L-IO)

Figure F.2.13 shows the variati on of the LCC with the instal led cost for each of the efficiency levels considered for the analysis. The installed cost is the sum of the equipment price and the installation cost of the equipment (which remains relatively flat) and so the increasing equipment price contributes to the increasing total in stalled cost as the efficiency level rises from Levels 2–7 (with reduced energy consumption). The LCC results show that at some of the higher efficiency levels (Levels 2–3), th e lifetime operating cost has more of an impact on the LCC than the total installed cost. In other words, the decrease in lifetime ope rating costs (because of reduced electricity costs) offsets the increase in total installed cost. As a result, the LCC at efficiency Levels 2–3 are lower than the baselin e efficiency level (Level 1) for this product category. For efficiency Levels 4–7 with all i nputs at national average values, the LCC was higher than the baseline level (Level 1). Ta ble F.2.7 shows the national distribution of LCC savings above the baseline (Level 1) calculated fo r this product for the higher efficiency levels (2–7) and shows a slightly diffe rent picture of relative LCCs. The weighted average of the distribution indicates a s light net LCC savings at Levels 4–5, meaning that the weighted average of LCCs at Levels 4–5 is slightly less than the baseline (Level 1). In either case, Levels 4 and 5 are very close to having $0 net LCC savings. Figure F.2.14 show this distribution of LCC savings graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

Figure F.2.15 shows the effect on payback peri od as the efficiency level changes from Levels 2–7, on a national averaged basis weighted over all building types, energy prices, sales taxes and installation costs. Table F.2.8 show s the national distribution of payback periods calculated for all efficiency leve ls as well as the average payback and percent of units with a payback of less than 3 years. Figur e F.2.16 show this distribution of payback results graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

F-16 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docOwner's Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Equipment= B-L-Indoor-Outdoor, Fuel Price=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012Life Cycle Cost $9,000

$8,000

$7,000

$6,000

$5,000

$4,000

$3,000

$2,000

$1,000

$0 $5,132

$2,118

Level 1 (Energy Star Tier 1) $5,110

$2,143

Level 2 $5,116

$2,162

Level 3 $5,137

$2,201

Level 4 $5,149

$2,214

Level 5 $5,759 $7,647

$2,678 $3,950 #N/A

Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.13 Effect of the Change in Efficien cy Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for B-L-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.7 Distribution of Life-Cycle Cost S avings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for B-L-IO Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 0) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Savings $

2 -9 10 18 25 32 37 43 51 61 3 -24 0 11 20 29 38 47 57 70 4 -60 -28 -12 1 15 28 41 56 76 5 -74 -42 -25 -11 4 17 31 46 68 6 -732 -658 -630 -606 -583 -565 -549 -521 -483 7 -2,780 -2,583 -2,531 -2,491 -2,456 -2,428 -2,400 -2,367 -2,324 79 117 94 145 107 181 100 177 -427 -318 -2,260 -2,151 43 46 40 30 -545 -2,414

F-17 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docB-L-IO Level 2 B-L-IO Level 3

B-L-IO Level 4 B-L-IO Level 5

B-L-IO Level 6 B-L-IO Level 7


### Figure F.2.14 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: B-L-IO

F-18 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docOwner's Installed Cost-Payback Tradeoff

Equipment= B-L-Indoor-Outdoor, Fuel Price=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012Payback Period (Years) 120.0

100.0

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 4.2

$2,143

Level 2 5.8 $2,162

Level 3 8.4

$2,201

Level 4 9.7 100.0 100.0

$2,214 $2,678 $3,950 #N/A
Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-Payback Period Tradeoff

Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.15 Effect of the Change in Effici ency Level on Average Payback Period for B-L-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.8 Summary of Payback Period Resu lts for All Efficiency Levels: B-L-IO Efficiency

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2 3 4 5 6 7 0.7 1.7 2.1 2.4 2.7 3.0 3.2 3.7 4.3 4.9 6.8 3.3 45 0.8 2.3 2.7 3.2 3.6 4.1 4.2 5.0 5.9 6.7 9.8 4.5 23 1.1 3.1 3.8 4.3 5.0 5.6 6.0 7.1 8.5 10.2 16.1 6.5 7 1.2 3.5 4.2 4.8 5.6 6.3 6.8 8.1 9.8 11.9 19.7 7.5 1 5.4 27.9 46.3 87.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 83.8 0 64.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0

F-19 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docB-L-IO, Level 2 B-L-IO, Level 3

B-L-IO, Level 4 B-L-IO, Level 5

B-L-IO, Level 6 B-L-IO, Level 7


### Figure F.2.16 Cumulative Chart of Payback Pe riod for All Efficiency Levels: B-L-IO

F-20 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### F.2.5 Equipment Category: Zone Cooled, Med ium Size, Indoor-Outdoor (B-M-IO)

Figure F.2.17 shows the variati on of the LCC with the instal led cost for each of the efficiency levels considered for the analysis. The installed cost is the sum of the equipment price and the installation cost of the equipment (w hich remains relatively flat). The increasing equipment price contributes to the increasing total in stalled cost as the efficiency level rises from Levels 2–7 (with reduced energy consumption). The LCC results show that at some of the higher efficiency levels (Levels 2–3), th e lifetime operating cost has more of an impact on the LCC than the total installed cost. In other words, the decrease in lifetime ope rating costs (because of reduced electricity costs) offsets the increase in total installed cost. As a result, the LCC at efficiency Levels 2–3 are lower than the baselin e efficiency level (Level 1) for this product category. For efficiency Levels 4–7, with all i nputs at national average values, the LCC was higher than the baseline level (Level 1). Ta ble F.2.9 shows the national distribution of LCC savings above the baseline (Level 1) calculated fo r this product for the higher efficiency levels (2–7) and shows a slightly diffe rent picture of relative LCCs. The weighted average of the distribution indicates a slight net LCC savings at Levels 4 an d 5, meaning that the weighted average of LCCs at Levels 4–5 is slightly less than the baseline (Level 1). In either case, Levels 4–5 are close to having $0 net LCC savings . Figure F.2.18 shows this distribution of LCC savings graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

Figure F.2.19 shows the effect on payback peri od as the efficiency level changes from Levels 2–7 on a national averaged basis weight ed over all building types, energy prices, sales taxes, and installation costs. Table F.2.10 show s the national distribution of payback periods calculated for all efficiency leve ls as well as the average payback and percent of units with a payback of less than 3 years. Figur e F.2.20 show this distribution of payback results graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

F-21 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docOwner's Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Equipment= B-M-Indoor-Outdoor, Fuel Price=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012Life Cycle Cost $8,000

$7,000

$6,000

$5,000

$4,000

$3,000

$2,000

$1,000

$0 $5,017

$2,046

Level 1 (Energy Star Tier 1) $4,997

$2,071

Level 2 $5,000

$2,094

Level 3 $5,026

$2,134

Level 4 $5,039

$2,146

Level 5 $5,658 $7,347

$2,610 $3,734 #N/A

Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.17 Effect of the Change in Efficien cy Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for B-M-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.9 Distribution of Life-Cycle Cost S avings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for B-M-IO Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 1) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Savings $

2 -10 9 17 23 30 35 41 49 59 3 -27 -1 11 21 31 41 50 61 76 4 -65 -33 -17 -3 11 25 38 53 74 5 -80 -47 -30 -16 0 14 27 43 65 6 -749 -673 -644 -621 -597 -579 -562 -534 -496 7 -2,584 -2,395 -2,345 -2,305 -2,272 -2,244 -2,219 -2,183 -2,139 76 114 102 157 106 181

99 178 -439 -330 -2,078 -1,978 41 49 36 26 -558 -2,230

F-22 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docB-M-IO Level 2 B-M-IO Level 3

B-M-IO Level 4 B-M-IO Level 5

B-M-IO Level 6 B-M-IO Level 7


### Figure F.2.18 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: B-M-IO

F-23 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docOwner's Installed Cost-Payback Tradeoff

Equipment= B-M-Indoor-Outdoor, Fuel Price=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012

120.0

100.0

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 4.4

$2,071

Level 2 5.9 $2,094

Level 3 8.9

$2,134

Level 4 10.2 100.0 100.0

$2,146 $2,610 $3,734 #N/A
Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-Payback Period Tradeoff

Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.19 Effect of the Change in Effici ency Level on Average Payback Period for B-M-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.10 Summary of Payback Period Resu lts for All Efficiency Levels: B-M-IOPayback Period (Years)

Efficiency

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2 3 4 5 6 7 0.7 1.8 2.1 2.5 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.8 4.4 5.1 7.1 3.4 43 0.8 2.3 2.8 3.2 3.6 4.1 4.3 5.0 6.0 6.9 10.1 4.6 23 1.1 3.2 3.9 4.5 5.2 5.8 6.3 7.4 9.0 10.8 17.6 6.9 5 1.2 3.6 4.3 5.0 5.9 6.6 7.1 8.5 10.3 12.6 21.6 7.9 1 5.5 29.7 51.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 85.4 0 49.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.9 0

F-24 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docB-M-IO, Level 2 B-M-IO, Level 3

B-M-IO, Level 4 B-M-IO, Level 5

B-M-IO, Level 6 B-M-IO, Level 7


### Figure F.2.20 Cumulative Chart of Payback Pe riod for All Efficiency Levels: B-M-IO

F-25 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### F.2.6 Equipment Category: Zone Cooled, Sm all Size, Indoor-Outdoor (B-S-IO)

Figure F.2.21 shows the variati on of the LCC with the instal led cost for each of the efficiency levels considered for the analysis. The installed cost is the sum of the equipment price and the installation cost of th e equipment (which remains relatively flat) and the increasing equipment price contributes to the increasing total in stalled cost as the efficiency level rises from Levels 2–7 (with reduced energy consumption). The LCC results show that at one of the higher efficiency levels (Level 2), the lifetime operating cost has more of an impact on the LCC than the total installed cost. In other words, the decrea se in lifetime operating costs (due to reduced electricity costs) offsets the increase in total in stalled cost. As a result, the LCC at efficiency Level 2 is lower than that for th e baseline efficiency level (Level 1) for this product category. For efficiency Levels 3–7, the LCC wa s higher than the baseline leve l (Level 1). Table F.2.11 shows the national distribution of LCC sa vings above the baseline (Level 1) calculated for this product for the higher efficiency levels (2–7). The weight ed average of the distribution indicates a slight net LCC savings at Levels 3–5, meaning that the weighted average of LCCs at Levels 3–5 is slightly less than the baseline (Level 1). In ei ther case, Levels 3–5 ar e close to having $0 net LCC savings. Figure F.2.22 shows this distribu tion of LCC savings graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

Figure F.2.23 shows the effect on payback peri od as the efficiency level changes from Levels 2–7 on a national averaged basis weighted over all building types, energy prices, sales taxes and installation costs. Table F.2.12 shows the national distribution of payback periods calculated for all efficiency levels as well as the average payback and percent of units with a payback of less than 3 years. Figure F.2.24 shows this distri bution of payback results graphically for each efficiency level analyzed.

F-26 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docOwner's Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Equipment= B-S-Indoor-Outdoor, Fuel Price=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012Life Cycle Cost $8,000

$7,000

$6,000

$5,000

$4,000

$3,000

$2,000

$1,000

$0 $4,700

$1,822

Level 1 (Energy Star Tier 1) $4,685

$1,848

Level 2 $4,721

$1,900

Level 3 $4,721

$1,900

Level 4 $4,737

$1,913

Level 5 $5,387 $6,920

$2,377 $3,354 #N/A

Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-LCC Tradeoff

Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.21 Effect of the Change in Efficien cy Level on Average Life-Cycle Cost for B-S-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.11 Distribution of Life-Cycle Cost S avings from a Baseline Level (Level 1) by Efficiency Level for B-S-IO Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 1) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Savings $

2 -12 4 12 17 24 29 35 42 51 3 -65 -41 -28 -16 -5 6 16 29 45 4 -65 -41 -28 -16 -5 6 16 29 45 5 -81 -56 -43 -31 -19 -8 2 17 34 6 -793 -716 -688 -666 -646 -630 -613 -591 -554 7 -2,476 -2,289 -2,238 -2,202 -2,165 -2,140 -2,115 -2,081 -2,040 67 102 73 134 73 134 62 126 -508 -415 -1,985 -1,881 35 16 16

2 -612 -2,129

F-27 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docB-S-IO Level 2 B-S-IO Level 3

B-S-IO Level 4 B-S-IO Level 5

B-S-IO Level 6 B-S-IO Level 7


### Figure F.2.22 Cumulative Chart of Life-Cycle Cost Savings for All Efficiency Levels: B-S-IO

F-28 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docOwner's Installed Cost-Payback Tradeoff

Equipment= B-S-Indoor-Outdoor, Fuel Pric e=AEO 2009 - Reference Case, Start Year= 2012

120.0

100.0

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0 5.0

$1,848

Level 2 11.1

$1,900

Level 3 11.1

$1,900

Level 4 13.7 100.0 100.0

$1 ,913 $2,377 $3,354 #N/A
Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 (Max Tech) Installed Cost-Payback Period Tradeoff

Installed Cost and Efficiency Level



### Figure F.2.23 Effect of the Change in Effici ency Level on Average Payback Period for B-S-IO (Level 1 Baseline)

Table F.2.12 Summary of Payback Period Resu lts for All Efficiency Levels: B-S-IOPayback Period (Years)

Efficiency

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2 3 4 5 6 7 0.7 2.0 2.3 2.8 3.1 3.5 3.7 4.3 5.0 5.9 8.4 3.9 35 1.2 3.7 4.4 5.2 6.1 7.0 7.5 9.1 11.3 13.9 25.8 8.7 1 1.2 3.7 4.4 5.2 6.1 7.0 7.5 9.1 11.3 13.9 25.8 8.7 1 1.4 4.2 5.1 6.1 7.1 8.3 8.9 11.0 13.9 17.5 37.3 10.9 1 6.9 65.5 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 94.7 0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0

F-29 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.docB-S-IO, Level 2 B-S-IO, Level 3

B-S-IO, Level 4 B-S-IO, Level 5

B-S-IO, Level 6 B-S-IO, Level 7


### Figure F.2.24 Cumulative Chart of Payback Pe riod for All Efficiency Levels: B-S-IO

F-30 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### F.3 LCC SENSITIVITY TO FUEL PR ICE ESCALATION - RESULTS

This section contains detailed output from th e LCC sensitivity analysis to the fuel price escalation rates reported in chap ter 8. These analyses were carried out using the LCC spreadsheet with the aggregated results reported in term s of national average LCC savings or national average PBP for each of the six equipment categorie s at each efficiency level. See TSD chapter 8 for a further explanation of the se nsitivity analysis and results.

Table F.3.1 through Table F.3.6 show the impacts of the Annual Energy Outlook 2009 ( AEO2009 ) low-price scenario for fuel price esca lation rates on LCC and PBP results, while Table F.3.7 through Table F.3.12 show the impacts of AEO2009 high-price scenario for fuel price escalation rates on LCC and PB P results. As expected, high-pr ice fuel price escalation rates increase the benefits of effi ciency levels beyond the baseli ne (increase LCC savings).

Table F.3.1 Summary of Life-Cycle Cost a nd Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: A-L-IN Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 1) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Savings $ Units with LCC Savings % 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 -3 28 42 51 60 67 77 88 103 128 190 -25 30 54 71 87 102 120 140 167 214 327 -50 31 67 93 117 139 166 196 236 308 476 -67 32 77 109 139 166 199 236 286 375 583 -89 24 76 113 147 178 217 259 318 419 660 -119 2 56 98 136 169 211 257 321 430 692 -1,905 -1,756 -1,690 -1,643 -1,597 -1,568 -1,518 -1,477 -1,385 -1,261 -992 78 99 120 99 167 97 201 97 219 95 213 93 -1,514 0

Efficienc y

Level

%

0 PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 0.6 1.3 1.6 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 3.0 3.4 4.5 2.4 79 3 0.7 1.7 2.1 2.5 2.7 3.0 3.2 3.5 4.1 4.7 6.3 3.2 49 4 0.8 1.9 2.3 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.6 3.9 4.5 5.3 7.1 3.6 37 5 0.8 2.0 2.4 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.7 4.1 4.7 5.5 7.5 3.7 33 6 0.9 2.1 2.6 3.1 3.3 3.6 4.0 4.4 5.1 5.9 8.0 4.0 27 7 1.0 2.3 2.8 3.4 3.7 4.1 4.4 4.9 5.7 6.6 9.1 4.4 21 8 7.5 31.5 51.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 85.2 0

F-31 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### Table F.3.2 Summary of Life-Cycle Cost s and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: A-M-IN Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficienc y (Level 1) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$ Mean Savings $ Units with LCC

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Savings % 2 -2 57 82 99 116 131 149 169 198 246 361 150 99 3 1 76 108 129 150 168 192 217 253 313 458 192 100 4 -43 52 96 127 156 181 213 249 297 381 581 215 99 5 -68 56 113 154 191 225 267 313 377 488 751 269 97 6 -94 42 103 149 190 226 273 324 394 516 805 275 97 7 -124 17 79 129 173 212 261 315 390 518 825 263 93 8 -1,636 -1,489 -1,412 -1,361 -1,313 -1, 276 -1,223 -1,181 -1,076 -936 -636 -1,218 0

Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown b y Percentiles of the Distribution of Results
years

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.5 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.8 3.2 0.5 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.6 3.0 0.7 1.7 2.1 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.2 3.5 4.0 4.7 0.8 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.7 4.3 5.0 0.8 2.0 2.4 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.7 4.1 4.8 5.6 0.9 2.2 2.7 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.2 4.6 5.3 6.3 5.6 20.5 30.2 48.4 63.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 4.2 4.0 6.3 6.8 7.6 8.6 100.0 2.2 2.1 3.2 3.4 3.7 4.2 73.6 87 87 49 43 33 25

0


### Table F.3.3 Summary of Life-Cycle Cost s and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: A-S-IN Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficienc y (Level 1) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Mean Savings $ Units with LCC Savings % 100 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 -2 45 66 79 93 105 120 136 160 -30 41 73 97 119 138 162 189 226 -57 39 81 115 144 171 204 240 291 -73 37 86 125 159 191 229 271 329 -94 25 79 122 160 195 236 282 347 -122 1 59 103 144 180 224 273 342 -1,586 -1,432 -1,367 $1,316 -1,270 -1, 244 -1,187 -1,148 -1,051 198 290 377 430 458 460 -926 292 121 99 441 164 99 585 205 97 671 230 97 723 238 95 740 227 93 -659 -1,186 0

Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown b y Percentiles of the Distribution of Results
years

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.5 1.2 1.4 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.8 3.2

0.7 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.4 3.9 4.5 0.8 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.4 5.2 0.8 1.9 2.3 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.6 4.0 4.6 5.5 0.8 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.2 3.6 3.9 4.3 5.0 5.9 0.9 2.2 2.7 3.3 3.6 4.0 4.3 4.8 5.6 6.7 5.9 25.0 41.2 86.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 4.2 6.2 7.2 7.5 8.2 9.4 100.0 2.2 3.1 3.5 3.6 3.9 4.4 82.6 87 55 41 37 29 25

0

F-32 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### Table F.3.4 Summary of Life-Cycle Cost s and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: B-L-IO Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 1) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$ Mean Savings $ Units with LCC Savings % 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

2 3 4 5 6 7 -10 7 15 21 28 34 39 47 56 73 109 39 97 -25 -3 7 16 24 33 41 51 64 86 134 40 89 -62 -33 -18 -5 9 21 32 46 66 96 165 31 69 -77 -47 -31 -17 -3 10 22 37 57 88 162 21 59 -741 -668 -640 -617 -595 -579 -562 -535 -501 -448 -344 -559 0 -2,792 -2,597 -2,544 -2,504 -2,470 -2,442 -2,416 -2,383 -2 ,341 -2,277 -2,166 -2,430 0

Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 3 4 5 6 7 0.7 1.8 2.1 2.5 2.8 3.2 3.3 3.8 4.5 5.1 0.9 2.4 2.8 3.3 3.7 4.2 4.4 5.2 6.2 7.1 1.1 3.2 3.9 4.4 5.2 5.9 6.2 7.4 9.0 10.7 1.2 3.6 4.4 5.0 5.9 6.6 7.1 8.5 10.4 12.6 5.7 30.5 52.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 77.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 7.2 10.4 17.4 21.4 100.0 100.0 3.4 4.7 6.9 7.9 85.8 100.0 43 23

5 1 0 0


### Table F.3.5 Summary of Life-Cycle Cost s and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: B-M-IO Efficienc y Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 1) Mean Units

Level Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results Savin g s with

% 2008$ $ LCC Savings 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % 2 -11 6 14 20 26 32 37 45 54 70 106 38 97 3 -28 -5 7 16 26 35 44 55 69 93 146 43 89 4 -68 -39 -23 -10 4 17 29 43 63 94 166 28 65 5 -83 -53 -36 -$2 -8 6 18 33 54 86 161 17 57 6 -758 -683 -655 -631 -609 -593 -575 -549 -515 -461 -356 -573 0 7 -2,596 -2,407 -2,358 -2,319 -2,285 -2,259 -2,233 -2,200 -2 ,159 -2,100 -1,992 -2,246 0

Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 3 4 5 6 7 0.7 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.9 3.3 3.5 3.9 4.6 5.4 0.9 2.4 2.9 3.3 3.8 4.3 4.5 5.2 6.3 7.3 1.1 3.3 4.0 4.6 5.5 6.1 6.5 7.8 9.5 11.4 1.3 3.7 4.5 5.2 6.1 6.9 7.4 8.9 11.0 13.4 5.7 32.6 59.2 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 57.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 7.5 10.7 19.1 23.7 100.0 100.0 3.6 4.8 7.3 8.4 87.1 99.9 41 21

5 1 0 0

F-33 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### Table F.3.6 Summary of Life-Cycle Cost s and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 Low-Price Scenario: B-S-IO Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 1) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$ Mean Savings $ Units with LCC Savings % 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2 3 4 5 6 7

-13 2 9 15 21 26 31 38 47 61 95 31 93 -68 -45 -33 -21 -10 0 9 21 38 63 121 9 53 -68 -45 -33 -21 -10 0 9 21 38 63 121 9 53 -83 -61 -48 -36 -25 -14 -5 8 25 51 112 -5 37 -801 -725 -698 -676 -658 -642 -625 -604 -569 -524 -439 -625 0 -2,487 -2,299 -2,251 -2,213 -2,178 -2,153 -2,129 -2,095 -2 ,055 -2,003 -1,894 -2,142 0

Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 3 4 5 6 7 0.8 2.0 2.4 2.9 3.2 3.6 3.9 4.5 5.3 6.2 1.3 3.8 4.6 5.5 6.4 7.4 7.8 9.6 12.1 14.9 1.3 3.8 4.6 5.5 6.4 7.4 7.8 9.6 12.1 14.9 1.4 4.4 5.3 6.3 7.5 8.8 9.3 11.6 15.0 19.1 7.2 80.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 9.0 28.9 28.9 43.4 100.0 100.0 4.0 9.3 9.3 11.8 95.5 100.0 31 1 1 1 0 0


### Table F.3.7 Summary of Life-Cycle Cost s and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: A-L-IN Efficienc y Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 0) Mean Units

Level Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results Savings with

% 2008$ $ LCC Savings 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % 2 0 36 50 60 70 79 89 101 118 147 213 90 100 3 -20 44 70 88 106 122 141 164 194 247 370 143 99 4 -42 52 92 118 146 170 198 232 277 355 541 201 99 5 -57 58 108 140 174 205 239 281 337 434 664 243 97 6 -78 55 112 149 189 223 263 311 376 488 754 268 97 7 -107 34 97 137 180 218 261 313 383 508 794 266 95 8 -1,866 -1,715 -1,641 -1,592 -1,541 -1,509 -1,458 -1,414 -1,311 -1,172 -881 -1,450 0

Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.5 1.2 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.2 2.4 2.8 3.2 0.7 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.5 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.8 4.4 0.8 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.4 3.7 4.2 4.9 0.8 1.9 2.3 2.7 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.4 5.1 0.8 2.0 2.4 2.9 3.1 3.4 3.7 4.1 4.7 5.5 0.9 2.2 2.7 3.2 3.4 3.8 4.1 4.6 5.2 6.1 7.0 27.7 43.3 78.5 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 4.2 5.9 6.6 6.9 7.4 8.4 100.0 2.2 3.0 3.3 3.5 3.7 4.1 82.6 87 57 45 41 33 25

0

F-34 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### Table F.3.8 Summary of Life-Cycle Cost s and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: A-M-IN Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficienc y (Level 0) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Savings $ Units with LCC Savings % 2 4 71 98 117 135 152 172 194 226 3 8 93 127 151 174 195 220 248 287 4 -34 78 126 157 189 218 252 292 345 5 -56 90 152 193 236 274 317 370 440 6 -80 79 147 192 239 281 328 386 464 7 -110 54 128 175 226 269 320 381 462 8 -1,594 -1,438 -1,364 -1,304 -1,253 -1, 211 -1,160 -1,103 -994 280 406 356 514 439 659 563 852 598 917 608 943 -835 -516 173 100 222 100 255 99 322 99 334 97 326 97 -1,148 0

Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown b y Percentiles of the Distribution of Results
years

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.5 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.6 3.0 0.5 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.8 0.7 1.6 1.9 2.3 2.5 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.7 4.3 0.7 1.7 2.1 2.5 2.7 2.9 3.2 3.5 4.0 4.7 0.8 1.9 2.3 2.7 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.4 5.1 0.9 2.1 2.5 3.0 3.2 3.6 3.9 4.3 4.9 5.8 5.3 18.4 26.5 40.7 49.6 77.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 3.9 3.7 5.8 6.3 7.0 7.9 100.0 2.1 2.0 3.0 3.2 3.5 3.9 68.9 89 93 59 49 41 29

0


### Table F.3.9 Summary of Life-Cycle Cost s and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: A-S-IN Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficienc y (Level 0) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$ Mean Savings $ Units with LCC

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Savings % 2 3 57 79 93 109 122 138 156 182 226 328 139 100 3 -22 61 96 120 145 167 192 222 263 333 500 194 99 4 -47 64 113 146 180 210 243 285 340 437 665 247 99 5 -61 66 124 162 201 235 275 323 386 499 764 279 99 6 -81 57 120 163 206 243 287 339 411 536 825 292 97 7 -108 36 101 146 193 232 278 334 410 544 850 284 95 8 -1,547 -1,389 -1,317 -1,264 -1,212 -1, 180 -1,129 -1,083 -974 -838 -549 -1,121 0

Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown b y Percentiles of the Distribution of Results
years

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.5 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.6 3.0 0.6 1.5 1.9 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.6 4.2 0.7 1.7 2.1 2.5 2.7 3.0 3.2 3.6 4.1 4.8 0.7 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.8 3.1 3.4 3.7 4.3 5.0 0.8 1.9 2.3 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.6 4.0 4.6 5.4 0.9 2.1 2.6 3.1 3.3 3.7 4.0 4.5 5.2 6.1 5.5 21.9 34.5 64.1 89.5 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 3.9 5.7 6.6 6.9 7.5 8.6 100.0 2.0 2.9 3.2 3.4 3.6 4.1 78.9 89 65 49 45 39 25

0

F-35 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### Table F.3.10 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: B-L-IO Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 0) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Savin g s $ Units with LCC Savings % 2 -8 12 21 28 35 41 48 56 66 84 124 3 -23 3 15 24 34 43 52 63 77 101 155 4 -57 -23 -7 8 22 35 49 65 85 119 195 5 -71 -37 -19 -4 11 25 40 56 78 112 193 6 -724 -649 -618 -596 -571 -551 -535 -506 -465 -408 -291 7 -2,768 -2,571 -2,519 -2,477 -2,442 -2,413 -2,386 -2,351 -2 ,307 -2,242 -2,136 47 51 48 38 -531 -2,399 99 93 79 69

0 0

Efficienc y

Level

%

0 PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 0.7 1.7 2.0 2.4 2.6 3.0 3.1 3.6 4.1 4.7 6.6 3.2 53 3 0.8 2.2 2.7 3.1 3.5 3.9 4.1 4.8 5.7 6.5 9.4 4.4 25 4 1.0 3.0 3.7 4.1 4.8 5.4 5.8 6.8 8.2 9.8 15.2 6.3 7 5 1.1 3.4 4.1 4.7 5.4 6.1 6.6 7.8 9.4 11.4 18.5 7.2 3 6 5.3 26.2 42.4 75.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 82.5 0 7 57.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.9 0


### Table F.3.11 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: B-M-IO Efficienc y Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 0) Mean Units

Level Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results Savings with

% 2008$ $ LCC Savings 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % 2 -9 11 20 26 33 39 45 53 64 81 121 45 99 3 -25 2 15 26 36 46 56 68 84 110 168 55 93 4 -63 -28 -11 3 18 32 46 62 83 117 196 45 75 5 -77 -42 -23 -9 7 21 36 53 75 111 193 35 67 6 -741 -663 -633 -610 -586 -565 -550 -520 -478 -419 -304 -544 0 7 -2,572 -2,384 -2,332 -2,293 -2,257 -2,229 -2,203 -2,170 -2 ,123 -2,058 -1,962 -2,215 0

Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 3 4 5 6 7 0.7 1.7 2.1 2.4 2.7 3.1 3.2 3.7 4.3 4.9 0.8 2.3 2.7 3.1 3.5 4.0 4.2 4.9 5.8 6.6 1.1 3.1 3.8 4.3 5.0 5.7 6.1 7.2 8.6 10.4 1.2 3.5 4.2 4.8 5.6 6.4 6.9 8.2 9.9 12.1 5.3 27.7 46.6 91.2 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 45.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 6.8 9.7 16.6 20.2 100.0 100.0 3.3 4.4 6.6 7.6 84.0 99.9 45 25

7 1 0 0

F-36 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc

### Table F.3.12 Summary of Life-Cycle Costs and Payback Period Results Assuming AEO2009 High-Price Scenario: B-S-IO Efficienc y

Level

% Decrease in LCC from Baseline Efficiency (Level 0) Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results 2008$

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Savings $ Units with LCC Savings % 2 -11 6 14 20 27 33 38 46 55 72 108 3 -63 -37 -22 -11 1 12 23 37 54 83 146 4 -63 -37 -22 -11 1 12 23 37 54 83 146 5 -79 -52 -38 -26 -13 -1 10 25 43 73 139 6 -785 -707 -678 -657 -635 -619 -601 -578 -539 -493 -392 7 -2,466 -2,278 -2,227 -2,189 -2,154 -2,127 -2,101 -2,067 -2 ,027 -1,966 -1,868 38 23 23 10 -599 -2,115 97 63 63 51

0 0

Efficienc y

Level

% PBP Shown by Percentiles of th e Distribution of Results
years

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Mean Less than 3 Years Payback % 2 3 4 5 6 7 0.7 1.9 2.3 2.7 3.0 3.4 3.6 4.1 4.9 5.7 1.2 3.6 4.3 5.1 5.8 6.8 7.2 8.8 10.8 13.1 1.2 3.6 4.3 5.1 5.8 6.8 7.2 8.8 10.8 13.1 1.4 4.1 5.0 5.9 6.8 8.0 8.5 10.5 13.2 16.5 6.6 57.5 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 98.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 8.1 23.8 23.8 33.7 100.0 100.0 3.7 8.3 8.3 10.3 94.0 100.0 39 1 1 1 0 0

F-37 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_AppendixF_08-14-09.doc