CHAPTER 15. EMPLOYMENT IMPACT ANALYSIS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

15.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 15-1 

15.2 METHOD ...................................................................................................................... 15-1 

15.3 RESULTS ...................................................................................................................... 15-2 

15.3.1 Increased Capital Investment Cost Impacts................................................................... 15-2 

15.3.2 Decreased Energy and Water Costs Impacts ................................................................. 15-3 

15.3.3 Changes in Operations and Maintenance Costs Impacts ............................................... 15-4 

15.3.4 Net National Employment Impacts................................................................................ 15-5 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 15.3.1 Commercial Clothes Washers Net National Change in Jobs............................. 15-6 

LIST OF FIGURE 

Figure 15.3.1 Commercial Clothes Washer Employment Impact of Increased Equipment 

Cost .................................................................................................................... 15-3 

Figure 15.3.2 Commercial Clothes Washer Employment Impact of Energy and Water 

Figure 15.3.3 Commercial Clothes Washer Employment Impacts of Operations and 

Savings............................................................................................................... 15-4 

Maintenance Cost Increase ................................................................................ 15-5 

Figure 15.3.4 Commercial Clothes Washer Net National Employment Impacts .................... 15-6 

15-i 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
 

CHAPTER 15. EMPLOYMENT IMPACT ANALYSIS
 

15.1 INTRODUCTION 

The Department defines net national employment impacts from commercial clothes 

washer efficiency standards as net jobs created or eliminated in the general economy as a 

consequence of: (1) increased spending on the purchase and installation of new appliances; (2) 

reduced spending on electricity, natural gas, and water; (3) reduced spending on new investment 

or capacity by energy companies; (4) changes in operation and maintenance costs; and (5) the 

associated indirect effects of the above. 

This chapter presents information and results pertaining solely to CCWs. As described in 

section 1.3 of chapter 1 of this technical support document (TSD), DOE is continuing the 

rulemaking for energy conservation standards for microwave oven standby power, and analyses 

related to these products will be published in a separate TSD. In addition, DOE issued a final 

rule1

 adopting energy conservation standards for conventional cooking products (i.e., cooktops 

and ovens) and microwave oven energy factor (EF), and details of the analyses for these products 

are contained in the corresponding final rule TSD.2 

15.2 METHOD 

The Department based its analysis on an input/output model of the U.S. economy that 

estimates the effects of standards on major sectors of the economy related to buildings and the 

net impact of standards on jobs. The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory developed the 

model, ImSET3

 (which stands for Impact of Sector Energy Technologies) as a successor to 

ImBuild4

, a special-purpose version of the IMPLAN5 national input/output model. ImSET 

estimates the employment and income effects of building energy technologies. In comparison 

with simple economic multiplier approaches, ImSET allows for more complete and automated 

analysis of the economic impacts of energy-efficiency investments in buildings. 

In an input/output model, the level of employment in an economy is determined by the 

relationship of different sectors of the economy and the spending flows among them. Different 

sectors have different levels of labor intensity and so changes in the level of spending (e.g., due 

to the effects of an efficiency standard) in one sector of the economy will affect flows in other 

sectors, which affects the overall level of employment. 

ImSET uses a 188-sector model of the national economy to predict the economic effects 

of residential and commercial buildings technologies. ImSET collects estimates of initial 

investments, energy savings, and economic activity associated with spending the savings 

resulting from standards (e.g., changes in final demand in personal consumption, business 

investment and spending, and government spending). It provides overall estimates of the change 

15-1 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
in national output for each input-output sector. The model applies estimates of employment and 

wage income per dollar of economic output for each sector and calculates impacts on national 

employment and wage income. 

Energy-efficiency technology primarily affects the U.S. economy along three spending 

pathways. First, general investment funds are diverted to sectors that manufacture, install, and 

maintain energy-efficient appliances. The increased cost of appliances leads to higher 

employment in the appliance manufacturing sectors and lower employment in other economic 

sectors. Second, commercial firm spending are redirected from utilities toward firms that supply 

production inputs. Third, electric utility sector investment funds are released for use in other 

sectors of the economy. When consumers use less energy, electric utilities experience relative 

reductions in demand which leads to reductions in utility sector investment and employment. 

15.3 RESULTS 

The results in this section refer to impacts of commercial clothes washer standards 

relative to the base case. DOE disaggregated the impact of commercial clothes washer standards 

on employment into three component effects: increased capital investment costs, decreased 

energy and water costs, and changes in operations and maintenance costs. 

15.3.1 Increased Capital Investment Cost Impacts 

Figures 15.3.1 shows the employment impacts of the increased investment and spending 

on more-efficient equipment. Because appliance manufacturing is relatively capital-intensive 

compared to other sectors of the economy, the net result is a small loss of employment. 

15-2 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
-0.03 

-0.025 

-0.02 

-0.015 

-0.01 

-0.005 

0 

2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 

Year 

Incremental Jobs (1000) 

TSL 1 

TSL 2 

TSL 3 

TSL 4 

TSL 5 

Figure 15.3.1 Commercial Clothes Washer Employment Impact of Increased 

Equipment Cost 

15.3.2 Decreased Energy and Water Costs Impacts 

Figures 15.3.2 shows the employment impact of redirected spending made possible by 

appliance energy savings. In this case, the employment impact is strongly positive, increasing 

employment in the sectors that supply these firms with production, investment, or financial 

inputs. Due to an error in the distribution of water savings in ImSET, DOE adds the dollar value 

of water savings to electricity savings, as the cost multipliers and labor intensity of the water 

sector and the electricity generation sector are similar. 

15-3 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
0 

0.1 

0.2 

0.3 

0.4 

0.5 

0.6 

0.7 

2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 

Year 

Incremental Jobs (1000) 

TSL 1 

TSL 2 

TSL 3 

TSL 4 

TSL 5 

Figure 15.3.2 Commercial Clothes Washer Employment Impact of Energy and 

Water Savings 

15.3.3 Changes in Operations and Maintenance Costs Impacts 

Figures 15.3.3 shows the employment impacts of non-energy operations and maintenance 

cost increases for commercial clothes washers. Repair and maintenance is comparatively laborintensive, so the net result is a small increase in employment. 

15-4 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
0 

0.005 

0.01 

0.015 

0.02 

0.025 

2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 

Year 

Incremental Jobs (1000) 

TSL 1, 2 

TSL 3 

TSL 4 

TSL 5 

Figure 15.3.3	 Commercial Clothes Washer Employment Impacts of Operations 

and Maintenance Cost Increase 

15.3.4 Net National Employment Impacts 

Figures 15.3.4 show the estimated net national employment impacts of the commercial 

clothes washer trial standard levels. For any given year, these figures show the net change in the 

number of jobs in the economy relative to if there were no change in standards (and thus no 

resulting change in spending and cash flow patterns throughout the economy). Table 15.3.1 

shows the net national employment impact in specific years. 

15-5 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
-0.1 

0 

0.1 

0.2 

0.3 

0.4 

0.5 

0.6 

0.7 

2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 

Year 

Incremental Jobs (1000) 

TSL 1 

TSL 2 

TSL 3 

TSL 4 

TSL 5 

Figure 15.3.4 Commercial Clothes Washer Net National Employment Impacts 

Table 15.3.1 Commercial Clothes Washers Net National Change in Jobs 

Trial Standard 

Level 

2013 

(thousands) 

2020 

(thousands) 

2030 

(thousands) 

2043 

(thousands) 

1

2

3

4

5

0.00

0.00

0.01

0.01

0.02

0.04

0.05

0.25

0.28

0.34

0.06

0.07

0.39

0.44

0.53

0.07

0.08

0.46

0.52

0.62

15-6 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REFERENCES 

1	 U.S. Department of Energy-Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Energy 

Conservation Standards for Certain Consumer Products (Dishwashers, Dehumidifiers, 

Microwave Ovens, and Electric and Gas Kitchen Ranges and Ovens) and for Certain 

Commercial and Industrial Equipment (Commercial Clothes Washers); Final Rule. Federal 

Register, 2009. 74(66): pp. 16040-16096. 

2	 U.S. Department of Energy-Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Technical 

Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Consumer Products and Commercial and 

Industrial Equipment: Residential Dishwashers, Dehumidifiers, Cooking Products, and 

Commercial Clothes Washers, March, 2009. Washington, DC. 

<http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/cooking_products_final_rul 

e_tsd.html> 

3	 Roop, J.M., M. J. Scott, and R. W. Schultz. ImSET: Impact of Sector Energy Technologies. 

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. July 2005. 

4	 Scott, M. J., D. J. Hostick, and D. B. Belzer, ImBuild: Impact of Building Energy Efficiency 

Programs, April, 1998. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Richland, WA. Report No. 

PNNL-11884. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO 

1830. 

5	 Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc., IMPLAN Professional: User’s Guide, Analysis Guide, 

Data Guide, 1997. Stillwater, MN. 

15-7 

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.1