### CHAPTER 10. NATIONAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

10.1 INTRODUCTION

............................................................................................................. 10-1 10.2 BASE-CASE AND STANDARDS-CASE FORECASTED WALK-IN STOCKS AND EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTIONS

..................................................................................... 10-2 10.2.1 Installed Walk-in Stock

..................................................................................... 10-2 10.2.2 Efficiency Distribution of the Stock

.................................................................. 10-4 10.3 NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS

................................................................................... 10-6 10.3.1 National Energy Savings Definition

.................................................................. 10-6 10.3.2 National Energy Savings Inputs

........................................................................ 10-7 10.3.1.1 Unit Energy Consumption (UEC) and Walk-in Stock by Walk-in Type

.................................................................................................... 10-7 10.3.1.2 Site-to-Source Conversion Factors

..................................................... 10-8 10.3.1.3 Interactions with Heating, Ve ntilation, and Air-Conditioning (HVAC) Systems

............................................................................... 10-8 10.3.1.4 Rebound Factor

................................................................................... 10-8 10.3.1.5 Discount Factor

................................................................................... 10-8 10.4 NET PRESENT VALUE

.................................................................................................. 10-9 10.4.1 Net Present Value Definition

............................................................................. 10-9 10.4.2 Net Present Value Inputs

................................................................................. 10-10 10.4.2.1 Total Annual Installed Cost Increases

.............................................. 10-10 10.4.2.2 Total Annual Operating Cost Savings

.............................................. 10-11 10.5 NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS AND NET PRESENT VALUE RESULTS

........... 10-11 10.5.1 National Energy Savings Summary Results

.................................................... 10-12 10.5.2 Net Present Value Su mmary Results

............................................................... 10-14 REFERENCES

............................................................................................................... 10-1 7

LIST OF TABLES

Table 10.2.1 Installed Walk-in Stock by Y ear and Envelope Equipment Class

.................. 10-3 Table 10.2.2 Installed Walk-in Stock by Y ear and Refrigeration System Equipment Class

................................................................................................................ 10-4 Table 10.3.1 National Energy Saving Inputs

....................................................................... 10-7 Table 10.4.1 Net Present Value Inputs

.............................................................................. 10-10 Table 10.5.1 National Energy Saving and Net Present Value Inputs

................................ 10-12 Table 10.5.2 Maximum Energy Savings for Wh ich Net Present Value of Savings Are Greater than Zero at a 7 Percent Discount Rate and Corresponding CSLs (2015-2045)

................................................................................................... 10-13 Table 10.5.3 Maximum Energy Savings for Wh ich Net Present Value of Savings are Greater than Zero at a 3 Percent Discount Rate and Corresponding CSLs (2015-2045)

................................................................................................... 10-14 Table 10.5.4 Net Present Value at Maximum Level of Energy Savings for Which Net Present Value is Greater than Zero at a 7-Percent Discount Rate and Corresponding CSLs

..................................................................................... 10-15

10-i

### Table 10.5.5 Net Present Value at Maximum Level of Energy Savings for Which Net Present Value is Greater than Zero at a 3-Percent Discount Rate and Corresponding CSLs

..................................................................................... 10-16

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 10.2.1 Walk-in Stock by Efficiency Level over Time

............................................... 10-6

10-ii

### CHAPTER 10. NATIONAL IMPACTS ANALYSIS

10.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the method for es timating the national imp acts of candidate standard levels (CSLs) for analyzed walk-in cool er and freezer equipment (hereafter “walk-ins” or “WICF”). In the national impact analysis (NIA), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) assesses the cumulative national energy savings (NES) and the cumulative national economic impacts of different CSLs. DOE measures energy savings as the cumulative quadrillion British thermal units (quads) of energy a CSL is exp ected to save the Nation. DOE measures economic impacts as the net present value (NPV) in 2009 do llars of total customer costs and savings expected to result from a CSL. The analysis period over which DOE calculates the NPV and NES is from 2015 to 2045. Results of the NIA desc ribed in this chapter include (1) national energy savings to the Nation as a result of st andards; (2) monetary value of operating cost savings (primarily from reduced energy consump tion) to the Nation as a result of standards; (3) increased total installed costs to the Nation as a result of standards; and (4) the NPV of these savings (the difference between the present m onetary values of opera ting cost savings and increased total installed costs). The main portion of this chapter summarizes the results of these estimates. More detailed results are provided in appendices 10A (for NES results) and 10B (for NPV results).

Because a walk-in is designed to work as a single coherent unit, the characteristics of complete walk-in systems ( e.g. , energy consumption, installed cost) must be considered for estimating the national impacts of walk-in CSLs. However, each walk-in does consist of two distinct parts, the envelope and the refrigeration system. DOE analyzes the two parts of a walk-in together for the purpose of calculating the national impacts, but DOE is considering separate standards for the two sepa rate WICF components.

DOE determines both the NPV and NES for each CSL and each equipment class it selects in the engineering analysis (preliminary technical support document [TSD] chapter 5). In this rulemaking, DOE considers up to 15 CSLs for each of the envelope equipment classes and up to 9 CSLs for each of the refri geration system equipment classes.

DOE performs all NIA calculations using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, available at www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/wicf.html . Appendix 10A will provide instructions for using the spreadsheet.

The following sections describe in deta il the methodology and inputs for the NIA. Several NIA inputs, including per-unit costs, per-unit energy consumption, and national shipments, are discussed in other analyses. In describing the inputs to the NIA, this chapter references those analyses and presents new in formation on installed stock. Section 10.2 discusses DOE’s walk-in shipment forecasts by efficiency, the installed stock of wa lk-ins, and the mix of efficiencies of that stock. Section 10.3 discusses DOE’s calculation of national energy consumption in the base and standards cases and the resulting difference in NES between these cases. Section 10.4 discusses th e NPV calculation. Section 10.5 presents the NES and NPV results by equipment class.

10-1

### 10.2 BASE-CASE AND STANDARDS-CASE FORECASTED WALK-IN STOCKS AND EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTIONS

The characteristics of DOE’s shipment forecas ts (such as equipment costs and operating costs) and projected walk-in stocks (such as aver age 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 re late to the NES and NPV.

For example, the projected distribution of walk-in efficiencies shipped and walk-in efficiencies in stock are key factors in determining the NPV. Two inputs to the NPV are the perunit total installed cost and per- unit annual operating cost. The per- unit total installed cost often varies with the efficiency of walk-ins shipped. When higher e fficiency walk-ins are shipped, higher or lower installed costs are often incurred. The life-cycle cost analysis (preliminary TSD chapter 8) describes how per-unit total installed co sts vary as a function of efficiency for each walk-in.

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 en ergy consumption is a function of walk-in characteristics in the installed stock. The total installed WICF stock 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 walk-in stock. The engineering analysis (preliminary TSD chapter 5) discusses the relationships among walk-in system design, system input power , and walk-in efficiency. The energy use characterization (preliminary TSD chapter 6) describes how the per-unit energy consumption varies as a function of system input power and market sector application for each walk-in design.

Sections 10.3.2 and 10.4.2 discuss inputs to cal culating the NES and NPV in further detail.

The following sections detail the forecasted di stribution of efficienci es, installed walk-in stocks, and average efficiency of those stocks in the base and standards cases.

10.2.1 Installed Walk-in Stock

From the information and the shipment forecasts presented in chapter 9, DOE establishes the installed walk-in stock profile for all analyzed walk-in equipment classes. This information is an important input to the National Impacts Anal ysis because the national energy and financial impacts are directly related to the size and typeof the walk-in stock. The following two tables show the installed walk-in stocks, which are the sa me in the base case a nd standards case. Table 10.2.1 presents the stock broken down into 5-year increments by the equipment class of the envelope portion of the walk-i n. Table 10.2.2 breaks down the stock by refrigeration system equipment class instead. Because each walk-in includes both an envelope component and a refrigeration system, the total stoc k is the same in both tables.

10-2

### Table 10.2.1 Installed Walk-in Stock by Year and En velope Equipment Class

WICF Envelope Systems Year and Stock
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Non-Display Cooler Small 202,025 215,869 231,723 249,314 267,200 286,372 306,924 Non-Display Cooler Medium 752,943 804,539 863,627 929,189 995,846 1,067,301 1,143,898

Non-Display Cooler Large 337,630 360,767 387,263 416,661 446,552 478,593 512,940 Display Cooler Small 8,619 9,255 9,980 10,782 11,607 12,496 13,454 Display Cooler Medium 157,522 169,148 182,392 197,045 212,122 228,367 245,873 Display Cooler Large 12,929 13,883 14,970 16,173 17,410 18,744 20,180 Non-Display Freezer Small 133,677 142,810 153,401 165,184 177,029 189,723 203,327

Non-Display Freezer Medium 430,401 459,806 493,907 531,845 569,981 610,852 654,654

Non-Display Freezer Large 170,565 182,218 195,732 210,767 225,880 242,077 259,435

Display Freezer Small 18,270 19,789 21,477 23,331 25,303 27,445 29,771 Display Freezer Medium 116,520 126,209 136,976 148,797 161,380 175,041 189,873 Display Freezer Large 9,135 9,894 10,739 11,665 12,652 13,723 14,885

Total 2,350,236 2,514,186 2,702,186 2,910,753 3,122,962 3,350,732 3,595,214

10-3

### Table 10.2.2 Installed Walk-in St ock by Year and Refrigerati on System Equipment Class
WICF Refrigeration Systems Year and Stock
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Dedicated Medium Temperature Indoor Small 34,546 36,914 39,625 42,633 45,691 48,970 52,484
Dedicated Medium Temperature Indoor Large 62,540 66,834 71,750 77,205 82,753 88,701 95,077
Dedicated Medium Temperature Outdoor Small 157,378 168,162 180,512 194,216 208,148 223,084 239,094

Dedicated Medium Temperature Outdoor Large 500,411 534,807 574,190 617,882 662,326 709,980 761,075

Multiplex system Medium Temperature Small 10,101 10,793 11,586 12,466 13,360 14,319 15,346

Multiplex system Medium Temperature Large 706,693 755,951 812,292 874,764 938,458 1,006,819 1,080,192

Dedicated Low Temperature Indoor Small 22,859 24,420 26,232 28,246 30,272 32,443 34,769
Dedicated Low Temperature Indoor Large 34,863 37,244 40,006 43,079 46,168 49,479 53,027
Dedicated Low Temperature Outdoor Small 104,134 111,249 119,500 128,678 137,905 147,794 158,392

Dedicated Low Temperature Outdoor Large 288,562 308,682 331,906 357,706 383,806 411,819 441,885

Multiplex system Low Temperature Small 6,684 7,140 7,670 8,259 8,851 9,486 10,166 Multiplex system Low Temperature Large 421,467 451,989 486,918 525,619 565,222 607,841 653,707

Total 2,350,236 2,514,186 2,702,186 2,910,753 3,122,962 3,350,732 3,595,214



### 10.2.2 Efficiency Distribution of the Stock

Besides the size of the stock, the other info rmation necessary to calculate the national energy impacts of the walk-in standard is the av erage energy consumption of the stock in both the base case and the standards case.

DOE calculates the energy consumption separate ly for each combination of envelope and refrigeration system equipment classes, at each possible combination of efficiency levels, for each possible combination of standard levels in ea ch year. Because this results in a prohibitively large number of possible combinations of factor s (24 equipment class combinations with some shipments, times 160 possible combinations of effi ciency level in the equipment in the market, times 160 possible standard levels DOE could set for each equipment class, times 31 years = 19,000,000 + combinations), DOE does not present th ese calculations in detail here. However, DOE outlines its method below. The calculations th emselves are available in the Microsoft Excel

10-4

### spreadsheet DOE used to conduct the National Impact Analysis. As mentioned above, this spreadsheet is available at www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/wicf.html

.
The method employed in that spreadsheet is as follows. Although, as mentioned above, there are many possible combinations of type s of shipments, regular patterns in these combinations allow for simpler analysis. Based on manufacturer interviews and DOE estimates, DOE assumes that the great majority of the WICF market will use equipment roughly corresponding to CSL 0 in the baseline. Based on the same sources, DOE also assumes that WICF consumers are unlikely to deliberately purchase equipment that exceeds any minimum efficiency standards (sometimes called a “shift” effect). Instead, DOE judges that consumers are likely to purchase equipment that exactly meets any efficiency standards established (a “roll-up” effect).

Therefore, it is possible to characterize the efficiency implications of any possible standard in a fairly concise manner. At any given point in time, all walk-ins will either:

• 

### meet the baseline efficiency level (DOE assumes this for all walk-ins installed before the standard goes into effect),

• 

### meet the efficiency standard (DOE assumes these for all new walk-ins installed after the standard goes into effect), or

• 

### partially meet the standard (DOE assumes this for all walk-ins in which the refrigeration system is replaced after the standard goes in to effect, but in which the old, pre-standard, envelope is still in use).

DOE projects that walk-in owners will retire their walk-ins primarily in case of mechanical failure, change of business ownershi p, or for style reasons in the case of some display units. Since none of these reasons to retire a walk-in are affected by efficiency standards, walk-ins should be replaced at the same rate under any efficiency standard. Therefore, DOE concludes that the share of walk-i ns that are at the baseline leve l, at the standard level, or partially at the standard level is the same in every scenario. DOE’s projections of how many walk-ins are in each of these three categories in any given year (in any scenario) are presented in Figure 10.2.1. This information is based on the ma rket growth rates, expected lifetimes of envelopes and refrigeration systems, and initial age distribution of the WICF stock, all as outlined in the shipments analysis (preliminary TSD chapter 9).

10-50.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

2014 2019 2024 2029 2034 2039 2044InstalledStockbyType(millions)

Both envelope and refrigeration system meet standard

Envelope at baseline efficiency, refrigeration
system meets standard

Both envelope and refrigeration system at baseline efficiency



### Figure 10.2.1 Walk-in Stock by Efficiency Level over Time

At each possible standard level, the total energy consumption and average efficiency of the stock can be determined by the informati on in Figure 10.2.1. At each possible combination of standard levels, the energy consumption of the WI CF stock is the sum of the energy consumption of all baseline units, all units that meet the standard, and all units for which only the refrigeration system meets the standard. Those energy consumpti on levels vary by equipment class, but can be found in the energy use characterization (preliminar y TSD chapter 6). The average efficiency is simply the total energy consumption divided by the size of the stock.

10.3 NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS

10.3.1 National Energy Savings Definition

DOE calculates annual national energy savings as the difference in annual national energy consumption (AEC) between the base case (without standards) a nd the standards case (with standards), adjusted by several factors. These factors are a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) factor, rebound factor, site -to-source conversion factor, and a discount factor. These are all described in secti ons 10.3.1.2 through 10.3.1.4. All together, the equation for calculating national energy savings takes this form:

NES
t 

### = ( AEC
t
, base 

### − AEC
t
, std 

### ) × src

_ conv × HVAC × RF × DF
t 

### Eq. 10.1

Where:

NES t 

### = national energy savings (in quads of source energy) in the year t, AEC t 

### = annual national energy consumption each year (in kilowatt-hours [kWh] of electricity consumed onsite),

src_conv = conversion factor to convert from site energy (kWh) to source energy (quads, Btu/kWh),

10-6

### HVAC = heating, ventilation, air conditioning factor,
RF = rebound factor,
DF t 

### = discount factor in the year t,

t = year in the forecast ( e.g. , 2020 or 2030), base = base case, and std = standards case.

DOE defines the cumulative national energy savings as the sum of the national energy savings in each year of the analysis period, i.e., from 2015 to 2045.

DOE calculated the AEC in any given year by multiplying the annual unit energy consumption for each type of walk-in ( i.e., each possible equipment class and efficiency level) by the number of walk-ins in stock that year of that type. This is shown in the following equation:

AEC
t 

### = 

# ∑ ( UEC

, 

### × STOCK PC

, CSL t 

### ) 

### Eq. 10.2 PC CSL

, PC

, CSL



### Where:

UEC PC 

### = unit energy consumption (kWh per year), STOCK PC,t 

### = the number of walk-ins of that type in stock in that year,
EC = a given combination of equipment classes, e.g., small non-display cooler with small indoor medium -temperature dedicated system, and CSL = a given combination of CSLs, e.g., CSL 5 for the envelope and CSL 7 for the refrigeration system.

The terms of this equation are ex plained in the following section.

10.3.2 National Energy Savings Inputs

Table 10.3.1 lists the inputs for determining the NES.

Table 10.3.1 National Energy Saving Inputs
Input
Unit Energy Consumption by Walk-in Type and CSL ( 

### UEC P C

, CSL ) Walk-in Stock by Walk-in Type, CSL, and year ( 

### STOCK P C

, CSL, t ) Site-to-Source Conversion Factor ( src_conv ) Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning Factor ( HVAC ) Rebound Factor ( RF ) Discount Factor ( DF )



### 10.3.1.1 Unit Energy Consumption (UEC) and Walk-in Stock by Walk-in Type

Walk-in UEC and stock by type are inputs to the National Energy Savings calculation that are both described elsewhere in this preliminary TSD. UEC is described in the energy use characterization (preliminary TSD chapter 6). St ock is described above in section 10.2.1 and in the shipments analysis (preliminary TSD chapter 9).

10-7

### 10.3.1.2 Site-to-Source Conversion Factors

Because walk-ins are powered by electrici ty, the amount of energy they consume indirectly at the point of electricity generation is greater than the amount of energy they use directly. To account for this, DOE uses a site-t o-source conversion factor to convert its estimates of onsite energy consumption (in the form of electricity) into primary or source energy consumption (in the form of, e.g., fossil fuels). This conversion factor depends on the generation sources used to produce electricity, which can vary over time. For the preliminary analysis, DOE used a site-to-source conversion factor of 10,147 Btu/kWh, which is the average site-to-source conversion factor of a concurrent rulemaking that applies to the same analysis period. During the next phase of the analysis, DOE intends to deri ve new site-to-source conv ersion factors specific to each year of this analysis using the vers ion of the Building Technologies version of the National Energy Modeling Systems (NEMS-BT) th at will correspond to the 2010 version of the Energy Information Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook (

AEO 2010 ). 1



### 10.3.1.3 Interactions with Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning (HVAC) Systems

The heat output from a walk-in interacts with the functioning of the HVAC systems in its building. Walk-ins of greater efficiency may produce slightly less heat, a ltering that interaction. Theoretically, this might change the walk-in’s interaction with the building’s HVAC systems. However, the models that can capture this inter action have not been developed to an adequate degree. Therefore, DOE assumed that this interaction was not substantial and that estimating its precise nature and extent was not feasible. In larg e part, this is because most walk-ins are cooled by outdoor compressors, which reject their waste h eat outside the building rather than inside. For this analysis, DOE assumed an HVAC factor of 1, or no measurable effect.

10.3.1.4 Rebound Factor

Under economic theory, a “rebound effect” refe rs to the tendency of a consumer to respond to the cost savings associated with more efficient equipment in a manner that actually leads to marginally greater equipment usage, thereby diminishing some portion of anticipated benefits related to impr oved efficiency. This typically manifests in the tendency for consumers to either make more frequent use of e quipment that is highly efficient ( e.g. , leaving efficient lights on more often) or adjusting equipment for greater thermal comfort ( e.g. , turning the thermostat on a more efficient furnace up a degree). However, because walk-ins must cool their contents at all times, it is not possible for consumers to ope rate them more frequently. And because most walk-ins operate within a narrow thermal range th at is determined by sanitary and other noncomfort reasons, it is unlikely that consumer s would significantly decrease the operating temperature of their walk-ins simply because the units were more efficient. For this analysis, DOE assumed a rebound factor of 1, or no effect.

10.3.1.5 Discount Factor

DOE multiplies the value of energy savings in future years by the discount factor (DF) to calculate the present value of these energy sa vings. The following equation describes how to calculate the discount factor for any given year:

10-8t

− t p 

### ) 

### DF = 1 

# ( 1 + r 

# ) ( 

### Eq. 10.3

Where:

r = discount rate,

t = year of the monetary value, and

t p 

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

DOE provides results calculated with both a 3- percent and a 7-percent real discount rate, in accordance with the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) guidance to Federal agencies on the development of regulatory an alysis (OMB Circular A-4, September 17, 2003), 2 

### and section E, “Identifying and Measuring Benefi ts and Costs,” therein. These discount rates are based on estimates of the average real rate of re turn on private investment in the U.S. economy. DOE defined the present year as 2010 (the current year) for this preliminary analysis.

10.4 NET PRESENT VALUE

10.4.1 Net Present Value Definition

An NPV is the value in the present of a series of costs and savings over time. The NPV presented here is the value in the present of the total changed in purchase costs and operating costs that DOE forecasts WICF consumers would face from energy conservation standards on walk-ins. Note that this is not the same as the sum of all costs and benefits from such standards,

e.g. environment benefits or costs of this rule are not included in the NPV calculation. The NPV is calculated as follows:

NPV = PVS

− PVC 

### Eq. 10.4

Where:

PVS = present value of the total operating cost savings over time, and PVC = present value of the total increase in installed costs over time.

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

PVS = 

# ∑ ( OCS
t 

### × DF
t 

### ) Eq. 10.5

t



### PVC = 

# ∑ ( ICS
t 

### × DF
t 

### ) Eq. 10.6

t



### Where:

OCS
t 

### = total operating cost savings in year t,

ICS
t 

### = total installed cost increases in year t,

DF t 

### = discount factor in year t, and

t = year ( PVS and PVC are summed over 2015-2044).

10-9

### DOE determined the contributions to PVC and PVS for each year from the effective date of the standard, 2015, to 2045, discounted for the pr eliminary analysis to the present year (2010). DOE calculated costs and savings as the difference between a standards case ( i.e. , with standards) and a base case ( i.e. , without standards). DOE calculate d a discount factor from the discount rate and the number of years between the “present” ( i.e. , 2010, the year to which the sum is being discounted) and the year in which the costs and savings occur. DOE calculated the net present value as the sum over time of the disc ounted net savings (which is equivalent to the approach shown in equations 10.4 through 10.6).

10.4.2 Net Present Value Inputs

Table 10.4.1 summarizes the inputs to the NPV calculation.

Table 10.4.1 Net Present Value Inputs
Input
Total Installed Cost Increases ( ICS t ) Total Annual Operating Cost Savings ( OCS t ) Discount Factor ( DF )



### 10.4.2.1 Total Annual Installed Cost Increases

DOE calculates the increase in total annual in stalled costs as the difference between the total annual installed cost s in the standards case minus those in the base case. This is shown in the following equation:

ICS
t 

### = 

### ( IC
t
, base 

### − IC
t
, std 

### ) 

### Eq. 10.7

where:

ICS t 

### = the total installed cost increases in the year t,
IC t,base 

### = the total installed cost in the year t in the base case, and
IC t,std 

### = the total installed cost in the year t in the standards case.

DOE determines the total installed cost (IC) in each year by adding up the product of annual operating cost for each type of walk-in ( i.e., each possible equipment class and efficiency level) by the number of walk-ins shipped that year of that type. This is shown in the following equation:

ICS
t 

### = 

# ∑ ( IC PC

, CSL 

### × SHIP PC

, CSL

, t 

### ) 

### Eq. 10.8

PC

, CSL



### where:

IC PC

, CSL 

### = the installed cost for a particular type (equipment class and CSL) of walk-in, and
SHIP PC

, CSL 

### = shipments of walk-ins of that type in year t.

10-10

### Installed cost numbers are calculated in the life cycle cost analysis (preliminary TSD chapter 8). Shipments are calculated in the shipments analysis (preliminary TSD chapter 9), as noted above.

10.4.2.2 Total Annual Operating Cost Savings

DOE calculated the total annual operating cost savings in the same manner as the total installed cost increase, i.e. , as the difference between the total annual installed costs in the standards case minus those in the base case. Th e equation takes the same form as equation 10.7, so it is not shown here to a void redundancy. Similarly, DOE dete rmines the total operating cost (TOC) in each year by adding up the product of annual operating cost for each type of walk-in ( i.e., each possible equipment class and efficiency le vel) by the number of walk-ins in stock that year of that type. This equation takes the same form as equation 10.8, except that operating cost savings are calculated based on the size of the walk-in stock in a given year rather than the number of walk-in shipments in that year.

Operating cost numbers are calculated in the life cycle cost analysis (preliminary TSD chapter 8). As described in chapter 8, the major co mponent of operating cost is electricity costs, though other components, such as maintenance cost s, are also included. Stock is calculated in the shipments analysis (preliminary TSD chapter 9), as noted above.

10.5 NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS AND NET PRESENT VALUE RESULTS

The NIA spreadsheet model provides estimates of the NES and NPV due to various CSLs. The inputs to the NIA spreadsheet are discussed in sections 10.3.2, National Energy Savings Inputs, and 10.4.2, Net Present Value Inputs.

Table 10.5.1 summarizes the inputs to the spread sheet model that calculates the NES and NPV. A brief description of the data is given for each input. As noted above, the model is freely available online at www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/wicf.html

.

10-11

### Table 10.5.1 National Energy Saving and Net Present Value Inputs
Input Data Data Description

Walk-ins Stock The initial stock is taken from the Shipments Model (preliminary TSD chapter 9). This model is based on estimated historical shipments based on Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey 2007 3 data and U.S. Census Bureau Current Industrial Reports data 4 , DOE and manufacturer estimates of walk-in lifetime, and forecasted growth rates from the Annual Energy Outlook 2009 and the U.S. Census of Agriculture 5

. Shipments Annual shipments from the walk-in Shipments Model (preliminary TSD chapter 9). Sources are the same as for stock estimates.

Effective Date of Standard 2015 Analysis Period 2015 to 2045 Unit Energy Consumption (kWh/yr) Established in the Energy-Use Characterization (preliminary TSD chapter 6) by walk-in type and CSL.

Total Installed Cost Established in the Markups Analysis (preliminary TSD chapter 7) and the LCC Analysis (preliminary TSD chapter 8) by walk-in type and CSL. Electricity Price Forecast EIA forecasts (to 2030) from the AEO2009 (April version*) 6 and extrapolation for beyond 2030. 7
Electricity Site-to-Source Conversion Based on a concurrent preliminary TSD, based on AEO2008 8 forecasts (to 2030) of electricity generation and electricity-related losses. DOE intends to derive new estimates for the notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) stage.* HVAC Interaction Savings Negligible.

Rebound Effect Negligible.

Discount Rate 3 and 7 percent real.

Present Year 2010. *While this analysis will rely on the most recent (2010) version of the AEO for the NOPR stage, that version was not available in time for the preliminary analysis.



### 10.5.1 National Energy Savings Summary Results

The following section provides summary NE S results. Results are cumulative to 2045 and are shown as primary energy savings measur ed in quads at partic ular combinations of equipment classes and CSLs. More detailed NES results ar e provided in appendix 10A.

Table 10.5.2 and Table 10.5.3 show summary NES results. Results are shown for selected CSLs. There is one matched combination of envelope and refrigeration system CSLs per matched combination of WICF envelopes and refrigeration equi pment classes. The selection criteria are as follows. The selected CSLs in the table are those for the highest primary energy savings for which the net present value is a pos itive number (at a 7-percent discount rate). In other words, the tables show the maximum possible energy savings for each equipment class that would result in a net financial be nefit to WICF users. In many cases, this corresponds to the highest CSL considered for both the envelope and the refrigeration system. This is because most of the CSLs analyzed in this rulemaking are associated with positive net present values. In cases where more than one possible combination of CSLs provides the same energy savings at positive LCC savings, the lowest possible combination of CSLs that can provide those savings is selected.

10-12

### The tables are laid out as follows. For conciseness, each table presents three numbers for each equipment class. The top number is the maximum energy savings in quads. The lower numbers are the CSLs at which these energy savings are achieved—envelope CSL on the left, refrigeration system CSL on the right. The first table shows results calculated at a 7-percent discount rate, and the second shows results calculated at a 3-percent discount rate.

Table 10.5.2 Maximum Energy Savings for Wh ich Net Present Value of Savings Are Greater than Zero at a 7 Percent Discount Rate and Corresponding CSLs (2015-2045)
Envelope Equipment Class Maximum Energy Savings (quads) and CSLs for Envelope and Refrigeration Unit (a,b) Refrigeration System Equipment Class
Dedicated

Indoor Small Dedicated Indoor Large Dedicated Outdoor

Small Dedicated Outdoor

Large Multiplex System Small Multiplex System Large Non-Display Cooler Small 0.02 13,7 - 0.09 13,8 - 0.00 10,3 -

Non-Display Cooler Medium - 0.08 13,7 - 0.36 13,8 - 0.24 10,3 Non-Display Cooler Large - - - 0.62 15,8 - 0.16 11,3 Display Cooler Small - 0.00 15,7 - 0.02 15,8 - -

Display Cooler Medium - - - - - 0.56 15,3 Display Cooler Large - - - 0.42 15,8 - -

Non-Display Freezer Small 0.04 15,8 - 0.19 15,9 - 0.01 15,4 -

Non-Display Freezer Medium - 0.15 15,8 - 0.64 15,9 - 0.44 15,4 Non-Display Freezer Large - - - 0.78 15,9 - 0.23 15,4 Display Freezer Small - - - 0.10 15,9 - -

Display Freezer Medium - - - - - 0.46
4

, 3 Display Freezer Large - - - 0.51 10,8 - -

10-13

### Table 10.5.3 Maximum Energy Savings for Wh ich Net Present Value of Savings are Greater than Zero at a 3 Percent Discount Rate and Corresponding CSLs (2015-2045)
Envelope Equipment Class Maximum Energy Savings (quads) and CSLs for Envelope and Refrigeration Unit (a,b) Refrigeration System Equipment Class
Dedicated

Indoor Small Dedicated Indoor Large Dedicated Outdoor

Small Dedicated Outdoor

Large Multiplex System Small Multiplex System Large Non-Display Cooler Small 0.04 13,7 - 0.18 13,8 - 0.01 10,3 -

Non-Display Cooler Medium - 0.16 13,7 - 0.74 13,8 - 0.51 10,3 Non-Display Cooler Large - - - 1.26 15,8 - 0.34 11,3 Display Cooler Small - 0.01 15,7 - 0.04 15,8 - -

Display Cooler Medium - - - - - 1.18 15,3 Display Cooler Large - - - 0.87 15,8 - -

Non-Display Freezer Small 0.09 15,8 - 0.40 15,9 - 0.01 15,4 -

Non-Display Freezer Medium - 0.32 15,8 - 1.32 15,9 - 0.94 15,4 Non-Display Freezer Large - - - 1.61 15,9 - 0.50 15,4 Display Freezer Small - - - 0.21 15,9 - -

Display Freezer Medium - - - - - 1.00
4

, 4 Display Freezer Large - - - 1.05 10,7 - -



### 10.5.2 Net Present Value Summary Results

Table 10.5.4 and Table 10.5.5 provide summary NPV results. Results are cumulative to 2045 and are shown in billion 2009 dollars. The tables are laid out in the same way as Table 10.5.2 and Table 10.5.3. As in those tables, one CSL combination is shown per equipment class combination, and in each case, it is the same CSL combination as was shown for the tables above; i.e., net present values are shown for the CSL that generates the maximum energy savings at a positive net present value.

The NPV summary results vary more wide ly that the NES summary results, from 0.01 billion $2009 to 7.90 billion 2009$. However, this is not necessarily a reflection of greater variation in NPV results than in NES results. Rather, it is simply a result of the way in which summary results are presented. As noted above, the CSL combinations used in these summary tables are selected on the basis of maximum NES rather than maximum NPV. Therefore, the

10-14

### NES summary numbers vary less widely than th e NPV summary numbers. This does not apply, however, to the detailed NPV results. Those are presented in appendix 10B.

Table 10.5.4 Net Present Value at Maximum Level of Energy Savings for Which Net
Present Value is Greater than Zero at a 7-Percent Discount Rate and Corresponding CSLs

Envelope Equipment Class NPV (Billion 2009$) and Correspo nding CSLs for Envelope and Refrigeration Unit (a,b) Refrigeration System Equipment Class
Dedicated Indoor Small Dedicated Indoor Large Dedicated Outdoor

Small Dedicated Outdoor

Large Multiplex System Small Multiplex System Large Non-Display Cooler Small 0.08

- 0.29

- 0.01

- 13,7 13,8 10,3 Non-Display Cooler Medium - 0.15

- 0.90

- 0.21 13,7 13,8 10,3 Non-Display Cooler Large - - - 0.52

- 0.29 15,8 11,3 Display Cooler Small - 0.05

- 0.24

- - 15,7 15,8 Display Cooler Medium - - - - - 3.05 15,3 Display Cooler Large - - - 6.56 - - 15,8 Non-Display Freezer Small 0.53

- 2.29

- 0.03

- 15,8 15,9 15,4 Non-Display Freezer Medium - 1.52

- 6.44

- 1.22 15,8 15,9 15,4 Non-Display Freezer Large - - - 7.90

- 0.75 15,9 15,4 Display Freezer Small - - - 0.05 - - 15,9 Display Freezer Medium - - - - - 0.08 4,3 Display Freezer Large - - - 0.09 - - 10,8

10-15

### Table 10.5.5. Net Present Value at Maximum Level of Energy Savings for Which Net Present Value is Greater than Zero at a 3-Percent Discount Rate and Corresponding CSLs

Envelope Equipme nt Class NPV (Billion 2009$) and Corresponding CSLs for Envelope and Refrigeration Unit (a,b) Refrigeration System Equipment Class
Dedicated

Indoor Small Dedicated Indoor Large Dedicated Outdoor

Small Dedicated Outdoor

Large Multiplex System Small Multiplex System Large
NonDisplay Cooler Small 0.19

- 0.67

- 0.02

- 13,7 13,8 10,3

NonDisplay Cooler Medium - 0.41

- 2.25

- 0.87 13,7 13,8 10,3

NonDisplay Cooler Large - - - 1.91

- 0.85 15,8 11,3

Display Cooler Small - 0.10

- 0.47

- - 15,7 15,8

Display Cooler Medium - - - - - 6.63 15,3

Display Cooler Large - - - 13.38 - - 15,8

NonDisplay Freezer Small 1.08

- 4.65

- 0.07

- 15,8 15,9 15,4

NonDisplay Freezer Medium - 3.16

- 13.30

- 3.42 15,8 15,9 15,4

NonDisplay Freezer Large - - - 16.33 - 2.06 15,9 15,4

Display Freezer Small - - - 0.05 - - 15,9

Display Freezer Medium - - - - - 0.00 4,4

Display Freezer Large - - - 0.06 - - 10,7

10-16

### REFERENCES

1 

### EIA (U.S. Energy Information Administration). 2010. Annual Energy Outlook 2010. DOE/EIA-0383(forthcoming). U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Washington D.C.

2 

### Office of Management and Budget. Circ ular A-4. September 2003. Washington, D.C. http://www.whitehouse.gov/om b/circulars/a004/a-4.pdf

.

3 

### EIA (U.S. Energy Information Administration). Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey 2003. Accessed January 2010 at http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs/cb ecs2003/public_use_2003/cbecs_pudata2003.html

.

4 

### U.S. Census Bureau 2007 Economic Census. Accessed March 2010 at http://www.census.gov/econ/census07 /

.

5 

### NASS (U.S. National Agricultu ral Statistics Service.) The 2007 Census of Agriculture. 2007. Accessed January 2010 at http://www.nass.usda.gov/Quic kStats/PullData_US.jsp

.

6 

### EIA (U.S. Energy Information Administrati on). 2009. Update to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009. DOE/EIA-0383(2007). U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Washington D.C.

7 

### U.S. Census Bureau. 2007 Econo mic Census. Accessed March 2010 at http://www.census.gov/econ/census07 /

8 

### EIA (U.S. Energy Information Administration). 2008. Annual Energy Outlook 2008. DOE/EIA-0383(2008). U.S. Depar tment of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Washington D.C.

10-17