10C-i APPENDIX 10C. PENETRATION OF EMERGING AND EXISTING

TECHNOLOGIES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

10C.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................10C-1 10C.2 PRICE AND PERFORMANCE OF EMERGING AND EXISTING TECHNOLOGIES .......................................................................................................10C-1 10C.2.1 LED............................................................................................................10C-1 10C.2.2 CMH ..........................................................................................................10C-3 10C.2.3 R-CFL ........................................................................................................10C-3

LIST OF TABLES

Table 10C.1 LED Device and Luminaire Performance Projections .......................................10C-2 Table 10C.2 LED Device and Driver Cost Projections ..........................................................10C-2 Table 10C.3 LED Reflector Lam p Cost Projection ................................................................10C-3 Table 10C.4 LED GSFL Replacement Cost Projection ..........................................................10C-3 Table 10C.5 CFL Historical Prices .........................................................................................10C-4APPENDIX 10C. PENETRATION OF EMERGING AND EXISTING TECHNOLOGIES

10C.1 INTRODUCTION

In this appendix, the U.S. Departm ent of Energy (DOE) presents the assumptions and methodology used to estimate the penetra tion of emerging technologies and existing technologies in the base case sh ipments projections for IRL and GSFL. For both GSFL and IRL, DOE analyzes an existing technologies scenario which models the penetration of only existing technologies and an emerging technology scenario which models additional penetration from emerging technologies. For the GSFL existi ng technology scenario, DOE analyzes only fluorescent technologies covere d under this rulemaking. For the IRL existing technology scenario, DOE models the penetration of R- CFL as R-CFL are a mature technology with a relatively stable price and efficacy points. In both the GSFL and IRL emerging technology scenario, DOE separately considered the potenti al market penetration of two technologies: 1) light-emitting diodes (LED) (into the commercial, residential, and industrial sectors), and 2) ceramic metal halide (CMH) (into the co mmercial and indust rial sectors).

In order to model the penetration of bot h emerging and existing technologies, DOE forecasted the future performance of both LEDs a nd CMH and estimated historical prices for RCFL. These performance forecasts allowed DOE to calculate the simple payback period encountered by consumers for each technology and t hus project the market penetration of these technologies for each year during the shipments analysis.

10C.2 PRICE AND PERFORMANCE OF EMERGING AND EXIS TING

TECHNOLOGIES

10C.2.1 LED

To estimate the future efficacy and lifetime of LED luminaires, DOE used the efficacy projection from DOE’s Solid State Lighti ng Multi-Year Program Plan (SSL MYPP). i The SSL MYPP estimates a luminaire efficacy of 62 lm/W in 2008 climbing to 94 lm/W in 2010 and then stabilizing at 151 lm/W in 2020. This luminair e projection takes into account improvements in performance of LED devices as we ll as fixture, thermal, and driv er efficiencies. DOE used the commercial cool white device proj ection for both the commercial and residential sector. DOE understands that the reside ntial sector may prefer a warm white luminaire. However, as stated in the SSL MYPP, manufacturers ar e achieving a warm white luminaire by using a red LED and cool-white LED devices. Therefore, DOE believe s this efficacy projection is appropriate for both the residential and commercial sectors. The proj ection in the SSL MYPP is shown below in Table 10C.1 . DOE used the lifetime assumed in the SSL MYPP of 50,000 hours.

10C-1Table 10C.1 LED Device and Lumi naire Performance Projections DeviceEfficacyCommercial Cool White

(lm/W 25 degrees C) Fixture Efficiency Thermal Efficiency Driver Efficiency Resultant Luminaire Efficiency Luminaire Efficacy

Cool White (lm/W) 2008 108 80% 85% 85% 58% 62 2010 147 83% 89% 87% 64% 94 2012 164 87% 91% 89% 70% 115 2015 188 92% 95% 92% 80% 151

In order to estimate the future price of bot h the LED reflector lamp replacement and the LED fluorescent system replacement, DOE estimat ed the OEM selling price for the components of the LED luminaire and then applied a markup that is consistent with cu rrent retail prices for these luminaires. The LED luminaire is composed of several parts: the LE D device, driver, heat sink, and other components. To estimate the OE M selling price for the LED device, DOE used the projection of LED device costs from the SSL MYPP. By interviewing an integrated circuits manufacturer, DOE was able to estimate the co st of the LED driver. DOE used both the LED device and driver cost estimates for the LED luminaire replacing GSFL systems and IRL. The device price and driver costs are displayed in Table 10C.2

.

Table 10C.2 LED Device and Driver Cost Projections Device Price from OEM ($/klm) Driver Cost ($/W) 2007 25 0.42 2008 18 0.40 2015 2 0.28 2020 2 0.20

To estimate the cost of other components used in a replacement LED reflector lamp, DOE purchased the LR6 6” recessed down light manufactured by CREE LED lighting as this luminaire exhibits similar efficacies shown in Table 10C.1 . By analyzing the components used in this lum inaire, DOE estimated the cost of the heat sink and other smaller components as $11 in 2007. DOE estimated that these components co uld drop to $4 in 2020. Using current retail prices for the LR6 6” recessed down light , DOE estimated a 220% markup from OEM manufacturer selling price to retail price. The resulting prices of the LED reflector lamp replacements for each of the baseline reflector lamps are shown in Table 10C.3 below.

10C-2Table 10C.3 LED Reflector Lamp Cost Projection

Heat Sink and Other Costs for IRL ($) 630 Lumen LED-RL Luminaire Cost Projection ($) 1050 Lumen LED-RL Luminaire Cost Projection ($) 1310 Lumen LED-RL Luminaire Cost Projection ($) 2007 11 100 151 182 2008 10 75 110 132 2015 7 20 24 26 2020 4 13 16 18

To estimate the cost of the LED replacement for a GSFL luminaire, DOE found a commercially available retrofit kit that included a LED replacement for a 4-foot medium bipin system. DOE used the retrofit kit as a current baseline from which to project future cost, efficacy and price points. Table 10C.4 presents the cost projections for the LED GSFL replacem ent.

Table 10C.4 LED GSFL Repl acement Cost Projection 6200 Lumen LED-GSFL Luminaire Cost Projection ($) 2007 339 2008 121 2015 63 2020 53

10C.2.2 CMH

In order to estimate the future perfor mance of ceramic metal halide lamps, DOE interviewed several manufacturers. These manufacturers believed that the integrated ballast CMH lamp recently introduced on the market coul d penetrate into GSFL and IRL shipments. Manufacturer interviews also revealed that the efficacy of this lamp could increase from 48.8 lm/W in 2007 to 56.1 lm/W in 2012. After 2012, the efficacy of the CMH lamp would stabilize. Manufacturers did not believe that the cost of this lamp woul d decrease overtime given the increase in efficacy. Therefore, DOE estimated th e current and future cost of the CMH using a similar methodology to that described in chapter 7. For the analysis, DOE used a cost of $58 and a lifetime of 15,000 hours for the CMH lamp.

10C.2.3 R-CFL

To estimate historical and future penetra tions of R-CFL into bot h the residential and commercial sectors, DOE estimated historical prices of R-CFL. As historic al prices of R-CFL In

10C-32005, 2006, and 2007, are not publicly available, DOE used publicly available information on historical prices of a CFL sold in Wal-Mart and estimated a similar reduction in price for R-CFL.

Table 10C.5 CFL Historical Prices Year CFL Historical Price R-CFL Historical Price PAR30 R-CFL Historical Price PAR38

2005 3.19 ii 11.45 13.90 2006 2.50 iii 8.97 10.89 2007 1.65 iv 5.92 7.19

10C-410C-5 REFERENCES

i Multi-Year Program Plan FY’09 to FY’15: So lid-State Lighting Research and Developm ent

. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy. http://apps1.eere.energy. gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/ssl/ssl_mypp2009_web.pdf.

ii Charles Fishman. “How many light bulbs does it take to change the world? One. And You’re Looking At It:” Fast Company Magazine . September 2006. Last Accessed: December 19,.2008

< http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/ 108/o pen_lightbulbs.html?page=0%2C2 >

iii “Wal-mart in efficient light bulb sales push.” Hybrid Cars . November 2006. Last Accessed December 19, 2008.

< http://www.hybridcars.com/forums/wal-mar t-efficient-light-bulb-s ales-push.html >

iv Associated Press. “Wal-mart sells 100 millionth compact fluorescent bulb.” Fox News . October 2007. Last Accessed December 19, 2008 <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298926,00.html>