10,000 Trials

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 269 Outliers

.047

035

- 467

350.2

.

-I

. .023 233.5 .

rD I =

L .012 116.7

I .000 i

Mean = 6.8 litt M

--

_______ iti.iiiiiiiiiiiniiiii _

-

0

0.0 6.3 12.5 18.8 25.0

Figure L.7 MEF of 1.257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

10,000 Trials

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 235 Outliers

.049

.037

- 489

366.7

=

. .024 244.5

.

.012 . 122.2 I

•

000 ___ I I _______________________I

0.0 6.3 12.5 18.8 25.0

Figure L.8 MEF = 1.26 in 2007, Low Income

L-5

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 260 Outliers

.045

.034 illIll

448

336

ii

. .022 224 .

=

. H -

I =

_______________ I I L. 12

.

0.0 6.3 12.5 18.8 25.0

Figure L.9. MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

10,000 Trials

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 236 Outliers

.033-

.025-

334

250.5

.

-'1

.017- _______ __________________________________________ 167 .

. rD

=

.008- 83.5

an =

.000 uIlHuuuuIuIIJlIlJJll 0

0.0 6.9 13.8 20.6 27.5

Figure L.10 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

L-6

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: Payback (yrs)

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 187 Outl iers

.035 - 346

. 026 259. 5

= I

017 '. . 173 ___________________________________

=

:6.5

0.0 6.9 13.8 20.6 27.5

Figure L.11 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

L-7

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: Payback (yrs)

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 345 Outliers

.334 - 3344

.251 - _____ _______________________________________________

=

- .167- -

.084- 836

Mean=0.1 -

.000 -

hhi.. 0

0.0 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.9

Figure L.12 MEF of 0.86 (5% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 362 Outliers

.450 - - 4504

.338- -

= C,

- .225- -

=

C,

=

000 Lt,

3 4.5 6.0

Figure L.13 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

L-8

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: Payback (yrs)

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 355 Outliers

.217 - 2172

163

=

. . 109

-

-

=

- rD

=

.054 543

. 000 0

0.0 3.1 6.3 9.4 12.5

Figure L.14 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 268 Outliers

.240 2401

= rD

.180 - ________ __________________________________________

. .120- .

=

=

.060

-

600.2

000 o

Mean=5.4

0.0 6.9 13.8 20.6 27.5

Figure L.15 MEF of 1.021 (20% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

Iku,

L-9

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: Payback (yrs)

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 175 Outliers

.026 - 255

. 019 191 . 2

=

. 013 127.5 .

=

.

o

006

=

. 63.75

.000 0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0

Figure L.16 MEF = 1.04 in 2004, Senior

10,000 Trials

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 177 Outliers

.026

.020 ____ b.hl

L IIII

PIi ii.

262

196.5

fl

-

I

.013

j

131

.0

0

.007 65.5

Mean =

000 _________ 0

0.0 5.6 11.3 16.9 22.5

Figure L.17 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

I 1liiiiiil IiIiIIiiii,i. __________________________________________________________________________

Ililfihli

I

[ h

________________

-II

L-1 0

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 266 Outliers

.036

.0271

356

267

-'1

-'

.018 178 -

il .009 IIJuhIII 1 ll 89 lI .

I Mean

.000 flfl1UIIflDU -

1

0

0.0 6.9 13.8 20.6 27.5

__

Figure L.18 MEF of 1.257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

10,000 Trials

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 235 Outliers

________ IIIIIIIIIIIL flhIIh J

'1 1iflH J '1' -'

- .018 ______________ . 181 .

.

-

=

90.5

I Me& = 8.4

000- ULLIUWIHIUU Hhi •, . wIili&n 0

1

0.0 6.9 13.8 20.6 27.5

Figure L.19 MEF = 1.26 in 2007. Senior

L-1 1

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

.043

_

.032

.021

I000

0.0

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 235 Outliers

- 426

319.5

11

-IrD

213 •

C,

=

106.5

30.0

Figure L.20 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

10,000 Trials

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 169 Outliers

.032

.024

- 318

238.5

-'1

I

-I

.016 _________________ 159 -

.

=

.008 h

79.5

.000 _______ 111 _____________ uwum. ____I __ 0

0.0 8.8 17.5 26.3 35.0

Figure L.21 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

L-1 2

7.5 15.0 22.5

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: Payback (yrs)

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 136 Outliers

.034 mIllIlIlIllil

025 _____________ __________________________________________________________________ 252.7

-'1

_________ L. E .0171 168.5

.008 84.25

Mean 1

H!IUhlEIUHI9D I ii .000 0

0.0 8.8 17.5 26.3 35.0

Figure L.22 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

L- 13

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
APPENDIX M. SUPPLEMENTAL SHIPMENTS FORECAST CHARTS

....................................................

..........

.............

TABLE OF CONTENTS

M.l INTRODUCTION M-l

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure M. 1 Shipments Forecasts for Medium Elasticity Price/income Shipments Model . M- 1

Figure M.2 Shipments Forecasts for Medium Elasticity Price-driven Model M-2

Figure M.3 Shipments Forecasts for High Elasticity Price-driven Model M-3

M-i

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
APPENDIX M. SUPPLEMENTAL SHIPMENTS FORECAST CHARTS

M.1 INTRODUCTION

This appendix provides additional charts regarding the several shipments scenario

sensitivities. Specifically, we provide results for three cases. The first case is a low impact case

where the medium value of the price/income sensitivity is used for a model that has price/income

as the primary driving variable for trends in consumer purchase decision probabilities. The second

case is a medium impact case where the medium value of the sensitivity is used for a shipments

model where price is the primary explanatory economic variable for consumer decisions. And the

third case is a high price elasticity case where a high value of price sensitivity is used for the

shipments model with price as the primary explanatory variable. The high price sensitivity value

represents the high end of the 99% confidence interval for the fit to historical shipments trends for

the price-driven model.

New Clothes Washer Shipments

Medium Price/Income Model

10.00

9.50

9.00

8.50

0

8.00

E

j

7.50

7.00

6.50

6.00

5.50

5.00

Historical

Base Case

Trail Level #1

Trial Level #2

Trial Level #3

Trai1 Level #4

*Trial Level #5

Tria1 Level #6

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Year

Figure M.1 Shipments Forecasts for Medium Elasticity Price/income Shipments Model

M-1

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
New Clothes Washer Shipments

Medium Price Model

10.00

9.50

9.00

8.50

8.00

, 7.50

7.00

6.50

6.00

5.50

5.00 +-

1990

> Historical

Base Case

HTrail Level #1

*Trial Level #2

Trial Level #3

Trail Level #4

Frial Level #5

Trial Level #6

1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Year

Figure M.2 Shipments Forecasts for Medium Elasticity Price-driven Model

M-2

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
New Clothes Washer Shipments

High Elasticity Price Model

10.00

9.50

9.00

8.50

8.00

,3 7.50

6.50

6.00

5.50

500

Historical

Base Case

Trail Level #1

hTriaJ Level #2

Trial Level #3

frail Level #4

Trial Level #5

'Tiial Level #6

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Year

Figure M.3 Shipments Forecasts for High Elasticity Price-driven Model

M-3

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
APPENDIX N. NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS (NES)

..........................................

......

................................

......

................................

......

................................

......

................................

......

................................

..................

..................

.................................

...............................

...............................

...............................

...............................

.................

.................

........

...............................

........

...............................

........

...............................

........

...............................

........

TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPENDIX N: INTRODUCTION N-i

LIST OF TABLES

Table N.1 Trial Standard Level i, MEF= l.021 (20% Reduction in Energy Use) N-2

Table N.2 Trial Standard Level i, MEF= l.02i N-2

Table N.3 Trial Standard Level 2, MEF= 1 .089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use) N-3

Table N.4 Trial Standard Level 2, MEF= 1.089 N-3

Table N.5 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF= l .257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use) N-4

Table N.6 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF= 1.257 N-4

Table N.7 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF= i .362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use) N-5

Table N.8 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF= 1 .362 N-5

Table N.9 Trial Standard Level 6, MEF= l .634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use) N-6

Table N.10 Trial Standard Level 6, MEF= i.634 N-6

Table N. 11 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF= 1 .04/i .26 in 2004/2007 N-7

Table N.12 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF= l.04/i.26 in 2004/2007 N-7

Table N.i3 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF=i.02i (20%, Medium Price/Income Elasticity) N-9

Table N.i4 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF= 1.02i N-9

Table N.i5 Trial Standard Level 2, MEF=i.089 (25%, Medium Price/Income Elasticity) N-l0

Table N.16 Trial Standard Level 2, MEF=1.089 N-iO

Table N. 17 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF=l .257 (3 5%, Medium Price/Income Elasticity) N-i i

Table N.18 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF= l.257 N-ll

Table N.l9 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF= l.362 (40%, Medium Price/Income Elasticity) N-i2

Table N.20 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF=i.362 N-12

Table N.2i Trial Standard Level 6, MEF= 1.634 (50%, Medium Price/Income Elasticity) N-13

Table N.22 Trial Standard Level 6, MEF= i.634 N-i3

Table N.23 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF= i.04/l.26 in 2004/2007 N-i4

Table N.24 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF= 1.04/l.26 in 2004/2007 N-i4

Table N.25 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF= 1.021(20%, High Price Elasticity) N- 15

Table N.26 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF= l.02l N-15

Table N.27 Trial Standard Level 2, MEF= l.089 (25%, High Price Elasticity) N-16

Table N.28 Trial Standard Level 2, MEF= 1.089 N-l6

Table N.29 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF= l.257 (35%, High Price Elasticity) N-l7

Table N.30 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF= 1.257 N-l7

Table N.31 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF=i.362 (40%, High Price Elasticity) N-l8

Table N.32 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF=1.362 N-i8

Table N.33 Trial Standard Level 6, MEF= i.634 (50%, High Price Elasticity) N-i9

N-i

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.34 Trial Standard Level 6, MEF= 1.634 ............................... N-19

Table N.35 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF=1 .04/1.26 in 2004/2007 ................. N-20

Table N.36 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF= 1 .04/1.26 in 2004/2007 ................. N-20

................................

................................

................................

...............................

...............................

............................

................................

................................

...............................

...............................

...............................

.................

...............................

...............................

...............................

...............................

...............................

.................

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure N.1 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF= 1.021 N-2

Figure N.2 Trial Standard Level 2, MEF= 1.089 N-3

Figure N.3 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF =1 .257 N-4

Figure N.4 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF = 1.362 N-5

Figure N.5 Trial Standard Level 6, MEF = 1.634 N-6

Figure N.6 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF = 1.04/1.26 N-7

Figure N.7 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF= 1.021 N-8

Figure N.8 Trial Standard Level 2, MEF= 1.089 N-9

Figure N.9 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF= 1.257 N-b

Figure N.l0 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF= 1.362 N-li

Figure N.h Trial Standard Level 6, MEF= 1.634 N-12

Figure N.12 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF= 1.04/1.26 in 2004/2007 N-13

Figure N.13 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF= 1.021 N-14

Figure N.14 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF= 1.021 N-l5

Figure N.i5 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF= 1.257 N-16

Figure N.16 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF= 1.362 N-17

Figure N.17 Trial Standard Level 6, MEF= 1.634 N-18

Figure N.18 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF= 1.04/1.26 in 2004/2007 N-19

N-u

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
APPENDIX N. NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS (NES) SPREADSHEET OUTPUT

N.1 INTRODUCTION

The NES spreadsheet (NES2kO5 1 5-2T.xls) calculates the energy and water savings by

comparing the energy and water consumption associated with clothes washers in a base case with

that in a specified standards case. This spreadsheet uses data from RECS93 and AE099. The

following pages contain tables and figures showing the results for each of the trial standards cases

assessed in this analysis. For each standards case two tables are presented. The first shows

cumulative energy savings by fuel type (electricity, gas, oil and LPG) and water savings for years

2010, 2020 and 2030. The second shows net present values (including energy and water savings and

equipment cost) from 2003 to 2030 discounted at 7% real to 1999. Benefit and cost ratios are also

presented. The corresponding figure for each standard case shows the annual benefit/cost pattern of

national savings and costs resulting from standards over time. The heavy line running just below

the energy and water savings bars indicates the undiscounted net national consumer impact of

standards over time. It is important to note that the net saving shown in each plot only captures a

snapshot of each year. For example, the benefit of the energy and water savings from the equipment

expenditure in year 2005 actually continues through the lifetime of the clothes washers bought in

2005.

The results can be separated into three categories.

1. Reference Case Tables N. 1 - N. 12

2. Medium Price/Income Elasticity Case Tables N. 13 - N.24

3. High Price Elasticity Case Tables N.25 - N.36

These parameters are discussed in Chapter 10. Detailed results for all three cases are presented here

in Appendix N. The Medium Price/ Income Elasticity represents the scenario for which the drop in

shipments after standards is the smallest. The high price elasticity represents a scenario for which

there is the greatest drop in shipments. The Reference Case represents a medium price elasticity and

gives a drop in shipments after standards greater than the Medium Price/ Income case and less than

the High Price Elasticity case.

N-i

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.1 Trial Standard Level 1. MEF=1.021 (20% Reduction in Enerv Use)

_____________

Energy_and_Water_Savings

_____________ Ener2v Savings in Ouads

__________________

Water Savings

______________ Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (tn!. gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 6.22 6.12 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.05

to 2020 1.07 0.57 0.45 0.03 0.02 0.26

To 2030 2.12 1.10 0.91 0.06 0.05 0.53

Table N.2 Trial Standard Level 1. MEF=1.021

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 5.48

Net Equipment Cost 1.82

Net Present Benefit 3.66

Benefit/Cost Ratio 3.0

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJ Price Change

• Energy & Water Saving

6.00 Net Saving

!t ::::

0.00 __ __ _______ Bfl1i1tt1 fl1

-2.00

-4.00

Figure N.1 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF= 1.021

N-2

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.3 Trial Standard Level 2.. MEF=1.089 ((25% Reduction in Enerv Use)

Energy and Water Savings

_____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.41 0.23 0.16 0.01 0.01 0.84

to 2020 2.03 1.08 0.86 0.06 0.04 4.48

To 2030 4.04 2.10 1.74 0.11 0.08 9.09

Table N.4 Trial Standard Level 2. MEF=1.089

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 21.24

Net Equipment Cost 6.95

Net Present Benefit 14.29

Benefit/Cost Ratio 3.1

[IrlrIrnjiii iw mrrTh!Fn rcrrTrTI

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 LJPrice Change

ftEnergy &WaterSaving

6.00 Net Saving

-

r"i11JI1

:::: t1I1J U

-2.00 -

-4.00 -

Figure N.2 Trial Standard Level 2, MEF=1.089

N-3

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.5 Trial Standard Level 4. MEF=1.257 (35% Reduction in Enerv Use

Energy and Water Savings

_____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.60 0.38 0.20 0.01 0.01 1.16

to 2020 2.98 1.79 1.06 0.07 0.05 6.30

To2030 5.99 3.55 2.19 0.14 0.11 12.94

Table N.6 Trial Standard Level 4. MEF=1.257

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 30.90

Net Equipment Cost 14.03

Net Present Benefit 16.88

Benefit/Cost Ratio 2.2

[wi flfl19

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJPrice Change

Energy & Water Saving

6.00 -NetSaving

• 4.00 --

2.00 FFId'

0.00

u_IJu

-2.00 -

-4.00 -

Figure N.3 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF1.257

N-4

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.7 Trial Standard Level 5. MEF=1.362 (40% Reduction in Enerv Use)

Energy and Water Savings

____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.60 0.39 0.20 0.01 0.01 1.16

to 2020 3.00 1.81 1.07 0.07 0.05 6.29

To2030 6.03 3.58 2.19 0.14 0.11 12.94

Table N.8 Trial Standard Level 5. MEF=1.362

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 30.98

Net Equipment Cost 14.25

Net Present Benefit 16.73

Benefit/Cost Ratio 2.2

[ITIwUrl ITIi ii itilFTI

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJPrice Change

Lull] E ne rgy & W ate r S av ing

6.00 -Net Saving

4.00 -

N

2.00 -

0.00 \fii

LIJ UU1

U UULJ

n

UULJIJ IJU

iflflhifl

Li ULJ U IJLJ LI UULI LI LI LI

-2.00

-4.00

Figure N.4 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF 1.362

N-S

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.9 Trial Standard Level 6. MEF1.634 (50% Reduction in Enerv Use

Energy and Water Savings

_____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.73 0.50 0.21 0.01 0.01 0.95

to 2020 3.69 2.41 1.16 0.07 0.05 5.24

To2030 7.53 4.85 2.42 0.15 0.11 10.85

Table N.10 Trial Standard Level 6. MEF=1.634

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 31.69

Net Equipment Cost 20.90

Net Present Benefit 10.79

Benefit/Cost Ratio 1.5

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJPrice Change

EiEnergy & Water Saving

6.00 -NetSaving

4.00

2.00

.. [I

ULUHU

-4.00

Figure N.5 Trial Standard Level 6, MEF = 1.634

N-6

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.h Trial Standard Level 3. MEF=1.04/1.26 in 2004/2007

_____________

Energy and Water Savings

_____________

Energy Savings in Quads

__________________

Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (In!, gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.39 0.23 0.14 0.01 0.01 0.60

to 2020 2.51 1.47 0.93 0.06 0.05 4.97

To2030 5.52 3.23 2.05 0.14 0.10 11,59

Table N.12 Trial Standard Level 3. MEF=1.04/1.26 in 2004/2007

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 27.16

Net Equipment Cost 11.86

Net Present Benefit 15.30

Benefit/Cost Ratio 2.3

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJPrice Change

LEnergy & Water Saving

6.00 -NetSaving

4.00

2.00 111*

0.00

1111

-2.00

-4.00

Figure N.6 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF = 1.04/1.26

N-7

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.13 Trial Standard Level 1. MEF=1.021 (20%. Medium Price/Income E1astieitv

____________

Energy and Water Savings

____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (tn!. gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.22 0.13 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.05

to 2020 1.08 0.57 0.45 0.03 0.02 0.27

To 2030 2.13 1.11 0.92 0.06 0.05 0.54

Table N.14 Trial Standard Level 1. MEF=1.021

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 5.53

Net Equipment Cost 1.85

Net Present Benefit 3.68

Benefit/Cost Ratio 3.0

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJPrice Change

LiIIEnergy & Water Saving

6.00 -Net Saving

___ 0.00 . '-

_____ _____

---

-2.00 -

-4.00 -

Figure N.7 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF 1.021

N-i

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.15 Trial Standard Level 2. MEF=l.089 (25%. Medium Price/Income ElasticitvI

_____________

Energy and Water Savings

_____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (In!, gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.42 0.24 0.16 0.01 0.01 0.86

to 2020 2.06 1.09 0.87 0.06 0.04 4.54

To2030 4.08 2.12 1.76 0.11 0.08 9.17

Table N.1 6 Trial Standard Level 2. MEF1 i)R9

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 21.56

Net Equipment Cost 7.16

Net Present Benefit 14.40

Benefit/Cost Ratio 3.0

tvinii

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJ Price Change

Energy &WaterSaving

6.00 -NetSaving

-2.00 -

-4.00 -

Figure N.8 Trial Standard Level 2, MEF= 1.089

N-2

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.17 Trial Standard Level 4. MEF=1.257 (35%. Medium Price/Income Elasticitv

_____________ Energy and Water Savings

_____________

Energy Savings in Quads

__________________

Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.63 0.40 0.20 0.01 0.01 1.21

to 2020 3.06 1.84 1.09 0.07 0.05 6.47

To2030 6.09 3.61 2.23 0.15 0.11 13.15

Table N.18 Trial Standard Level 4. MEF=1.257

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 31.78

Net Equipment Cost 14.80

Net Present Benefit 16.98

Benefit/Cost Ratio 2.1

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJ Price Change

Energy &WaterSaving

6.00 -NetSaving j II

-

4.00

N

2.00

0.00 d1IiUiit UU L] U Ii U -2.00 -

-4.00 -

Figure N.9 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF= 1.257

N-3

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.19 Trial Standard Level 5. MEF=1.362 (40%. Medium Price/Income Elasticitv

Energy and Water Savings

_____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.63 0.40 0.20 0.01 0.01 1.20

to 2020 3.08 1.86 1.10 0.07 0.05 6.47

To2030 6.13 3.65 2.23 0.15 0.11 13,15

Table N.20 Trial Standard Level 5. MEF=1.362

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 31.87

Net Equipment Cost 15.05

Net Present Benefit 16.83

Benefit/Cost Ratio 2.1

[nTrrn IT lLL14UJJLMI1ThflJ1TTRiU

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJPrice Change

LEnergy & Water Saving

6.00 Net Saving

4.00

N

2.00

' I i !j r

0,00

= Er *41t J LU LJI IUU -2.00

-4.00

Figure N.10 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF= 1.362

N-4

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.21 Trial Standard Level 6. MEF=1.634 (50%. Medium Price/Income Elasticitv

Energy and Water Savings

____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.78 0.53 0.22 0.01 0.01 1.01

to 2020 3.84 2.50 1.20 0.07 0.06 5.45

To 2030 7.70 4.96 2.47 0.15 0.11 11.09

Table N.22 Trial Standard Level 6. MEF1.634

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 33.00

Net Equipment Cost 22.54

Net Present Benefit 10.46

Benefit/Cost Ratio 1.5

L1TmI.'r1DILwMl rlrncrrTr1Tn

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJ Price Change

Energy &WaterSaving

6.00 -Net Saving

N

2.00

4.00

_______ .Wjjj 0.00

=

-2.00 UUUUUU[Jjj[]

-4.00

Figure N.!! Trial Standard Level 6, MEF 1.634

N-S

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.23 Trial Standard Level 3. MEF=1.04/1 .26 in 2004/2097

Energy and Water Savings

____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.40 0.24 0.14 0.01 0.01 0.62

to 2020 2.58 1.52 0.95 0.067 0.05 5.12

To 2030 5.61 3.28 2.08 0.14 0.10 11.80

Table N.24 Trial Standard Level 3. MEF=1 .04/1.26 in 2004/2007

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 27.94

Net Equipment Cost 12.52

Net Present Benefit 15.42

Benefit/Cost Ratio 2.2

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJ Price Change

IEnergy &WaterSaving

6.00 - Net Saving

4.00

N

2.00

.. 0.00

=

U -2.00

-4.00 -

Figure N.12 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF= 1.04/1.26 in 2004/2007

N-6

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.25 Trial Standard Level 1. MEF=1.021 (20%. Hugh Price Elasticity)

____________

Energy and Water Savings

____________

Energy Savings in Quads

__________________

Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (tn!. gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.22 0.12 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.05

to 2020 1.08 0.57 0.45 0.03 0.02 0.26

To 2030 2.15 1.11 0.92 0.06 0.05 0.54

Table N.26 Trial Standard Level 1. MEF=1.021

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 5.52

Net Equipment Cost 1.82

Net Present Benefit 3.70

Benefit/Cost Ratio 3.0

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 LJ Price Change

iiEnergy & Water Saving

6.00 -NetSaving

::::

0.00 iminnii1imirn

-2.00 -

-4.00

Figure N.13 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF= 1.021

N-7

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.27 Trial Standard Level 2. MEF=1 .089 (25%.. Hk!rh Price Elasticitv

Energy and Water Savings

____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.40 0.23 0.16 0.01 0.01 0.82

to 2020 2.01 1.06 0.85 0.06 0.04 4.45

To2030 4.06 2.11 1.75 0.11 0.08 9.14

Table N.28 Trial Standard Level 2. MEF=1 .089

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 21.08

Net Equipment Cost 6.76

Net Present Benefit 14.32

Benefit/Cost Ratio 3.1

[H1T1 TVJIII1i'wI Id F7T1 rrmTn

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJPrice Change

Energy &WaterSaving

6.00 Net Saving

4.00

N

2.00

0.00 ui11ifl1ffl jJ1iij -2.00

-4.00

Figure N.14 Trial Standard Level 1, MEF= 1.021

N-8

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.29 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF=1.257 (35%, High Price Elasticity)

____________

Energy and Water Savings

____________

Energy Savings in Quads

__________________

Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.56 0.36 0.18 0.01 0.01 1.08

to 2020 2.87 1.73 1.03 0.07 0.05 6.09

To2030 5.94 3.52 2.17 0.14 0.11 12.86

Table N.30 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF1.257

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 29.86

Net Equipment Cost 13.06

Net Present Benefit 16.80

Benefit/Cost Ratio 2.3

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJPrice Change

1 Energy & Water Saving

6.00 -Net Saving

4.00

N

2.00

lulli

-

0.00 -\rU

-2.00 -

-4.00

Figure N.15 Trial Standard Level 4, MEF= 1.257

N-9

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.31 Trial Standard Level 5. MEF=1.362 (40%. High Price Elasticity)

Energy and Water Savings

__________

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG

_______________

Water Savings

from 2004 (tril. gals.)

to 2010

to 2020

To 2030

______________

Table N.32 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF1.362

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 29.91

Net Equipment Cost 13.25

Net Present Benefit 16.66

Benefit/Cost Ratio 2.3

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EPrice Change

Energy & Water Saving

6.00 -Net Saving

4.00

::::gnrn4i UUUUUUUUUUL]UUUUUUUUUUUUUHUU

-2.00 -

-4.00 -

Figure N.16 Trial Standard Level 5, MEF= 1.362

N- 10

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.33 Trial Standard Level 6. MEF=1.634 150%. High Price Elasticitv

____________

Energy and Water Savings

____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (till, gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.65 0.45 0.18 0.01 0.01 0.85

to 2020 3.46 2.25 1.09 0.07 0.05 4.92

To2030 7.36 4.74 2.37 0.15 0.11 10.63

Table N.34 Trial Standard Level 6. MEF=1.634

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 29.71

Net Equipment Cost 18.53

Net Present Benefit 11.18

Benefit/Cost Ratio 1.6

!7TVTVFfl iTII fTSFT I

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJPrice Change

i Energy & Water Saving

6.00 Net Saving

4.00

N

2.00

0.00

-2.00

-4.00

Figure N.17 Trial Standard Level 6, MEF 1.634

N-il

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Table N.35 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF=1.04/1.26 in 2004/2007

____________

Energy and Water Savings

____________

Energy Savings in Quads Water Savings

Total Electric Gas Oil LPG (triL gals.)

from 2004

to 2010 0.37 0.23 0.13 0.01 0.01 0.57

to 2020 2.43 1.43 0.90 0.06 0.04 4.79

To 2030 5.48 3.21 2,04 0.13 0.10 11.50

Table N.36 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF=1.04/1.26 in 2004/2007

Cost and Net Present Value (in billion 1997$)

Cumulative for Clothes Washers Purchased from 2004 to 2030

Discounted at 7% to year 1999

Total Energy and Water Savings 26.35

Net Equipment Cost 11.11

Net Present Benefit 15.25

Benefit/Cost Ratio 2.4

LTh3TU1ifl IflTTiJ.ffflTI

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

8.00 EJ Price Change

EEnergy & Water Saving

6.00 Net Saving

4.00 -'

uWrfl Uhi1 I

UHLiIIUU HUHUUHHUUUUUHU

-2.00

-4.00

Figure N.18 Trial Standard Level 3, MEF= 1.04/1.26 in 2004/2007

N-i 2

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
APPENDIX 0. MANUFACTURER INTERVIEW GUIDE

....................................................

.....................

.......................................

............................

...............................

...............................

.................

..............................

TABLE OF CONTENTS

0.1 INTRODUCTION 0-1

0.2 CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS 0-1

0.3 INDUSTRY INFRASTRUCTURE 0-2

0.4 MANUFACTURER CASH FLOW ANALYSIS 0-2

0.5 COMPETITIVE IMPACTS ASSESSMENT 0-4

0.6 EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS ASSESSMENT 0-4

0.7 MANUFACTURING CAPACITY IMPACTS ASSESSMENT 0-4

0.8 CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF REGULATION 0-5

0-i

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
APPENDIX 0. MANUFACTURER INTERVIEW GUIDE

0.1 INTRODUCTION

The Department proposes to conduct interviews with manufacturer representatives to gather

key information on the effects that potential new energy efficiency standards for clothes washers

might have on their company's revenues and finances, and on their workforce. This interview guide

provides a starting point to identify relevant issues and qualitatively and quantitatively describe the

impacts of possible candidate standards levels.

0.2 CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS

The Department's interest concerning manufacturer impact is focused at the plant or profit

center level which is directly pertinent to clothes washer production. The context within which the

plant operates and the details of plant production and costs are not readily available from the

published literature; therefore the Department invites the manufacturers to provide these details

confidentially in their own words to the extent feasible. The organizational setting around the

clothes washer profit center is of interest to round out the Department's understanding of the

potential future of the clothes washer manufacturing activity without and with energy efficiency

standards.

0.2.1 Identify Names of Parent Companies and Any Subsidiaries Relevant to the Clothes Washer

Industry.

0.2.2 Please Provide the Locations of Your Clothes Washer Production Facilities and the Product

Mix Manufactured There

0.2.2.1 How would energy efficiency standards affect each production facility mix?

0.2.3 How has your company incorporated energy efficiency improvements in clothes washer

technology into its product line and marketing strategy?

0.2.3.1 Are horizontal-axis clothes washers currently being produced by your

company?

0.2.4 How would a new energy efficiency standard on clothes washers affect your product mix and

marketing strategy?

0-1

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
0.3 INDUSTRY INFRASTRUCTURE

As part of an attempt to better understand the industry infrastructure and the impact energy

efficiency standards might have on it, the Department would like manufacturer representatives to

discuss their major distribution channels and major sources of supply.

Major Customer Types

The following questions are intended to gain an understanding of how potential energy standards

levels might affect customer mix and distribution channels.

0.3.1 Generally how would a new clothes washer standard impact your customer mix, distribution

channels and corresponding profit margins?

0.3.2 Do you see any changes in emphasis on export sales, and would the presence of new energy

efficiency standards have an impact on production of clothes washers for export sale?

Maj or Suppliers

The Department recognizes that manufacturers do not operate in isolation and that changes

in the production levels or economic health of a manufacturer can have significant impacts on its

suppliers and other trade allies. The Department plans to be available to meet with representatives

of these trade allies and to consider their impacts.

0.3.3 Who are the suppliers that may be affected by changes in your product mix as a result of

standards? How might they be affected?

0.4 MANUFACTURER CASH FLOW ANALYSIS

Each manufacturer has been given the Government Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM) to

develop its own cash flow model to compare with that of the "industry" cash flow. This will allow

each manufacturer to use its own financial information to arrive at the expected differences in cash

flow due to new energy efficiency standards. These results, together with an adequate understanding

of how they were developed, will help the Department to estimate industry impacts for different

types of manufacturers.

0-2

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
0.4.1 Costs

How do you explain differences, if any, between your manufacturing costs with and without

new energy efficiency standards and those presented in the sample results for the industry as

a whole?

0.4.1 .1 Is the "Industry" cost structure (materials, labor, overhead, tooling, etc

representative of your firm's costs? What are the differences and their causes?

0.4.1 .2How might new standards alter this cost structure?

0.4.2 Prices

How do you explain differences, if any, between your expected product prices with and

without new energy efficiency standards and those presented in the sample results for the

industry as a whole?

0.4.2.1 Are your gross margins (% revenue) different post-standards? If so, what are the

causes?

0.4.3 Shipments

How do you explain differences, if any, between your expected product shipments with and

without new energy efficiency standards?

0.4.3.1 What assumption(s) did you make about your firm's market share post-standards?

What was your reasoning?

O.4.3.21s your product mix significantly different from the overall industry proportions?

0.4.4 Financial

How do you explain differences, if any, between your financial data and those presented for

the industry as a whole?

0.4.5 Impacts on the Business

Please discuss your interpretations of the cash flow analyses results for the standards cases.

What do the results imply about the future of the business? Availability of capital?

Are there additional financial impacts on new standards that are not being captured in the

cash flow analysis? Please explain? (0.e., Tax Rate, Discount Rate, Working Capital,

SG&A, R&D, Depreciation)

0.4.6 Additional Economic Measures

Please discuss any additional measures, if any, that you might have developed that provide

insight into the economic effects of changes in energy-efficiency standards.

0-3

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
0.5 COMPETITIVE IMPACTS ASSESSMENT

Competitive impacts are assessed mainly in terms of market power, which is defined as the

ability to set a given product price within a limited range. The Department is interested in

manufacturer viewpoints on the degree to which new energy efficiency standards would increase

market power and thereby lessen competition within the clothes washer industry.

0.5.1 How would new energy efficiency standards affect your ability to compete in the

marketplace?

0.5.2 Do you believe that new energy efficiency standards would unfairly assist or harm the ability

to compete of some firms in the industry?

0.5.3 Please discuss examples, if any, wherein substantial consumer subgroups would experience

economic or performance penalties as a result of new standards.

0.5.4 Can your firm meet potential efficiency levels without changing your products in ways that

consumers might care about?

0.5.5 Does your company have specific information for the Department on consumer preferences

for product attributes potentially affected by new standards?

0.6 EMPLOYMENT IMPACTS ASSESSMENT

The impact of new energy efficiency standards on employment is an important consideration

in the rulemaking process. This section of the interview guide seeks to explore current trends in

clothes washer production employment and solicit manufacturer views on how domestic

employment patterns might be affected by new energy efficiency standards.

0.6.1 How would your employment levels change under new energy efficiency standards?

0.6.2 Would the workforce skills required under new energy efficiency standards be different

enough to require extensive retraining or replacement of employees?

0.7 MANUFACTURING CAPACITY IMPACTS ASSESSMENT

The information discussed here is important for developing an understanding of the

investment cost inputs to GRIM.

0.7.1 How would the imposition of new energy efficiency standards affect your capacity utilization

and manufacturing assets levels at your domestic production facilities?

0-4

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
0.7.1.1 Would any facilities be closed or downsized?

0.7.1 .2 Would any facilities be added or upgraded?

0.7.2 If current capacity were to be made obsolete, would it be remodeled to accommodate a new

product mix?

0.7.3 Please estimate the value of stranded assets resulting from a new standard, and/or the costs

of refitting the facility and carrying out the research, engineering, and other supporting

activities required to accommodate the new product mix.

0.8 CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF REGULATION

Clothes washer manufacturers typically produce other appliances, some of which face regulations

of their own. While any one regulation may not impose a significant burden on manufacturers, the

combined effects of several impending regulations may have serious consequences for some

manufacturers, groups of manufacturers, or an entire industry. Assessing the impact of a single

regulation may overlook this cumulative regulatory burden.

0.8.1 Please discuss the cumulative impact, if any, of other current or future product regulations

on your business, particularly those which could mitigate or exacerbate the impact of new

energy-efficiency standards.

0.8.1.1 Are you facing additional regulations for clothes washers?

0.8.1 .2Are you facing regulations on other products that you manufacture?

0.8.1 .3 What is the level of effort required to meet these regulations? (Cost, personnel etc.)

0.8.1 .4Are you facing any shortages in available design and manufacturing expertise (design

engineers etc.)?

0-5

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88