# #23.4
Phase II: Develop Interview Guide n A critical aspect of the MIA involves interviews with manufacturers. An interview guide is sent to manufacturers in preparation for Phase Ill. n Interview topics will include ... • Engineering analysis • Shipments model • Cost structure and financial parameters • Conversion costs (capital expenditures, tooling, R&D, testing) • Impact of other regulations / cumulative burden • Direct employment impacts • Import / Export issues Consolidation / competitive impacts • Replacement parts or refurbishments • Impact of the standard's effective date • Other topics important to manufacturers
135

# #23.4

Phase III: Manufacturer Interviews n Expected timeframe n Time and personnel commitment for manufacturers (industry-wide GRIM, GRIM assumptions, subgroup analysis discussion) n Confidentiality agreements

136

# #23.4

Phase III: Manufacturer Subgroup Analysis n The subgroup analysis is a more focused version of the industrywide analysis. • Work with subgroup representatives to tailor a GRIM incorporating unique financial characteristics • Consider and focus on issues of importance to the subgroup, including employment, capacity utilization and cumulative burden • Review draft findings with subgroup members during development

137

## NOPR Analyses Flow Diagram 

# 0

Revise ANOPR Analyses Trial Manufacturer,' Utility Employment

Standard Impact Impact Impact Levels Analysis Analysis Analysis 7 Environmenta Assessment Regulatory

Impact Analysis

138

# #23.4

F

# rUtility Impact Analysis n Purpose • To investigate the effects on utilities from reduced energy sales and peak load demand due to potential standards 

### n Method • Uses national energy savings results • Uses the Energy Information Administration's National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) tailored for DOE's Building Technologies Program (NEMS-BT) 

### n Output • Change in energy sales and price by region Change in the mix of electricity generation • Change in new capacity construction

139

## NOPR Analyses Flow Diagram 

# 0

Revise ANOPR Analyses Trial Manufacturer Utility Employment

Standard Impact Impact Impact Levels Analysis Analysis Analysis ^Environmenta Assessment 

# #23.4

Regulatory Impact Analysis

140

# #23.4
Employment Impact Analysis n Purpose • To report net jobs created or eliminated nationally as a consequence of new energy efficiency standards 

### n Method • Uses the ImSET tool, a spreadsheet model of the U.S. economy that focuses on 188 sectors most relevant to industrial, commercial, and residential building energy use • Changes in product and energy expenditures taken from the National Impact Analysis Estimates the national employment and income effects of energy saving appliances ' Direct employment impacts taken from the Manufacturer Impact Analysis n Output • Change in employment by sector as a consequence of new standards

141

## NOPR Analyses Flow Diagram 

# 0

Trial Manufacturer Utility Employment Standard Impact Impact Impact Levels Analysis Analysis Analysis Environmental Assessment 

# #23.4

142

# #23.4
Environmental Assessment n Purpose • To report environmental impacts as a consequence of new energy efficiency standards, including changes in power plant emissions 

### n Method • Energy savings results taken from the National Impact Analysis • Energy Information Administration's National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) provides power-plant emissions • `In-Building' emissions due to fossil-fuel fired appliances to be determined using emission factors • Wastewater discharge impacts due to water consuming appliances to be determined using discharge factors 

### n Output • Estimate of national emission reductions of SO2, NOX, mercury and C02 - Power plant SO2, NOX, and mercury are effectively capped through Congressional legislation resulting in little to no emission reductions due to standards - In-building SO2 and NOX still emitted by fossil-fuel fired appliances • Estimate of wastewater discharge reductions 143

## NOPR Analyses Flow Diagram 

# 0

Revise ANOPR Analyses Trial Manufacturer Utility Employment

Standard Impact Impact Impact Levels Analysis Analysis Analysis Environment Assessment 

# #23.4

Regulatory Impact Analysis

144

# #23.4 Regulatory Impact Analysis n Purpose • To investigate the national impacts due to non-regulatory alternatives compared with mandatory energy efficiency standards • The non-regulatory alternatives that may be considered: - No new regulatory action; early replacement; prescriptive standards; consumer tax credits; manufacturer tax credits; consumer rebates; voluntary efficiency targets; bulk government procurement 

### n Method • Modify NES spreadsheet model to consider non-regulatory scenarios - Non-regulatory scenarios increase overall appliance efficiency and are modeled by modifying the base case efficiency trend - NPV calculated for non-regulatory alternatives in the same way as for the adopted standard n Each non-regulatory scenario will decrease national appliance operating costs and increase appliance equipment prices 

### n Output • National Energy Savings and Net Present Value of the non-regulatory alternatives 145

# #23.4

INNNEWSHMM 

## Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Dishwashers, Dehumidifiers, and Cooking Products

and Commercial Clothes Washers ANOPR Public Meeting 

# Microwave Oven Supplementary Analysis

Building Technologies Program Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

U.S. Department of Energy December 13, 2007

# #23.4

Purpose n Validate the approach of updating the 1996 TSD analysis • Industry-supplied data still suggests no relationship between efficiency and output power or cavity size. • The supplementary analysis was designed to verify the potential impacts on efficiency of specific design options and to validate cost-efficiency results. n Examine the microwave oven test procedure for potential updating • The DOE test procedure references a superseded IEC efficiency test procedure. • There are differences between the current and superseded IEC test procedures that could significantly impact efficiency measurements. n Investigate standby power for a possible standard • The supplementary analysis was intended to determine whether there is an opportunity to reduce standby power consumption. ' Design options associated with changes in standby power would be identified. • An IEC standby power test procedure exists which could be incorporated by reference into the DOE test procedure.
147

### Cost-Efficiency Validation 2 

### 3 4 Test Procedure Evaluation Standby Power 

### Conclusions 

# #23.4

148

# #23.4

Cost-Efficiency Validation n AHAM submitted efficiency data for 21 microwave ovens: • Denoted by manufacturer-rated output power, cavity volume and the presence of a cooking sensor. • The range of efficiencies is similar to the range of efficiencies from the 1996 TSD. nDOE tested 32 off-the-shelf units with a range of output powers , cavity volumes, and the following identifiable design options: • Cooking sensor • Display type • Control interface type • Magnetron control (i.e., inverter-based low power settings) n DOE further compiled design options in their test sample via teardowns, including: • Magnetron characteristics • Power supply characteristics • Motor types • Waveguide design 149

# #23.4

AHAM and DOE measured efficiencies are very similar.
62% - 61% ^ 60% A AHAM Standard MOT ♦ AHAM Inverter Drive n DOE Standard MOT o DOE Inverter Drive n W

56% A A A N.

A O

0 • 0 M o

•

7 55% 54%600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 Rated Output Power (W) Legend: MOT = Microwave Oven Transformer a A 6

150

## Measured output power is similar as well.
62% 61% 60% - o AHAM Standard MOT • AHAM Inverter Drive n DOE Standard MOT DOE Inverter Drive w 59%

56% --. 55% 54% n a n A A p A

0

•

• 

# #23.4

600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 Measured Output Power (W) Legend: MOT = Microwave Oven Transformer 151

# #23.4

Several ANOPR design options were not observed ... n Added insulation - no MWO had any; nor would it likely have a measurable effect. n Dual magnetrons - none of the MWOs had dual magnetrons. n Eliminate or improve ceramic mode stirrer cover - only one unit in the sample had a mode stirrer, and the cover was made of plastic. nReflective surfaces - all MWOs in the test sample utilized similar epoxy-coated cold-rolled steel for their cavities.



## .., or had little to no impact on cooking efficiency testing. nCooking sensors - while many of the units had cooking sensors, no benefit can be captured by the existing efficiency test procedure. They also increase standby power. n Improved fan efficiency - all MWOs used shaded pole motors (SPMs). Moving to a brushless DC fan motor would save about 5.6kWh over life of an 800W-rated MWO. n Low-standby-loss electronic controls - have no impact on the efficiency measurement, but will be discussed later in the context of standby power consumption. n Modified wave guide - 6 of the 32 waveguides were oriented horizontally instead of vertically. No coatings were observed, nor did orientation have a consistent impact. 152