Energy Conservation Standards forCommercial Refrigeration EquipmentANOPR Public MeetingNOPR Analyses and Next StepsBuilding Technologies ProgramOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyU.S. Department of EnergyAugust 23, 2007Revise ANOPR AnalysesNOPR Analyses Flow DiagramImpactUtilityImpactTrialStandardLevelsReviseANOPRAssessmentRegulatoryImpactImpactManufacturerAnalysisAnalysisAnalysesEnvironmentalAnalysisEmploymentAnalysis2Revise ANOPR AnalysesANOPR Issues for Public CommentSelection of Candidate StandardLevels for Post-ANOPR Analysis(Issue #13)Approach to Characterizing Energy Conservation Standards(Issue #14)Standards for Commercial Refrigerator-Freezers (Issue #15)3Revise ANOPR AnalysesRevise ANOPR AnalysesANOPR AnalysisActionEngineering Analysis•Consider ANOPR comments•Revise using latest dataLife-Cycle Cost and Payback•Consider ANOPR commentsPeriod Analyses•Revise using latest data•Conduct LCCSub-Group AnalysisNational Impacts Analysis•Consider ANOPR comments•Revise using latest data4Revise ANOPR AnalysesSelection of Candidate Standard Levels for Post-ANOPR Analysis(Issue #13)DOE selects Candidate Standard Levels (CSLs) for individual equipmentbased on the broader set of levels analyzed in the ANOPR.DOE identified four efficiency levelsplus the baseline level in each classbased on levels showing:•maximum LCC savings•maximum energy savings,•highest efficiency level withless than 3 year payback.•DOE also included additional levels between the baseline and these levels in its set ofCSLsDOE invites comments on the candidate standard levels selected forfuture analysis.5Revise ANOPR AnalysesProposed Candidate Standard LevelsEquipmentClassTestMetricCandidate Standard Level in Order ofEfficiencyCandidate Standard Levels forEquipment Analyzed Expressed inTerms of the Test MetricBaselineCSL1CSL2CSL3CSL4BaselineCSL1CSL2CSL3CSL4VOP.RC.MCDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 4Level 6Level 7Level 81.080.900.750.700.64VOP.RC.LCDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 62.932.612.472.462.39VOP.SC.MTDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 3Level 5Level 7Level 82.552.232.071.841.65VCT.RC.MCDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 3Level 5Level 6Level 70.540.420.380.240.19VCT.RC.LCDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 3Level 5Level 7Level 81.060.900.750.650.55VCT.SC.ITDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 3Level 6Level 7Level 81.581.240.770.690.63VCS.SC.ITDEC/VkWh/day/ft3Level 1Level 5Level 6Level 7Level 80.270.190.180.170.17SVO.RC.MCDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 2Level 4Level 6Level 71.051.000.900.800.74SVO.SC.MTDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 3Level 5Level 7Level 82.241.991.871.621.54SOC.RC.MCDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 70.950.760.740.710.60HZO.RC.MCDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 40.160.160.140.110.10HZO.RC.LCDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 60.830.750.700.650.62HZO.SC.MTDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 4Level 6Level 7Level 80.780.610.560.540.48HZO.SC.LTDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 3Level 6Level 7Level 82.051.801.521.331.32HCT.SC.ITDEC/TDAkWh/day/ft2Level 1Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 61.631.280.730.610.576Revise ANOPR AnalysesApproach to Characterizing Energy Conservation Standards(Issue #14)Standards will be based on the CDECor TDEC as calculated by the testprocedureDOE proposes the use of Total Display Area (TDA) as a normalizing factorfor•for remote condensing commercial equipment with transparent doors or without doors,•commercial ice-cream freezerswith transparent doors•self-contained commercialequipment without doorsDOE proposes the use of Refrigerated Volume (V) as a normalizing factor for•remote condensing commercial refrigerators,commercial freezers, and commercialrefrigerators-freezers with solid doors•commercial ice-cream freezers with solid doors7Revise ANOPR AnalysesApproach to Characterizing Energy Conservation Standards(Issue #14)For equipment using TDA as the normalizing factor, DOE proposes thatMaximum Energy Consumption Standards be described asMECSC= ASCx TDA(self-contained equipment)MECRC= ARCx TDA(remote condensing equipment)•ARC, ASCareexpressed in terms of kWh/day/ft2of rated volumeFor equipment using V as the normalizing factor, DOE proposes thatMaximum Energy Consumption Standards be described asMaximum Energy Consumption (M) (kWh/yr) = B x V + K•Bis expressed in terms of kWh/day/ft3of rated volume,•Vis the adjusted volume (ft3) calculated for theequipment class, and•Kis an offset factorexpressed in kWh/day.DOE invites comments on its approach for characterizing energyconservation standards as discussed in section III of the ANOPR andhow it could develop appropriate offset factors.8Revise ANOPR AnalysesStandards for Commercial Refrigerator-Freezers(Issue #15)For remote-condensing refrigerator-freezers with independent remotecondensing units for refrigerator and freezer compartments•Determine the maximum allowable energyconsumption for each compartmentindividually based on eachcompartment’s respectiveequipment class and TDA orVolume•Maximum allowable energy consumption for a display caseis based on the sum of themaximum allowable consumption for each compartment calculated separately.Self-contained refrigerator-freezers w/o doors but with separatecompressor/condensers for refrigeratorand freezer compartment treatedsimilarly using TDEC for each compartment9Revise ANOPR AnalysesStandards for Commercial Refrigerator-Freezers(Issue #15)For remote condensing refrigerator freezers where a single condensing unitserves both refrigerator and freezer compartments•Measure total refrigeration load according to ASHRAE 72 for all compartments•Use ARI 1200-2006 and calculate CEC using lowestevaporator temperature•Determine CDEC as sum of CEC, FEC, LEC, AEC, DEC, and PEC for case•Determine maximum-allowable energy consumption as themaximum allowablenormalized energy consumption (MEC/ TDA orMEC / V) for the compartment with thelower evaporator temperature times total case refrigerator TDA or volume as appropriateSelf-contained refrigerator-freezers with a single condensing unit servesboth refrigerator and freezer compartment treated similarly using TDEC forcompartment with the lowest temperatureDOE invites comments on this approach to implementing standards forcommercial refrigerator-freezers.10Trial Standard LevelsNOPR Analyses Flow DiagramImpactUtilityImpactTrialStandardLevelsReviseANOPRAssessmentRegulatoryImpactImpactManufacturerAnalysisAnalysisAnalysesEnvironmentalAnalysisEmploymentAnalysis11Trial Standard LevelsSelection of Trial Standard LevelsPurpose•To develop a list of standard levels from which impacts are weighed and aproposed standard level is selected–Each trial standard level consists of aset of potential minimum efficiency levelscovering all equipment classes, andmay vary between equipment classes–NOPR analyses assess impacts for trial standard levels (not equipment classes)Method•Trial standard levels are assembled fromthe equipment classesidentified in theANOPR–Candidate standard levels cover a range of efficiencies and can include:Most energy efficientlevel (max tech)Efficiency level with the lowest life-cycle costEfficiency level with a paybackperiod of three years or lessEfficiency levels withnoteworthy technologiesEfficiency levels that fill in largegaps between candidate standard levels–Each trial standard level consists ofthe candidate standard level from eachequipment class that meetsone of the above criteria12Trial Standard LevelsTrial Standard Level CriteriaA critical part of the NOPR analysis on which DOE is seeking earlyguidance and input.•Trial standard levels are created from combinations of candidatestandard levels at an equipment class level.•Based around a consistent theme, such as lowest life-cycle cost orpayback in 3-years or less.DOE invites comments on the criteria for selecting trial standard levels.13Manufacturer Impact AnalysisNOPR Analyses Flow DiagramImpactUtilityImpactTrialStandardLevelsReviseANOPRAssessmentRegulatoryImpactImpactManufacturerAnalysisAnalysisAnalysesEnvironmentalAnalysisEmploymentAnalysis14Manufacturer Impact AnalysisManufacturer Impact AnalysisPurpose•To assess the impacts of standardson commercial refrigeration equipmentmanufacturers•To identify and estimate impacts on manufacturer sub-groups that may be moreseverely impacted thanthe industry as a whole•To examine the impact of cumulativeregulatory burdens on the industryMethod•Analyze industry cash flow and net present value through use of the GovernmentRegulatory Impact Model (GRIM)•Interview manufacturers to refine inputsto the GRIM, developsub-group analyses,and address qualitative issuesOutput•Industry Net Present Value impacts•Sub-group Net Present Value impacts•Other impacts15Manufacturer Impact AnalysisManufacturer Impact Analysis ProcessThe MIA consists of three phasesPhase 1Phase 2Phase 3profileDevelopstraw-manGRIM*Developguidewide /subgroupAssess directcompetition,cumulativeburdenFinalizeMIA resultsfor NOPRIndustryinterviewInterviews& industryanalysesemployment,*Government Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM)16Utility Impact AnalysisNOPR Analyses Flow DiagramImpactUtilityImpactTrialStandardLevelsReviseANOPRAssessmentRegulatoryImpactImpactManufacturerAnalysisAnalysisAnalysesEnvironmentalAnalysisEmploymentAnalysis17Utility Impact AnalysisUtility Impact AnalysisPurpose•To investigate the effects on utilities from reduced energy sales and peak loaddemand due to potential standardsMethod•Uses national energy savings results•Uses the Energy Information Administration’s National Energy Modeling System(NEMS) tailored for DOE’s BuildingTechnologies Program (NEMS-BT)Output•Change in electricity sales and price by region•Change in the mix of electricity generation•Change in new capacity construction18Employment Impact AnalysisNOPR Analyses Flow DiagramImpactUtilityImpactTrialStandardLevelsReviseANOPRAssessmentRegulatoryImpactImpactManufacturerAnalysisAnalysisAnalysesEnvironmentalAnalysisEmploymentAnalysis19Employment Impact AnalysisEmployment Impact AnalysisPurpose•To report net jobs created or eliminated nationally as a consequence of newenergy efficiency standardsMethod•Uses the IMSET tool, a buildings-sectorversion of the IMPLAN national inputoutput model•Changes in equipment and energy expenditures taken from the National EnergySavings Analysis•Direct employment impacts taken from the Manufacturer Impact AnalysisOutput•Change in employment by sectoras a consequence of new standards20Environmental AssessmentNOPR Analyses Flow DiagramImpactUtilityImpactTrialStandardLevelsReviseANOPRRegulatoryImpactImpactManufacturerAnalysisAnalysisAnalysesEnvironmentalAssessmentAnalysisEmploymentAnalysis21Environmental AssessmentEnvironmental AssessmentPurpose•To report environmental impacts as aconsequence of newenergy efficiencystandards, including changes in power plant emissionsMethod•Energy savings results taken fromthe National Energy Savings Analysis•Energy Information Administration’s National Energy Modeling System (NEMS)provides power-plant emissionsOutput•Estimate of national emission reductions of SO2, NOx, CO2and Mercury22Regulatory Impact AnalysisNOPR Analyses Flow DiagramImpactUtilityImpactTrialStandardLevelsReviseANOPRAssessmentRegulatoryImpactImpactManufacturerAnalysisAnalysisAnalysesEnvironmentalAnalysisEmploymentAnalysis23Regulatory Impact AnalysisRegulatory Impact AnalysisPurpose•To investigate the national impacts dueto non-regulatory alternatives comparedwith mandatory energy efficiency standards•The non-regulatory alternativesthat may be considered:–No new regulatory action;early replacement; prescriptive standards; customer taxcredits; manufacturer tax credits; customer rebates; voluntary efficiency targets; bulkgovernment procurementMethod•Modify NES spreadsheet model to consider scenarios. Changes may include:energy prices and escalation factors; implicit marketdiscount rates; customerpurchase price, operating cost, and income elasticities; and equipment stockdataOutput•National Energy Savings and Net Present Value of the non-regulatoryalternatives•Impact of non-regulatory alternativeson purchase price and use of energyefficient equipment24ClosingThe Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) directs DOE toconsider seven factors when setting energy conservation standardsFactorAnalysis1. Economic impact on consumers andLife-cycle cost analysismanufacturersManufacturer impacts analysis2. Lifetime operating cost savingsLife-cycle cost analysis3. Total projected energy savingsNational impact analysis4. Impact on utility or performanceScreening analysisEngineering analysis5. Impact of any lessening ofManufacturer impacts analysiscompetition6. Need for national energyNational impact analysisconservation7. Other factors the SecretaryEnvironmental assessmentconsiders relevantUtility impact analysisEmployment impact analysis25ClosingHow to Submit Comments...Public Meeting– oral comments will be captured in the transcript andbecome part of the public record.Written comments – ANOPR comment period open untilOctober 9, 2007Reference docket #: EE-2006-STD-0126 and/or RIN #: 1904-AB59Email:commercialrefrigeration.rulemaking@ee.doe.govMail: Ms. Brenda Edwards-JonesU.S.Department of EnergyBuilding TechnologiesProgram, Mail stop EE-2JANOPR for Commercial Refrigeration EquipmentEE-2006-STD-01261000 Independence Avenue, SWWashington DC, 20585-0121Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards-JonesU.S.Department of EnergyBuilding Technologies Program, 1J-0181000 Independence Avenue, SWWashington DC, 20585-012126