From: Rosenstock, Steven [mailto:SRosenstock@eei.org]

Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 9:45 AM

To: Caskey, John; Eckman, Tom; Cymbalsky, John; Meye rs, Aaron; Nadel, Steve; Bruce R Hirsch; Robert Berman; Jerry Hodge

Cc: Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com; Savitz, Maxine (EMAB); mhyland@appanet.org; Raymond.Polinski@ATIm etals.com; maheshsampat@bellsouth.net; tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com; dbrender@cda.copper.org; Jame s.Lass@cleco.com; chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com; frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com; ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com; Trujillo, Anto nio; Moore, Jack C; Corkran, Jerry L; tballo@earthjustice.org; carlosgsiqueiros@eaton .com; eduardorobles@eaton.com; Marchetti, Emily (CONTR); Freeman, Jeremiah (CONTR); Raba, Jim; DYoung@energy-solution.com; rick.anderson@faypwc.com; bsmith@federalpacific.com; rgreeson@federalpacific.com; carlos.gaytan@ge.com; artrosenfeld@gmail.com; gr eg.coulter405@gmail.com; ned.efbrush@gmail.com; Richard Parker; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com; Cohen, Daniel; Phil Hopkinson; cabolduc@lbl.gov; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov; kcoughlin@lbl.gov; Sco ttB@LVMetals.com; dave.millure@metglas.com; kwinder@mleainc.com; jrossetti@mlgw.org; Brian Co ffey; Caitlin Johnson; Matthew Nardotti; Michael Rivest; Zhimei Luo; Creevy, Jim; mwaltner@nrd c.org; rroy@nrdc.org; robert.saint@nreca.coop; vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com; gbf1@ pge.com; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com; ahofmann@publicpower.org; pkumar@publicpo wer.org; adelaski@standardsASAP.org; jmauer@standardsasap.org; wes.patterson@us.abb.com; chad.kennedy@us.schneider-electric.com; thomas.patzner@us.schneider-electric.com; charlied@uus.org Subject: RE: Electric Vehicle Projections

Mr. Caskey makes excellent points. See below:

http://www.sae.org/ mags/aei/enrg/7479

The standard as now written addr esses two charging levels:

AC Level 1: 120 V, 1 phase, up to 16 A

AC Level 2: 240 V, 1 phase, up to 80 A

Ford has announced that its Focus Electric will recharge faster t han the leaf (it will be able to use 6.6 kW with the Level 2 charger, while the Volt and Leaf typically use 3.1 to 3.3 kW).

Also, with the “DC fast char gers” that could be located at commercial / industrial facilities, some of the specifications I have seen have them using 50 or more kW to recharge vehicles.

So for certain transformers, in areas with high penetrations of EV’s, loading is likely to be higher than predicted, which means that losses could be increased for certain
transformers. In te rms of modeling, one sensitivit y analysis could be that X% of transformers are loaded higher than 50%, leading to higher transformer losses over the 30 year time period (lower during the firs t several years, then about the same for several years, and higher dur ing the last 10-15 years).Steve Rosenstock Manager, Energy Solutions

Edison Electric Institute srosenstock@eei.org

202-508-5465

From: Caskey, John [ mailto:Joh_Caskey@nema.org ]

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 8:09 PM

To: Eckman, Tom; Rosenstock, Steven; Cymbalsky, John; Meyers, Aaron; Nadel, Steve; Bruce R Hirsch; Robert Berman; Jerry Hodge

Cc: Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com ; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com ; Savitz, Maxine (EMAB); mhyland@appanet.org ; Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com ; maheshsampat@bellsouth.net ; tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com ; dbrender@cda.copper.org ; James.Lass@cleco.com ; chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com ; frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com ; ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com ; Trujillo, Antonio; Moore, Jack C; Corkran, Jerry L; tballo@earthjustice.org ; carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com ; eduardorobles@eaton.com ; Marchetti, Emily (CONTR); Freeman, Jeremiah (CONTR); Raba, Jim; DYoung@energy-solution.com ; rick.anderson@faypwc.com ; bsmith@federalpacific.com ; rgreeson@federalpacific.com ; carlos.gaytan@ge.com ; artrosenfeld@gmail.com ; greg.coulter405@gmail.com ; ned.efbrush@gmail.com ; Richard Parker; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com ; Cohen, Daniel; Phil Hopkinson; cabolduc@lbl.gov ; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov ; kcoughlin@lbl.gov ; ScottB@LVMetals.com ; dave.millure@metglas.com ; kwinder@mleainc.com ; jrossetti@mlgw.org ; brian.coffey@navigant.com ; caitlin.johnson@navigant.com ; matthew.nardotti@navigant.com ; mrivest@navigant.com ; zhimei.luo@navigant.com ; Creevy, Jim; mwaltner@nrdc.org ; rroy@nrdc.org ; robert.saint@nreca.coop ; vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com ; gbf1@pge.com ; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com ; ahofmann@publicpower.org ; pkumar@publicpower.org ; adelaski@standardsASAP.org ; jmauer@standardsasap.org ; wes.patterson@us.abb.com ; chad.kennedy@us.schneider-electric.com ; thomas.patzner@us.schneider-electric.com ; charlied@uus.org Subject: RE: Electric Vehicle Projections

There are two fundamental problems with the Council’s analysis. Fi rst, the analysis looks at both 110 volt 15 amp charging and 220 volt 30 amp charging. Level 1 charging only requires less than 2 kW and may not significantly impact tran sformer loading. However, most EV proponents today are looking at Level 2 charging (up to 20 kW ) or even Level 3 charging (over 20 kW). The analysis only looks at impacts at 6 kW not th e potential 20 kW. The higher kW can impact existing transformer loading.

Second, the average kW impact on EV’s may be relatively small. But some transformers in affluent areas (high Prius adoption) may be over loaded while transformer loading in less affluent areas may not increase. Typical distribu tion systems in Virginia have roughly 6-8 15 kW

homes connected to a 75-100 kVA transformer. If just two or three of these 6-8 homes charge EV’s at the same time using 6kW chargers, that increased load can cause transformer failure even if the average load increase in the region is small. This can be particularly bad with electric heating loads during evening hours.I personally don’t think that EV loading on transf ormers will significantly impact our analyses and discussions, but I do think that utilities will n eed to carefully track the penetration of EV’s

on individual circuits and tran sformers; particularly with Le vel 2 charging.

John F. Caskey, CEM Assistant Vice President, Industry Operations National Electrical Manufacturers Assoc. (NEMA)

1300 North 17th Street - Suite 1752 Rosslyn, VA 22209 john.caskey@nema.org

703-841-3233 Voice

703-841-3333 FAX

703-350-6886 Cell

From: Eckman, Tom [ mailto:teckman@nwcouncil.org ]

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 6:54 PM

To: 'Rosenstock, Steven'; Cymbalsky, John; Meye rs, Aaron; Nadel, Steve; Bruce R Hirsch; Robert Berman; Jerry Hodge; Caskey, John

Cc: Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com ; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com ; Savitz, Maxine (EMAB); mhyland@appanet.org ; Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com ; maheshsampat@bellsouth.net ; tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com ; dbrender@cda.copper.org ; James.Lass@cleco.com ; chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com ; frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com ; ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com ; Trujillo, Antonio; Moore, Jack C; Corkran, Jerry L; tballo@earthjustice.org ; carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com ; eduardorobles@eaton.com ; Marchetti, Emily (CONTR); Freeman, Jeremiah (CONTR); Raba, Jim; DYoung@energy-solution.com ; rick.anderson@faypwc.com ; bsmith@federalpacific.com ; rgreeson@federalpacific.com ; carlos.gaytan@ge.com ; artrosenfeld@gmail.com ; greg.coulter405@gmail.com ; ned.efbrush@gmail.com ; Richard Parker; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com ; Cohen, Daniel; Phil Hopkinson; cabolduc@lbl.gov ; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov ; kcoughlin@lbl.gov ; ScottB@LVMetals.com ; dave.millure@metglas.com ; kwinder@mleainc.com ; jrossetti@mlgw.org ; brian.coffey@navigant.com ; caitlin.johnson@navigant.com ; matthew.nardotti@navigant.com ; mrivest@navigant.com ; zhimei.luo@navigant.com ; Creevy, Jim; mwaltner@nrdc.org ; rroy@nrdc.org ; robert.saint@nreca.coop ; vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com ; gbf1@pge.com ; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com ; ahofmann@publicpower.org ; pkumar@publicpower.org ; adelaski@standardsASAP.org ; jmauer@standardsasap.org ; wes.patterson@us.abb.com ; chad.kennedy@us.schneiderelectric.com ; thomas.patzner@us.schneider-electric.com ; charlied@uus.org Subject: RE: Electric Vehicle Projections

Aaron/Steve R., et al:

As part of developing the last Pacific Northwest Power Plan, th e Council analyzed the potential impact of electric vehicles on PNW loads th rough 2030. We created th ree scenarios, ranging

from a low market share of 20% of cumulative new sales by 2030 to a high of 48% of cumulative new sales by 2030. For comparison, my review of the spreadsheet that John sent shows EV’s and PHEV’s comprising just over 4 % of all new vehicle sales between 2010 and2030, so our “low” case scenario is five times as high as the one assumed in the AEO. Bottom line, is that under the Council’s low case scenario, PNW “off-peak” load s would increase about 800 MW (4% above the base forecast) while un der the high case they would increase by just under 2000 MW (10% above the base forecast). Both scenarios assumed that 95% of the charging would take place “off-peak.” Given this rather modest impact in off-peak demand (In the PNW peak loads are typically 1.8 times off- peak loads) it would s eem very unlikely that average transformer loading will increase dramati cally, especially given (as has been noted by Steve R. in prior e-mail) the impact of other federal appliance efficiency standards and the deployment of smart grid over this same time frame.

I’ve attached presentation staff made to th e Council during the plan’s development that discusses the assumptions and results of this analysis in more detail.

Tom

Tom Eckman Manager, Conservation Resources

Northwest Power and Conservation Council 851 SW 6th Avenue, Suite 1100 Portland, OR 97204

Office - 503.222.5161

Mobile - 503.803.5047

Fax - 503.820.2370

From: Rosenstock, Steven [mailto:SRosenstock@eei.org]

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 10:54 AM

To: Cymbalsky, John; Meyers, Aar on; Nadel, Steve; Bruce R Hirsch; Robert Berman; Jerry Hodge; John Caskey

Cc: Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com ; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com ; Savitz, Maxine (EMAB); mhyland@appanet.org ; Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com ; maheshsampat@bellsouth.net ; tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com ; dbrender@cda.copper.org ; James.Lass@cleco.com ; chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com ; frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com ; ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com ; Trujillo, Antonio; Moore, Jack C; Corkran, Jerry L; tballo@earthjustice.org ; carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com ; eduardorobles@eaton.com ; Marchetti, Emily (CONTR); Freeman, Jeremiah (CONTR); Raba, Jim; DYoung@energy-solution.com ; rick.anderson@faypwc.com ; bsmith@federalpacific.com ; rgreeson@federalpacific.com ; carlos.gaytan@ge.com ; artrosenfeld@gmail.com ; greg.coulter405@gmail.com ; ned.efbrush@gmail.com ; Richard Parker; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com ; Cohen, Daniel; Phil Hopkinson; cabolduc@lbl.gov ; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov ; kcoughlin@lbl.gov ; ScottB@LVMetals.com ; dave.millure@metglas.com ; kwinder@mleainc.com ; jrossetti@mlgw.org ; brian.coffey@navigant.com ; caitlin.johnson@navigant.com ; matthew.nardotti@navigant.com ; mrivest@navigant.com ; zhimei.luo@navigant.com ; Jim Creevy; mwaltner@nrdc.org ; rroy@nrdc.org ; robert.saint@nreca.coop ; Eckman, Tom; vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com ; gbf1@pge.com ; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com ;ahofmann@publicpower.org ; pkumar@publicpower.org ; adelaski@standardsASAP.org ; jmauer@standardsasap.org ; wes.patterson@us.abb.com ; chad.kennedy@us.schneiderelectric.com ; thomas.patzner@us.schneider-electric.com ; charlied@uus.org Subject: RE: Electric Vehicle Projections

As a point of reference, the spreadsheet that Mr. Cymbalsky sent out (thank you, John) showed estimated sales of 24,900 EV’s and PHEV’s in 2011. Based on the following articles:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/ 11/02/us-tesla-idUSTRE7A18RJ20111102

http://detnews.com/article/20111102/AUTO 01/111020344/Chevy-Volt-sees-best-sales-yet--

Nissan-Leaf-still-ahead

As of October 31, 2011, there have been 13,051 Leafs a nd Volts sold or leased in the US so far in 2011. I could not find specific numbers for th e Tesla Roadster or conversions of gasoline vehicles to PHEV’s in 2011, so I will make a semi -educated guess that other vehicle sales would raise the number to about 13,500 EV’s and PHEV’s sold in 2011 as of 10/31/2011.

Will the number rise to 24,900 by the end of this year? I will leave that to the forecasters..... :-)

Steve Rosenstock Manager, Energy Solutions

Edison Electric Institute srosenstock@eei.org

202-508-5465

From: Cymbalsky, John [ mailto:John.Cymbalsky@EE.Doe.Gov ]

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 12:20 PM

To: 'Meyers, Aaron'; Nadel, Steve; Bruce R Hi rsch; Robert Berman; Jerry Hodge; John Caskey

Cc: Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com ; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com ; Savitz, Maxine (EMAB); mhyland@appanet.org ; Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com ; maheshsampat@bellsouth.net ; tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com ; dbrender@cda.copper.org ; James.Lass@cleco.com ; chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com ; frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com ; ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com ; Trujillo, Antonio; Moore, Jack C; Corkran, Jerry L; tballo@earthjustice.org ; carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com ; eduardorobles@eaton.com ; Marchetti, Emily (CONTR); Freeman, Jeremiah (CONTR); Raba, Jim; Rosenstock, Steven; DYoung@energy-solution.com ; rick.anderson@faypwc.com ; bsmith@federalpacific.com ; rgreeson@federalpacific.com ; carlos.gaytan@ge.com ; artrosenfeld@gmail.com ; greg.coulter405@gmail.com ; ned.efbrush@gmail.com ; Richard Parker; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com ; Cohen, Daniel; Phil Hopkinson; cabolduc@lbl.gov ; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov ; kcoughlin@lbl.gov ; ScottB@LVMetals.com ; dave.millure@metglas.com ; kwinder@mleainc.com ; jrossetti@mlgw.org ; brian.coffey@navigant.com ; caitlin.johnson@navigant.com ;matthew.nardotti@navigant.com ; mrivest@navigant.com ; zhimei.luo@navigant.com ; Jim Creevy; mwaltner@nrdc.org ; rroy@nrdc.org ; robert.saint@nreca.coop ; Teckman@nwcouncil.org ; vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com ; gbf1@pge.com ; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com ; ahofmann@publicpower.org ; pkumar@publicpower.org ; adelaski@standardsASAP.org ; jmauer@standardsasap.org ; wes.patterson@us.abb.com ; chad.kennedy@us.schneider-electric.com ; thomas.patzner@us.schneider-electric.com ; charlied@uus.org Subject: RE: Electric Vehicle Projections

Aaron et al:

Attached is the official USG projections for L DV sales from EIA, the independent statistical agency of the USG from which our electricity projections are based.

John

From: Meyers, Aaron [ mailto:Aaron.Meyers@CooperIndustries.com ]

Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 12:09 PM

To: Steve Nadel; Bruce R Hirsch; Robert Berman; Jerry Hodge; John Caskey

Cc: Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com ; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com ; Savitz, Maxine (EMAB); mhyland@appanet.org ; Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com ; maheshsampat@bellsouth.net ; tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com ; dbrender@cda.copper.org ; James.Lass@cleco.com ; chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com ; frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com ; ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com ; Trujillo, Antonio; Moore, Jack C; Corkran, Jerry L; tballo@earthjustice.org ; carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com ; eduardorobles@eaton.com ; Marchetti, Emily (CONTR); Freeman, Jeremiah (CONTR); Raba, Jim; Cymbalsky, John; srosenstock@eei.org ; DYoung@energy-solution.com ; rick.anderson@faypwc.com ; bsmith@federalpacific.com ; rgreeson@federalpacific.com ; carlos.gaytan@ge.com ; artrosenfeld@gmail.com ; greg.coulter405@gmail.com ; ned.efbrush@gmail.com ; Richard Parker; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com ; Cohen, Daniel; Phil Hopkinson; cabolduc@lbl.gov ; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov ; kcoughlin@lbl.gov ; ScottB@LVMetals.com ; dave.millure@metglas.com ; kwinder@mleainc.com ; jrossetti@mlgw.org ; brian.coffey@navigant.com ; caitlin.johnson@navigant.com ; matthew.nardotti@navigant.com ; mrivest@navigant.com ; zhimei.luo@navigant.com ; Jim Creevy; mwaltner@nrdc.org ; rroy@nrdc.org ; robert.saint@nreca.coop ; Teckman@nwcouncil.org ; vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com ; gbf1@pge.com ; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com ; ahofmann@publicpower.org ; pkumar@publicpower.org ; adelaski@standardsASAP.org ; jmauer@standardsasap.org ; wes.patterson@us.abb.com ; chad.kennedy@us.schneider-electric.com ; thomas.patzner@us.schneider-electric.com ; charlied@uus.org Subject: Electric Vehicle Projections

Dear Distribution Transformer Ef ficiency Subcommittee, et al,

The following link is to an articl e published by the NEMA Intellig ence Portal and provides some insight into the projected im pact of electric vehicles:http://portal.nema.org/Pages/document.aspx?docId=3156&LoadSource=LexisNexis&utm_mediu m=email&utm_campaign=digest_2011-11- 17&utm_source=aaron.meyers@cooperindustries.com

Most interestingly, by 2025, one in seven new cars is projected to be a zero-emission or plug-in hybrid vehicle, and 1.4 million are projected to be on the road in California alone by 2025. I don’t see how we can ignore the impact of this significant change. Meeting the charging needs will dramatically change the loading assumptions in the current analysis. As someone pointed out at the October meeting, the reference loading leve l (50%) is part of the testing standard and is not on the table for negotiating purpo ses, so this is just another non-trivial factor that must be considered outside of the existing analysis results.

Keep in mind that for two transformers having the same efficiency at 50% load, the amorphous one will be more efficient at low loading levels whereas the grain-oriented one will be more efficient at higher loading levels. Looking at Cooper’s data, the ratio of no-load to load losses at 100% load on a typical DOE comp liant grain-oriented transformer today is 6:1, and on a Cooper amorphous unit it’s about 10:1. To make an anal ogy, if no-load losses were a slice of pie, the

load losses would be the rest of the entire pie! Load losses are a huge lever and cannot be tossed aside as if merely a nuisance! Most of the discussion thus far has been squarely focused on noload losses. We need to make sure we aren ’t spending four dollars to save fifty cents.

Best Regards,

Aaron