APPENDIX I. FURNACE FAN CURVES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.1 Furnace Fan Curves .............................................. I-1

LIST OF TABLES

Table I.1 Coefficients for CFM equation for PSC motors ........................ I-1

Table 1.2 Coefficients for CFM equation for Two-Stage and Step-Modulating

furnaces with ECM motors ........................................ 1-4

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure I.1 Example Fit of CFM for 3-ton Non-Condensing Single-Stage Furnace ...... 1-2

Figure 1.2 Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Single-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces ..... 1-3

Figure 1.3 Fan Curves for Condensing Single-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces .......... 1-3

Figure 1.4 Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces

- High Fire ..................................................... 1-6

Figure 1.5 Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces

- Low Fire ..................................................... 1-6

Figure 1.6 Fan Curves for Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces

- High Fire ..................................................... 1-7

Figure 1.7 Fan Curves for Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces

- Low Fire ..................................................... 1-7

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

1.1 

Table 1.1 

Table 1.2 

Figure 1.1 

Figure 1.2 

Figure 1.3 

Figure 1.4 

Figure 1.5 

Figure 1.6 

Figure 1.7 

APPENDIX I. FURNACE FAN CURVES 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Furnace Fan Curves .............................................. 1-1 

LIST OF TABLES 

Coefficients for CFM equation for PSC motors ........................ 1-1 

Coefficients for CFM equation for Two-Stage and Step-Modulating 

furnaces with ECM motors ........................................ 1-4 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Example Fit ofCFM for 3-ton Non-Condensing Single-Stage Furnace ...... 1-2 

Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Single-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces ..... 1-3 

Fan Curves for Condensing Single-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces .......... 1-3 

Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces 

- High Fire ..................................................... 1-6 

Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces 

- Low Fire ..................................................... 1-6 

Fan Curves for Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces 

- High Fire ..................................................... 1-7 

Fan Curves for Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces 

- Low Fire ..................................................... 1-7 

I-i 
APPENDIX I. FURNACE FAN CURVES

1.1 Furnace Fan Curves

Depending on the resistance (measured as static pressure) of the supply and return air ducts,

a furnace will move more or less air. When these airflow values are plotted graphically against

pressure, they are referred to as fan curves.

The Department developed fan curves for the single-stage virtual furnace models by fitting

the manufacturer airflow and pressure data points from the basic model furnaces" 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 to a

fourth-order polynomial. The Department did this separately for each of the four nominal air

handlers sizes for both non-condensing and condensing furnaces. The CFM for PSC blower motors

is given by the following equation:

CFM=mo+m,x(P)+m2x(P2)+m3x(P3)+m4x(P4) Eq.l

where,

CFM

m0 1 2 3, and4

P

airflow in CFM reported by manufacturer,

coefficients derived from 4t`' degree polynomial approximation (see Table

1.1 for actual coefficient values), and

external static pressure (in. w.g.).

Table 1.1 Coefficients for C1 'M equation for PSC motors

mo m1 mz mj m4

2-ton 891.0 -590.8 564.6 -552.2 0.0

3-ton 1280.6 -279.8 194.4 -456.3 0.0

4-ton 1585.1 32.8 -575.7 -78.4 12.3

5-ton 1998.1 260.9 -93.2 -359.8 115.9

2-ton 840.4 70.0 -908.4 294.3 56.4

3-ton 1169.5 -226.1 -272.6 -95.7 137.0

4-ton 1541.2 -110.3 -777.3 419.0 0.0

5-ton 1915.1 -198.0 -594.5 -277.8 8.3

Figure 1.1 shows an example of a CFM curve for a 3-ton Non-Condensing Single-Stage

Furnace fitted with the manufacturers' raw data.

I-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX I. FURNACE FAN CURVES 

1.1 Furnace Fan Curves 

Depending on the resistance (measured as static pressure) ofthe supply and return air ducts, 

a furnace will move more or less air. When these airflow values are plotted graphically against 

pressure, they are referred to as fan curves. 

The Department developed fan curves for the single-stage virtual furnace models by fitting 

the manufacturer airflow and pressure data points from the basic model furnaces!' 2,3,4,5,6,7 to a 

fourth-order polynomial. The Department did this separately for each of the four nominal air 

handlers sizes for both non-condensing and condensing furnaces. The CFM for PSC blower motors 

is given by the following equation: 

where, 

CFM 

mO,/,2,3,and4 

p 

airflow in CFM reported by manufacturer, 

coefficients derived from 4th degree polynomial approximation (see Table 

1.1 for actual coefficient values), and 

external static pressure (in. w.g.). 

T a bi e 11 . C oe ffi· IClen t s £ or CFM equa f .on £ or PSC mo t ors 

rno rnj rn2 rn3 rn4 

~ 2-ton 891.0 -590.8 564.6 -552.2 0.0 .S 

'" = Q.j 3-ton 1280.6 -279.8 194.4 -456.3 0.0 '"0 

= 0 4-ton 1585.1 32.8 -575.7 -78.4 12.3 U I 

= 0 5-ton 1998.1 260.9 -93.2 -359.8 115.9 

Z 

~ 2-ton 840.4 70.0 -908.4 294.3 56.4 

.S 3-ton 1169.5 -226.1 -272.6 -95.7 137.0 '" 

Q.j = 

'"0 4-ton 1541.2 -110.3 -777.3 419.0 0.0 

= 0 

U 5-ton 1915.1 -198.0 -594.5 -277.8 8.3 

Figure 1.1 shows an example of a CFM curve for a 3-ton Non-Condensing Single-Stage 

Furnace fitted with the manufacturers' raw data. 

I-I 
X L-90-12B

X MIB&006•'•

M1G8.090

M 1GH.09^ "'

M1MB.056--•'•

A11M8-090-"'

RGPN%E,N)AMER

X GUICO7O•'30

X TUBOfi0003GL

$ TUE0fi0A93fiL'

+ GE 0F?]^A^TO ER GSOGP.3GA.0]0.•

TBB0fi0003fii•

TOEOfi0A93fi

OPG80]

AIPGA]-- SB3

X RGPJOtEAUER

1GH090-•"

A11MB.056 "'

M111MB.090

® P4HUA12N03201

A PoHA12N01

PlH All ... 2NO64 0fi401

$ OBONH3R All

O APL050812

M-050 12

P3201

P-12N004I

OMPLO50B12

TOMPN05OBf2

SGGLA0412

SBGL%151

SBSTA095:12

G,lo., 45.12'

G900F3fiC

GSOOF-3fiC- 110-'•

50GLAOID

;; 5 0

-12

2•

5

8ST

05T

7

-.

-

I

."•. RGLJ.O]EAVER

Figure 1.1 Example Fit of CFM for 3-ton Non-Condensing Single-Stage

Furnace

Figures 1.2 and 1.3 show the fan curves for non-condensing and condensing furnaces.

Appendix H, Determination of Basic Furnace and Boiler Models, contains the data on the basic

models that were used to develop these fan curves.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

2500,---------------------------, 

2000 

_ 1500 ::;; 

US!. 

~ u:: 

< 1000~-~--~-~~-~-_4~-~-~~~~---~-~ 

500T-------------------------~ 

0.00 0.10 

Figure 1.1 

0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 

Pressure (in.w.g.) 

Example Fit of CFM for 3-ton Non-Condensing Single-Stage 

Furnace 

Figures 1.2 and 1.3 show the fan curves for non-condensing and condensing furnaces. 

Appendix H, Determination of Basic Furnace and Boiler Models, contains the data on the basic 

models that were used to develop these fan curves. 

1-2 
Figure 1.2

Figure 1.3

0.25 0.50

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

0.75 1.00

Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Single-Stage Virtual Model

Furnaces

0.25 0.50

External Static Pressure ( in. w.g.)

0.75 1.00

Fan Curves for Condensing Single-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces

I-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

2500 

-0-2000 CFM 

-e-1600 CFM 

2000 

-::-1200 CFM 

..... SOOCFM 

~ 1500 u. 

~ 

::: 

0 

'E 1000 ;;: 

500 . -------~-

o+------------+------------+-----------~----------~ 

0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Figure 1.2 Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Single-Stage Virtual Model 

Furnaces 

2500r---------~----------~------~~======~~ 

-0-2000 CFM 

-e-1600 CFM 

-::-1200 CFM 2000 .-... .....SOOCFM 

500 

O~----------~------------~----------~----------~ 

0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

FigureI.3 Fan Curves for Condensing Single-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces 

1-3 
The two-stage and step-modulating design options in this analysis use brushless

permanent magnet motors (or sometimes referred as Electronically Commutated Motors (ECM)).

Unlike PSC motors, these motors are electronically commutated and the speed they operate at

can be varied across a wide range. These motors are controlled to operate the blower fans at a

wide variety of air flows and static pressures. In the furnaces with these motors currently on the

market, the controls are designed to provide a nearly constant air flow across the entire range of

pressures at which they operate.

Because of the versatility of the motors, manufacturers only offer furnaces with blowers

nominally designed for operation with five-ton and three-ton air conditioners. The

manufacturers provide control options to decrease the airflow for installations that use smaller

air conditioners.

To develop fan curves for furnaces with ECM motors, the Department fit quadratic

curves through the air flow and pressure data points reported by manufacturers.$° 9,10, 11, 12, 13, 14

DOE did this separately for high-fire and low-fire operation for both non-condensing and

condensing furnaces. See Figures 1.4 through 1.7 for charts showing the fit lines. Table 1.2

shows the coefficients for two-stage and step-modulating furnaces with ECM motors using Eq.

2. Data from the basic models that were used to develop these fan curves is shown in Appendix

H, Determination of Basic Furnace and Boiler Models.

CFM=mo +Y/'tlx(P) +m2x (P2) Eq. 2

where,

CFM = airflow in CFM reported by manufacturer,

MO, 1, and 2 = coefficients derived from 2d degree polynomial approximation (see

Table 1.2 for actual coefficient values), and

P = external static pressure (in. w.g.).

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

The two-stage and step-modulating design options in this analysis use brushless 

permanent magnet motors (or sometimes referred as Electronically Commutated Motors (ECM)). 

Unlike PSC motors, these motors are electronically commutated and the speed they operate at 

can be varied across a wide range. These motors are controlled to operate the blower fans at a 

wide variety of air flows and static pressures. In the furnaces with these motors currently on the 

market, the controls are designed to provide a nearly constant air flow across the entire range of 

pressures at which they operate. 

Because of the versatility of the motors, manufacturers only offer furnaces with blowers 

nominally designed for operation with five-ton and three-ton air conditioners. The 

manufacturers provide control options to decrease the airflow for installations that use smaller 

air conditioners. 

To develop fan curves for furnaces with ECM motors, the Department fit quadratic 

curves through the air flow and pressure data points reported by manufacturers. 8,9,10,11,12,13,14 

DOE did this separately for high-fire and low-fire operation for both non-condensing and 

condensing furnaces. See Figures 1.4 through 1.7 for charts showing the fit lines. Table 1.2 

shows the coefficients for two-stage and step-modulating furnaces with ECM motors using Eq. 

2. Data from the basic models that were used to develop these fan curves is shown in Appendix 

H, Determination of Basic Furnace and Boiler Models. 

where, 

CFM 

rna, I, and 2 

p 

Eq.2 

airflow in CFM reported by manufacturer, 

coefficients derived from 2nd degree polynomial approximation (see 

Table 1.2 for actual coefficient values), and 

external static pressure (in. w.g.). 

1-4 
Table 1.2 Coefficients for CFM equation for Two-Stage and Step -Modulating furnaces

with ECM motors

High Fire Low Fire

mo m1 m, mo ( mi m2

2-ton I 857.5 I 62.0 I 0.0 634.7 I 37.5 I 0.0

3-ton 1091.1 37.4 0.0 831.7 I 6.4 0.0

4-ton I 1324.8 ( 12.9 I 0.0 1028.7 I -24.7 ( 0.0

5-ton ( 1558.5 I -11.7 I 0.0 1225.7 I -55.8 I 0.0

2-ton I 714.0 I -16.4 I -13.8 489.4 I -50.2 I 0.0

3-ton I 1003.0 I -27.4 I 0.0 680.2 I -31.5 I 0.0

4-ton I 1291.9 I -38.4 I 13.8 870.9 I -12.9 I 0.0

5-ton I 1580.9 I -49.5 I 27.6 1061.6 I 5.8 0.0

To be consistent with the analysis it did for the single-stage furnaces with PSC blower

motors, the Department created virtual models for furnaces intended to act as air handlers for

four and two ton air conditioners even though these are not currently offered by manufacturers.

To generate the fan curves for the virtual furnaces intended to be used with 4 ton air

conditioners, DOE calculated the average of the slopes and intercepts of the virtual furnaces with

air handler for 5 ton and 3 ton air conditioners. This was done separately for high and low fire

operations for non-condensing and condensing furnaces.

For the virtual furnace models intended to operate with two-ton air conditioners, the fan

curves were created by extrapolating the values for the slopes and intercepts of the virtual

furnace models with air handlers intended to operate with three-ton and five- ton air

conditioners. This was also done separately for high fire and low fire operation for both noncondensing and condensing furnaces. See Figures 1.4 through 1.7 for charts showing the fan

curves for these air handlers.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table 1.2 

ell 2-ton .5 

= '" 

Q,) 3-ton "C 

= c 

U 4-ton I 

= c 5-ton Z 

ell 2-ton 

.5 3-ton 

= '" 

Q,) 

"C 4-ton = c 

U 5-ton 

Coefficients for CFM equation for Two-Stage and Step-Modulating furnaces 

with ECM motors 

High Fire Low Fire 

mo ml m2 mo ml m2 

857.5 62.0 0.0 634.7 37.5 0.0 

1091.1 37.4 0.0 831.7 6.4 0.0 

1324.8 12.9 0.0 1028.7 -24.7 0.0 

1558.5 -11.7 0.0 1225.7 -55.8 0.0 

714.0 -16.4 -13.8 489.4 -50.2 0.0 

1003.0 -27.4 0.0 680.2 -31.5 0.0 

1291.9 -38.4 13.8 870.9 -12.9 0.0 

1580.9 -49.5 27.6 1061.6 5.8 0.0 

To be consistent with the analysis it did for the single-stage furnaces with PSC blower 

motors, the Department created virtual models for furnaces intended to act as air handlers for 

four and two ton air conditioners even though these are not currently offered by manufacturers. 

To generate the fan curves for the virtual furnaces intended to be used with 4 ton air 

conditioners, DOE calculated the average of the slopes and intercepts of the virtual furnaces with 

air handler for 5 ton and 3 ton air conditioners. This was done separately for high and low fire 

operations for non-condensing and condensing furnaces. 

For the virtual furnace models intended to operate with two-ton air conditioners, the fan 

curves were created by extrapolating the values for the slopes and intercepts of the virtual 

furnace models with air handlers intended to operate with three-ton and five- ton air 

conditioners. This was also done separately for high fire and low fire operation for both noncondensing and condensing furnaces. See Figures 1.4 through 1.7 for charts showing the fan 

curves for these air handlers. 

1-5 
Figure 1.4

2500

2000 -

g 15001---

LL

U

0

1000

500

0 -!-

0.00

Figure 1.5

Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model

Furnaces - High Fire

-0-2000 CFM

--1600 CFM

--1200 CFM

-®-800 CFM

0.25 0.50 0.75

External Static Pressure ( in. w.g.)

1.00

Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model

Furnaces - Low Fire

1-6

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

2500 

2000 

~ 1500 LL. 

~ 

3: 

o 

t: 

<C 1000 

- -

: 

I 

1 ~ 

, 

: 

-

-

-

-0-2000 CFM 

~1600CFM 

.....:)-1200 CFM 

..... 800CFM 

~ 

I 

- - - ! 

I 

I - - - - - - .. 

500 --------------- - ~-

o 

0.00 

Figure 1.4 

I 

0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model 

Furnaces - High Fire 

2500~----------~------------~----------~------------' 

2000 

~ 1500 LL. 

~ 

~ t: 

<C 

--- ----~ 

-0-2000 CFM 

~1600CFM 

.....:)-1200 CFM------ -

..... 800CFM ~~-~-,---~- ----

- - - 500 - - ---------~~ 1-- ---~--~~---1--~---~---- - ----~ 

o ~--------~-----------+----------~i----------~ 0.00 

Figure 1.5 

0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Fan Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model 

Furnaces - Low Fire 

1-6 
2500

2000

g 1500

u.

U

-0-2000 CFM

-®-1600 CFM

X1200 CFM

800 CFM

3

0

1000 d

500 I---

0 -

0.00

Figure 1.6

2500

0

0.25 0.50 0.75

External Static Pressure ( in. w.g.)

1.00

Fan Curves for Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces

- High Fire

2000 --

1500 -

1000

500

0 k0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75

External Static Pressure ( in. w.g.)

1.00

Figure 1.7 Fan Curves for Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces

- Low Fire

X2000 CFM

--1600 CFM

X1200 CFM

X800 CFM

I-7

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

2500 ,------------,------------,------------,------------, 

-<>-2000 CFM 

..... 1600CFM 

2000 "":>-1200 CFM 1- ,,----

-l1li-800 CFM i 

,.... ,.... --------- -

1 ":' 

- - - T - I 

- - - - -- - T - - 500------- ------------------

o +-------------r-----------~------------_+------------~ 

0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Figure 1.6 Fan Curves for Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces 

- High Fire 

~ LL 

~ 

3:: 

0 

1: 

« 

2500 

,-___ ~J __ -<>-2000 CFM 

..... 1600CFM 

2000 +---- "":>-1200 CFM 

-l1li-800 CFM 

1500 - ----------"---

1000 

500 

o 

0.00 

,.... ,.... 

-

---

0.25 

1 

i 

,.... ,.... 

- - - I 

I 

- i -

0.50 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

I 

--------

,.... 

I --

i - - i 

I 

i 

0.75 1.00 

Figure 1.7 Fan Curves for Condensing Two-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces 

- Low Fire 

1-7 
REFERENCES

1. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G40DF (Merit Series

Upflow/Horizontal Gas Furnace). 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc. 2003.)

<http://pirl.lennox . com/CO3e7ol41/76EOZC21u/ehb_g4Odf 0307.pdf5

2. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G40UH (Merit Series

Upflow/Horizontal Gas Furnace). 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox . com/C03e7ol4l/76EOZC2 lu/ehb_g40uh_0407.pdf>

3. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data. G41 UF (Merit Series Downflow Gas

Furnace). 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e7ol4l/76EOZC21u/ehb_g4luf 0402.pdf>

4. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G43 OF (Merit Series Upflow Gas

Furnace). 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox . com/C03e7ol4l/76EOZC21u/ehb_g43uf 0412.pdf>

5. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G50DF (Elite Series Downflow Gas

Furnace). 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e7ol4l/76EOZC21u/ehb_g5Odf 0307.pdf>

6. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G50UH (Elite Series

Upflow/Horizontal Gas Furnace). 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox . com/C03e7ol4l/76EOZC21u/ehb_g5Ouh 0307.pdf>

7. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G51 MP (Elite Series Multi-Position

Gas Furnace). 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox .com/C03e7ol4l/76EOZC21u/ehb_g5lmp-0412.pdf>

8. Carrier Corporation. Carrier Product Data : 58CVA/CVX(Infznity 80 Series MultiPoise

Furnace). 2004. Carrier Co.

<http://www.xpedio. carrier.com/ide/groups/public/documents/techlit/5 8cv-3pd.pdf>

9. Carrier Co. Carrier Product Data: 58MVP (Infinity 96 Deluxe 4-Way Multipoise

Furnace). 2004. Carrier Co.

<http ://www.xpedio. carrier.com/idc/groups/public/documents/techlit/58mvp- 11 pd.pdf>

10. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G61MPV (Multi-Position - Variable

Speed Blower - Two-Stage Heat - Direct Vent/Non-Direct Vent). 2004. Lennox

Industries, Inc.

11. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G60UHV (Up-Flow/Horizontal - Two

Stage Heat - Variable Speed Blower). 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc.

1-8

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G40DF (Merit Series 

Upjlow/Horizontal Gas Furnace). 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc. 2003.) 

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e7014l176EOZC21 u/ehb _g40dC 0307 .pdf> 

2. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G40UH (Merit Series 

Upjlow/Horizontal Gas Furnace). 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e70141176EOZC21 u/ehb _g40uh _ 0407.pdf> 

3. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G41UF (Merit Series Downjlow Gas 

Furnace). 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.1ennox. corn/C03 e7 014117 6EOZC21 u/ ehb _g41 uC 0402. pdf> 

4. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G43 UF (Merit Series Upjlow Gas 

Furnace). 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e70141176EOZC21 u/ehb _g43uC 0412.pdf> 

5. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G50DF (Elite Series Downjlow Gas 

Furnace). 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e70141176EOZC21 u/ehb _g50dC 0307 .pdf> 

6. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G50UH (Elite Series 

Upjlow/Horizontal Gas Furnace). 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e70141176EOZC21 u/ehb _g50uh _0307 .pdf> 

7. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G51MP (Elite Series Multi-Position 

Gas Furnace). 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e7014l176EOZC21 u/ehb _g51mp _ 0412.pdf> 

8. Carrier Corporation. Carrier Product Data: 58CVA/CVX(Injinity 80 Series MultiPoise 

Furnace}. 2004. Carrier Co. 

<http://www.xpedio.carrier.com/idc/groups/pub1ic/documents/techlit/58cv-3pd.pdf> 

9. Carrier Co. Carrier Product Data: 58MVP (Infinity 96 Deluxe 4-Way Multipoise 

Furnace). 2004. Carrier Co. 

<http://www.xpedio.carrier.com/idc/ groups/publici documents/techlit/ 5 8mvp-ll pd. pdf> 

10. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G61MPV (Multi-Position - Variable 

Speed Blower - Two-Stage Heat - Direct Vent/Non-Direct Vent). 2004. Lennox 

Industries, Inc. 

11. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G60UHV (Up-Flow/Horizontal - Two 

Stage Heat - Variable Speed Blower). 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

1-8 
12. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G60DFV (Down flow - Variable Speed

Blower - Two-Stage Heat). 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc.

13. Trane Co. Trane Product Data: XV 80. 2004. Trane Co.

14. Trane Co. Trane Product Data: XV 90. 2004. Trane Co.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

12. Lennox Industries Inc. Lennox Engineering Data: G60DFV (Downllow - Variable Speed 

Blower - Two-Stage Heat). 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

13. Trane Co. Trane Product Data: XV 80. 2004. Trane Co. 

14. Trane Co. Trane Product Data: XV 90. 2004. Trane Co. 

1-9 
APPENDIX J. FURNACE FAN POWER CURVES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

J.1 Fan Power ........................................................... J-1

LIST OF TABLES

Table J.1 Coefficients for W/CFM equation for PSC motors ...................... J-2

Table J.2 Coefficients for W/CFM equation for Two-Stage and Step-Modulating

furnaces with ECM motors ........................................ J-4

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure J. 1 Example Fit of Watts/CFM for 3-ton Condensing Single-Stage Furnace ..... J-2

Figure J.2 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Single-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces ........................................... J-3

Figure J.3 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Single-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces ........................................... J-3

Figure J.4 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces - High Fire ................................. J-5

Figure J.5 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces - Low Fire .................................. J-5

Figure J.6 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Two-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces - High Fire ................................. J-6

Figure J.7 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Two-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces - Low Fire .................................. J-6

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX J. FURNACE FAN POWER CURVES 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

J.l Fan Power ........................................................... J-l 

Table J.l 

Table J.2 

Figure J.l 

Figure J.2 

Figure 1.3 

Figure 1.4 

Figure J.5 

Figure J.6 

Figure J.7 

LIST OF TABLES 

Coefficients for W/CFM equation for PSC motors ...................... J-2 

Coefficients for W/CFM equation for Two-Stage and Step-Modulating 

furnaces with ECM motors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. J-4 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Example Fit ofWatts/CFM for 3-ton Condensing Single-Stage Furnace ..... J-2 

Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Single-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces ........................................... J-3 

Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Single-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces ........................................... J-3 

Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces - High Fire ................................. J-5 

Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces - Low Fire .................................. J-5 

Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Two-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces - High Fire ................................. J-6 

Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Two-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces - Low Fire .................................. J-6 

J-i 
APPENDIX J. FURNACE FAN POWER CURVES

J.1 Fan Power

Once the operating point of air flow and static pressure is determined by finding the

intersection of the fan curve and the system curve, the watts per cubic feet per minute (CFM) of

airflow are determined using the equations developed in this appendix. The power consumption of

the fan at this operating condition, BE, is calculated by multiplying the Watts/CFM by the CFM at

the operating point:

BE=

where,

Watts Q

CFM x

BE = circulating air fan electrical energy consumption (watts),

Watts/CFM = determined by Equation 2 or Equation 3 in section J.1, and

Q = airflow (cfm).

Eq. 1

For furnaces with air handlers with permanent split capactiro (PSC) blower motors, one

manufacturer reports watts across a range of pressures.' z,s,a,s,6°' For these models, the Department

divided watts at these pressures by air flow in CFM at these same pressures. These values of watts

per CFM across a range of pressures were fit to a fourth order polynomial for the basic furnace

models made by the manufacturer. The Department did this separately for each of the four nominal

air handlers sizes for both non-condensing and condensing furnaces. The watts per CFM for PSC

blower motors is given by the following equation:

CFM-mo+mlx(P)+m2x(P2)+m3x (P3)+m4x(P4) Eq.2

where,

Watts

Watts/CFM = blower electricity consumption in watts reported by manufacturer divided

by the airflow in CFM at the same static pressure,

mo,l,2,3,anda = coefficients derived from 4`" degree polynomial approximation (see Table

J.1 for actual coefficient values), and

P = external static pressure (in. w.g.).

J-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX J. FURNACE FAN POWER CURVES 

J.1 Fan Power 

Once the operating point of air flow and static pressure is determined by finding the 

intersection of the fan curve and the system curve, the watts per cubic feet per minute (CFM) of 

airflow are determined using the equations developed in this appendix. The power consumption of 

the fan at this operating condition, BE, is calculated by multiplying the Watts/CFM by the CFM at 

the operating point: 

where, 

BE 

Watts/CFM 

Q 

BE (watts) Q CFM x 

circulating air fan electrical energy consumption (watts), 

determined by Equation 2 or Equation 3 in section 1.1, and 

airflow (cfm). 

Eq.1 

F or furnaces with air handlers with permanent split capactiro (PSC) blower motors, one 

manufacturer reports watts across a range of pressures. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 For these models, the Department 

divided watts at these pressures by air flow in CFM at these same pressures. These values of watts 

per CFM across a range of pressures were fit to a fourth order polynomial for the basic furnace 

models made by the manufacturer. The Department did this separately for each of the four nominal 

air handlers sizes for both non-condensing and condensing furnaces. The watts per CFM for PSC 

blower motors is given by the following equation: 

where, 

Watts/CFM 

mO,!,2,3, and4 

p 

Eq.2 

blower electricity consumption in watts reported by manufacturer divided 

by the airflow in CFM at the same static pressure, 

coefficients derived from 4th degree polynomial approximation (see Table 

1.1 for actual coefficient values), and 

external static pressure (in. w.g.). 

J-I 
Table J.1 Coefficients for W/CFM equation for PSC motors

MO 772, m2 YIZ3 7724

2-ton 0.39 -0.01 -0.11 0.22 0.03

3-ton 0.43 -0.15 0.09 0.02 0. 06

4-ton 0.41 -0.16 0.14 -0.07 0.08

5-ton 0.44 -0.08 0.01 0.05 0.01

2-ton 0.40 -0.19 0.41 -0.50 0.31

3-ton 0.45 -0.24 0.19 0 02 -0 04

a

. .

a 4-ton 0.41 -0.12 -0.10 0.20 -0.02

5-ton 0.47 -0.19 0.30 -0.32 0.17

Figure J.1 shows the Watts per CFM curve for 3-ton condensing single-stage furnace fitted

to the manufacturers' data. A similar process of fitting curves to data was done for each nominal

air handler size for both non-condensing and condensing furnaces.

G51 MP-36B-045

♦ G43UF-368-070-"

® G51MP-36B-070"

X G43UF-36C-090-'

* G43UF-36C-09OH -

® G51MP-36C-090 -

-data fit

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 1

Figure J.1 Example Fit of Watts/CFM for 3-ton Condensing Single-Stage

Furnace

Figures J.2 and J.3 show the fit curves of Watts/CFM for pressures from 0 in.w.g. to 1.0

in.w.g. Data from the models that were used to develop these fan curves is shown in Appendix

H, Determination of Basic Furnace and Boiler Models.

J-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

T a e bi J . 1 C oe ffi· lClen t s £ or W/CFM equa f IOn £ or PSC mo t ors 

mo mj m2 mJ m4 

ell 2-ton 0.39 -0.01 -0.11 0.22 0.03 .5 

= '" 

Q.I 3-ton 0.43 -0.15 0.09 0.02 0.06 '0 

c = 4-ton 0.41 -0.16 0.14 -0.07 0.08 U I 

= c 5-ton 0.44 -0.08 0.01 0.05 0.01 

Z 

ell 2-ton 0.40 -0.19 0.41 -0.50 0.31 

.;;; = 3-ton 0.45 -0.24 0.19 0.02 -0.04 Q.I = 

'0 

= 4-ton 0.41 -0.12 -0.10 0.20 -0.02 c 

U 5-ton 0.47 -0.19 0.30 -0.32 0.17 

Figure J.l shows the Watts per CFM curve for 3-ton condensing single-stage furnace fitted 

to the manufacturers' data. A similar process of fitting curves to data was done for each nominal 

air handler size for both non-condensing and condensing furnaces. 

0.6,--------------------------, 

OJ .. OJ OJ ::;; 

LL 

g 0.3 

ro 

S 

0.2 I------~~ 

0.1 -----~------~--- --~~~--~---- ~~--~~--~~ 

0+--~-~--~-_--_-~-_--~-~-_4 

o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 

Pressure (in.w.g.) 

.. G43UF-36B-070-*" 

Ii!!I G51MP·36B-070·H 

X G43UF-36C-090-H 

): G43UF-36C-090H-~· 

II G51MP-36C-090-'" 

I-data fit 

Figure J.l Example Fit of Watts/CFM for 3-ton Condensing Single-Stage 

Furnace 

Figures J.2 and J.3 show the fit curves ofWatts/CFM for pressures from 0 in.w.g. to 1.0 

in.w.g. Data from the models that were used to develop these fan curves is shown in Appendix 

H, Determination of Basic Furnace and Boiler Models. 

J-2 
0 6.

0.4

LL

U

N

R

0-2000 CFM

0.2

X1600 CFM

X1200 CFM

--8000FM

0.0 ^-

0.00 0.25 0.50

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

0.75 1.00

Figure J.2 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing

Single-Stage Virtual Model Furnaces

0.6

11

0.4

0.2

0.0 -

0.00

X2000 CFM

1600 CFM

X1200 CFM

-^^800 CFM

0.25 0.50 0.75

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

1.00

Figure J.3 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Single-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces

J-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

0.6 

0.2 +-----1 

~2000CFM 

.... 1600CFM 

-<>-1200 CFM ! 

-111-800 CFM j 

0.0 -j-------f--------+-------t---------1 

0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Figure J.2 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing 

Sin le-Sta e Virtual Model Furnaces 

0.6 

0.4 

(~ 

~I 

0.2 r---

0.0 

0.00 

I 

I ~2000CFM 

.... 1600CFM 

-<>-1200 CFM 

-111-800 CFM 

0.25 

-" 

~ -.. y" 

I 

I 

I 

0.50 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

; 

,.... .I 

;..(;;;11"" 

I 

-----

I 

i 

; 

; 

I 

I 

! 

i 

0.75 1.00 

Figure J.3 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Single-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces 

J-3 
For the two-stage and step-modulating furnaces with ECM motors, the Department

calculated watts per CFM equations using data from basic models of several manufacturers.8°9, lo,

11, 12, 13, 14 These data are in the reduced set of furnace models database.

This was done for basic model furnaces nominally designed for use with 3 ton and 5 ton

air conditioners. The watts per CFM data points of these basic models were fit to straight lines

using Equation 3. This was done separately for high fire and low fire for both non-condensing

and condensing models. To be consistent with other analyses, the Department calculated the

slope and intercept for the watts per CFM curves for furnaces intended to operate with 2 ton and

4 ton air conditioners by interpolating from the values for 3 ton and 5 ton air handlers. Figures

J.4-J.7 show the lines for the basic models. Table J.2 shows the coefficients for two-stage and

step-modulating furnaces with ECM motors using Eq. 3. Data from the models used to develop

these fan curves is shown in Appendix H, Determination of Basic Furnace and Boiler Models.

Watts

CFM=mo+

m,x(P) Eq. 3

where,

Watts/CFM = blower electricity consumption in watts reported by manufacturer

divided by the airflow in CFM at the same static pressure,

mo,, = coefficients derived from linear approximation (see Table J.2 for

actual coefficient values), and

P = external static pressure (in. w.g.).

Table J.2 Coefficients for W/CFM equation for Two-Stage and Step-Modulating

furnaces with ECM motors

High Fire Low Fire

mo m, MO m,

2-ton 0.13 0.24 0.06 0.25

3-ton 0.14 0.24 0.08 0.25

4-ton 0.15 0.24 0.09 0.25

5-ton 0.16 0.24 0.11 0. 24

2-ton 0.12 0.23 0.10 0.24

3-ton 0.14 0.24 0.10 0.25

4-ton 0.17 0.25 0.11 0.26

5-ton 0.20 0.26 0.11 0.27

J-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

For the two-stage and step-modulating furnaces with ECM motors, the Department 

calculated watts per CFM equations using data from basic models of several manufacturers. 8, 9, 10, 

11,12,13,14 These data are in the reduced set of furnace models database. 

This was done for basic model furnaces nominally designed for use with 3 ton and 5 ton 

air conditioners. The watts per CFM data points of these basic models were fit to straight lines 

using Equation 3. This was done separately for high fire and low fire for both non-condensing 

and condensing models. To be consistent with other analyses, the Department calculated the 

slope and intercept for the watts per CFM curves for furnaces intended to operate with 2 ton and 

4 ton air conditioners by interpolating from the values for 3 ton and 5 ton air handlers. Figures 

1.4-1.7 show the lines for the basic models. Table 1.2 shows the coefficients for two-stage and 

step-modulating furnaces with ECM motors using Eq. 3. Data from the models used to develop 

these fan curves is shown in Appendix H, Determination of Basic Furnace and Boiler Models. 

Watts 

CFM = mo + mI x (P) Eq.3 

where, 

Watts/CFM blower electricity consumption in watts reported by manufacturer 

divided by the airflow in CFM at the same static pressure, 

coefficients derived from linear approximation (see Table J.2 for 

actual coefficient values), and 

p 

Table J.2 

~ 2-ton .5 

= '" 

CI.l 3-ton "C 

= 0 

U 4-ton I 

= 0 5-ton Z 

~ 

2-ton 

.5 3-ton 

= '" 

CI.l 

"C 4-ton = 0 

U 5-ton 

external static pressure (in. w.g.). 

Coefficients for W/CFM equation for Two-Stage and Step-Modulating 

furnaces with ECM motors 

High Fire Low Fire 

rn(} rnJ rna rn J 

0.13 0.24 0.06 0.25 

0.14 0.24 0.08 0.25 

0.15 0.24 0.09 0.25 

0.16 0.24 0.11 0.24 

0.12 0.23 0.10 0.24 

0.14 0.24 0.10 0.25 

0.17 0.25 0.11 0.26 

0.20 0.26 0.11 0.27 

J-4 
0.25 0.50

External Static Pressure ( in. w.g.)

0.75 1.00

Figure J.4 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces - High Fire

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

0.00

-0-2000 CFM

--1600 CFM

X1200 CFM

800 CFM

0.25 0.50 0.75

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

1.00

Figure J.5 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces - Low Fire

J-5

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

0.6 ~-------,-------,-------,---------, 

0.4 

0.2 

-0-2000 CFM 

..... 1600CFM 

-..0-1200 CFM 

..... SOOCFM 

~~~~~ 

O.O+------~------_r------~-----~ 

0.00 

FigureJA 

0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces - Hi h Fire 

0.6 ,----------,--------,-------,----------, 

-0-2000 CFM 

..... 1600CFM 

-..0-1200 CFM 

..... SOOCFM 

0.4 +------~------_+_------+__-----__1 

0.2 

0.0 +------~------_+_------+__-----__1 

0.00 

FigureJ.5 

0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Two-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces - Low Fire 

J-5 
0.6

x°2000 CFM

1600 CFM

-1200 CFM

800 CFM

LL

0

N

0.4

0.2 O'

0

0.0 -!-

0.00

0

a

C

01 - 0

0

0-0

jJ

0

m0

O°

fJ

O

O

.01

O

O

0

O

0° 0

0.25 0.50

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

0.75 1.00

Figure J.6 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Two-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces - High Fire

0.6

-0-2000 CFM

*-1600 CFM

0-1200 CFM

-0-800 CFM

LL

V

y

0.4

0.2

0.0.1-

0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

1.00

Figure J.7 Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Two-Stage

Virtual Model Furnaces - Low Fire

-)

J-6

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

0.6 

-0-2000 CFM 

..... 1600CFM 

-:>-1200 CFM 

.... SOOCFM 

0.4 

:i!: 

u.. 

() 

"iii 

--III 

~ 

0.2 

0.0+------------4-------------r------------~----------~ 

0.00 

Figure J.6 

0.6 

0.4 

0.2 

0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Two-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces - High Fire 

-0-2000 CFM 

..... 1600CFM 

-:>-1200 CFM 

..... SOOCFM .~ 

- .-

~ 

r...Jj< 

""' 

~ ~ 

1,....-

0.0 

0.00 

Figure J.7 

0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 

External Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Watts/CFM vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Two-Stage 

Virtual Model Furnaces - Low Fire 

J-6 
REFERENCES

Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G40DF (Merit Series

Upflow/Horizontal Gas Furnace), 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc. 2003.)

<http://pirl.lennox . com/C03e7o141/76E0ZC21u/ehb_g40df 0307.pdf

2. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G40UH (Merit Series

Upflow/Horizontal Gas Furnace), 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox. com/C03 e7o 141/76E0ZC21 u/ehb _g40uh_0407.pdf>

3. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G41 OF (Merit Series Downflow Gas

Furnace), 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e7o141/76E0ZC21u/ehb_g41uf 0402.pdfl

4. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G43 OF (Merit Series Upflow Gas

Furnace), 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox. com/C03e7o141/76E0ZC21u/ehb_g43uf 0412.pdf^

5. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G50DF (Elite Series Downflow Gas

Furnace), 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e7o141/76E0ZC21u/ehb_g50df 0307.pdf>

6. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G50UH (Elite Series

Upflow/Horizontal Gas Furnace), 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox . com/C03 e7o 141/76E0ZC21 u/ehb_g50uh_0307.pdf^

7. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G51MP (Elite Series Multi-Position

Gas Furnace), 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc.

<http://pirl.lennox.com/C03e7o 141/76E0ZC21 u/ehb_g51 mp_0412.pdf^

8. Carrier Corporation, Carrier Product Data: 58C VA/C VX(Infinity 80 Series MultiPoise

Furnace), 2004. Carrier Co.

<http://www.xpedio.carrier.com/idc/groups/public/documents/techlit/5 8cv-3pd.pdf>

9. Carrier Co., Carrier Product Data: 58MVP (Infinity 96 Deluxe 4- Way Multipoise

Furnace), 2004. Carrier Co.

<http ://www.xpedio . carrier.com/idc/groups/public/documents/techlit/58mvp- 11 pd.pdf>

10. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G61MPV (Multi-Position - Variable

Speed Blower - Two-Stage Heat - Direct Vent/Non-Direct Vent). 2004, Lennox

Industries, Inc.

11. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G60UHV (Up-Flow/Horizontal - Two

Stage Heat - Variable Speed Blower). 2003, Lennox Industries, Inc.

J-7

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G40DF (Merit Series 

Upjlow/Horizontal Gas Furnace), 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc. 2003.) 

<http://pirl.lennox.comlC03e70141176EOZC21 u/ehb _g40dC 0307.pdf> 

2. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G40UH (Merit Series 

Upjlow/Horizontal Gas Furnace), 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.comlC03 e 7 014117 6EOZC21 u/ ehb _g40uh _0407. pdf> 

3. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G41 UF (Merit Series Downjlow Gas 

Furnace), 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.comlC03 e 7 014117 6EOZC21 ul ehb _g41 uC 0402. pdf> 

4. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G43 UF (Merit Series Upjlow Gas 

Furnace), 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.comlC03e70 14l176EOZC21 u/ehb _g43uC 0412.pdf> 

5. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G50DF (Elite Series Downjlow Gas 

Furnace), 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.comlC03e70 14l176EOZC21 u/ehb _g50dC 0307.pdf> 

6. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G50UH (Elite Series 

Upjlow/Horizontal Gas Furnace), 2003. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.comlC03e7014lI76EOZC21 u/ehb _g50uh _0307 .pdf> 

7. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G51MP (Elite Series Multi-Position 

Gas Furnace), 2004. Lennox Industries, Inc. 

<http://pirl.lennox.comlC03e70 141176EOZC21 u/ehb _g51mp _ 0412.pdf> 

8. Carrier Corporation, Carrier Product Data: 58CVA/CVX(Infinity 80 Series MultiPoise 

Furnace), 2004. Carrier Co. 

<http://www.xpedio.carrier.comlidc/groups/public/documents/techlit/58cv-3pd.pdf> 

9. Carrier Co., Carrier Product Data: 58MVP (Infinity 96 Deluxe 4-Way Multipoise 

Furnace), 2004. Carrier Co. 

<http://www.xpedio.carrier.comlidc/ groups/publicl documents/techlitl 5 8mvp-11 pd.pdf> 

10. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G61MPV (Multi-Position - Variable 

Speed Blower - Two-Stage Heat - Direct Vent/Non-Direct Vent). 2004, Lennox 

Industries, Inc. 

11. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G60UHV (Up-Flow/Horizontal - Two 

Stage Heat - Variable Speed Blower). 2003, Lennox Industries, Inc. 

J-7 
12. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G60DFV (Down flow - Variable

Speed Blower - Two-Stage Heat). 2004, Lennox Industries, Inc.

13. Trane Co., Trane Product Data: XV 80, 2004. Trane Co.

14. Trane Co., Trane Product Data: XV 90, 2004. Trane Co.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

12. Lennox Industries Inc., Lennox Engineering Data: G60DFV (Down-jlow - Variable 

Speed Blower - Two-Stage Heat). 2004, Lennox Industries, Inc. 

13. Trane Co., Trane Product Data: XV 80,2004. Trane Co. 

14. Trane Co., Trane Product Data: XV 90, 2004. Trane Co. 

J-8 
APPENDIX K. AIR MOVING EFFICIENCY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

K.l INTRODUCTION .................................................... K-1

K.2 METHODOLOGY ................................................... K-1

K.3 OVERALL AIR EFFICIENCY CURVES ................................. K-2

K.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................... K-1

K.2 METHODOLOGY ................................................... K-1

K.3 OVERALL AIR EFFICIENCY CURVES ................................. K-2

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure K.3.1 Airflow and Watts/CFM vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing FurnaceSingle-Stage, PSC motor ......................................... K-3

Figure K.3.2 BE vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing Furnace -

Single-Stage, PSC motor ......................................... K-4

Figure K.3 . 3 Air Horsepower (AHP) vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing Furnace -

Single-Stage, PSC motor ......................................... K-4

Figure K.3.4 Overall Blower Motor Efficiency vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing

Furnace - Single -Stage, PSC motor ................................. K-5

Figure K.3.5 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Furnace -

Single-Stage Control, PSC Motor .................................. K-5

Figure K.3 . 6 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Furnace -

Single-Stage Control, PSC Motor .................................. K-6

Figure K.3.7 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Furnace -

Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, High Fire .................... K-6

Figure K.3.8 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Furnace -

Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, Low Fire .................... K-7

Figure K.3.9 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Furnace -

Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, High Fire .................... K-7

Figure K.3.10 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Furnace -

Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, Low Fire .................... K-8

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX K. AIR MOVING EFFICIENCY 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

K.l INTRODUCTION .................................................... K-l 

K.2 METHODOLOGY ................................................... K-l 

K.3 OVERALL AIR EFFICIENCY CURVES ................................. K-2 

K.l INTRODUCTION .................................................... K-l 

K.2 METHODOLOGY ................................................... K-l 

K.3 OVERALL AIR EFFICIENCY CURVES ................................. K-2 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure K.3.1 Airflow and Watts/CFM vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing FurnaceSingle-Stage, PSC motor ......................................... K-3 

Figure K.3.2 BE vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing FurnaceSingle-Stage, PSC motor ......................................... K-4 

Figure K.3.3 Air Horsepower CAHP) vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing FurnaceSingle-Stage, PSC motor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. K-4 

Figure K.3.4 Overall Blower Motor Efficiency vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing 

Furnace - Single-Stage, PSC motor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. K-5 

Figure K.3.5 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing FurnaceSingle-Stage Control, PSC Motor ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. K-5 

Figure K.3.6 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Furnace -

Single-Stage Control, PSC Motor .................................. K-6 

Figure K.3.7 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Furnace -

Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, High Fire .................... K-6 

Figure K.3.8 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing Furnace -

Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, Low Fire .................... K-7 

Figure K.3.9 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Furnace -

Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, High Fire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. K-7 

Figure K.3.10 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing FurnaceTwo-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, Low Fire .................... K-8 

K-i 
APPENDIX K. AIR MOVING EFFICIENCY

K.1 INTRODUCTION

The purpose of calculating the overall air-moving efficiency for the basic furnace models

used in the LCC analysis is to show typical efficiency levels for furnace air handlers.

K.2 METHODOLOGY

The overall air-moving efficiency is a ratio of the air power divided by the electric power

used by the blower motor:

AHP

17 overall = BE Eq.1

where:

77 overall

AHP

BE

overall air-moving efficiency,

air horsepower (watts), and

circulating air fan electrical energy consumption (watts).

Air power is the power embodied in the air due to its motion and pressure increase. Air

power at any operating condition can be calculated for any furnace from pressure , airflow, and

supply air outlet area. Air power (air horsepower or AHP) is calculated as':

AHP = 4.7 x Q x (763556

where:

4005 x A

21

Eq. 2

X6356) '

= a conversion factor to express air horsepower in watts

4005 = a conversion factor to express the velocity pressure of standard air in

(745.7 )

AHP = air power (watts),

Q = airflow (cfm),

P = external static pressure (in.w.g.), and

' The velocity pressure is the increase in pressure caused by the motion of air.

K-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX K. AIR MOVING EFFICIENCY 

K.1 INTRODUCTION 

The purpose of calculating the overall air-moving efficiency for the basic furnace models 

used in the LCC analysis is to show typical efficiency levels for furnace air handlers. 

K.2 METHODOLOGY 

The overall air-moving efficiency is a ratio of the air power divided by the electric power 

used by the blower motor: 

where: 

77 overall 

AHP 

BE 

1]werall 

AHP 

BE 

overall air-moving efficiency, 

air horsepower (watts), and 

Eq.1 

circulating air fan electrical energy consumption (watts). 

Air power is the power embodied in the air due to its motion and pressure increase. Air 

power at any operating condition can be calculated for any furnace from pressure, airflow, and 

supply air outlet area. Air power (air horsepower or AHP) is calculated asl

: 

where: 

AHP 

Q 

(

745.7) 

6356 

4005 

P 

air power (watts), 

airflow (cfm), 

a conversion factor to express air horsepower in watts, 

Eq.2 

a conversion factor to express the velocity pressure of standard air in 1 w.g., 

external static pressure (in.w.g.), and 

1 The velocity pressure is the increase in pressure caused by the motion of air. 

K-I 
A = cross-sectional airflow area of the supply -air outlet area (sq.ft.)

determined by equation 1 or 2 in Chapter 7, section 7.2.5..

The power consumption of the fan (BE) is calculated by multiplying the Watts/CFM by the

CFM at the operating point:

Watts

BE= CFMxQ

where,

Eq. 3

BE = circulating air fan electrical energy consumption (watts),

Watts/CFM = determined by equation 1 or equation 2 in Appendix J, and

Q = airflow (cfm) determined in Chapter 7, section 7.5.2.

K.3 OVERALL AIR EFFICIENCY CURVES

In order to generate the overall air moving efficiency curves we followed the following

procedure (a 3-ton non-condensing single-stage furnace is used as an example):

STEP 1: Using the coefficients in Appendix I and J generate the Airflow (CFM) vs. pressure and

Watts/CFM vs. pressure curves. See Figure K.3.1 for the sample 3-ton non-condensing

furnace (single-stage, PSC motor).

STEP 2: Using Equation 3, DOE multiplied the airflow times the Watt/CFM at each pressure from

Step 1 to calculate BE in terms of pressure. See Figure K.3.2 for the sample 3-ton noncondensing furnace (single-stage, PSC motor)..

STEP 3: Using Equation 2, DOE used the airflow (CFM) and pressure from Step 1 to calculate

the variables Q and P and used the equations in Chapter 7, section 7.2.5, to calculate the

A, the supply-air outlet area. These values were used to calculate AHP in terms of

pressure. See Figure K.3.3 for the sample 3-ton non-condensing furnace (single-stage,

PSC motor), where A is equal to 2.04 sq. ft. (at 75 kBtu input capacity).

STEP 4: Using Equation 1, finally DOE substituted BE and AHP from Step 2 and Step 3,

respectively, to calculate the overall air moving efficiency in terms of pressure. See

Figure K.3.4.

Figures K.3.5 through K.3.10 show the overall air moving efficiency vs. pressure curves for

single-stage non-condensing, single-stage condensing, two-stage non-condensing (high and low

fire), and two-stage condensing (high and low fire). Not all 25 basic design options are shown on

graphs, just 4 are shown: 2-ton at 50 kBtu, 3-ton at 75 kbtu, 4-ton at 100 kbtu, and 5-ton at 120 kbtu.

K-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

A cross-sectional airflow area of the supply-air outlet area (sq.ft.) 

determined by equation 1 or 2 in Chapter 7, section 7.2.5 .. 

The power consumption ofthe fan (BE) is calculated by multiplying the Watts/CFM by the 

CFM at the operating point: 

where, 

BE 

Watts/CFM 

Q 

BE 

Watts 

CFM x Q Eq.3 

circulating air fan electrical energy consumption (watts), 

determined by equation 1 or equation 2 in Appendix J, and 

airflow (cfm) determined in Chapter 7, section 7.5.2. 

K.3 OVERALL AIR EFFICIENCY CURVES 

In order to generate the overall air moving efficiency curves we followed the following 

procedure (a 3-ton non-condensing single-stage furnace is used as an example): 

STEP 1: Using the coefficients in Appendix I and J generate the Airflow (CFM) vs. pressure and 

Watts/CFM vs. pressure curves. See Figure K.3.1 for the sample 3-ton non-condensing 

furnace (single-stage, PSC motor). 

STEP 2: Using Equation 3, DOE multiplied the airflow times the Watt/CFMateachpressure from 

Step 1 to calculate BE in terms of pressure. See Figure K.3.2 for the sample 3-ton noncondensing furnace (single-stage, PSC motor) .. 

STEP 3: Using Equation 2, DOE used the airflow (CFM) and pressure from Step 1 to calculate 

the variables Q andP and used the equations in Chapter 7, section 7.2.5, to calculate the 

A, the supply-air outlet area. These values were used to calculate AHP in terms of 

pressure. See Figure K.3.3 for the sample 3-ton non-condensing furnace (single-stage, 

PSC motor), where A is equal to 2.04 sq. ft. (at 75 kBtu input capacity). 

STEP 4: Using Equation 1, finally DOE substituted BE and AHP from Step 2 and Step 3, 

respectively, to calculate the overall air moving efficiency in terms of pressure. See 

Figure K.3.4. 

Figures K.3.5 through K.3.1 0 show the overall air moving efficiency vs. pressure curves for 

single-stage non-condensing, single-stage condensing, two-stage non-condensing (high and low 

fire), and two-stage condensing (high and low fire). Not all 25 basic design options are shown on 

graphs, just 4 are shown: 2-ton at 50 kBtu, 3-ton at 75 kbtu, 4-ton at 100 kbtu, and 5-ton at 120 kbtu. 

K-2 
200 -

Airflow

0.2

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

Figure 1.3.1 Airflow and Watts/CFM vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing

Furnace - Single-Stage, PSC motor

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

1400 

1200 

1000 

:!: LL. 800 +~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~-~~~~ -~-~~~~~~ --~-~-~~~-~ -~~~ -~~-~-~ ~ ~ 

~ 

o == 

'E 600 

< 

1.4 

........ Airflow 

-+-Watts/CFM 1.2 

200 ~~~~~~~-~ ~~--~~-~~~ ~~- ~~--~-~~-~-~ ~~~-~~~~~-~~~ ~ ~ -~~~-----~~-~----~~~~-~~--~~~---~- 0.2 

o +~~--~~-~~--,-~--~------~c-~-~-~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~--~~-~~~ ~~~~~~~~~-~~~T~~~~ ~ --~--~~-- ~ 0 

o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 

Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Figure K.3.1 Airflow and Watts/CFM vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing 

Furnace - Single-Stage, PSC motor 

K-3 
200 I---- ---

100 I----

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

Figure K.3.2 BE vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing Furnace -

Single-Stage, PSC motor

100 -

90 -- -------

80 - -- -- - -----

70 -- - - ----- -

N 60 ---- --- --------

50 - ---- ------ -

a

a 40 --------- _ _ -- --- - --

30

20

10

0

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Static Pressure ( in. w.g.)

Figure K.3 .3 Air Horsepower (AHP) vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing

Furnace - Single-Stage, PSC motor

K-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

600 

500+-----~~~------------------------------------------

400 

~ 

~ 300----

w 

III 

200 -------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------

1 OO----~-------------------------------- -- -- ----------

O+---------_,---------,----------~--------_,----------

o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 

Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Figure K.3.2 BE vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing FurnaceSingle-Stage, PSC motor 

100 -

90 

80 

70 

U) 60 

:::: 

fIl 

~ 50 

0-

J: 

« 40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

0 

Figure K.3.3 

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 

Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Air Horsepower (AHP) vs. Pressure for 3-Ton Non-Condensing 

Furnace - Single-Stage, PSC motor 

K-4 
0 0.2 0.4 0.6

Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

0.8 1

Figure K.3.4 Overall Blower Motor Efficiency vs. Pressure for 3-Ton

Non-Condensing Furnace - Single-Stage, PSC motor

--T_- ---1 , ----- -- ---, - ------ 1-____ --T

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0. 5 0.6 0. 7 0.8 0.9

Static Pressure ( in. w.g.)

1

Figure K.3.5 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing

Furnace - Single-Stage Control, PSC Motor

K-5

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2
-+-5-Ton

4-Ton

3-Ton

0%

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

1

Figure K.3.6 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Furnace

- Single-Stage Control, PSC Motor

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

Static Pressure ( in. w.g.)

1

Figure K.3.7 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing

Furnace - Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, High Fire

K-6

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

45% 

40% ..... S-Ton_ _ _ _ _____ _ 

-ill-4-Ton 

..... 3-Ton 

35% -1--------, ~"'---2-Ton 

~ 

:, 25% (.) 

r:: 

Q) :§ 20%~-------------------------------~~2~~~---------------

in 15%~-----------------------~~~~-------------------------

10% 

5% 

o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 

Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Figure K.3.6 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Furnace 

- Sin le-Sta e Control, PSC Motor 

45% 

40% 

35% 

30% ~ 

:::!! 

:, 25% (.) 

r:: 

Q) :§ 20% 

:s:: 

w 

15% 

10% 

5% 

0% 

0 0.1 

-ill-4-Ton 

..... 3-Ton 

~4iI---2-Ton 

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 

Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Figure K.3.7 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing 

Furnace - Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, High Fire 

K-6 
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

0.8 0.9 1

Figure K.3.8 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing

Furnace - Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, Low Fire

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Static Pressure (in. w.g.)

0.8 0.9 1

Figure K.3.9 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Furnace

- Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, High Fire

K-7

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

45% 

40% ..... 5-Ton _ 

-lll-4-Ton 

-:6r-3-Ton 

35% -- ~-f$-- 2-Ton 

30% 

~ 

0>. 25% () 

c: 

Q) 

:~ 20%~-------~~~~~~------------------------------------­ :I: 

w 

15%1---~'~~~~-------------------------------------------

10% -

5% 

O%+-----,----,-----,----~----,_----,_--_,----_,----_,----~ 

o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 

Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Figure K.3.8 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Non-Condensing 

Furnace - Two-Sta e Virtual Control, ECM Motor, Low Fire 

45% 

40% ~------! : -lll-4-Ton 

I -:6r- 3-Ton 

35%l-----~~-~*~-2~-T~o~n_r_--------------------------------------_=~ 

30% ~ 

~ 

;: 25% -------------- () 

c: 

Q) 

~ 20% 

15% 

1 0% -1------~C7-'-o~"": 

5% 

0% 1-------I------,-----,--------,----r------, 

o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 

Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

---,------~ 

0.7 0.8 0.9 

Figure K.3.9 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing Furnace 

- Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, High Fire 

K-7 
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Static Pressure ( in. w.g.)

0.8 0.9 1

Figure K.3.10 Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing

Furnace - Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, Low

Fire

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

45% 

40% 

35% 

30% 

0 ~ 

;: 25% (,) 

I:: 

Q) 

'(3 20% IE 

w 

15% 

10% 

5% 

0% 

0 0.1 

Figure K.3.1 0 

-$-5-Ton 

-il-4-Ton 

--,lr-3-Ton 

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 

Static Pressure (in. w.g.) 

Blower Efficiency vs. Pressure Curves for Condensing 

Furnace - Two-Stage Virtual Control, ECM Motor, Low 

Fire 

K-8 
REFERENCES

1. Lindeburg, M. R., Fans and Ductwork, Chapter 20. In Mechanical Engineering

Reference Manual for the PE Exam, Michael R. Lindeburg PE, Editor. Tenth ed. 1997.

Professional Publications, Inc.: Belmont, CA. p. 20-23

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. Lindeburg, M. R., Fans and Ductwork, Chapter 20. In Mechanical Engineering 

Reference Manualfor the PE Exam, Michael R. Lindeburg PE, Editor. Tenth ed. 1997. 

Professional Publications, Inc.: Belmont, CA. p. 20-23 

K-9 
APPENDIX L. DETERMINATION OF FURNACE AND BOILER ENERGY USE IN

THE LCC ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

L.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................... L-2

L.2 CALCULATIONS ..................................................... L-2

L.2.1 Determination of Average Annual Fuel Energy Consumption (EF) ......... L-2

L.2.2 Determination of Average Annual Electrical Energy Consumption (EAE) .... L-3

L.2.3 Determination of National Average Number of Burner Operating Hours

(BOHss) .......................................................L-5

L.3 SUMMARY TABLES .................................................. L-8

LIST OF TABLES

Table L.3.1 Non-Weartherized Gas Furnaces .................................... L-8

Table L.3.2 Weartherized Gas Furnaces ........................................ L-8

Table L.3.3 Mobile Home Gas Furnaces ........................................ L-8

Table L.3.4 Oil-Fired Furnaces ............................................... L-9

Table L.3.5 Hot-Water Gas Boilers ............................................ L-9

Table L.3.6 Hot-Water Oil Boilers ........................................... L-10

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX L. DETERMINATION OF FURNACE AND BOILER ENERGY USE IN 

THE LCC ANALYSIS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

L.I INTRODUCTION .................................................... L-2 

L.2 CALCULA nONS ..................................................... L-2 

L.2.1 Determination of Average Annual Fuel Energy Consumption (EF) ••••••••• L-2 

L.2.2 Determination of Average Annual Electrical Energy Consumption (EAE) •••• L-3 

L.2.3 Determination of National Average Number of Burner Operating Hours 

(BOHss) ....................................................... L-5 

L.3 SUMMARY TABLES .................................................. L-8 

Table L.3.1 

Table L.3.2 

Table L.3.3 

Table L.3.4 

Table L.3.5 

Table L.3.6 

LIST OF TABLES 

Non-Weartherized Gas Furnaces .................................... L-8 

Weartherized Gas Furnaces ........................................ L-8 

Mobile Home Gas Furnaces ........................................ L-8 

Oil-Fired Furnaces ............................................... L-9 

Hot-Water Gas Boilers ............................................ L-9 

Hot-Water Oil Boilers ........................................... L-IO 

L-i 
APPENDIX L. DETERMINATION OF FURNACE AND BOILER ENERGY USE IN

THE LCC ANALYSIS

L.1 INTRODUCTION

The energy consumption in the LCC analysis is determined using the proposed

BSR/ASHRAE SPC 103R "Method of Testing for Annual Fuel Efficiency of Residential Central

Furnaces and Boilers".' Department of Energy used this test procedure instead of the current

DOE test procedure, because of the anomaly with the DHR parameter as described in Appendix

D section D.2.3. This approach requires the calculation of the average annual fuel energy

consumption (EF), the average annual electrical energy consumption (EAE), and the national

average number of burner operating hours (BOH) of furnaces and boilers.

The following calculations and summary tables describe the determination of EF, EAE, and

BOH for gas- and oil-fired furnaces and boilers.

L.2 CALCULATIONS

L.2.1 Determination of Average Annual Fuel Energy Consumption (EF)

The average annual fuel consumption is calculated in Appendix C section 2 of the

BSR/ASHRAE 103/1993R test procedure:'

EF = BOHss * (QIN - Qr) + 8,760 * Q p , for single-stage furnaces and boilers, Eq. 1

EF = (BOHH * QIN) + (BOHR * Q,N R) + [8,760 - (BOHH + BOHR )] * Q,,, for two-stage

furnaces andboilers, and Eq. 2

EF = (BOHM * Q/N M) + (BOHR * QJNR)+ [8,760 - (BOHM + BOHR )] * Qp, for step

modulating furnaces and boilers Eq. 3

where,

BOHss = national average number of burner operating hours (see derivation in section

L.2.3),

BOHH = national average number of burner operating hours at the maximum operating

mode for two-stage furnaces and boilers (see derivation in section L.2.3),

BOHR = national average number of burner operating hours at the reduced operating mode

for two-stage or step modulating furnaces and boilers (see derivation in section

L.2.3),

BOHM = national average number of burner operating hours at the modulating operating

mode for step modulating furnaces and boilers (see derivation in section L.2.3),

L-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX L. DETERMINATION OF FURNACE AND BOILER ENERGY USE IN 

THE LCC ANALYSIS 

L.1 INTRODUCTION 

The energy consumption in the LCC analysis is determined using the proposed 

BSRlASHRAE SPC 103R "Method of Testing for Annual Fuel Efficiency of Residential Central 

Furnaces and Boilers". 1 Department of Energy used this test procedure instead of the current 

DOE test procedure, because of the anomaly with the DHR parameter as described in Appendix 

D section D.2.3. This approach requires the calculation of the average annual fuel energy 

consumption (EF)' the average annual electrical energy consumption (EAE)' and the national 

average number of burner operating hours (BOH) of furnaces and boilers. 

The following calculations and summary tables describe the determination of EF, EAE> and 

BOH for gas- and oil-fired furnaces and boilers. 

L.2 CALCULATIONS 

L.2.1 Determination of Average Annual Fuel Energy Consumption (EF) 

The average annual fuel consumption is calculated in Appendix C section 2 of the 

BSRlASHRAE 10311993R test procedure: l 

EF = BOHss * (QIN - Qp) + 8,760 * Qp, for single-stage furnaces and boilers, Eq.1 

EF = (BOHH * QIN) + (BOHR * QINR) + [8,760 - (BOHH + BOHR )]* Qp, for two-stage 

furnaces and boilers, and Eq.2 

EF = (BOHM* QIN,M) + (BOHR * QIN,R)+ [8,760 - (BOHM+ BOHR)]* Qp, for step 

modulating furnaces and boilers Eq. 3 

where, 

BOHss = national average number of burner operating hours (see derivation in section 

L.2.3), 

national average number of burner operating hours at the maximum operating 

mode for two-stage furnaces and boilers (see derivation in section L.2.3), 

national average number of burner operating hours at the reduced operating mode 

for two-stage or step modulating furnaces and boilers (see derivation in section 

L.2.3), 

national average number of burner operating hours at the modulating operating 

mode for step modulating furnaces and boilers (see derivation in section L.2.3), 

L-2 
QIN

QIN,R

QIN, M

QP

steady-state nameplate input rate in Btu/h for single-stage furnaces and boilers or

steady-state nameplate maximum input rate in Btu/h for two-stage and step

modulating furnaces and boilers,

steady-state reduced fuel input rate,

steady-state modulating fuel input rate, and

pilot flame fuel input rate in Btu/h.

Qm is based on the baseline value for each product class. We set QIN,R to be 69% of QIN

for non-condensing two-stage equipment, 67% for condensing two-stage equipment, and 40%

for step modulation equipment, where this value represents the average ratio Q,N/Q,N R as derived

using manufacturer product literature and Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association (GAMA)

March 2005 Directory data for all listed two-stage furnace models.Z

From Appendix C Section 1,' QIN,M is calculated using QOVT,M and Effyss,M (as defined in

section 11.4.8.10 or 11.5.8.8). ` Q,, is zero for all product classes, except for the baseline

manufactured-home gas furnace and gas boiler.

L.2.2 Determination of Average Annual Electrical Energy Consumption (EAE)

Using the BSR/ASHRAE SPC 103 test procedure,' the average annual auxiliary electrical

energy consumption is calculated in Appendix C section 3:

EAE = BOHSS (yP * PE + Ylc *PEIC + y * BE), for single-stage furnaces and boilers,Eq. 4

and

where

y*BEFI)', for two-stage and step modulating furnaces and boilers, Eq. 5

EAE = BOHR (YP.R *PER + YIG,R *PEIC.R + YR *BEI) + BOHH M (YP *PEH + Ylc *PE+

BOHss = as defined in section L.2.3,

BOHH = as defined in section L.2.3,

BOHM = as defined in section L.2.3,

BOHR = as defined in section L.2.3,

yP = ratio of induced or forced draft blower on-time to average burner on-time,

YP,R = ratio of induced or forced draft blower on-time to average burner on-time,

measured at the reduced fuel input rate,

PE = burner (or draft inducer) electrical power input at full-load steady-state operation

in kW,

The BSR/ASHRAE test procedure does not deal with ignitor energy consumption. The ratio of ignitor on-time to

burner on-time and the ignitor power consumption variables come from the DOE test procedure.3

L-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

QIN steady-state nameplate input rate in Btu/h for single-stage furnaces and boilers or 

steady-state nameplate maximum input rate in Btu/h for two-stage and step 

modulating furnaces and boilers, 

QIN,R steady-state reduced fuel input rate, 

QIN,M steady-state modulating fuel input rate, and 

Qp pilot flame fuel input rate in Btu/h. 

QIN is based on the baseline value for each product class. We set QIN,R to be 69% ofQIN 

for non-condensing two-stage equipment, 67% for condensing two-stage equipment, and 40% 

for step modulation equipment, where this value represents the average ratio QIN/QIN,R as derived 

using manufacturer product literature and Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association (GAMA) 

March 2005 Directory data for all listed two-stage furnace models. 2 

From Appendix C Section 1,1 QIN,M is calculated using QOUT,M and Effyss,M (as defined in 

section 11.4.8.10 or 11.5.8.8).1 Qp is zero for all product classes, except for the baseline 

manufactured-home gas furnace and gas boiler. 

L.2.2 Determination of Average Annual Electrical Energy Consumption (EAE) 

Using the BSRI ASHRAE SPC 103 test procedure,1 the average annual auxiliary electrical 

energy consumption is calculated in Appendix C section 3: 

and 

where 

BOHss 

BOHH 

BOHM 

BOHR 

yP 

YP,R 

PE 

EAE = BOHss (yp * PE + YlG *PElG + Y * BE), for single-stage furnaces and boilers,Eq. 4 

EAE = BOHR (yp,R*PER + YIG,R *PEIG,R + YR*BEJ + BOHHorM (Yp*PEH + YlG *PElG.H + 

y*BEJ1, for two-stage and step modulating furnaces and boilers, Eq.5 

as defined in section L.2.3, 

as defined in section L.2.3, 

as defined in section L.2.3, 

as defined in section L.2.3, 

ratio of induced or forced draft blower on-time to average burner on-time, 

ratio of induced or forced draft blower on-time to average burner on-time, 

measured at the reduced fuel input rate, 

burner (or draft inducer) electrical power input at full-load steady-state operation 

inkW, 

I The BSRJASHRAE test procedure does not deal with ignitor energy consumption. The ratio of ignitor on-time to 

burner on-time and the ignitor power consumption variables come from the DOE test procedure. 3 

L-3 
PER = burner (or draft inducer) electrical power input at full-load steady-state operation

in kW, measured at the reduced fuel input rate,

PEH = burner (or draft inducer) electrical power input at full-load steady-state operation

in kW, measured at the maximum fuel input rate,

YIG = ratio of burner interrupted-ignition device on-time to average burner on-time,

YIG,R = ratio of burner interrupted-ignition device on-time to average burner on-time,

measured at the reduced fuel input rate,

PEIG = electrical input rate to the interrupted ignition device on the burner,

PEIG,R = electrical input rate to the interrupted ignition device on the burner, measured at

the reduced fuel input rate,

PEIG,H = electrical input rate to the interrupted ignition device on the burner, measured at

the maximum fuel input rate,

y = ratio of blower or pump on-time to burner on-time,

YR = ratio of blower or pump on-time to burner on-time, measured at the reduced fuel

input rate,

BE = circulating-air fan or water pump electrical energy input rate in kW,

BER = circulating-air fan or water pump electrical energy input rate in kW, measured at

the reduced fuel input rate, and

BEH = circulating-air fan or water pump electrical energy input rate in kW, measured at

the maximum fuel input rate.

The values y,, and yP,R are calculated using tP (post-purge time). For this calculation, DOE

took t, to be 5 seconds for furnaces, which is less than or 30 seconds and is therefore set equal to

0 seconds, according to Appendix C section 1.' For gas furnaces, t, is equal to 3 minutes. For

boilers, DOE calculated the values YIG and YIG R using tIG (burner interrupted-ignition device ontime). For gas furnaces and boilers, tIG = 0.62 min.' For oil boilers, tIG is equal to 26 minutes for

oil equipment without interrupted ignition and 45 seconds with oil equipment with interrupted

ignition.5 DOE calculated the values y and yP,R using t+ (blower or pump on-delay) and t- (blower

or pump off-delay). For furnaces, t+ = 2 min and t- = 0.5 min, and for gas and oil boilers, t+ = 15

minutes and t- = 0, which are values obtained for the generic furnace models (see Chapter 7

Section 7.2.6). For gas furnaces, PE is equal to 75 W for non-condensing furnaces and 90 W for

condensing furnaces (see Chapter 7 Section 7.2.6). For oil furnaces and boilers, PE is set to 220

W6 . For gas boilers, PE is equal to 76 W using typical values from the March 2005 GAMA

Directory.2 For design options which include modulation, we set PER and PEH to have the same

values as PE, since it is assumed that there is no inducer modulation. For gas furnaces and

boilers, PEIG, PEIG,R, and PEIG,H are set equal to 400 W.' For oil furnaces and boilers, PEI G is

equal to 45 watts for oil equipment without interrupted ignition and 25 watts with oil equipment

with interrupted ignition.' For design options which include modulation, we set PEIG,R and PEIG H

to have the same values as PEIG, since it is assumed that there is no ignition modulation. For

furnaces, BE and BER values are calculated using equations in Appendix J for the different design

options. For boilers, BEH and BE are set equal to 70 W, while BER is set 80% of BEH (56 W).9

L-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

YIG 

Y/G,R 

Y 

YR 

burner (or draft inducer) electrical power input at full-load steady-state operation 

in kW, measured at the reduced fuel input rate, 

burner (or draft inducer) electrical power input at full-load steady-state operation 

in kW, measured at the maximum fuel input rate, 

ratio of burner interrupted-ignition device on-time to average burner on-time, 

ratio of burner interrupted-ignition device on-time to average burner on-time, 

measured at the reduced fuel input rate, 

electrical input rate to the interrupted ignition device on the burner, 

electrical input rate to the interrupted ignition device on the burner, measured at 

the reduced fuel input rate, 

electrical input rate to the interrupted ignition device on the burner, measured at 

the maximum fuel input rate, 

ratio of blower or pump on-time to burner on-time, 

ratio of blower or pump on-time to burner on-time, measured at the reduced fuel 

input rate, 

circulating-air fan or water pump electrical energy input rate in kW, 

circulating-air fan or water pump electrical energy input rate in kW, measured at 

the reduced fuel input rate, and 

circulating-air fan or water pump electrical energy input rate in kW, measured at 

the maximum fuel input rate, 

The values yp and YP,R are calculated using tp (post-purge time), For this calculation, DOE 

took tp to be 5 seconds for furnaces, which is less than or 30 seconds and is therefore set equal to 

o seconds, according to Appendix C section 1,1 For gas furnaces, tp is equal to 3 minutes, For 

boilers, DOE calculated the values Yro and Yro,R using tro (burner interrupted-ignition device ontime), For gas furnaces and boilers, tro = 0.62 min,4 For oil boilers, tro is equal to 26 minutes for 

oil equipment without interrupted ignition and 45 seconds with oil equipment with interrupted 

ignition,S DOE calculated the values Y and YP,R using t+ (blower or pump on-delay) and r (blower 

or pump off-delay), For furnaces, t = 2 min and r = 0.5 min, and for gas and oil boilers, t = 15 

minutes and r = 0, which are values obtained for the generic furnace models (see Chapter 7 

Section 7.2.6). For gas furnaces, PE is equal to 75 W for non-condensing furnaces and 90 W for 

condensing furnaces (see Chapter 7 Section 7.2.6). For oil furnaces and boilers, PE is set to 220 

W 6. For gas boilers, PE is equal to 76 W using typical values from the March 2005 GAMA 

Directory.2 For design options which include modulation, we set PER and PEH to have the same 

values as PE, since it is assumed that there is no inducer modulation. For gas furnaces and 

boilers, PEro, PEro R, and PEro H are set equal to 400 W. 7 For oil furnaces and boilers, PEro is , , 

equal to 45 watts for oil equipment without interrupted ignition and 25 watts with oil equipment 

with interrupted ignition.s For design options which include modulation, we set PEro Rand PEro H , , 

to have the same values as PEro, since it is assumed that there is no ignition modulation. For 

furnaces, BE and BER values are calculated using equations in Appendix J for the different design 

options. For boilers, BEH and BE are set equal to 70 W, while BER is set 80% ofBEH (56 W).9 

L-4 
L.2.3 Determination of National Average Number of Burner Operating Hours (BOHss)

From the BSRIASHRAE SPC 103R test procedure,' the national average number of burner

operating hours for furnaces and boilers is calculated in Appendix C section 1:

BOHSS = 2080 * 0.77 * A * (QoUT / (1 + a)) - 2080 * B, for single-stage furnaces and

boilers, Eq. 6

and

where

BOHH = XH * (2080) * (0.77) * AN * (QoUT l (1 + a)) - 2080 * BH, for two-stage furnaces

and boilers at the maximum operating mode, Eq. 7

BOHR = XR * (2080) * (0.77) * An * (QoUT l (1 + a)) - 2080 * BR, for two-stage and step

modulating furnaces and boilers operating at the reduced operating mode, Eq. 8

BOHM = XH * (2080) * (0.77) * AM * (QoUT / (1 + a)) - 2080 * BM, for step modulating

furnaces and boilers operating at the modulating operating mode, Eq. 9

2080 = national average heating load hours,

0.77 = adjustment factor to adjust the calculated design heating requirements and heating load

hours to the actual heating load experienced by the heating system,

A = 100,000/ [341300(yP * PE +YIG,R *PEJG,R + Y * BE) + (QIN - QP) * Eff),HS]a,

AH = 100,000/ [341300(yP * PEH +YIG,R *PEIG.R + y * BEH) + (Qn, - QP) * Effyu,H]a,

AR = 100,000/ [341300(YP,R * PER +YIG,R *PEIG,R + YR * BER) + (QIN,R - QP) * Eff),U R]a,

AM = 100,000/ [341300(yp * PEH +YIG,R *PEIG,R + Y * BEH) + (QT,,M - QP) * EffyU M]a,

B =

BH =

BR =

BM =

2 * (Q,) * (EffyH5) * (A) /100,000,

2 * (Q,) * (EffyU H) * (AH) / 100,000,

2 * (Q,) * (EffyU,R) * (AR) / 100,000,

2 * (QP) * (EffyU,M) \*( AM) / 100,000,

QOUT = maximum fuel input rate heating capacity,

a = oversize factor,

XH = fraction of heating load at maximum fuel input rate operating mode,

XR = fraction of heating load at reduced fuel input rate operating mode (1-XH),

QIN = as defined in section L.2.1 of this appendix,

QIN,R = as defined in section L.2.1 of this appendix,

QIN,M = as defined in section L.2.1 of this appendix,

QP = as defined in section L.2.1 of this appendix,

a The BSRIASHRAE test procedure does not deal with ignitor energy consumption. The ratio of ignitor on-time to

burner on-time and the ignitor power consumption variables come from the DOE test procedure.3

L-5

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

L.2.3 Determination of National Average Number of Burner Operating Hours (BOHss) 

From the BSRJASHRAE SPCI03R test procedure,! the national average number of burner 

operating hours for furnaces and boilers is calculated in Appendix C section 1: 

and 

where 

2080 

0.77 

A 

AH 

AR 

AM 

B 

BH 

BR 

BM 

QOUT 

a 

XH 

XR 

QIN 

QIN,R 

QIN,M 

Qp 

BOHss = 2080 * 0.77 * A * (QOUT1 (1 + a)) - 2080 * B, for single-stage furnaces and 

boilers, Eq.6 

BOHH =XH * (2080) * (0.77) * AH * (QOUT1 (1 + a)) - 2080 * BH, for two-stage furnaces 

and boilers at the maximum operating mode, Eq. 7 

BOHR = XR * (2080) * (0.77) * AR * (QOUT1 (1 + a)) - 2080 * BR, for two-stage and step 

modulating furnaces and boilers operating at the reduced operating mode, Eq.8 

BOH M = XH * (2080) * (0.77) * AM * (QOUT 1 (1 + a)) - 2080 * B M' for step modulating 

furnaces and boilers operating at the modulating operating mode, Eq. 9 

national average heating load hours, 

adjustment factor to adjust the calculated design heating requirements and heating load 

hours to the actual heating load experienced by the heating system, 

100,0001 [341300(yp * PE + YIG,R *PEIG,R + Y * BE) + (QIN - Qp) * EffYHS]a, 

100,0001 [341300(yp * PEH + YIG,R *PEIG,R + Y * BEH) + (QIN - Qp) * EffYu,H]", 

100,0001 [341300(Yp,R * PER + YIG,R *PE1G,R + YR * BER) + (QIN,R - Qp) * EffYu,R]", 

100,0001 [341300(yp * PEH + YIGR *PE1GR + Y * BEH) + (QrN M - Qp) * EffYuM]"' " , , 

2 * (Qp) * (EffYHS) * (A) 1100,000, 

2 * (Qp) * (EffYu,H) * (AH) 1 100,000, 

2 * (Qp) * (EffYu R) * (AR) 1 100,000, 

2 * (Qp) * (EffYUM) * (AM) 1 100,000, 

maximum fuel input rate heating capacity, 

oversize factor, 

fraction of heating load at maximum fuel input rate operating mode, 

fraction of heating load at reduced fuel input rate operating mode (l-XH), 

as defined in section L.2.1 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.1 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.1 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.1 of this appendix, 

a The BSRJASHRAE test procedure does not deal with ignitor energy consumption. The ratio of ignitor on-time to 

burner on-time and the ignitor power consumption variables come from the DOE test procedure. 3 

L-5 
yP = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

YP,R = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

PE = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

PER = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

PEH = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

y,G = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

YIG,R = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

PEIG = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

PE,G,R = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

PE,G,H = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

Y

YR

BE

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

BER = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

BEH = as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix,

EffyHS = ratio of the average length of the heating season in hours to the average heating load

hours,

EffyUH = average part load efficiency at the maximum fuel input rate,

EffyUR = average part load efficiency at the reduced fuel input rate, and

EffyU,,,,, = average part load efficiency at the modulating fuel input rate.

Equations 6 through 9 are modified to account for the fact that we know the house heating

load (HHL) for each RECS household (see Chapter 7 section 7.6). First we set HHL equal to the

factors in equations 6 through 9 used to approximate HHL:

HHL=2080*0.77*(QouT/( 1+6e))

Therefore Geis set equal to:

a= QoUT * (2080) * (0.77) l (HHL) - 1

Eq. 10

Eq. 11

instead of being equal to the constant value 0.7 as defined in the BSR/ASHRAE SPC103 test

procedure.'

The modified equations used in the LCC spreadsheet are as follows (Note that the

maximum value for BOH is set to 8760):

BOHSS = A * HHL - 2080 * B, for single-stage furnaces and boilers, Eq. 12

BOHH = XH * AH * HHL - 2080 * BH, for two-stage furnaces and boilers at the maximum

operating mode, Eq. 13

BOHR = XR * AR * HHL - 2080 * BR, for two-stage and step modulating furnaces and

boilers operating at the reduced operating mode, Eq. 14

L-6

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

YP 

YP,R 

PE 

PER 

PEH 

YIG 

YIG,R 

PEIG 

PEIG,R 

PEIG,H 

Y 

YR 

BE 

BER 

BEH 

Ef/YHS 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

as defined in section L.2.2 of this appendix, 

ratio of the average length of the heating season in hours to the average heating load 

hours, 

Ef/YU,H = 

Ef/YU,R = 

Ef/YU,M = 

average part load efficiency at the maximum fuel input rate, 

average part load efficiency at the reduced fuel input rate, and 

average part load efficiency at the modulating fuel input rate. 

Equations 6 through 9 are modified to account for the fact that we know the house heating 

load (HHL) for each RECS household (see Chapter 7 section 7.6). First we set HHL equal to the 

factors in equations 6 through 9 used to approximate HHL: 

HHL = 2080 * 0.77 * (QOUT/ (1 + a)) Eq.l0 

Therefore ais set equal to: 

a= QOUT * (2080) * (0.77) / (HHL) - 1 Eq.ll 

instead of being equal to the constant value 0.7 as defined in the BSRlASHRAE SPCI03 test 

procedure. 1 

The modified equations used in the LCC spreadsheet are as follows (Note that the 

maximum value for BOH is set to 8760): 

BOHss = A * HHL - 2080 * B, for single-stage furnaces and boilers, Eq.12 

BOHH = XH * AH * HHL - 2080 * B H, for two-stage furnaces and boilers at the maximum 

operating mode, Eq. 13 

BOHR = XR * AR * HHL - 2080 * B R' for two-stage and step modulating furnaces and 

boilers operating at the reduced operating mode, Eq. 14 

L-6 
and

BOHM = XH * AM * HHL - 2080 * BM, for step modulating furnaces and boilers operating at

the modulating operating mode, Eq. 15

To calculate factors A , AH, AR, AM, B, BH, BR, and BM, DOE calculated yp, YPR, PE, PER,

PEH, YIG, YIG,R, PEIG, PE,G,R, PEIG H, Y, YR, BE, BER, BEH, , PE, YIG, PEIG, y, BE, QIN , and QP yP, as

described in section L.2.2 of this appendix. For factor B, if QP = 0, then B = 0, which is true for

all cases except for the baseline manufactured-home gas furnace and the baseline gas boiler. We

calculated EffyHS, heating seasonal efficiency , as defined in sections 11.2.11, 11 . 3.11.3, 11.4.11.3,

and 11.5.11.3.' For QP = 0, EffyHS is equal to the annual fuel utilization efficiency (AFUE). For

QP > 0, Effyf3 is calculated using Effyss (as defined in section 11.2.8.1'). Effyss is calculated using

QOUT (as defined below), K (factor that adjusts the jacket losses, where K = 1.7 for nonweatherized furnaces, 3.3 for weatherized furnaces, and 1 for boilers as described in section

11.2.8.1 '), and Lj (jacket loss, where Lj = 1 is the default value as described in section 11.2.8.1')

QOUT for all product classes is calculated using the following equations based on GAMA

Directory 2005 data for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces2:

QoUT = QIN (0.7247 * AFUE + 0.22346), for non-condensing equipment, and Eq. 16

QoUT = QIN (0.8127 * AFUE + 0.17557), for condensing equipment. Eq. 17

DOE calculated XH by using Tc (balance-point temperature as defined in section 11.4.8.4

a (the oversize factor, as calculated in Equation 11), QouT, and QOUTR (reduced fuel input rate

heating capacity). QOUT;R is set equal to 69% QOUT for non-condensing equipment and 67% QOUT

for condensing equipment, as derived using manufacturer product literature and Gas Appliance

Manufacturers Association (GAMA) March 2005 Directory data for all listed two-stage furnace

models.2 XR is set equal to l-XH. For similar reasons as provided in Appendix D, section D.3.2,

EffyuH = Effyu,R and therefore using the equation in section 11.5.11.3' is equal to Effyss• E.ffyUM is

calculated using the equation in section 11.4.9.2.3.'

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

and 

BOHM= XH * AM * HHL - 2080 * BM, for step modulating furnaces and boilers operating at 

the modulating operating mode, Eq.15 

To calculate factors A, AH, AR, AM' B, B H' B R' and B M' DOE calculated yP, yp R, PE, PER' 

PEH, YIG' YIG,R' PE1G, PElG,R' PE1G,H' y, YR' BE, BER, BEH, , PE, YIG' PEIG, y, BE, QIN' and Qp yp , as 

described in section L.2.2 of this appendix. For factor B, if Qp = 0, then B = 0, which is true for 

all cases except for the baseline manufactured-home gas furnace and the baseline gas boiler. We 

calculated EffyHS' heating seasonal efficiency, as defined in sections 11.2.11, 11.3.11.3, 11.4.11.3, 

and 11.5.11.3.' For Qp = 0, EffyHS is equal to the annual fuel utilization efficiency (AFUE). For 

Qp> 0, EffyHS is calculated using Effyss (as defined in section 11.2.8.1'). Effyss is calculated using 

QOUT (as defined below), K (factor that adjusts the jacket losses, where K = 1.7 for nonweatherized furnaces, 3.3 for weatherized furnaces, and 1 for boilers as described in section 

11.2.8.1 I), and Lj (jacket loss, where Lj = 1 is the default value as described in section 11.2.8.1') 

QOUT for all product classes is calculated using the following equations based on GAMA 

Directory 2005 data for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces2

: 

QOUT = QIN (0.7247 * AFUE + 0.22346), for non-condensing equipment, and Eq. 16 

QOUT = QIN (0.8127 * AFUE + 0.17557), for condensing equipment. Eq.17 

DOE calculated XH by using Tc (balance-point temperature as defined in section 11.4.8.4 

I), ex (the oversize factor, as calculated in Equation 11), QOUT' and QOUT,R (reduced fuel input rate 

heating capacity). QOUT,R is set equal to 69% QOUT for non-condensing equipment and 67% QOUT 

for condensing equipment, as derived using manufacturer product literature and Gas Appliance 

Manufacturers Association (GAMA) March 2005 Directory data for all listed two-stage furnace 

models.2 XR is set equal to l-XH• For similar reasons as provided in Appendix D, section D.3.2, 

Effyu,H = EffyU,R and therefore using the equation in section 11.5.11.3' is equal to Effyss. EffyU,M is 

calculated using the equation in section 11.4.9.2.3. 1 

L-7 
L.3 SUMMARY TABLES

Tables L.4.1 through L.4.6 in this appendix contain data about the furnaces and boilers.

Table L3.1 Non-Weartherized Gas Furnaces

Description EffyHs t, PE tIG P►G t+ t

78% AFUE - Baseline 78% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

80% AFUE - Increased HX Area 80% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

80% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 80% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

81% AFUE - Increased HX Area 81% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

81% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 81% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

90% AFUE 90% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

92% AFUE - Increased HX Area 92% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

92% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 92% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

92% AFUE - Modulation (Continuous) 92% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

96% AFUE - Modulation (Continuous) 96% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

Table L.3.2 Weartherized Gas Furnaces

Description EffyHs tp PE t,G PIG t+ t78% AFUE - Baseline 78% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

80% AFUE - Increased HX Area 80% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

81% AFUE - Increased HX Area 81% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

82% AFUE - Increased HX Area 82% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

83% AFUE - Increased HX Area 83% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

Table L.3.3 Mobile Home Gas Furnaces

Description EffyHs tp PE t,G P,G _ t

75% AFUE - Baseline 79% 5 sec 75 37 sec 0 120 sec 30 sec

80% AFUE - Increased HX Area 80% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

80% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 80% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

81% AFUE - Increased HX Area 81% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

81% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 81% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

82% AFUE - Increased HX Area 82% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

82% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 82% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

90% AFUE - Condensing 90% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

L.3 SUMMARY TABLES 

Tables L.4.1 through L.4.6 in this appendix contain data about the furnaces and boilers. 

Table L.3.1 Non-Weartherized Gas Furnaces 

Description EffYHS tp PE tIG PIG t+ r 

78% AFUE - Baseline 78% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

80% AFUE - Increased HX Area 80% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

80% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 80% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

81 % AFUE - Increased HX Area 81% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

81 % AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 81% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

90%AFUE 90% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

92% AFUE - Increased HX Area 92% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

92% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 92% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

92% AFUE - Modulation (Continuous) 92% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

96% AFUE - Modulation (Continuous) 96% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

Table L.3.2 Weartherized Gas Furnaces 

Description EffYHS tp PE tlG PIG t+ t78% AFUE - Baseline 78% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

80% AFUE - Increased HX Area 80% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

81 % AFUE - Increased HX Area 81% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

82% AFUE - Increased HX Area 82% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

83% AFUE - Increased HX Area 83% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

Table L.3.3 Mobile Home Gas Furnaces 

Description EffYHS tp PE tlG PIG t+ t75% AFUE - Baseline 79% 5 sec 75 37 sec 0 120 sec 30 sec 

80% AFUE - Increased HX Area 80% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

80% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 80% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

81 % AFUE - Increased HX Area 81% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

81 % AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 81% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

82% AFUE - Increased HX Area 82% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

82% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 82% 5 sec 75 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

90% AFUE - Condensing 90% 5 sec 90 37 sec 400 120 sec 30 sec 

L-8 
Table L.3.4 Oil-Fired Furnaces

Description EffyHs tp PE t1 P« t+ t78% AFUE - Baseline 78% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec

80% AFUE - Increased HX Area 80% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec

81% AFUE - Increased HX Area 81% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec

81% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 81% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec

81% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 81% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec

82% AFUE - Increased HX Area 82% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec

82% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 82% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec

82% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 82% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec

83% AFUE - Increased HX Area 83% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec

83% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 83% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec

83% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 83% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec

84% AFUE - Increased HX Area 84% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec

84% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 84% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec

84% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 84% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec

85% AFUE - Increased HX Area 85% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec

85% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 85% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec

85% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 85% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec

Table L.3.5 Hot-Water Gas Boilers

Description EffyHS tp PE tIG PIG t+ t80% AFUE - Baseline 82% 180 sec 76 37 sec 0 15 min 0 sec

81% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 81% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

81% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 81% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

82% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 82% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

82% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 82% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

83% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 83% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

83% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 83% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

84% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 84% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

84% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 84% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

85% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 85% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

85% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 85% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

86%AFUE 86% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

91% AFUE 91% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

99% AFUE 99% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min 0 sec

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table L.3.4 Oil-Fired Furnaces 

Description EffYHS tp PE tlG PIG e t78% AFUE - Baseline 78% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec 

80% AFUE - Increased HX Area 80% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec 

81 % AFUE - Increased HX Area 81% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec 

81 % AFUE - Intemlpted Ignition 81% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec 

81 % AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 81% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec 

82% AFUE - Increased HX Area 82% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec 

82% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 82% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec 

82% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 82% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec 

83% AFUE - Increased HX Area 83% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec 

83% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 83% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec 

83% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 83% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec 

84% AFUE - Increased HX Area 84% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec 

84% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 84% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec 

84% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 84% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec 

85% AFUE - Increased HX Area 85% 5 sec 220 26 min 45 120 sec 30 sec 

85% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 85% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec 

85% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 85% 5 sec 220 45 sec 25 120 sec 30 sec 

Table L.3.5 Hot-Water Gas Boilers 

Description EffYHS tp PE tlG PIG e t80% AFUE - Baseline 82% 180 sec 76 37 sec 0 15 min Osee 

81 % AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 81% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

81 % AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 81% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min o sec 

82% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 82% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

82% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 82% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

83% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 83% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

83% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 83% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

84% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 84% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

84% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 84% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

85% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 85% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

85% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 85% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

86%AFUE 86% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

91% AFUE 91% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

99%AFUE 99% 180 sec 76 37 sec 400 15 min Osee 

L-9 
Table L.3.6 Hot-Water Oil Boilers

Description Effy15 tp PE tiG Pic t+ t

80% AFUE - Baseline 80% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min 0 sec

81% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 81% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min 0 sec

81% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 81% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

82% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coe£ 82% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min 0 sec

82% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 82% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

82% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 82% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

83% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coe£ 83% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min 0 sec

83% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 83% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

83% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 83% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

84% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 84% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min 0 sec

84% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 84% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

84% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 84% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

85% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coe£ 85% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min 0 sec

85% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 85% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

85% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 85% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

86% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coe£ 86% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min 0 sec

86% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 86% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

86% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 86%0 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

90% AFUE 90% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

95% AFUE 95% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min 0 sec

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table L.3.6 Hot-Water Oil Boilers 

Description EffYHS tp PE tIG PIG t+ t80% AFUE - Baseline 80% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min o sec 

81 % AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 81% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min o sec 

81 % AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 81% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

82% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 82% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min o sec 

82% AFUE - Intemlpted Ignition 82% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

82% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 82% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

83% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 83% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min o sec 

83% AFUE - Intemlpted Ignition 83% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

83% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 83% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

84% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 84% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min o sec 

84% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 84% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

84% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 84% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

85% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 85% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min o sec 

85% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 85% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

85% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 85% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

86% AFUE - Improved Heat Transfer Coef. 86% 180 sec 220 26 min 45 15 min o sec 

86% AFUE - Interrupted Ignition 86% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

86% AFUE - Modulation (2-Stage) 86% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

90%AFUE 90% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

95%AFUE 95% 180 sec 220 45 sec 25 15 min o sec 

L-I0 
REFERENCES

American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers Inc., Method

of Testingfor Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency of Residential Central Furnaces and

Boilers, October, 2003. Atlanta, GA. Report No. BSR/ASHRAE Standard 103-1993R.

First Public Review.

2. Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association (GAMA), GAMA Directory March 2005, 2005.

(Last accessed March, 2005.)

<<http://www. gamanet. org/gama/inforesources.nsf/vAllDocs/Product+Directories?OpenD

ocument>>

3. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 430- Energy Conservation Program for

Consumer Products, Appendix N to Subpart B of Part 430-Uniform Test Method for

Measuring the Energy Consumption of Furnaces and Boilers, January 1, 1999. Chapter

II.

4. Honeywell Inc., Hot Surface Modules: S89C, D, G, H, J and S890C, D, G, H, J, 1989.

Form Number: 68-0079-1.

5. Carlin Combustion Technology Inc., Oil Burner Ignition Systems: Interrupted Duty vs.

Intermittent Duty, 2002. (Last accessed October 29, 2002.)

<http://www.carlincombustion.com/TechLib/tech-speakingl.html>

6. Comparison of Burner Operating Options, 1994. Brookhaven National Laboratory.

7. Gable, G., Report to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory on Gas Furnace Ignition

Systems, 2003.

8. Oswald, K., Report to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory on Pumps and Burners,

2002.

9. Taco Inc., 110-120 Red Baron Circulators, 2003.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers Inc., Method 

of Testingfor Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency of Residential Central Furnaces and 

Boilers, October,2003. Atlanta, GA. Report No. BSRJASHRAE Standard 103-1993R. 

First Public Review. 

2. Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association (GAMA), GAMA Directory March 2005, 2005. 

(Last accessed March, 2005.) 

< <http://www . gamanet.orgl gamalinforesources.nsf/v AllDocs/Product+ Directories?OpenD 

ocument» 

3. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 430- Energy Conservation Programfor 

Consumer Products, Appendix N to Subpart B of Part 430-Uniform Test Methodfor 

Measuring the Energy Consumption of Furnaces and Boilers, January 1, 1999. Chapter 

II. 

4. Honeywell Inc., Hot Surface Modules: S89C, D, G, H, J and S890C, D, G, H, J, 1989. 

Form Number: 68-0079-1. 

5. Carlin Combustion Technology Inc., Oil Burner ignition Systems: Interrupted Duty vs. 

Intermittent Duty, 2002. (Last accessed October 29,2002.) 

<http://www.carlincombustion.comlTechLib/tech _speaking l.html> 

6. Comparison of Burner Operating Options, 1994. Brookhaven National Laboratory. 

7. Gable, G., Report to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory on Gas Furnace Ignition 

Systems, 2003. 

8. Oswald, K., Report to Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory on Pumps and Burners, 

2002. 

9. Taco Inc., 110-120 Red Baron Circulators, 2003. 

L-ll 
APPENDIX M. DERIVATION OF HEATING LOAD HOURS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

M.1 Purpose of using Heating Load Hours (HLH) in LCC Analysis ................. M-1

M.2 Derivation of Heating Load Hours (HLH) ................................. M-1

M.2.1 HLH Calculation Methodology .................................... M-2

M.2.1.1 ODT Imputation Method ............................. M-3

LIST OF TABLES

Table M.2.1 Imputation Results .............................................. M-4

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure M.2.1 Heating Degree Days (HDD) vs. Outdoor Design Temperature (ODT) ..... M-2

Figure M.2.2 Cooling Degree Days (CDD) vs. Outdoor Design Temperature (ODT) ..... M-3

Figure M.2.3 Heating Degree Days (HDD) vs. Imputed Outdoor Design Temperature

(ODT) Values .................................................. M-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX M. DERIVATION OF HEATING LOAD HOURS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

M.l Purpose of using Heating Load Hours (HLH) in LCC Analysis ................. M-I 

M.2 Derivation of Heating Load Hours (HLH) ................................. M-l 

M.2.l HLH Calculation Methodology .................................... M-2 

M.2.1.l ODT Imputation Method ............................. M-3 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table M.2.1 Imputation Results .............................................. M-4 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure M.2.1 Heating Degree Days (HDD) vs. Outdoor Design Temperature (ODT) ..... M-2 

Figure M.2.2 Cooling Degree Days (CD D) vs. Outdoor Design Temperature (ODT) ..... M-3 

Figure M.2.3 Heating Degree Days (HDD) vs. Imputed Outdoor Design Temperature 

(ODT) Values .................................................. M-4 

M-i 
APPENDIX M: DERIVATION OF HEATING LOAD HOURS

M.1 Purpose of using Heating Load Hours (HLH) in LCC Analysis

Using HLH permits a more accurate calculation of the electricity contribution to the house

heating load (HHL). The calculation of the HHL for the existing household in the LCC spreadsheet

is shown in Eq. M- 1:

HHL = QI,,RECS * AFUEeX Eey *

t+ - t

BOHek+N*HLH*(

3600 )

Eq. M-1

where,

QYR,RECS = fuel used for heating per year of the existing household , (BTU/h),

AFUEex = AFUE for existing household (see Chapter 7 Section 7.4.3 for

household assignment), (%),

3.412 = constant to convert kW to kBtu/hr,

BE,,,, = calculation of baseline BE for the household (see Chapter 7 Section

7.5.3 for the calculation of BE for the baseline furnaces; the power

consumption of boilers circulating pump motor is 62 watts for the

baseline model design` ), (kW),

BOHeX = QYRRgcs divided by input capacity (see Chapter 7 Section 7.6), (h),

N = number of cycles per hour (set equal to 5 for furnaces and 2 for

boilers)', (cycles/h),

HLH = heating load hours (as defined in section M.2), (h),

t+ = off delay (see Chapter 7 Section 7.2.7 for values used), (min), and

f = on delay (see Chapter 7 Section 7.2.7 for values used) (min).

M.2 Derivation of Heating Load Hours (HLH)

The heating load hours (HLH) is defined in Eq. M-2 as3:

24*HDD

HLH = 65 - ODT

Eq. M-2

where,

24 = number of hours in one day (h/d),

HDD = heating degree days, (d),

ODT = outdoor design temperature, (F°) and

65 = typical average outdoor temperature at which a furnace or boiler

starts operating, (F°).

M-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX M: DERIVATION OF HEATING LOAD HOURS 

M.l Purpose of using Heating Load Hours (HLH) in LCC Analysis 

Using HLH permits a more accurate calculation of the electricity contribution to the house 

heating load (HHL). The calculation of the HHL for the existing household in the LCC spreadsheet 

is shown in Eq. M-l: 

where, 

[ 

t+ r 1 HHL = Qn,RECS * AFUEex + BEex * BOHex + N * HLH* ( 3600 ) Eq. M-l 

QYR,RECS 

AFUEex 

3.412 

BEex 

fuel used for heating per year of the existing household, (BTU/h), 

AFUE for existing household (see Chapter 7 Section 7.4.3 for 

household assignment), (%), 

constant to convert kW to kBtu/hr, 

calculation of baseline BE for the household (see Chapter 7 Section 

7.5.3 for the calculation of BE for the baseline furnaces; the power 

consumption of boilers circulating pump motor is 62 watts for the 

baseline model designl), (kW), 

QYR,RECS divided by input capacity (see Chapter 7 Section 7.6), (h), 

number of cycles per hour (set equal to 5 for furnaces and 2 for 

boilers) 2, (cycles/h), 

heating load hours (as defined in section M.2), (h), 

off delay (see Chapter 7 Section 7.2.7 for values used), (min), and 

on delay (see Chapter 7 Section 7.2.7 for values used) (min). 

M.2 Derivation of Heating Load Hours (HLH) 

where, 

The heating load hours (HLH) is defined in Eq. M-2 as3

: 

24 

HDD 

ODT 

65 

24* HDD 

HLH= Eq. M-2 

65- ODT 

number of hours in one day (hid), 

heating degree days, (d), 

outdoor design temperature, (FO) and 

typical average outdoor temperature at which a furnace or boiler 

starts operating, (PO). 

M-l 
M.2.1 HLH Calculation Methodology

The Energy Information Administration (EIA)'s Residential Energy Consumption Survey

of 2001 (RECS 2001)4 data include heating degree days (HDD) for individual households, but does

not calculate outdoor design temperature (ODT). To calculate HLH, DOE gathered HDD, cooling

degree days (CDD), and ODT data for individual cities in the U.S. and matched RECS 2001 data

using household's location defined by its census division and four large state designation, CDD, and

HDD. Due to confidentiality issues with the RECS 2001 data HDD and CDD are averaged for a

number of households over their census division or large state designation. Therefore, there are only

255 individual HDD and CDD combinations for the 4822 individual households. DOE matched

ODT data to these 255 individual combinations, not to individual households.

DOE gathered HDD and CDD data for over 5000 cities using U.S.climate data5'6. We used

the 1993 ASHRAE Handbook Fundamentals' to gather ODT data for 753 cities and the 97.5 percent

ODT used by NIST3 to calculate HLH. From these sources, DOE matched 660 cities that had both

ODT, HDD, and CDD data. See Figures M.2.1 and M.2.2 to see the relationship between ODT and

HDD and between ODT and CDD.

LL

5000 T^^00 15000 20000 25000 0

0 -20

y=-0.0061x+41.493

RZ = 0.8735

w

HDD (days)

Figure M.2.1 Heating Degree Days (HDD) vs. Outdoor Design Temperature

(ODT)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

M.2.1 HLH Calculation Methodology 

The Energy Information Administration (EIA)'s Residential Energy Consumption Survey 

of200 1 (RECS 2001)4 data include heating degree days (HDD) for individual households, but does 

not calculate outdoor design temperature (ODT). To calculate HLH, DOE gathered HDD, cooling 

degree days (CDD), and ODT data for individual cities in the U.S. and matched RECS 2001 data 

using household's location defined by its census division and four large state designation, CDD, and 

HDD. Due to confidentiality issues with the RECS 2001 data HDD and CDD are averaged for a 

number of households over their census division or large state designation. Therefore, there are only 

255 individual HDD and CDD combinations for the 4822 individual households. DOE matched 

ODT data to these 255 individual combinations, not to individual households. 

DOE gathered HDD and CDD data for over 5000 cities using U.S.climate data5

,6. We used 

the 1993 ASHRAE Handbook Fundamentals 7 to gather 0 DT data for 753 cities and the 97.5 percent 

ODT used by NIST3 to calculate HLH. From these sources, DOE matched 660 cities that had both 

ODT, HDD, and CDD data. See Figures M.2.1 and M.2.2 to see the relationship between ODT and 

HDD and between ODT and CDD. 

[ 

le 

0 

80r~----------~-------~----~------~~-~-~------------~-~----

60 

40 

20 

0 

-20 

-40 

-60 

-80 

-100 

y = -0.0061x + 41.493 

R' = 0.8735 

Y-. __ .. __ .. __ ... _ ... _~ ___________ ._ .~ .. ___ ~ ____ _ 

15000 20000 25000 

HDD (days) 

Figure M.2.1 Heating Degree Days (HDD) vs. Outdoor Design Temperature 

(ODT) 

M-2 
80

60

40

-20

-40

-60

y = 0.01 14x - 2.5092

® R2 = 0.4433

0

-

"co^m

JC10 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

0

-

CDD (days)

Figure M.2.2 Cooling Degree Days (CDD) vs. Outdoor Design Temperature

(ODT)

M.2.1.1 ODT Imputation Method

To calculate ODT, DOE matched the RECS 2001 combinations (255 individual

combinations of census divisions plus 4 large states, HDD, and CDD) to U.S. weather data. DOE

used the U.S. weather station closest (or with minimum "distance") from the RECS 2001 data

combination. Eq. M-3 calculates the "distance" between the U.S. weather data and RECS 2001

data:

"Distance" = (HDD2 - HDD,) 2 + (CDD2 - CDD,) 2 Eq. M-3

where,

HDD,

HDD2

CDD,

CDD2

heating degree days from U.S. weather data,

heating degree days from RECS 2001 data,

cooling degree days from U.S. weather data, and

cooling degree days from RECS 2001 data.

Figure M.2.3 shows the relationship between the imputed ODT values and the RECS 2001

HDD values.

M-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

80,---------------------------------------------------

y = 0.0114x - 2.5092 

R2 = 0.4433 

6000 

-40 -- -- - ---------- ---------- -- -------------- -----------

• 

-60 

COO (days) 

Figure M.2.2 Cooling Degree Days (CDD) vs. Outdoor Design Temperature 

(ODT) 

M.2.1.1 ODT Imputation Method 

To calculate ODT, DOE matched the RECS 2001 combinations (255 individual 

combinations of census divisions plus 4 large states, HDD, and CDD) to u.s. weather data. DOE 

used the U.S. weather station closest (or with minimum "distance") from the RECS 2001 data 

combination. Eq. M-3 calculates the "distance" between the U.S. weather data and RECS 2001 

data: 

where, 

HDD/ 

HDD2 

CDD/ 

CDD2 

heating degree days from U.S. weather data, 

heating degree days from RECS 2001 data, 

cooling degree days from U.S. weather data, and 

cooling degree days from RECS 2001 data. 

Figure M.2.3 shows the relationship between the imputed ODT values and the RECS 2001 

HDD values. 

M-3 
HDD (days)

Figure M.2.3 Heating Degree Days (HDD) vs. Imputed Outdoor Design

Temperature (ODT) Values

Table M.2.1 shows the imputation results.

Table M.2.1 Imputation Results

Division + 4 HDD65 CDD65 ODT

1 5053 903 9

1 5247 820 9

1 5256 613 9

1 5312 777 9

1 5397 760 9

1 5415 753 9

1 5455 583 9

1 5456 887 0

1 5549 769 9

1 5791 781 0

1 5872 711 0

1 5914 696 0

1 5939 708 0

1 5978 671 9

1 6183 761 0

1 6433 590 1

1 6822 447 -7

1 8072 416 -7

1 8948 191 -9

2 4148 1225 14

2 4168 1404 14

2 4398 1271 14

2 4484 1070 14

2 4781 1045 14

2 4807 1027 14

2 4850 961 13

2 4880 983 11

2 4931 1083 14

2 4940 1027 14

2 5190 743 13

2 5235 801 10

2 5263 704 13

2 5289 881 12

2 5395 719 13

2 5508 596 9

2 5560 714 8

2 5573 589 9

2 5631 714 2

2 5651 722 2

2 5826 608 5

M-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

0-

s 

I- 20 

0 

0 

10 

0 

2000 4000 

-10 

-20 

• 

• • • 

HOD (days) 

y = -0.0066x + 43.973 

1l2~~131Q1 

12000 

Figure M.2.3 Heating Degree Days (HDD) vs. Imputed Outdoor Design 

Temperature (ODT) Values 

Table M.2.l shows the imputation results. 

Table M.2.1 Imputation Results 2 4148 1225 

Division +4 HDD65 CDD65 DDT 2 4168 1404 

1 5053 903 9 2 4398 1271 

1 5247 820 9 2 4484 1070 

1 5256 613 9 2 4781 1045 

1 5312 777 9 2 4807 1027 

1 5397 760 9 2 4850 961 

1 5415 753 9 2 4880 983 

1 5455 583 9 2 4931 1083 

1 5456 887 0 2 4940 1027 

1 5549 769 9 2 5190 743 

1 5791 781 0 2 5235 801 

1 5872 711 0 2 5263 704 

1 5914 696 0 2 5289 881 

1 5939 708 0 2 5395 719 

1 5978 671 9 2 5508 596 

1 6183 761 0 2 5560 714 

1 6433 590 1 2 5573 589 

1 6822 447 -7 2 5631 714 

1 8072 416 -7 2 5651 722 

1 8948 191 -9 2 5826 608 

M-4 

14 

14 

14 

14 

14 

14 

13 

11 

14 

14 

13 

10 

13 

12 

13 

9 

8 

9 

2 

2 

5 
Division + 4 HDD65 CDD65 ODT 2 5831 515 5

4 4984 1270

2

2 6340 377

74 5106 1297

2

3 4683 141194 5771 980

0

3 4752 974 10

4 6456 940 -4

3 4806 1231

74 6727 711 -3

3 4824 1048 10

4 7153 922 -7

3 4889 1083 10

4 7506 647 -10

3 5046 11496

4 7574 708 -10

3 5080 9027

4 7617 738 -11

3 5207 8477

4 7808 654 -10

3 5297 7407

4 7988 777 -14

3 5316 115464 8122 711 -12

3 5409 1072

5

5 2164 1936 25

3 5501 6967

5 2251 1902 26

3 5513 74075 2474 1669 22

3 5530 106445 2554 1535 23

3 5590 7157

5 2592 1648 22

3 5598 6977

5 2672 1770 24

3 5637 8634

5 2742 1669 22

3 5641 9731

5 2932 1643 22

3 5725 6066

5 2957 1555 23

3 5777 8025

5 2971 1367 21

3 5800 7355

5 2992 1352 21

3 5855 9313

5 2997 1330 27

3 5873 67375 3047 1420 21

3 5936 8492

5 3100 1479 21

3 6019 5376

5 3118 1497 19

3 6041 74665 3163 1536 19

3 6139 51665 3175 1422 21

3 6215 6205

5 3213 1414 21

3 6633 729 -1

5 3222 1290 27

3 6796 713 -1

5 3241 1463 22

3 6877 693 -4

5 3377 1356 20

3 6932 642

55 3687 1424 22

3 7038 567 -3

5 3885 1301 20

3 7076 722 -45 4068 1139 18

3 7137 546 -3

5 4095 1025 16

3 7526 653 -9

5 4263 1125 18

3 7927 590 -8

5 4364 1105 14

4 4174 1419 16

5 4394 1072 16

4 4198 1573 15

5 4454 1030 16

4 4249 17134

5 4520 837 14

4 4404 1377

9

5 4591 1133 14

4 4422 1545 13

6 1291 2716 31

4 4545 1637

4

6 2384 1955 22

4 4665 1294

9

6 2565 1833 22

4 4720 14059

6 2620 1797 22

4 4873 11148

6 2760 1907 22 6 3424 1430 13

M-5

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Division + 4 HDD65 CDD65 cor 

2 5831 515 5 4 4984 1270 2 

2 6340 377 7 4 5106 1297 2 

3 4683 1411 9 4 5771 980 0 

3 4752 974 10 4 6456 940 -4 

3 4806 1231 7 4 6727 711 -3 

3 4824 1048 10 4 7153 922 -7 

3 4889 1083 10 4 7506 647 -10 

3 5046 1149 6 4 7574 708 -10 

3 5080 902 7 4 7617 738 -11 

3 5207 847 7 4 7808 654 -10 

3 5297 740 7 4 7988 777 -14 

3 5316 1154 6 4 8122 711 -12 

3 5409 1072 5 5 2164 1936 25 

3 5501 696 7 5 2251 1902 26 

3 5513 740 7 5 2474 1669 22 

3 5530 1064 4 5 2554 1535 23 

3 5590 715 7 5 2592 1648 22 

3 5598 697 7 5 2672 1770 24 

3 5637 863 4 5 2742 1669 22 

3 5641 973 1 5 2932 1643 22 

3 5725 606 6 5 2957 1555 23 

3 5777 802 5 5 2971 1367 21 

3 5800 735 5 5 2992 1352 21 

3 5855 931 3 5 2997 1330 27 

3 5873 673 7 5 3047 1420 21 

3 5936 849 2 5 3100 1479 21 

3 6019 537 6 5 3118 1497 19 

3 6041 746 6 5 3163 1536 19 

3 6139 516 6 5 3175 1422 21 

3 6215 620 5 5 3213 1414 21 

3 6633 729 -1 5 3222 1290 27 

3 6796 713 -1 5 3241 1463 22 

3 6877 693 -4 5 3377 1356 20 

3 6932 642 5 5 3687 1424 22 

3 7038 567 -3 5 3885 1301 20 

3 7076 722 -4 5 4068 1139 18 

3 7137 546 -3 5 4095 1025 16 

3 7526 653 -9 5 4263 1125 18 

3 7927 590 -8 5 4364 1105 14 

4 4174 1419 16 5 4394 1072 16 

4 4198 1573 15 5 4454 1030 16 

4 4249 1713 4 5 4520 837 14 

4 4404 1377 9 5 4591 1133 14 

4 4422 1545 13 6 1291 2716 31 

4 4545 1637 4 6 2384 1955 22 

4 4665 1294 9 6 2565 1833 22 

4 4720 1405 9 6 2620 1797 22 

4 4873 1114 8 6 2760 1907 22 

6 3424 1430 13 

M-5 
Division + 4 HDD65 CDD65 ODT 6 3568 1206 19 10 4575 1029 15 6 3649 1315 13 10 5947 789 6 6 3836 1626 10 10 5957 638 6 6 3851 1074 16 10 6191 684 6 6 4047 1269 19 10 6217 653 6 6 4193 981 14 10 6243 571 6 7 1437 2704 35 10 6820 325 1 7 1562 2502 27 10 6932 400 2 7 1718 2604 31 10 7675 145 -2 7 1816 2578 27 11 1258 1314 35 7 2629 2490 17 11 1281 1058 39 7 2915 2115 15 11 1290 1050 39 7 3287 2078 14 11 1359 1704 33 7 3348 2374 16 11 1413 544 40 8 1093 5161 39 11 1539 446 40 8 1212 4612 39 11 1576 960 44 8 1615 3949 34 11 1669 311 36 8 1692 3509 28 11 1718 3745 33 8 2277 2067 19 11 1730 646 43 8 2686 2255 21 11 1734 1137 43 8 3266 1911 25 11 1737 1066 39 8 5356 1018 0 11 1849 2041 30 8 5447 1109 7 11 1912 1856 33 8 5566 905 6 11 1967 152 36 8 5576 663 8 11 1971 579 35 8 5675 912 6 11 2013 1787 33 8 6022 789 10 11 2050 1107 43 8 6074 592 -5 11 2094 1820 30 8 6262 703 12 11 2223 234 36 8 6583 426 2 11 2273 1528 32 8 6781 1037 8 11 2427 1522 30 8 7075 859 -2 11 2443 828 32 8 7134 431 -1 11 2642 135 36 8 7205 235 -1 11 2705 1676 22 8 7379 298 -1 11 2869 2256 32 8 7418 346 -14 11 2935 290 29 8 7419 790 -15 11 5228 310 17 8 7594 538 0 11 5524 256 17 9 0 4912 63 11 5968 463 17 9 4195 357 23 11 6083 106 33 9 4670 106 26 12 1189 3086 32 9 4993 71 24 12 1342 2806 31 9 5821 35 27 12 1376 2947 36 9 5897 531 5 12 1542 2995 31 9 6860 357 6 12 1545 2521 31 9 10045 0 -18 12 1568 2875 33

10 4242 1251 15 12 1791 2510 27

10 4298 1216 15 12 2022 2916 26

12 2294 2642 24

M-6

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Division + 4 HDD65 CDD65 ODT 

6 3568 1206 19 10 4575 1029 15 

6 3649 1315 13 10 5947 789 6 

6 3836 1626 10 10 5957 638 6 

6 3851 1074 16 10 6191 684 6 

6 4047 1269 19 10 6217 653 6 

6 4193 981 14 10 6243 571 6 

7 1437 2704 35 10 6820 325 1 

7 1562 2502 27 10 6932 400 2 

7 1718 2604 31 10 7675 145 -2 

7 1816 2578 27 11 1258 1314 35 

7 2629 2490 17 11 1281 1058 39 

7 2915 2115 15 11 1290 1050 39 

7 3287 2078 14 11 1359 1704 33 

7 3348 2374 16 11 1413 544 40 

8 1093 5161 39 11 1539 446 40 

8 1212 4612 39 11 1576 960 44 

8 1615 3949 34 11 1669 311 36 

8 1692 3509 28 11 1718 3745 33 

8 2277 2067 19 11 1730 646 43 

8 2686 2255 21 11 1734 1137 43 

8 3266 1911 25 11 1737 1066 39 

8 5356 1018 0 11 1849 2041 30 

8 5447 1109 7 11 1912 1856 33 

8 5566 905 6 11 1967 152 36 

8 5576 663 8 11 1971 579 35 

8 5675 912 6 11 2013 1787 33 

8 6022 789 10 11 2050 1107 43 

8 6074 592 -5 11 2094 1820 30 

8 6262 703 12 11 2223 234 36 

8 6583 426 2 11 2273 1528 32 

8 6781 1037 8 11 2427 1522 30 

8 7075 859 -2 11 2443 828 32 

8 7134 431 -1 11 2642 135 36 

8 7205 235 -1 11 2705 1676 22 

8 7379 298 -1 11 2869 2256 32 

8 7418 346 -14 11 2935 290 29 

8 7419 790 -15 11 5228 310 17 

8 7594 538 0 11 5524 256 17 

9 0 4912 63 11 5968 463 17 

9 4195 357 23 11 6083 106 33 

9 4670 106 26 12 1189 3086 32 

9 4993 71 24 12 1342 2806 31 

9 5821 35 27 12 1376 2947 36 

9 5897 531 5 12 1542 2995 31 

9 6860 357 6 12 1545 2521 31 

9 10045 0 -18 12 1568 2875 33 

10 4242 1251 15 12 1791 2510 27 

10 4298 1216 15 12 2022 2916 26 

12 2294 2642 24 

M-6 
Division + 4 HDD65 CDD65 ODT

12 2340 2580 25

12 2619 2574 25

12 2852 2242 20

12 3402 1937 18

12 4180 1622 13

12 4280 1828 15

13 83 4553 57

13 138 4546 57

13 224 4151 48

13 416 3458 42

13 421 3675 40

13 508 3665 40

13 516 3494 42

13 522 3308 44

13 545 3294 44

13 550 3661 40

13 849 2806 35

13 992 2726 35

13 1010 2723 35

13 1061 2628 33

13 1480 2225 30

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Division + 4 HDD65 CDD65 CDT 

12 2340 2580 25 

12 2619 2574 25 

12 2852 2242 20 

12 3402 1937 18 

12 4180 1622 13 

12 4280 1828 15 

13 83 4553 57 

13 138 4546 57 

13 224 4151 48 

13 416 3458 42 

13 421 3675 40 

13 508 3665 40 

13 516 3494 42 

13 522 3308 44 

13 545 3294 44 

13 550 3661 40 

13 849 2806 35 

13 992 2726 35 

13 1010 2723 35 

13 1061 2628 33 

13 1480 2225 30 

M-7 
REFERENCES

1. Taco Inc., 110-120 Red Baron Circulators, 2003.

2. American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers Inc., Method

of Testing for Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency of Residential Central Furnaces and

Boilers, October, 2003. Atlanta, GA. Report No. BSRIASHRAE Standard 103-1993R.

First Public Review

3. Kelly, G. E., Chi, J., Kuklewicz, Mark E., Recommended Testing and Calculation

Procedures forDetermining the Seasonal Performance ofResidential Central Furnaces and

Boilers, October, 1978. National Bureau of Standards. Report No. NBSIR 78-1543.

4. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration, Residential Energy

Consumption Survey: Household Energy Consumption and Expenditures 2001, 2001. (Last

accessed May 18, 2005.) <http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs2001/publicuse2001.html>

5. American Society for Heating Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE),

Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, SI Edition, 2004.

Atlanta, GA. Report No. ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2004. (Normative

Appendix D: Climate Data, Table D-1 pgs. 130-152)

6. American Society for Heating Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE),

US. Climatic Data for ENVSTD 3.x (ASHRAE Energy Calculation Method),

7. American Society for Heating Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE),

Table 1 Climate Conditions for the United States. In ASHRAE Handbook, Fundamentals.

I-P Edition ed. 1993. ASHRAE. p. 24.4-24.15

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. Taco Inc., 110-120 Red Baron Circulators, 2003. 

2. American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers Inc., Method 

of Testing for Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency of Residential Central Furnaces and 

Boilers, October, 2003. Atlanta, GA. Report No. BSRJASHRAE Standard 103-1993R. 

First Public Review 

3. Kelly, G. E., Chi, J., Kuklewicz, Mark E., Recommended Testing and Calculation 

Procedures for Determining the Seasonal Performance of Residential Central Furnaces and 

Boilers, October, 1978. National Bureau of Standards. Report No. NBSIR 78-1543. 

4. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration, Residential Energy 

Consumption Survey: HouseholdEnergy Consumption and Expenditures 2001,2001. (Last 

accessed May 18,2005.) <http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs200 l/publicuse200 1.html> 

5. American Society for Heating Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), 

Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, S1 Edition, 2004. 

Atlanta, GA. Report No. ANSIIASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2004. (Normative 

Appendix D: Climate Data, Table D-l pgs. 130-152) 

6. American Society for Heating Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), 

u.s. Climatic Datafor ENVSTD 3.x (ASHRAE Energy Calculation Method), 

7. American Society for Heating Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), 

Table 1 Climate Conditionsfor the United States. In ASHRAE Handbook, Fundamentals. 

I-P Edition ed. 1993. ASHRAE. p.24.4-24.15 

M-8 
APPENDIX N. USER INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE LIFE-CYCLE COST ANALYSIS

SPREADSHEET

TABLE OF CONTENTS

N.1 USER INSTRUCTIONS ............................................... N-1

N.1.1 Startup ....................................................... N-1

N.1.2 Description of Life-Cycle Cost Worksheets .......................... N-1

N.1.3 Basic Instructions for Operating the Life-Cycle Cost Spreadsheets ........ N-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX N. USER INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE LIFE-CYCLE COST ANALYSIS 

SPREADSHEET 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

N.1 USER INSTRUCTIONS .............................................. , N-I 

N.I.I Startup ....................................................... N-I 

N.I.2 Description of Life-Cycle Cost Worksheets .......................... N-I 

N.I.3 Basic Instructions for Operating the Life-Cycle Cost Spreadsheets ....... , N-4 

N-i 
APPENDIX N: USER INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE LIFE-CYCLE COST ANALYSIS

SPREADSHEET

N.1 USER INSTRUCTIONS

The results obtained in this analysis can be examined and reproduced using the Microsoft

Excel® spreadsheet available on the U. S. Department of Energy Building Technologies website at:

http://www. eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/xx.html.

N.1.1 Startup

The Department named the spreadsheets"LCC_XX.xls" where "XX" stands for the product

class. The spreadsheets enable users to perform Life-Cycle Cost (LCC) analyses of residential

furnace and boilers. A separate spreadsheet exists for each of the six different product classes. To

execute the spreadsheets, the Department assumes that the user has access to a personal computer

(PC) with a hardware configuration capable of running Windows NT/2000/XP. The furnace and

boiler LCC spreadsheets require Microsoft Excel® 2000 or later installed under the Windows

operating system. Because certain variables inside the spreadsheets are defined as distributions; the

user's computer requires a copy of Crystal Ball® from Decisioneering°.

N.1.2 Description of Life-Cycle Cost Worksheets

For each of the six product classes, the Department created one spreadsheet as an Excel®

workbook containing a collection of worksheets (referred to as "sheets"). The Department

modularized the calculations. Each sheet usually represents a conceptual component within the LCC

calculation. To facilitate navigability and identify how the sheets are related, each sheet contains

an area on the extreme left that shows the variables which are imported from other sheets and also

the variables that are used by other sheets. The LCC spreadsheets consist of the following

worksheets:

Simulation Results The Simulation Results contains the LCC and Payback Period simulation

results for each design option of the product class.

Simulation Stat The Simulation Stat contains the retail price, installation cost, total installed

price, annual gas use, annual electricity use, burner operating hours (steady

state), burning operating hours (low-fire for two-stage), and household

characteristics results for each design option of the product class.

Summary The Summary contains a user interface to manipulate the Energy Price Trend

and the Start Year and to run a Crystal Ball® simulation. The Department

shows results of LCC calculations for different efficiency levels for a single

Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) household only. During

N-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIXN: USER INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE LIFE-CYCLE COST ANALYSIS 

SPREADSHEET 

N.I USER INSTRUCTIONS 

The results obtained in this analysis can be examined and reproduced using the Microsoft 

Excel®spreadsheet available on the U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies website at: 

http://www. eere.energy .gov !buildingsl appliance _ standards/residential/xx.html. 

N.1.1 Startup 

The Department named the spreadsheets"LCC _ XX.xls" where "XX" stands for the product 

class. The spreadsheets enable users to perform Life-Cycle Cost (LCC) analyses of residential 

furnace and boilers. A separate spreadsheet exists for each ofthe six different product classes. To 

execute the spreadsheets, the Department assumes that the user has access to a personal computer 

(PC) with a hardware configuration capable of running Windows NT/2000/XP. The furnace and 

boiler LCC spreadsheets require Microsoft Excel® 2000 or later installed under the Windows 

operating system. Because certain variables inside the spreadsheets are defined as distributions; the 

user's computer requires a copy of Crystal Ball®from Decisioneering©. 

N.1.2 Description of Life-Cycle Cost Worksheets 

For each of the six product classes, the Department created one spreadsheet as an Excel® 

workbook containing a collection of worksheets (referred to as "sheets"). The Department 

modularized the calculations. Each sheet usually represents a conceptual component within the LCC 

calculation. To facilitate navigability and identifY how the sheets are related, each sheet contains 

an area on the extreme left that shows the variables which are imported from other sheets and also 

the variables that are used by other sheets. The LCC spreadsheets consist of the following 

worksheets: 

Simulation Results The Simulation Results contains the LCC and Payback Period simulation 

results for each design option of the product class. 

Simulation Stat 

Summary 

The Simulation Stat contains the retail price, installation cost, total installed 

price, annual gas use, annual electricity use, burner operating hours (steady 

state), burning operating hours (low-fire for two-stage), and household 

characteristics results for each design option of the product class. 

The Summary contains a user interface to manipulate the Energy Price Trend 

and the Start Year and to run a Crystal Ball® simulation. The Department 

shows results ofLCC calculations for different efficiency levels for a single 

Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) household only. During 

N-l 
a Crystal Ball' simulation, the spreadsheet records the LCC and payback

periods for every sampled household.

Equipment Price The Equipment Price calculates retail price values used as inputs in the LCC

calculations in the Summary sheet. The Department derived the inputs for

the Equipment Price sheet from the baseline and incremental manufacturer

costs from the Engineering Spreadsheet. DOE applied baseline and

incremental markups inputs derived in the Markups sheet to calculate the

final retail prices. The Department based the prices on a baseline unit and

adjusted for the size of the equipment (and the size of the air handler for

furnaces installed in each sampled household.)

Markups The Markups sheet contains distributions of (i) manufacturer markup, (ii) wholesaler

markup, (iii) contractor markup, (iv) builder markup for new homes, and (v) sales

tax. The Department use these distributions of markups to calculate the total

baseline markup and total incremental markup for every design option. DOE

calculated the markups differently for replacement units and new units.

Energy Use The Energy Use calculates burner operating hours for single-stage and two-stage

equipment and the annual gas or oil and electricity use. The annual energy use

calculations for each design option are inputs to the Summary sheet to calculate the

annual operating cost of the LCC.

Electricity The Electricity Use calculates the electricity use of the air handler. For he electricity

Use use of both permanent split capacitor (PSC) and electronically commutated motor

(ECM) air handle motors, the Department calculated separately for both single-stage

and two-stage equipment and for non-condensing and condensing furnaces. The

boiler spreadsheets do not contain this sheet because boilers do not have air handlers.

Fan Curves The Fan Curves contains the coefficients of the equations for the fan curves and

watt/CFM curves for PSC and ECM air handler motors in non-condensing,

condensing, high-fire and low-fire models. The boiler spreadsheets do not contain

this sheet because boilers do not have air handlers.

AFUEexisting The AFUEexisting Lookup determines the efficiency of the existing equipment in

Lookup the household at the time of Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS)

survey. DOE located the AFUE from tables of the age of the heating equipment and

the Heating-Degree-Day (HDD) of the weather for the house . The Department

assumed the AFUE ofthe existing equipment in the household to correlate by rank

with HDD.

InputCapcity The InputCapcity Lookup determines the input capacity of the existing heating

N-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

a Crystal BaIllY simulation, the spreadsheet records the LCC and payback 

periods for every sampled household. 

Equipment Price The Equipment Price calculates retail price values used as inputs in the LCC 

calculations in the Summary sheet. The Department derived the inputs for 

the Equipment Price sheet from the baseline and incremental manufacturer 

costs from the Engineering Spreadsheet. DOE applied baseline and 

incremental markups inputs derived in the Markups sheet to calculate the 

final retail prices. The Department based the prices on a baseline unit and 

adjusted for the size of the equipment (and the size of the air handler for 

furnaces installed in each sampled household.) 

Markups 

Energy Use 

Electricity 

Use 

Fan Curves 

The Markups sheet contains distributions of (i) manufacturer markup, (ii) wholesaler 

markup, (iii) contractor markup, (iv) builder markup for new homes, and (v) sales 

tax. The Department use these distributions of markups to calculate the total 

baseline markup and total incremental markup for every design option. DOE 

calculated the markups differently for replacement units and new units. 

The Energy Use calculates burner operating hours for single-stage and two-stage 

equipment and the annual gas or oil and electricity use. The annual energy use 

calculations for each design option are inputs to the Summary sheet to calculate the 

annual operating cost of the LCC. 

The Electricity Use calculates the electricity use of the air handler. For he electricity 

use of both permanent split capacitor (PSC) and electronically commutated motor 

(ECM) air handle motors, the Department calculated separately for both single-stage 

and two-stage equipment and for non-condensing and condensing furnaces. The 

boiler spreadsheets do not contain this sheet because boilers do not have air handlers. 

The Fan Curves contains the coefficients of the equations for the fan curves and 

watt/CFM curves for PSC and ECM air handler motors in non-condensing, 

condensing, high-fire and low-fire models. The boiler spreadsheets do not contain 

this sheet because boilers do not have air handlers. 

AFUEexisting The AFUEexisting Lookup determines the efficiency of the existing equipment in 

Lookup the household at the time of Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) 

survey. DOE located the AFUE from tables ofthe age of the heating equipment and 

the Heating-Degree-Day (HDD) of the weather for the house. The Department 

assumed the AFUE of the existing equipment in the household to correlate by rank 

withHDD. 

InputCapcity The InputCapcity Lookup determines the input capacity of the existing heating 

N-2 
Lookup equipment in the house and located the capacity on a table based on the age of the

heating equipment and the square-footage of the household. The Department

assumes the input capacity to correlate by rank with the size of the house.

AirFlow The AirFlow Lookup determines the size of the air handler (or maximum air flow)

Lookup of the heating equipment. If the house has central air conditioning then the size of

the air handler, the Department rank ordered the size of the household with size of

the units within air conditioner shipments of that vintage. If the house does not have

central air conditioning then the Department assumed the size of the air handler to

be sized for 800 CFM at 0.5 in.w.g. static pressure..

Generic The Generic Model Lookup maps the input capacity and air handler size to one of

Model the predefined set of generic models.

Lookup

HDD Dist The HDD Dist by Division looks up the rank of the HDD of the climate of the

by Division house within the HDD of all houses. For non-weatherized gas furnaces, the

Department rank ordered the HDD within the household's census division.

RECS HH The RECS HH Data contains the RECS household data for each product class. It

Data includes: average and marginal energy prices, annual gas or oil use, size of the

house, age of the house, and the age of the existing heating equipment.

AFUE The AFUE Baseline Lookup determines the AFUE of the baseline unit which

Baseline represents the equipment that the household would have purchased in 2015 in the

Lookup absence of standards. DOE rank order correlated the AFUE with the HDD of the

house. For non-weatherized gas furnaces, DOE performed this rank correlation

within the division to which the house belongs. For all other product classes, the

Department rank correlated all houses within the sample.

Installation The Installation Cost provides the weighted average installation cost for each design

Cost option. It is an input to the Summary sheet to calculate the total installed prices of

the design options.

Maintenance The Maintenance Cost provides the maintenance cost for each design option. It

Cost is an input to the Summary sheet to be part of the operating costs of the design

options.

Energy Price The Energy Price Trends provides the price trends of the different heating fuels;

Trends these trends represent the growth rate of energy prices relative to the energy prices

in 2001. DOE took energy price data and forecasts from the Annual Energy Outlook

2005 from 2001 to 2025; and then extrapolated beyond 2025).

N-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Lookup 

AirFlow 

Lookup 

Generic 

Model 

Lookup 

HDDDist 

by Division 

RECSHH 

Data 

AFUE 

Baseline 

Lookup 

Installation 

Cost 

equipment in the house and located the capacity on a table based on the age of the 

heating equipment and the square-footage of the household. The Department 

assumes the input capacity to correlate by rank with the size of the house. 

The AirFlow Lookup determines the size of the air handler (or maximum air flow) 

of the heating equipment. If the house has central air conditioning then the size of 

the air handler, the Department rank ordered the size of the household with size of 

the units within air conditioner shipments of that vintage. Ifthe house does not have 

central air conditioning then the Department assumed the size of the air handler to 

be sized for 800 CFM at 0.5 in.w.g. static pressure .. 

The Generic Model Lookup maps the input capacity and air handler size to one of 

the predefined set of generic models. 

The HDD Dist by Division looks up the rank of the HDD of the climate of the 

house within the HDD of all houses. For non-weatherized gas furnaces, the 

Department rank ordered the HDD within the household's census division. 

The RECS HH Data contains the RECS household data for each product class. It 

includes: average and marginal energy prices, annual gas or oil use, size of the 

house, age of the house, and the age of the existing heating equipment. 

The AFUE Baseline Lookup determines the AFUE of the baseline unit which 

represents the equipment that the household would have purchased in 2015 in the 

absence of standards. DOE rank order correlated the AFUE with the HDD of the 

house. For non-weatherized gas furnaces, DOE performed this rank correlation 

within the division to which the house belongs. For all other product classes, the 

Department rank correlated all houses within the sample. 

The Installation Cost provides the weighted average installation cost for each design 

option. It is an input to the Summary sheet to calculate the total installed prices of 

the design options. 

Maintenance The Maintenance Cost provides the maintenance cost for each design option. It 

Cost is an input to the Summary sheet to be part of the operating costs of the design 

options. 

Energy Price The Energy Price Trends provides the price trends of the different heating fuels; 

Trends these trends represent the growth rate of energy prices relative to the energy prices 

in 2001. DOE took energy price data and forecasts from the Annual Energy Outlook 

2005 from 2001 to 2025; and then extrapolated beyond 2025). 

N-3 
Discount Rate The Discount Rate contains the distributions of discount rates for

replacement and new units.

Lifetime The Lifetime contains the distribution of lifetimes for equipment of that product

class.

Labels The Labels contains labels and variables that are used for the user interface in the

Summary sheet.

N.1.3 Basic Instructions for Operating the Life-Cycle Cost Spreadsheets

Basic instructions for operating the LCC spreadsheet are as follows:

1. Once the LCC spreadsheet file has been downloaded from the Web, open the file using

Excel". Click "Enable Macro" when prompted and then click on the tab for the worksheet

Summary.

2. Use Excel's® View/Zoom commands at the top menu bar to change the size of the display to

fit your monitor.

3. The user can change the parameters listed under USER OPTIONS. There are three dropdown boxes and one command button. The default parameters are:

a. Energy Price Trend: Set to "AEO 2005 - Reference Case". To change values use

the drop-down arrow and select the desired energy price trend (Reference, Low or

High).

b. Start Year: Set to 2015. To change the value use the drop-down arrow and select the

desired year (2015, 2011, 2012, 2013 or 2014).

c. # of Trials: Set to 10,000. To change this value use the drop-down arrow and select

the desired number of trials (10,000, 1,000, 2,000, 3,000 or 5,000).

4. To run the Crystal Ball simulation, click the "run" button (you must re-run after changing

the parameters). The spreadsheet will then be minimized. You can monitor the progress of

the simulation by watching the count of iterations at the left bottom corner. When the

simulation is finished, a sheet named Simulation Results will appear with the results.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Discount Rate The Discount Rate contains the distributions of discount rates for 

replacement and new units. 

Lifetime The Lifetime contains the distribution of lifetimes for equipment of that product 

class. 

Labels The Labels contains labels and variables that are used for the user interface in the 

Summary sheet. 

N.1.3 Basic Instructions for Operating the Life-Cycle Cost Spreadsheets 

Basic instructions for operating the LCC spreadsheet are as follows: 

1. Once the LCC spreadsheet file has been downloaded from the Web, open the file using 

Excel®. Click "Enable Macro" when prompted and then click on the tab for the worksheet 

Summary. 

2. Use Excel's® View/Zoom commands at the top menu bar to change the size of the display to 

fit your monitor. 

3. The user can change the parameters listed under USER OPTIONS. There are three dropdown boxes and one command button. The default parameters are: 

a. Energy Price Trend: Set to "AEO 2005 - Reference Case". To change values use 

the drop-down arrow and select the desired energy price trend (Reference, Low or 

High). 

b. Start Year: Setto 2015. To change the value use the drop-down arrow and select the 

desired year (2015,2011,2012,2013 or 2014). 

c. # of Trials: Set to 10,000. To change this value use the drop-down arrow and select 

the desired number of trials (10,000, 1,000,2,000,3,000 or 5,000). 

4. To run the Crystal Ball simulation, click the "run" button (you must re-run after changing 

the parameters). The spreadsheet will then be minimized. You can monitor the progress of 

the simulation by watching the count of iterations at the left bottom comer. When the 

simulation is finished, a sheet named Simulation Results will appear with the results. 

N-4 
APPENDIX O. GLOSSARY OF VARIABLES AND THEIR VALUES

FROM EIA'S RECS 2001

TABLE OF CONTENTS

0.1 RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION SURVEY (RECS) 2001

VARIABLES USED IN LCC ANALYSIS ................................. 0-1

0.2 RECS 2001 DATABASE .............................................. 0-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX O. GLOSSARY OF VARIABLES AND THEIR VALVES 

FROM EIA'S RECS 2001 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

0.1 RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION SURVEY CRECS) 2001 

VARIABLES USED IN LCC ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 0-1 

0.2 RECS 2001 DATABASE .............................................. 0-1 

O-i 
APPENDIX 0. GLOSSARY OF VARIABLES AND THEIR VALUES

FROM THE ENERGY INFORMATION AGENCY'S RECS 2001

0.1 RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION SURVEY (RECS) 2001 VARIABLES

USED IN LCC ANALYSIS

Using Microsoft ACCESS, the Department created a database containing a subset of the

records and variables from DOE's Energy Information Administration (EIA)'s RECS 2001.' The

Department used this RECS subset in the life-cycle cost (LCC) analysis of the Residential Furnace

and Boiler Rulemaking. This appendix explains the variable name abbreviations and provides

definitions of the variable values. For the entire RECS 2001 dataset, refer to

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs200l /publicuse2OO I.html.

The Department divided the RECS sample by product classes, using different classification

algorithms based on fuel type, home type, (the presence of) central air conditioning, etc. (Table

0.1.1). The variables can be categorized into five classifications: location, house characteristics,

equipments characteristics, householder characteristics, and energy use.

Table 0.1.1 RECS 2001 Variables Used in Life-Cycle Cost Analysis

Location House

Characteristics

Equipment

Characteristics

Householder

Characteristics

Energy Use

Census Region Housing Type Heating Equipment YearX for Senior- Annual Heating

Type Only Determination Energy

Census Division Year Made Heating Equipment Low Income Annual Cooling

Age Energy

Large State (NY, Square Foot Heating Fuel Renter Gas Rate

CA, TX, FL)

Heating Degree Weighting Central Air Number of People Electricity Rate

Day 65 Presence in Household

Cooling Degree Central Air Age Gallon of Fuel Oil

Day65

Gallons of LPG

Dollars of FO

Dollars of LPG

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX O. GLOSSARY OF VARIABLES AND THEIR VALUES 

FROM THE ENERGY INFORMATION AGENCY'S RECS 2001 

0.1 RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION SURVEY (RECS) 2001 VARIABLES 

USED IN Lce ANALYSIS 

Using Microsoft ACCESS, the Department created a database containing a subset of the 

records and variables from DOE's Energy Information Administration (EIA)'s RECS 2001. 1 The 

Department used this RECS subset in the life-cycle cost (LCC) analysis of the Residential Furnace 

and Boiler Ru1emaking. This appendix explains the variable name abbreviations and provides 

definitions of the variable values. For the entire RECS 2001 dataset, refer to 

http://www. eia.doe. gov I emeu/recs/recs200 1 Ipub1icuse200 l.html. 

The Department divided the RECS sample by product classes, using different classification 

algorithms based on fuel type, home type, (the presence of) central air conditioning, etc. (Table 

0.1.1). The variables can be categorized into five classifications: location, house characteristics, 

equipments characteristics, householder characteristics, and energy use. 

T a e hI 0 .. 11 RECS 2001 V . ana hI es U se d· III L·t I e-C :yc I e C os t A nalYSIS I . 

Location House Equipment Householder Energy Use 

Characteristics Characteristics Characteristics 

Census Region Housing Type Heating Equipment YearX for Senior- Annual Heating 

Type Only Determination Energy 

Census Division Year Made Heating Equipment Low Income Annual Cooling 

Age Energy 

Large State (NY, Square Foot Heating Fuel Renter Gas Rate 

CA, TX, FL) 

Heating Degree Weighting Central Air Number of People Electricity Rate 

Day 65 Presence in Household 

Cooling Degree Central Air Age Gallon of Fuel Oil 

Day65 

Gallons of LPG 

Dollars ofFO 

Dollars of LPG 

0-1 
0.2 RECS 2001 DATABASE

The glossary below lists the variable names alphabetically. A brief explanation of the

variable name as it appears in the database file follows the name. Definitions of the variable's

values follow below the name.

AGECENAC AGE OF CENTRAL A/C

EQUIP

LESS THAN 2 YEARS OLD = 1

2 TO 4 YEARS OLD = 2

5 TO 9 YEARS OLD = 3

10 TO 19 YEARS OLD = 4

20 YEARS OR OLDER = 5

AS OLD AS THE HOME (IF

VOLUNTEERED) = 6

DON'T KNOW = 96

NOT APPLICABLE = 99

BTUELCOL ELEC AIR COND USE EST

IN THOUSANDS OF BTU

9999999 = NOT APPLICABLE

CDD65 COOLING DD TO BASE 65 1-97

TO 12-97

COOLING DEGREE DAYS ARE THE

NUMBER OF DEGREES THE AVERAGE

DAILY TEMPERATURE IS ABOVE THE

BASE TEMPERATURE.

TO CALCULATE DEGREE DAYS:

AVERAGE DAILY TEMPERATURE (ADT)

HIGH TEMPERATURE FOR DAY PLUS

THE LOW DIVIDED BY 2.

COOLING DEGREE DAY (CDD) = ADT -

BASE TEMPERATURE. IF HDD OR CDD

= OR < 0, DEGREE DAY (DD) = 0.

CUMULATED DEGREE DAYS ARE IN

WHOLE DAYS.

BTUFOSPH FO SPACE HEAT USE EST

THOUSANDS OF BTU 9999999 = NOT

APPLICABLE

BTULPSPH LPG SPACE HEAT USE EST

IN KS OF BTU 9999999 = NOT

APPLICABLE

BTUNGSPH NAT GAS SPACE HEAT USE

EST THOUSANDS OF BTU

9999999 = NOT APPLICABLE

COOLTYPE TYPE OF AC EQUIP

CENTRAL SYSTEM = 1

INDIVIDUAL UNITS = 2

BOTH CENTRAL AND UNITS = 3

DON'T KNOW=6

REFUSED = 7

NO ANSWER = 8

NOT APPLICABLE = 9

DIVISION CENSUS DIVISION

NEW ENGLAND = 1

MIDDLE ATLANTIC = 2

EAST NORTH CENTRAL = 3

WEST NORTH CENTRAL = 4

SOUTH ATLANTIC = 5

EAST SOUTH CENTRAL = 6

WEST SOUTH CENTRAL = 7

MOUNTAIN = 8

PACIFIC = 9

0-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

0.2 RECS 2001 DATABASE 

The glossary below lists the variable names alphabetically. A brief explanation of the 

variable name as it appears in the database file follows the name. Definitions of the variable's 

values follow below the name. 

AGECENAC AGE OF CENTRAL AIC 

EQUIP 

LESS THAN 2 YEARS OLD = 1 

2 TO 4 YEARS OLD = 2 

5 TO 9 YEARS OLD = 3 

10 TO 19 YEARS OLD = 4 

20 YEARS OR OLDER = 5 

AS OLD AS THE HOME (IF 

VOLUNTEERED) = 6 

DON'T KNOW = 96 

NOT APPLICABLE = 99 

BTUELCOL ELEC AIR COND USE EST 

IN THOUSANDS OF BTU 

9999999 = NOT APPLICABLE 

BTUFOSPH FO SPACE HEAT USE EST 

THOUSANDS OF BTU 9999999 = NOT 

APPLICABLE 

BTULPSPH LPG SPACE HEAT USE EST 

IN KS OF BTU 9999999 = NOT 

APPLICABLE 

BTUNGSPH NAT GAS SPACE HEAT USE 

EST THOUSANDS OF BTU 

9999999 = NOT APPLICABLE 

CDD65 COOLING DD TO BASE 65 1-97 

TO 12-97 

COOLING DEGREE DAYS ARE THE 

NUMBER OF DEGREES THE AVERAGE 

DAILY TEMPERATURE IS ABOVE THE 

BASE TEMPERATURE. 

TO CALCULATE DEGREE DAYS: 

AVERAGE DAIL Y TEMPERATURE (ADT) 

HIGH TEMPERATURE FOR DAY PLUS 

THE LOW DIVIDED BY 2. 

COOLING DEGREE DAY (CDD) = ADT -

BASE TEMPERATURE. IF HDD OR CDD 

= OR < 0, DEGREE DAY (DD) = O. 

CUMULATED DEGREE DAYS ARE IN 

WHOLE DAYS. 

COOLTYPE TYPE OF AC EQUIP 

CENTRAL SYSTEM = 1 

INDIVIDUAL UNITS = 2 

BOTH CENTRAL AND UNITS = 3 

DON'T KNOW = 6 

REFUSED=7 

NO ANSWER = 8 

NOT APPLICABLE = 9 

DIVISION CENSUS DIVISION 

NEW ENGLAND = 1 

MIDDLE ATLANTIC = 2 

. EAST NORTH CENTRAL = 3 

WEST NORTH CENTRAL = 4 

SOUTH ATLANTIC = 5 

EAST SOUTH CENTRAL = 6 

WEST SOUTH CENTRAL = 7 

MOUNTAIN = 8 

PACIFIC = 9 

0-2 
DOEID DOE 4-DIGIT IDENTIFICATION

NUMBER

DOLLARFO ESTIMATED COST OF FO IN

DOLLARS 99999 = NOT APPLICABLE

DOLLARLP ESTIMATED COST OF LPG

IN DOLLARS 99999 = NOT APPLICABLE

ELECRATE LOCAL ELECTRIC RATE

FOR 1000KWH AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL

RATE, IN CENTS PER KILOWATT, OF

ELECTRICITY COMPUTED FROM 1997

TYPICAL ELECTRIC BILL DATA.

WHERE DATA WERE NOT AVAILABLE,

A RATE WAS IMPUTED FROM KNOWN

RATES IN AREAS NEAR THE

HOUSEHOLD WITH MISSING

INFORMATION. DATA INCLUDES AN

ERROR TERM.

FIELD CONTAINS ONE IMPLIED

DECIMAL PLACE.

999 = NOT APPLICABLE

EQUIPAGE AGE OF MAIN HEATING

EQUIP

LESS THAN 2 YEARS OLD = 1

2 TO 4 YEARS OLD = 2

5 TO 9 YEARS OLD = 3

10 TO 19 YEARS OLD = 4

20 YEARS OR OLDER = 5

AS OLD AS THE HOME (IF

VOLUNTEERED) = 6

DON'T KNOW = 96

NOT APPLICABLE = 99

EQUIPM MAIN HOME HEATING

EQUIPMENT

STEAM=2

CENTRAL WARM-AIR FURNACE WITH

DUCTS = 3

HEAT PUMP = 4

BUILT-IN ELECTRIC UNITS IN THE

WALLS, Etc. = 5

BUILT-IN FLOOR = 6

ROOM HEATER BURNING GAS, OIL, OR

KEROSENE = 7

HEATING STOVE = 8

FIREPLACE = 9

PORTABLE ELECTRIC HEATERS = 10

PORTABLE KEROSENE HEATERS = 11

COOKING STOVE (USED TO HEAT

HOME) = 12

EQUIPMENT NOT LISTED = 21

NOT APPLICABLE = 99

FUELHEAT MAIN HOME HEATING

FUEL CON 3

NATURAL GAS FROM UNDERGROUND

PIPES = 1

BOTTLED GAS (LPG OR PROPANE) = 2

FUEL OIL = 3

KEROSENE = 4

ELECTRICITY = 5

WOOD = 7

SOLAR = 8

DISTRICT STEAM = 9

SOME OTHER FUEL = 21

DON'T HEAT HOME = 00

GALLONFO EST GALLONS OF FUEL

OIL BOUGHT 999999 = NOT APPLICABLE

GALLONLP EST GALLONS OF LPG

BOUGHT OBS 6

999999 = NOT APPLICABLE

HDD65 HEATING DD TO BASE 65 1-97

TO 12-97

0-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

DOEID DOE 4-DIGIT IDENTIFICATION 

NUMBER 

DOLLARFO ESTIMATED COST OF FO IN 

DOLLARS 99999 = NOT APPLICABLE 

DOLLARLP ESTIMATED COST OF LPG 

IN DOLLARS 99999 = NOT APPLICABLE 

ELECRA TE LOCAL ELECTRIC RATE 

FOR 1 OOOKWH AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL 

RATE, IN CENTS PER KILOWATT, OF 

ELECTRICITY COMPUTED FROM 1997 

TYPICAL ELECTRIC BILL DATA. 

WHERE DATA WERE NOT AVAILABLE, 

A RA TE WAS IMPUTED FROM KNOWN 

RATES IN AREAS NEAR THE 

HOUSEHOLD WITH MISSING 

INFORMATION. DATA INCLUDES AN 

ERROR TERM. 

FIELD CONTAINS ONE IMPLIED 

DECIMAL PLACE. 

999 = NOT APPLICABLE 

EQUIPAGE AGE OF MAIN HEATING 

EQUIP 

LESS THAN 2 YEARS OLD = 1 

2 TO 4 YEARS OLD = 2 

5 TO 9 YEARS OLD = 3 

10 TO 19 YEARS OLD = 4 

20 YEARS OR OLDER = 5 

AS OLD AS THE HOME (IF 

VOLUNTEERED) = 6 

DON'T KNOW = 96 

NOT APPLICABLE = 99 

0-3 

EQUIPM MAIN HOME HEATING 

EQUIPMENT 

STEAM=2 

CENTRAL WARM-AIR FURNACE WITH 

DUCTS =3 

HEAT PUMP =4 

BUILT-IN ELECTRIC UNITS IN THE 

WALLS, Etc. = 5 

BUILT-IN FLOOR = 6 

ROOM HEATER BURNING GAS, OIL, OR 

KEROSENE=7 

HEATING STOVE = 8 

FIREPLACE = 9 

PORTABLE ELECTRIC HEATERS = 10 

PORTABLE KEROSENE HEATERS = 11 

COOKING STOVE (USED TO HEAT 

HOME) = 12 

EQUIPMENT NOT LISTED = 21 

NOT APPLICABLE = 99 

FUELHEAT MAIN HOME HEATING 

FUEL CON 3 

NATURAL GAS FROM UNDERGROUND 

PIPES = 1 

BOTTLED GAS (LPG OR PROPANE) = 2 

FUEL OIL=3 

KEROSENE =4 

ELECTRICITY = 5 

WOOD =7 

SOLAR = 8 

DISTRICT STEAM = 9 

SOME OTHER FUEL = 21 

DON'T HEAT HOME = 00 

GALLONFO EST GALLONS OF FUEL 

OIL BOUGHT 999999 = NOT APPLICABLE 

GALLONLP EST GALLONS OF LPG 

BOUGHTOBS 6 

999999 = NOT APPLICABLE 

HDD65 HEATING DD TO BASE 651-97 

TO 12-97 
HEATING DEGREE DAYS ARE THE

NUMBER OF DEGREES THE AVERAGE

DAILY TEMPERATURE IS BELOW THE

BASE TEMPERATURE.

TO CALCULATE DEGREE DAYS:

AVERAGE DAILY TEMPERATURE (ADT) _

HIGH TEMPERATURE FOR DAY PLUS THE

LOW DIVIDED BY 2.

HEATING DEGREE DAY (HDD) = BASE

TEMPERATURE (E.G. 65 DEGREES) - ADT

IF HDD = OR < 0, DEGREE DAY (DD) = 0.

CUMULATED DEGREE DAYS ARE IN

WHOLE DAYS.

LRG+DIV LARGE STATE AND CENSUS

DIVISION DESIGNATIONS

NEW ENGLAND = I

MIDDLE ATLANTIC LESS NY = 2

EAST NORTH CENTRAL = 3

WEST NORTH CENTRAL = 4

SOUTH ATLANTIC LESS FL = 5

EAST SOUTH CENTRAL = 6

WEST SOUTH CENTRAL LESS TX = 7

MOUNTAIN = 8

PACIFIC LESS CA = 9

NEW YORK STATE = 10

CALIFORNIA = 11

TEXAS = 12

FLORIDA = 13

LRGSTATE LARGE STATE DESIGNATION

NEW YORK STATE = 1

CALIFORNIA = 2

TEXAS = 3

FLORIDA = 4

NHSLDMEM NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLD

MEMBERS

DON'T KNOW = 96

REFUSED = 97

NO ANSWER = 98

NOT APPLICABLE = 99

NWEIGHT THE FINAL WEIGHT

THE FINAL WEIGHT (REFLECTING THE

PRODUCT OF THE PRE-SECOND STAGE

WEIGHT AND THREE ADJUSTMENTS)

POOR100 BELOW 100 PERCENT OF

POVERTY

POVERTY DEFINED AS 100 PERCENT OF

POVERTY LINE. POVERTY LINE VARIES

WITH HOUSEHOLD SIZE (1-9), AGE AND

HOUSEHOLD INCOME. FOR HOUSEHOLD

SIZE OF :

1 - AGE 65 AND OVER, LESS THAN $ 7,525

1 - AGE 64 AND UNDER, LESS THAN $ 8,163

2 - AGE 65 AND OVER, LESS THAN $ 9,491

2 - AGE 64 AND UNDER, LESS THAN $ 10,507

3 - LESS THAN $ 12,516

4 - LESS THAN $16,036

5 - LESS THAN $18,952

6 - LESS THAN $21,389

7 - LESS THAN $24,268

8 - LESS THAN $27,091

9 OR MORE - LESS THAN $31,971

POOR 100% = 1

NONPOOR = 0

NO ANSWER = 8

REGIONC CENSUS REGION

NORTHEAST = 1

MIDWEST = 2

SOUTH = 3

WEST = 4

SQFTREG MODEL-BASED EST. OF

HEATED SQ FT

99999 = NOT APPLICABLE

TYPEHUQ RESP REPORTED TYPE OF HOME

MOBILE HOME = 1

SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED = 2

SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED = 3

APARTMENT BUILDING WITH 2-4 UNITS = 4

APARTMENT BUILDING WITH 5 OR MORE

UNITS = 5

0-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

HEATING DEGREE DAYS ARE THE 

NUMBER OF DEGREES THE AVERAGE 

DAILY TEMPERATURE IS BELOW THE 

BASE TEMPERATURE. 

TO CALCULATE DEGREE DAYS: 

AVERAGE DAILY TEMPERATURE (ADT) = 

HIGH TEMPERATURE FOR DAY PLUS THE 

LOW DIVIDED BY 2. 

HEATING DEGREE DAY (HDD) = BASE 

TEMPERATURE (E.G. 65 DEGREES) - ADT 

IF HDD = OR < 0, DEGREE DAY (DD) = 0. 

CUMULATED DEGREE DAYS ARE IN 

WHOLE DAYS. 

LRG+DIV LARGE STATE AND CENSUS 

DIVISION DESIGNATIONS 

NEW ENGLAND = 1 

MIDDLE ATLANTIC LESS NY = 2 

EAST NORTH CENTRAL = 3 

WEST NORTH CENTRAL = 4 

SOUTH ATLANTIC LESS FL = 5 

EAST SOUTH CENTRAL = 6 

WEST SOUTH CENTRAL LESS TX = 7 

MOUNTAIN = 8 

PACIFIC LESS CA = 9 

NEW YORK STATE = 10 

CALIFORNIA = 11 

TEXAS = 12 

FLORIDA = l3 

LRGSTATE LARGE STATE DESIGNATION 

NEW YORK STATE = 1 

CALIFORNIA = 2 

TEXAS = 3 

FLORIDA =4 

NHSLDMEM NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLD 

MEMBERS 

DON'T KNOW = 96 

REFUSED=97 

NO ANSWER = 98 

NOT APPLICABLE = 99 

NWEIGHT THE FINAL WEIGHT 

THE FINAL WEIGHT (REFLECTING THE 

PRODUCT OF THE PRE-SECOND STAGE 

WEIGHT AND THREE ADJUSTMENTS) 

0-4 

POORIOO BELOW 100 PERCENT OF 

POVERTY 

POVERTY DEFINED AS 100 PERCENT OF 

POVERTY LINE. POVERTY LINE VARIES 

WITH HOUSEHOLD SIZE (1-9), AGE AND 

HOUSEHOLD INCOME. FOR HOUSEHOLD 

SIZE OF: 

1 - AGE 65 AND OVER, LESS THAN $ 7,525 

1 - AGE 64 AND UNDER, LESS THAN $ 8,163 

2 - AGE 65 AND OVER, LESS THAN $ 9,491 

2 - AGE 64 AND UNDER, LESS THAN $ 10,507 

3 - LESS THAN $ 12,516 

4 - LESS THAN $16,036 

5 - LESS THAN $18,952 

6 - LESS THAN $21,389 

7 - LESS THAN $24,268 

8 - LESS THAN $27,091 

9 OR MORE - LESS THAN $31,971 

POOR 100% = 1 

NONPOOR=O 

NO ANSWER = 8 

REGIONC CENSUS REGION 

NORTHEAST = 1 

MIDWEST=2 

SOUTH=3 

WEST=4 

SQFTREG MODEL-BASED EST. OF 

HEATED SQFT 

99999 = NOT APPLICABLE 

TYPEHUQ RESP REPORTED TYPE OF HOME 

MOBILE HOME = 1 

SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED = 2 

SINGLE-FAMILY ATTACHED = 3 

APARTMENT BUILDING WITH 2-4 UNITS = 4 

APARTMENT BUILDING WITH 5 OR MORE 

UNITS =5 
UGASRATE LOCAL NATURAL GAS RATE YEARS4 ADULTS IN HH OVER 75

FOR MCF AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL RATE NOT APPLICABLE = 99

FOR MCF OF NATURAL GAS COMPUTED

FROM 1997 TYPICAL NATURAL GAS BILL

DATA. WHERE DATA WERE NOT

AVAILABLE, A RATE WAS IMPUTED FROM

KNOWN RATES IN AREAS NEAR THE

HOUSEHOLD WITH MISSING

INFORMATION. DATA INCLUDES AN

ERROR TERM. HOUSEHOLDS THAT DO

NOT USE NATURAL GAS ARE CODED

9999 FOR NOT APPLICABLE.

FIELD CONTAINS TWO IMPLIED DECIMAL

PLACES.

YEARMADE YEAR HOME BUILT

BEFORE 1940 = 1

1940-49 = 2

1950-59 = 3

1960-69 = 4

1970-76 = 5

1977-79 = 6

1980-86 = 7

1987-89 = 8

1990 = 9

1991 = 10

1992 = 11

1993 = 12

1994 = 13

1995 = 14

1996 = 15

1997 = 16

NOT APPLICABLE = 99

YEARS1 INFANTS IN HH UNDER 1

NOT APPLICABLE = 99

YEARS2 CHILDREN IN HH 1-12

NOT APPLICABLE = 99

YEARS3 ADULTS IN HH OVER 65

DON'T KNOW = 96

REFUSED = 97

NO ANSWER = 98

NOT APPLICABLE = 99

0-5

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

UGASRATE LOCAL NATURAL GAS RATE 

FOR MCF AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL RATE 

FOR MCF OF NATURAL GAS COMPUTED 

FROM 1997 TYPICAL NATURAL GAS BILL 

DATA. WHERE DATA WERE NOT 

A V AILABLE, A RATE WAS IMPUTED FROM 

KNOWN RATES IN AREAS NEAR THE 

HOUSEHOLD WITH MISSING 

INFORMATION. DATA INCLUDES AN 

ERROR TERM. HOUSEHOLDS THAT DO 

NOT USE NATURAL GAS ARE CODED 

9999 FOR NOT APPLICABLE. 

FIELD CONTAINS TWO IMPLIED DECIMAL 

PLACES. 

YEARMADE YEAR HOME BUILT 

BEFORE 1940 = 1 

1940-49 = 2 

1950-59 = 3 

1960-69 = 4 

1970-76 = 5 

1977-79 = 6 

1980-86 = 7 

1987-89 = 8 

1990 = 9 

1991 = 10 

1992 = 11 

1993 = 12 

1994 = 13 

1995 = 14 

1996 = 15 

1997 = 16 

NOT APPLICABLE = 99 

YEARSl INFANTS IN HH UNDER 1 

NOT APPLICABLE = 99 

YEARS2 CHILDREN IN HH 1-12 

NOT APPLICABLE = 99 

YEARS3 ADULTS IN HH OVER 65 

DON'T KNOW = 96 

REFUSED =97 

NO ANSWER = 98 

NOT APPLICABLE = 99 

0-5 

YEARS4 ADULTS IN HH OVER 75 

NOT APPLICABLE = 99 
REFERENCES

U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Residential Energy

Consumption Survey: Household Energy Consumption and Expenditures 2001. 2001.

(Last accessed May 18, 2005.)

<http://www.eia.doe . gov/emeu/recs/rees2001/publicuse2OOI.html>

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Residential Energy 

Consumption Survey: Household Energy Consumption and Expenditures 2001. 2001. 

(Last accessed May 18,2005.) 

<http://www. eia.doe.gov I emeu/recslrecs200 1 Ipublicuse200 l.html> 

0-6 
APPENDIX P. DISTRIBUTION FOR DISCOUNT RATES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

P.1 DISTRIBUTION OF NEW INSTALLATION DISCOUNT RATES .............. P-1

P.2 DISTRIBUTION OF REPLACEMENT DISCOUNT RATES ................... P-1

P.3 REFERENCES ....................................................... P-6

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure P.1.1 Distribution of New Home Mortgage Real Interest Rates ................. P-1

Figure P.2.1 Distribution of Equity Line of Credit Real Interest Rates ................. P-2

Figure P.2.2 Distribution of Credit Card Real Interest Rates ......................... P-2

Figure P.2.3 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on CD's ......................... P-3

Figure P.2.4 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on Corporate AAA Bond ........... P-3

Figure P.2.5 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on T-Bills ....................... P-4

Figure P.2.6 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on S&P 500 ..................... P-4

Figure P.2.7 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on Mutual Funds ................. P-5

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX P. DISTRIBUTION FOR DISCOUNT RATES 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

P.I DISTRIBUTION OF NEW INSTALLATION DISCOUNT RATES .............. P-I 

P.2 DISTRIBUTION OF REPLACEMENT DISCOUNT RATES ................... P-I 

P.3 REFERENCES ....................................................... P-6 

Figure P.1.1 

Figure P.2.1 

Figure P.2.2 

Figure P.2.3 

Figure P.2.4 

Figure P.2.S 

Figure P.2.6 

Figure P.2.7 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Distribution of New Home Mortgage Real Interest Rates ................. P-I 

Distribution of Equity Line of Credit Real Interest Rates ................. P-2 

Distribution of Credit Card Real Interest Rates ......................... P-2 

Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on CD's ......................... P-3 

Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on Corporate AAA Bond ........... P-3 

Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on T-Bills ....................... P-4 

Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on S&P SOO ..................... P-4 

Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on Mutual Funds ................. P-S 

P-i 
APPENDIX P. DISTRIBUTION FOR DISCOUNT RATES

P.1 DISTRIBUTION OF NEW INSTALLATION DISCOUNT RATES

Figure P.1.1 shows the distribution of nominal interest rates for new home mortgages. ^

The real discount rate equals the nominal rate after deducting taxes (28 percent) and 1998

inflation (1.5 percent).2 The median U.S. household income in 2000 was $44,887.3 The marginal

income tax of heads of households with this income is 27.5 percent.4 The Department rounded

the 27.5 percent figure to 28 percent for this analysis.

25%

20%

5%

6\0 ,.\^ A\ o\= ,^\= ti\= \. 0\0 9\0 ^a\o ry,^\o ry0\o

O 6\ 5^ 6' 6^ 6'l^B000^O^O,^ S\° O4\0 O^ 1^11 ^6\^ 'L' ,^9\^ a1= h\= A^ _\_ '9,^\^ ^r,^\= Ae\^ >^>\^ dh\= ^\.6a\a h' \o o\o n\

Real Interest Rate

Figure P.1.1 Distribution of New Home Mortgage Real Interest

Rates

P.2 DISTRIBUTION OF REPLACEMENT DISCOUNT RATES

Figures P.2.1 through P.2. show the distribution of real interest rates for types of debt and

equity used to finance replacement furnaces. These include distributions for equity line of credit

and credit cards,' certificates of deposit (CDs),5 savings bonds,' and corporate bonds," stocks,'

and mutual funds. The real discount rate equals the nominal rate after deducting taxes (28

percent) from mortgages and 1998 inflation (1.5 percent) from the other finance methods.

The Department defines CDs returns based on returns to six-month, secondary market

CDs (1977-1999). The Department defines returns to savings bonds as the returns to one-year

P-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX P. DISTRIBUTION FOR DISCOUNT RATES 

P.I DISTRIBUTION OF NEW INSTALLATION DISCOUNT RATES 

Figure P.l.l shows the distribution of nominal interest rates for new horne mortgages. I 

The real discount rate equals the nominal rate after deducting taxes (28 percent) and 1998 

inflation (1.5 percent)? The median U.S. household income in 2000 was $44,887. 3 The marginal 

income tax of heads of households with this income is 27.5 percent.4 The Department rounded 

the 27.5 percent figure to 28 percent for this analysis. 

25%,---------------------------, 

5% -~~~-~ ~ - - - -1111-----~----------1 

Real Interest Rate 

Figure P.I.I Distribution of New Home Mortgage Real Interest 

Rates 

P.2 DISTRIBUTION OF REPLACEMENT DISCOUNT RATES 

Figures P.2.1 through P.2. show the distribution of real interest rates for types of debt and 

equity used to finance replacement furnaces. These include distributions for equity line of credit 

and credit cards, I certificates of deposit (CDs),5 savings bonds,5 and corporate bonds,6 stocks/ 

and mutual funds. The real discount rate equals the nominal rate after deducting taxes (28 

percent) from mortgages and 1998 inflation (1.5 percent) from the other finance methods. 

The Department defines CDs returns based on returns to six-month, secondary market 

CDs (1977-1999). The Department defines returns to savings bonds as the returns to one-year 

P-l 
Treasury Bills (1977-1999). The Department defines returns to corporate bonds as the returns to

Moody's AAA Corporate Bonds (1977-1999). The Department derived the mutual fund interest

rate data according to the average return to stocks, treasury bonds, and savings bonds.

16%

14%

12%

10%

6%

4%

0%

,o\o ^oo\o ^o\o \e .\ e\e ,^\_ \e 0\= \e y\o o\o e \0 9\o a\o .o\o 11 191a o\e 9\e ti\e o\o p\o o\o ^,\o

Real Interest Rate

Figure P.2.1 Distribution of Equity Line of Credit Real Interest

Rates

Real Interest Rate

Figure P.2.2 Distribution of Credit Card Real Interest Rates

P-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Treasury Bills (1977-1999). The Department defines returns to corporate bonds as the returns to 

Moody's AAA Corporate Bonds (1977-1999). The Department derived the mutual fund interest 

rate data according to the average return to stocks, treasury bonds, and savings bonds. 

16% r--------------------------, 

14% ----- --------- ,---,---- -

12%+__----1111---------------------1 

~ :;; 

~ 8%-

e 

a. 

6% +__--;;;;--I11II-I111---

4% +__--l1li---1II1-II11---

2% -

O%+-""'-,-B...,..J""--"'-,-

~~$~~~~~,~~~~~~~~~$$~$ffJ~ 

Real Interest Rate 

Figure P.2.1 Distribution of Equity Line of Credit Real Interest 

Rates 

9%~------------------------------------------~ 

7% -- -----------~--------

6% --- --- -------------

~5%+------------~--------------~~--------~ 

:g 

.D 

o Ii. 4% ----------~ --~- - -~-~~. ---- ----- ~ - --

2% 

1% lI-it---jIJ-;;;-l-l--Bh.---l-.l-I-hrH-H-IH-I-H-IH-I-H-IH-;;-H-.----IIf---------_ 

0% 1.1 Imh 11111111 I I III III. ,1m 

Real Interest Rate 

Figure P.2.2 Distribution of Credit Card Real Interest Rates 

P-2 
70%

6. 0%

- - --------- - ----

4.0%.

I 20%I I E

0

z

1978 179 1 3 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1- '

-2.0%

Year

Figure P.2.3 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on CD's

10. 0%

6.0% III, III --- - ---

4.0% ^ --t ^

- j . - -

2.01'

0

- III j

z

I 00% JLLLL1 HCI

-

1

I

1977 1978 1 , ) 1981 1982 1983 1984 1965 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

-2.0%

-4.0%

Year

Figure P.2.4 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on Corporate

AAA Bond

P-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

7,0% 

6.0% 

5.0% 

4,0% -~------ -- - - -

3.0% 

2.0% +------1111-.-l1li--l1li-.-l1li1.0% --------"- - - - -

-2.0% "-_____________________________ ---1 

Year 

Figure P.2.3 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on CD's 

10.0% ,------------------------______ _ 

8.0% f--------- -- -----... ----------------------- -.-

~ 4.0% - t---- ~ 

~ 

.E! 

.EO 

~ 

'E 2.0% 

0 

Z 

0.0% ~ l ~~ .... c c-It 1977 1971f981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

-2.0% ,-

-4.0% 

Year 

Figure P.2.4 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on Corporate 

AAABond 

P-3 
10, 0%

8.0°0

nn

^,IIn

II

4.0% - - -

I 1 -

2.0% -- -- -- III -

0.0% L

-2.0%

-0 0%

1977 1978 4 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

_ ___

.

Year

Figure P.2.5 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on T-Bills

40.0%

30.0%

20.0% - -

^-

K it

10.0% .-

E

G

_

- m

1 1978 1979 1980 41 1982 1993 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 !Y9) 1991 1991 2 1993 1 914 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 . 02 2003

-10.0%

-20.0%

Year

Figure P.2.6 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on S&P 500

P-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

10,0% 

RO% 

6.0% 

4.0% 

2.0% 

0.0% I -2.0% 

-4.0% L-_______________________________ --' 

Year 

Figure P.2.S Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on T-Bills 

40.0% 

30.0% ~---.-.-.----.~-----.---~.~- .--~---~~--~~--~ ------

20.0% 

~ 

'" ti 

e 

~ 10,0% 

I ,~'®'~ _,~,~ ".'""_ ,!1.1."" , .. , .. ,~ , .. r~l ' 1':18·19791980 

~ 

"E 

0 

z 

0.0% 

-10.0% 

-20.0% 

Year 

Figure P .2.6 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on S&P 500 

P-4 
300%

25.0%

20.0% nI I --.

l

15.07

n

10,0%

E

I

I 0

z

I I

i

7 1978 1979 1980 IH 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 .• f{0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 n,Z (11 102 20031

-10.0%

J

---

Year

Figure P.2.7 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on Mutual

Funds

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

300% 

25.0% 

20.0% 

15.0% .~ ... ------'''-----l1li---------------- - --. 

100% --- - --------- 1-- ---=-------- ----- 1---------

5.0% --. ... 

0.0% I I I 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 "11' 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 200220031 

·5.0% 

-10.0% ---------~ --~~--- ~ 

-15.0% 

Year 

Figure P .2. 7 Distribution of Annual Rate of Return on Mutual 

Funds 

P-5 
REFERENCES

1. The Federal Reserve Board. 1998 Survey of Consumer Finances. 1998. (Last accessed

October 8 , 2002.)

<http: //www. federalreserve .gov/pubs/oss/oss2/98/sef98home.html#summary>

2. U.S. Department of Labor - Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index. 2005.

(Last accessed July 1, 2005, 2005.) <http://www.data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost>

3. U.S. Department of Commerce - Bureau of the Census. Historic Income-Households.

2003. (Last accessed July 1, 2005, 2005.)

<http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/hO I ar.html>

4. Internal Revenue Service. Marginal Income Tax Data. 2005. (Last accessed July 1,

2005, 2005.) <http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/lists/0„id=97887,00.html>

5. The Federal Reserve Board. Federal Reserve Statistical Release, Selected Interest Rates,

H.15 Historical Data, CDs (secondary market), 6-month. 2000. (Last accessed March

15, 2001.) <http://www.bog.frb.fed.us/releases/H15/data.htm>

6. The Federal Reserve Board. Federal Reserve Statistical Release, Selected Interest Rates,

H.15 Historical Data, Corporate bonds, Moody's seasoned, AAA. 2000. (Last accessed

March 15, 2001.) <http://www.bog.frb.fed.us/releases/H15/data.htm>

7. Damodaran Online Data Page. Historical Returns on Stocks, Bonds and Bills-United

States. Damodaran. (Last accessed October 9, 2002),

<http://pages.stem.nyu.edu/-adamodar/>

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. The Federal Reserve Board. 1998 Survey of Consumer Finances. 1998. (Last accessed 

October 8, 2002.) 

<http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/oss/oss2/98/scf98home.html#summary> 

2. U.S. Department of Labor - Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index. 2005. 

(Last accessed July 1,2005,2005.) <http://www.data.bls.govlcgi-binlsurveymost> 

3. U.S. Department of Commerce - Bureau of the Census. Historic Income-Households. 

2003. (Last accessed July 1,2005,2005.) 

<http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/hO 1 ar.html> 

4. Internal Revenue Service. Marginal Income Tax Data. 2005. (Last accessed July 1, 

2005, 2005.) <http://www . irs .gov/formspubs/lists/O "id=978 87,00 .html> 

5. The Federal Reserve Board. Federal Reserve Statistical Release, Selected Interest Rates, 

H.15 Historical Data, CDs (secondary market), 6-month. 2000. (Last accessed March 

15, 2001.) <http://www.bog.frb.fed.us/releases/HI5/data.htm> 

6. The Federal Reserve Board. Federal Reserve Statistical Release, Selected Interest Rates, 

H.15 Historical Data, Corporate bonds, Moody's seasoned, AM. 2000. (Last accessed 

March 15, 2001.) <http://www.bog.frb.fed.us/releases/HI5/data.htm> 

7. Damodaran Online Data Page. Historical Returns on Stocks, Bonds and Bills-United 

States. Damodaran. (Last accessed October 9,2002), 

<http://pages. stern. nyu. edu/ ~adamodar/> 

P-6 
APPENDIX Q. LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Q.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................... Q.4-1

Q.2 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO

2005 HIGH GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO ............................... Q.4-7

Q.3 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO

2005 LOW GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO .............................. Q.4-18

Q.4 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO

2006 HIGH GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO .............................. Q.4-29

Q.5 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO

2006 LOW GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO .............................. Q.4-41

LIST OF TABLES

Table Q.2.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ....................................... Q.4-7

Table Q.2.2 LCC and PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ....................................... Q.4-9

Table Q.2.3 LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-10

Table Q.2.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2005 High Growth) ...... Q.4-12

Table Q.2.5 LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005 High Growth) ....... Q.4-14

Table Q.2.6 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 High Growth) ........ Q.4-16

Table Q.3.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-18

Table Q.3.2 LCC and PBP for Weatherized Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth) ..... Q.4-20

Table Q.3.3 LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-21

Table Q.3.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...... Q.4-23

Table Q.3.5 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 Low Growth) ........ Q.4-25

Table Q.3.6 LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005 Low Growth) ....... Q.4-27

Table Q.4.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-29

Table Q.4.2 LCC and PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-31

Table Q.4.3 LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-33

Table Q.4.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth) ...... Q.4-35

Table Q.4.5 LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2006 High Growth) ....... Q.4-37

Table Q.4.6 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2006 High Growth) ........ Q.4-39

Table Q.5.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-41

Q-i

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX Q. LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING 

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Q.l INTRODUCTION ................................................... Q.4-1 

Q.2 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 

2005 HIGH GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO ............................... Q.4-7 

Q.3 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 

2005 LOW GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO .............................. Q.4-18 

Q.4 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 

2006 HIGH GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO .............................. Q.4-29 

Q.5 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 

2006 LOW GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO .............................. Q.4-41 

Table Q.2.1 

Table Q.2.2 

Table Q.2.3 

Table Q.2.4 

Table Q.2.5 

Table Q.2.6 

Table Q.3.1 

Table Q.3.2 

Table Q.3.3 

Table Q.3.4 

Table Q.3.5 

Table Q.3.6 

Table Q.4.l 

Table Q.4.2 

Table Q.4.3 

Table Q.4.4 

Table Q.4.5 

Table Q.4.6 

Table Q.5.1 

LIST OF TABLES 

LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ....................................... Q.4-7 

LCC and PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ....................................... Q.4-9 

LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-10 

LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2005 High Growth) ...... Q.4-12 

LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005 High Growth) ....... Q.4-14 

LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 High Growth) ........ Q.4-16 

LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-18 

LCC and PBP for Weatherized Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth) ..... Q.4-20 

LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-21 

LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...... Q.4-23 

LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 Low Growth) ........ Q.4-25 

LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005 Low Growth) ....... Q.4-27 

LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-29 

LCC and PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-31 

LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-33 

LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth) ...... Q.4-35 

LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2006 High Growth) ....... Q.4-37 

LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2006 High Growth) ........ Q.4-39 

LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-41 

Q-i 
Table Q.5.2

Table Q.5.3

Table Q.5.4

Table Q.5.5

Table Q.5.6

LCC and PBP for Weatherized Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) ..... Q.4-43

LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-45

LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...... Q.4-47

LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2006 Low Growth) ........ Q.4-49

LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2006 Low Growth) ....... Q.4-51

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Q.1.1

Figure Q.1.2

Figure Q.1.3

Figure Q.1.4

Figure Q.1.5

Figure Q.1.6

Figure Q.1.7

Figure Q.1.8

Figure Q.2.1

Figure Q.2.2

Figure Q.2.3

Figure Q.2.4

Figure Q.2.5

Figure Q.2.6

Figure Q.2.7

Figure Q.2.8

Figure Q.2.9

Figure Q.2.10

Figure Q.2.11

Figure Q.2.12

Figure Q.3.1

Figure Q.3.2

Residential Natural Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2005) ................... Q.4-2

Residential Electricity Price Forecast (AEO 2005) .................... Q.4-2

Residential Liquefied Petroleum Gas Forecast (AEO 2005) ............. Q.4-3

Residential Oil Fuel Price Forecast (AEO 2005) ...................... Q.4-3

Residential Natural Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2006) ................... Q.4-4

Residential Electricity Price Forecast (AEO 2006) .................... Q.4-5

Residential Liquefied Petroleum Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2006) ........ Q.4-5

Residential Oil Fuel Price Forecast (AEO 2006) ...................... Q.4-6

National LCC Savings Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ....................................... Q.4-8

National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ....................................... Q.4-8

National LCC Savings Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ....................................... Q.4-9

National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-10

National LCC Savings Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-11

National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-11

National LCC Savings Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-13

National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-13

National LCC Savings Results for Gas Boilers

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-15

National PBP Results for Gas Boilers

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-15

National LCC Savings for Oil Boilers

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-17

National PBP Results for Oil Boilers

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-17

National LCC Savings Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-19

National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

Q-ii

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.5.2 

Table Q.5.3 

Table Q.5.4 

Table Q.5.5 

Table Q.5.6 

Lee and PBP for Weatherized Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) ..... Q.4-43 

Lee and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-45 

Lee and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...... Q.4-47 

Lee and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2006 Low Growth) ........ Q.4-49 

Lee and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2006 Low Growth) ....... Q.4-51 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure Q.1.1 Residential Natural Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2005) ................... Q.4-2 

Figure Q.1.2 Residential Electricity Price Forecast (AEO 2005) .................... Q.4-2 

Figure Q.1.3 Residential Liquefied Petroleum Gas Forecast (AEO 2005) ............. Q.4-3 

Figure Q.1.4 Residential Oil Fuel Price Forecast (AEO 2005) ...................... Q.4-3 

Figure Q.1.5 Residential Natural Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2006) ................... Q.4-4 

Figure Q.1.6 Residential Electricity Price Forecast (AEO 2006) .................... Q.4-5 

Figure Q.1.7 Residential Liquefied Petroleum Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2006) ........ Q.4-5 

Figure Q.1.8 Residential Oil Fuel Price Forecast (AEO 2006) ...................... Q.4-6 

Figure Q.2.1 National Lee Savings Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ....................................... Q.4-8 

Figure Q.2.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ....................................... Q.4-8 

Figure Q.2.3 National Lee Savings Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ....................................... Q.4-9 

Figure Q.2.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-l0 

Figure Q.2.5 National Lee Savings Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-1l 

Figure Q.2.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-11 

Figure Q.2.7 National Lee Savings Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-13 

Figure Q.2.8 National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-13 

Figure Q.2.9 National Lee Savings Results for Gas Boilers 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-15 

Figure Q.2.10 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-15 

Figure Q.2.11 National Lee Savings for Oil Boilers 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-17 

Figure Q.2.12 National PBP Results for Oil Boilers 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-17 

Figure Q.3.1 National Lee Savings Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-19 

Figure Q.3.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

Q-ii 
(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-19

Figure Q.3.3 National LCC Savings Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-20

Figure Q.3.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-21

Figure Q.3.5 National LCC Savings Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-22

Figure Q.3.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-22

Figure Q.3.7 National LCC Savings Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-24

Figure Q.3.8 National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-24

Figure Q.3.9 National LCC Savings Results for Oil Boilers

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-26

Figure Q.3.10 National PBP Results for Oil Boilers

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-26

Figure Q.3.11 National LCC Savings Results for Gas Boilers

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-28

Figure Q.3.12 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-28

Figure Q.4.1 National LCC Savings Results for Non-Weatherzied Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-30

Figure Q.4.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-30

Figure Q.4.3 National LCC Savings Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-31

Figure Q.4.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-32

Figure Q.4.5 National LCC Savings Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-33

Figure Q.4.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-34

Figure Q.4.7 National LCC Savings Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-36

Figure Q.4.8 National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-36

Figure Q.4.9 National LCC Savings Results for Gas Boilers

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-38

Figure Q.4.10 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-38

Figure Q.4.11 National LCC Savings Results for Oil Boilers

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-40

Figure Q.4.12 National PBP Results for Oil Boilers

Q-iii

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-19 

Figure Q.3.3 National Lee Savings Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-20 

Figure Q.3.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-21 

Figure Q.3.5 National Lee Savings Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-22 

Figure Q.3.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-22 

Figure Q.3.7 National Lee Savings Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-24 

Figure Q.3.8 National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-24 

Figure Q.3.9 National Lee Savings Results for Oil Boilers 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-26 

Figure Q.3.10 National PBP Results for Oil Boilers 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-26 

Figure Q.3.11 National Lee Savings Results for Gas Boilers 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-28 

Figure Q.3.l2 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-28 

Figure Q.4.l National Lee Savings Results for Non-Weatherzied Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-30 

Figure Q.4.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-30 

Figure Q.4.3 National Lee Savings Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-31 

Figure Q.4.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-32 

Figure Q.4.5 National Lee Savings Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-33 

Figure Q.4.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-34 

Figure Q.4.7 National Lee Savings Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-36 

Figure Q.4.8 National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-36 

Figure Q.4.9 National Lee Savings Results for Gas Boilers 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-38 

Figure Q.4.10 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-38 

Figure Q.4.11 National Lee Savings Results for Oil Boilers 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-40 

Figure Q.4.12 National PBP Results for Oil Boilers 

Q-iii 
(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-40

Figure Q.5.1 National LCC Savings Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-42

Figure Q.5.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-42

Figure Q.5.3 National LCC Savings Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-43

Figure Q.5.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-44

Figure Q.5.5 National LCC Savings Results for Mobile Home Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-45

Figure Q.5.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-46

Figure Q.5.7 National LCC Savings Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-48

Figure Q.5.8 National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-48

Figure Q.5.9 National LCC Savings Results for Oil Boilers

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-50

Figure Q.5.10 National PBP Results for Oil Boilers

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-50

Figure Q.5.11 National LCC Savings Results for Gas Boilers

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-52

Figure Q.5.12 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-52

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

(AEO 2006 High Growth) ...................................... Q.4-40 

Figure Q.S.I National Lee Savings Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-42 

Figure Q.S.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-42 

Figure Q.S.3 National Lee Savings Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-43 

Figure Q.S.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-44 

Figure Q.S.S National Lee Savings Results for Mobile Horne Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-4S 

Figure Q.S.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Horne Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-46 

Figure Q.S.7 National Lee Savings Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-48 

Figure Q.S.8 National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-48 

Figure Q.S.9 National Lee Savings Results for Oil Boilers 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-S0 

Figure Q.S.I0 National PBP Results for Oil Boilers 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-S0 

Figure Q.S.ll National Lee Savings Results for Gas Boilers 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-S2 

Figure Q.S.12 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) ...................................... Q.4-S2 

Q-iv 
APPENDIX Q. LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS

Q.1 INTRODUCTION

This appendix presents life-cycle cost (LCC) and payback results using alternative

energy price scenarios from Energy Information (EIA)'s Annual Energy Outlook 2005 (AEO

2005)' and Annual Energy Outlook 2006 (AEO 2006)2. The Department of Energy (DOE or the

Department) based the payback periods on the calculation methodology used in Chapter 8: LifeCycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis.

Figures Q.1.1 - Q.1.4 show the price forecasts from AEO 2005 for natural gas, electricity,

liquefied petroleum gas and oil for the three economic growth cases considered by EIA. For

natural gas, the price in the High Economic Growth case is considerably higher than in the

Reference case in 2012. The decline in 2018-2020 stems from initial gas flows from the Alaskan

pipeline occur earlier in the High Economic Growth case than in the Reference case. The price

in this case rises much faster than in the Reference case after 2020 due to higher economic

growth causing greater demand for gas.'

a After 2025, the price in the Low Economic Growth case is higher than in the Reference case. This results from DOE's

use of the average annual growth rate in the 2010-2025 period to project post-2025 prices. In the Low case, Alaskan

gas flows occur later in time, so the price of gas rises significantly in the 2015-2025 period despite the lower economic

growth in this case.

Q-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX Q. LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING 

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS 

Q.l INTRODUCTION 

This appendix presents life-cycle cost (LCC) and payback results using alternative 

energy price scenarios from Energy Information (EIA)'s Annual Energy Outlook 2005 (AEO 

2005Yand Annual Energy Outlook 2006 (AEO 2006)2. The Department of Energy (DOE or the 

Department) based the payback periods on the calculation methodology used in Chapter 8: LifeCycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis. 

Figures Q.l.l - Q.1.4 show the price forecasts from AEO 2005 for natural gas, electricity, 

liquefied petroleum gas and oil for the three economic growth cases considered by EIA. For 

natural gas, the price in the High Economic Growth case is considerably higher than in the 

Reference case in 2012. The decline in 2018-2020 stems from initial gas flows from the Alaskan 

pipeline occur earlier in the High Economic Growth case than in the Reference case. The price 

in this case rises much faster than in the Reference case after 2020 due to higher economic 

growth causing greater demand for gas. a 

a After 2025, the price in the Low Economic Growth case is higher than in the Reference case. This results from DOE's 

use of the average annual growth rate in the 2010-2025 period to project post-2025 prices. In the Low case, Alaskan 

gas flows occur later in time, so the price of gas rises significantly in the 2015-2025 period despite the lower economic 

growth in this case. 

Q-1 
$7

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Year

Figure Q.1.1 Residential Natural Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2005)

$29 1

$28

$27

$24 -

$23

$22

Reference

High

Low

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Year

Figure Q.1.2 Residential Electricity Price Forecast (AEO 2005)

Q-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

$13 

$12 

$11 

:::s I ..... 

Q;! $10 j :::e: 

:::e: 

tI7 

$9 

$8 

$7 

2000 

.0· 

2005 2010 2015 

Year 

-Reference 

···0··' High 

- .... -- Low 

.' 0·'· () 

_o··~o··~o· 

2020 2025 

~~----"--------

Figure Q.1.1 Residential Natural Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2005) 

.. --~.---.--.~----------~-----.. -----

$29 .. ---- .------,,~------~~---------~ ---""---~.---,,-.-.~--~-,,------

$28 +-------------------1--Refere~el i-----

···0··' High I 

- .... -- Low J $27 ----------~---~--,,---.-.,,---.-. 

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 

Year 

Figure Q.1.2 Residential Electricity Price Forecast (AEO 2005) 

Q-2 
$24 ---

$23

$22

$21

$20

w $19

$18

$17

$16

$15

$14

$13

$12

2000 2005 2010 2015

Year

Reference

o High

--a--Low

2020 2025

Figure Q.1.3 Residential Liquefied Petroleum Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2005)

$8

-»- Reference

o High

L- b- Low

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Year

Figure Q.1.4 Residential Oil Fuel Price Forecast (AEO 2005)

Q-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

$24 

$23 .. -----

$22 

$21 

$20 

--+-Reference 

---o--High 

:s $19 

j $18 

--o--Low 

! $17 +----+---'1c-------------------

$16---------_~~~-~:~~:~~:-:-~ .. ~---o,,~o:.:: ~ 

$15t-~-t_-~~~~~~-~--~~~--~~-~-~~-~--o~-_~-o~--~-o~.~~~~~-~~~-~~~--~~~-~~~-~~ 

$14 - ":n ..... ~tr--_ 'C' _-.06~___lr__ ..... lt_-"""1r--~-!c' -K'-

$12+-------~------~------~--------~----~ 

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 

Year 

.. ----~-------~------~~~--

Figure Q.1.3 Residential Liquefied Petroleum Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2005) 

:s 

-

$16 .. ---.. -------.. -----.--------------~----

$15 .-- Reference 

--o---High 

$14+------------------~ Low 

$13 

III :IE $12 - :E 

~ 

$11 -

$10 

,,0.". 0·' - 0·· - 0- ~. -0- ---0 

$91-~1~-~~------~~~~~=--=~ 

$8 ·I~---___r-- "~-~:~~~:~-~:~:~-:-~-~~~~:.~~- ... --~~:.--~~~~~~~~ 

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 

Year 

Figure Q.1.4 Residential Oil Fuel Price Forecast (AEO 2005) 

Q-3 
Figures Q.1.5 - Q.1.8 show the price forecasts from AEO 2006 for natural gas, electricity,

liquefied petroleum gas and oil for the three economic growth cases considered by EIA

Figure Q.1.5 Residential Natural Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2006)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Figures Q.l.S - Q.l.8 show the price forecasts from AEO 2006 for natural gas, electricity, 

liquefied petroleum gas and oil for the three economic growth cases considered by EIA 

$13~-----------------------------------------

$12+------;------------------------------------

,0 _'.(1 

$11 +-----~~~--------------------------~~~ 

~ 

~ $1 0 +-----f----~~~...o-...<>:__--~~r=___._~----­ :E 

tR-

$9 

$8 

$7 

2000 2005 

~~--~--~~---------- --.- Reference ------

·~·o~·· High 

. -.-~-------r__~- - ------,------ -----T-~--~--~-.- ---~----------

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 

Year 

Figure Q.1.5 Residential Natural Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2006) 

Q-4 
$29

$28

$27 -

-o- Reference

...o... High

-- - Low

.-o

a

$22 -I ------1

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Year

Figure Q.1.6 Residential Electricity Price Forecast (AEO 2006)

$24

$23

$22

$21

$20

$19

$18

$17

$16

$15

$14

$13

$12

aD•

Oc ,s

gI

q ' I

Reference

a---High

- - b- Low

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Year

Figure Q.1.7 Residential Liquefied Petroleum Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2006)

Q-5

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

$29~------------------------------------------

--Reference ! $28+-------~------------------~ ~------- 1···o ... Hi9h 

$27 - ... --Low ____________________________ ~_L ___________ ~ _____ _______' ________ _ 

.a $26 

til 

~ 

! $25--

$23 . 

$22 

2000 2005 2010 

.0 .•. 0 .... 

2015 2020 2025 

Year 

Figure Q.1.6 Residential Electricity Price Forecast (AEO 2006) 

2030 

$24 

$23+---------------------------------------~··~ .0' 

$22 

$21 +-________ ~------------------------.o~·~,a----~L-~--~A 

~ , $20 ---------------:<"-" --==*'-----~~---~- ... / 

.- ::J $19 ------------ "'0-- -----==------~c,o,.!...~O/,_----... ,t>'-::..:.. =------- ...., '\ -.'0., ".1,{/ 

~ $18 ------_____ 1. <··o~·:-::o:::-:::::;--;::::::;:::::_~::;::::/--~~-"' __________ _ 

!$17+-----~--------~~--~~~=------------------

$16 -------.. -... --. -Refer;n~C 

$15 +--\---+--------------------------------1 ... 0 ... High 

$14 - --t.-- Low 

$13 --

$12+-----~------~------~----~------~----~ 

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 

Year 

Figure Q.1. 7 Residential Liquefied Petroleum Gas Price Forecast (AEO 2006) 

Q-5 
$14

--e-- Reference I

-.-High

- -e- - Low

$9

$8 -1-

2000 2005 2010 2015

Year

2020 2025 2030

Figure Q.1.8 Residential Oil Fuel Price Forecast (AEO 2006)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

$16 

$15 

$14 

$13 :l 

.... 

~ $12 

:!: 

(19-

$11 

$10 

$9 

$8 

--Reference 

+---+-----------------1---0 --- High 

-...,--Low 

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 

Year 

Figure Q.1.8 Residential Oil Fuel Price Forecast (AEO 2006) 

Q-6 

2030 
Q.2 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 2005

HIGH GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO

For each product class, this section presents one table and two charts summarizing the

LCC and PBP results using energy prices in the AEO 2005 High Economic Growth case.

Table Q.2.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2005 High

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $10,320

80% $10,162 $2 0% 98% 2% 0.8 1.5

80% 2-stage Modulation $10,454 ($191) 62% 36% 2% 47 79

81% $10,151 $4 32% 36% 32% 13 26

81% 2-stage Modulation $10,442 ($191) 60% 35% 4% 39 74

90% $10,050 $22 38% 35% 27% 15 23

92% $10,104 ($23) 48% 27% 26% 17 25

92% 2-stage Modulation $10,367 ($277) 79% 4% 17% 26 54

96% Modulation (Continuous) $10,520 ($426) 85% 4% 12% 30 73

96% Modulation (Continuous) $10,803 ($700) 87% 4% 9% 39 88

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level

indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely large

paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is probably a

better indicator.

Growth)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Q.2 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 2005 

HIGH GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO 

For each product class, this section presents one table and two charts summarizing the 

LCC and PBP results using energy prices in the AEO 2005 High Economic Growth case. 

Table Q.2.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2005 High 

Growth) 

Lce Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

78% $10,320 

80% $10,162 $2 0% 98% 2% 0.8 1.5 

80% 2-stage Modulation $10,454 ($191) 62% 36% 2% 47 79 

81% $10,151 $4 32% 36% 32% 13 26 

81 % 2-stage Modulation $10,442 ($191) 60% 35% 4% 39 74 

90% $10,050 $22 38% 35% 27% 15 23 

92% $10,104 ($23) 48% 27% 26% 17 25 

92% 2-stage Modulation $10,367 ($277) 79% 4% 17% 26 54 

96% Modulation (Continuous) $10,520 ($426) 85% 4% 12% 30 73 

96% Modulation (Continuous) $10,803 ($700) 87% 4% 9% 39 88 

* "No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level 

indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the fonn of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely large 

paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is probably a 

better indicator. 

Q-7 
LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

1200 - Median

1000 Mean

800

600

400

200

-200

0 J =[ j

-400

^

-600

-800

-1000

-1200

-1400

-1600

-1800

t5

N N

0 0 0

Co 00 0)

Figure Q.2.1 National LCC Savings Results for Non-Weatherized Gas

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

350 - K/Iediah

Mean

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

-50

rn

2 , t9^ 2 c^ ^ c^

fn N N

N U N N

W

of W

Figure Q.2.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas

Furnaces (AEO 2005 High Growth)

Furnaces (AEO 2005 High Growth)

Q-8

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

1200 Ian 

1000 lVean 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

-200 

-400 

-600 

-800 

-1000 

-1200 

-1400 

-1600 

-1800 

j 

x 

:r: 

~ ;,R 

~ a) 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

rvedian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 50/0-95% 

"8 ffi ~ 'Q'2. co "8 ~ 4: &] ~ 

« ~ 

2l, x 2l, x 2l, 

-ffi :r: .lll :r: co 

ti (J) ..: 1i5 

N N ~ N 

'Q'2. £: ;,R ;,R 'Q'2. 0 ;,R 0 

?il 10 Ki Sl ro Q) 

en 

a ~ g ::> 

c .f;; 

~ "5 §. Q ""0 ""0 

~ ~ ;,R 

~ 'Q'2. 

Figure Q.2.1 National LCC Savings Results for N on-Weatherized Gas 

Furnaces AEO 2005 Hi h Growth) 

350 la 

c.l lVean 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

-50 

ffi 

4: 

x 

:r: 

ti 

£: 

;,R 

~ a) 

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option 

IVedian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

~J;gg T'Q ~ co ""0 ;,R co ""0 

cD ~ ~ cD ~ en gj 4: Q) 4: ::> 

2l, X cD 

~ cD g g 

~ ~ ! c .lll :r: (J) "'" ti ti § N N N Q ;,R .£ ;,R .£ ;,R 

~ ;,R 0 'Q'2. Ki ""0 

~ 0 a) 10 ro Sl Q) ~ ;,R 'Q'2. 0 

N 

Figure Q.2.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas 

Furnaces (AEO 2005 High Growth) 

Q-8 
Table Q.2.2 LCC and PEP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2005 High

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net

Cost

No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $8,435

80% $8,354 $2 0% 98% 2% 1.3 1.6

81% $8,320 $20 2% 46% 52% 2.9 3.6

82% $8,285 $48 2% 20% 78% 2.7 3.3

83% $8,256 $77 6% 0% 94% 3.6 4.6

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

N/ledian ; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

260 - ian

240 -' Mean

220

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

-20

80% Incr HX Area 82% Incr HX Area

81 % Incr HX Area 83% Incr HX Area

Figure Q.2.3 National LCC Savings Results for Weatherized Gas

Furnaces (AEO 2005 High Growth)

Growth)

Q-9

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.2.2 Lee and PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2005 High 

Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net No Net 

78% 

80% 

81% 

82% 

83% 

* 

** 

Cost Impact* Benefit 

$8,435 

$8,354 $2 0% 98% 2% 1.3 l.6 

$8,320 $20 2% 46% 52% 2.9 3.6 

$8,285 $48 2% 20% 78% 2.7 3.3 

$8,256 $77 6% 0% 94% 3.6 4.6 

"No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater efficiency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

260 'IVI3(]lan 

240 u lVean -,--

220 

200 

180 

160 -,--

140 

120 

100 

80 -- n 

60 

0 

40 

20 I u I 

0 r 

-20 

80% Incr HX Area 82% Incr HX Area 

81% Incr HXArea 83% Incr HXArea 

Figure Q.2.3 National Lee Savings Results for Weatherized Gas 

Furnaces (AEO 2005 High Growth) 

Q-9 
Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

1 2 -Median

u Mean

10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

"0 co

Figure Q.2.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 High Growth)

Table Q.2.3 LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces (AEO 2005 High Growth

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

75% $8,231

80% $7,876 $55 1% 85% 14% 2.9 5.0

80% 2-stage modulation $ 8,200 ($253) 84% 5% 11% 52 95

81% $7,908 $24 69% 5% 26% 24 31

81% 2-stage modulation $8,233 ($285) 85% 5% 10% 55 96

82% $7,878 $54 50% 5% 45% 16 20

82% 2-stage modulation $8,203 ($256) 84% 5% 11% 43 79

90% Condensing $7,777 $149 39% 5% 56% 13 24

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

Q-10

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Payback Pericxl Rarges By Design Option 

I'Iiedian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

12 -~Ian 

:.J l'Iiean -r---

10 

-- 8 -r---

6 

" 4 

~ r 

2 

~ ~ ~ 

0 ----~--- ---------- - --------------~-----~-.-~- .. _-"-------------------------

-2 

co co co ffi !!! !!! (]) 

« « ~ ~ x x x X I I I I 

t3 ~ t; E 0 

.f; .f; .f; 

~ >R. 'if< >R. 0 co Rl ~ 

Figure Q.2.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 High Growth) 

Table Q.2.3 LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces (AEO 2005 Hi~h Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

75% $8,231 

80% $7,876 $55 1% 85% 14% 2.9 5.0 

80% 2-stage modulation $8,200 ($253) 84% 5% 11% 52 95 

81% $7,908 $24 69% 5% 26% 24 31 

81 % 2-stage modulation $8,233 ($285) 85% 5% 10% 55 96 

82% $7,878 $54 50% 5% 45% 16 20 

82% 2-stage modulation $8,203 ($256) 84% 5% 11% 43 79 

90% Condensing $7,777 $149 39% 5% 56% 13 24 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater efficIency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the fonn of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Q-lO 
LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

1000

-Median

800 0 Mean

600

400

200

-200

400

-600

as O a -o m o rn

m o a o 0 o c

= m = m = m ^c

0 0 0

- -

c c c 0 N N - N

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

O O N N O

W W CO ap co co O

Figure Q.2.5 National LCC Savings Results for Mobile Home

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

500

450 -Median

q Mean

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

_ _ q _ q ,. _

_

-50

c N aoi aoi

0 U U U

lf^ C C C

I^ -

0 0 0

O N

a0 W QD

Figure Q.2.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces (AEO

2005 High Growth)

Furnaces (AEO 2005 High Growth

Q-11

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option 

1000r-----r----,----~----~----~----~----~----~----~--_. 

-Median 

800 0 Mean 

600 

o 

-200 

-400 

-600L---~~--~----~----~----~----~----~----~----~--~ 

'" "0 '" "0 '" ~ 0 ~ 0 Q) 

:2 <t: :2 4: >< Q) >< Q) >< I OJ I OJ I 

t; ~ t; ~ t; 

E c(, E c(, E 

;fi. ;fi. ;fi. ;fi. ;fi. 0 0 ;;; ;;; N 00 00 00 

Figure Q.2.5 for Mobile Home 

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option 

500.---~r_--__ r_--_,----_,----~----~----~----~----~----~ 

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

-Median 

o Mean 

-50L---~~--~~--~----~----~----~----~----~----~----~ 

Q) '" "0 '" "0 '" "0 

.S; ~ 0 

~ 0 ~ 0 

Cii <t: :2 :2 :2 Ul >< Q) >< Q) >< Q) '" OJ OJ OJ III I 

~ I 

~ I 

;fi. t; '" ~ ~ Ci5 (.) (.) 

L{") E c(, E c(, E c(, I'-

;fi. ;fi. ;fi. "" 0 ;fi. ;fi. 0 0 ;;; ;;; N N 00 00 00 00 

Figure Q.2.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces (AEO 

2005 High Growth) 

Q-ll 
Table Q.2.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2005 High Growth

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net

Cost

No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $11,855

80% $11,674 $7 0% 96% 4% 0.3 0.3

81% $11,591 $58 0% 39% 61% 0.8 1.0

81% Interrupted Ignition $11,515 $111 2% 30% 68% 1.9 2.5

81% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $11,674 ($1) 44% 30% 26% 12 16

82% $11,507 $117 0% 30% 70% 0.6 0.8

82% Interrupted Ignition $11,442 $167 2% 23% 75% 1.9 2.7

82% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $11,591 $51 39% 23% 38% 9.8 13

83% $11,588 $55 32% 23% 45% 8.5 12

83% Interrupted Ignition $11,523 $109 27% 15% 58% 6.8 8.9

83% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $11,672 ($18) 55% 15% 30% 13 17

84% $11,669 ($14) 52% 15% 33% 13 18

84% Interrupted Ignition $11,605 $45 45% 7% 47% 9.8 13

84% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $11,755 ($93) 66% 7% 27% 14 19

85% $11,759 ($98) 66% 7% 26% 16 21

85% Interrupted Ignition $11,696 ($34) 59% 0% 41% 12 15

85% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $11,846 ($184) 75% 0% 25% 16 20

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.2.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2005 Hi2h Growth) 

* 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net No Net 

Cost Impact* Benefit 

78% $11,855 

80% $11,674 $7 0% 96% 4% 0.3 0.3 

81% $11,591 $58 0% 39% 61% 0.8 l.0 

81 % Intemlpted Ignition $11,515 $111 2% 30% 68% l.9 2.5 

81 % Atom Burner wi 2-stage $11,674 ($1) 44% 30% 26% 12 16 

82% $11,507 $117 0% 30% 70% 0.6 0.8 

82% Interrupted Ignition $11,442 $167 2% 23% 75% l.9 2.7 

82% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $11,591 $51 39% 23% 38% 9.8 13 

83% $11,588 $55 32% 23% 45% 8.5 12 

83% Intemlpted Ignition $11,523 $109 27% 15% 58% 6.8 8.9 

83% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $11,672 ($18) 55% 15% 30% 13 17 

84% $11,669 ($14) 52% 15% 33% 13 18 

84% Interrupted Ignition $11,605 $45 45% 7% 47% 9.8 13 

84% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $11,755 ($93) 66% 7% 27% 14 19 

85% $11,759 ($98) 66% 7% 26% 16 21 

85% Intemlpted Ignition $11,696 ($34) 59% 0% 41% 12 15 

85% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $11,846 ($184) 75% 0% 25% 16 20 

"No Impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the fonn of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Q-12 
0 O

N W A CJ1 0

O 0 0 0 O 0

)

78% Baseline

80% Incr HX Area

81% Incr HX Area lip I

81 % Internupted Ignition

1 % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod

82% Incr HX Area

82% Interrupted Ignition

% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod e--^

c

83%IncrHXArea -ftj co

83% Interrupted Ignition 0

3% Atom Burner 2 -stage Mod q

o O

84% Incr HX Area c^r° g

84% Interrupted Ignition -

%Atom B urner 2-stage Mod

85% Incr HX Area [

85% Interrupted Ignition

60 6) 'L N N) A 0

O O 0 0 O O 0 O

)

80% I nor HX Area

81%IncrHX Area

81 % Interrupted Ignition

1 % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod

82%Incr HX Area

n

CD

82% Interrupted Ignition

CC) m

X0 5.

N

2% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod

83% Incr HX Area L

J

83% Interrupted Ignition

3% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod cb.

84% I nor HX Area O

84% Interrupted Ignition m g

4% Atom Burner 2 -stage Mod {- --)

85% Incr HX Area

85% Interrupted Ignition

5% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod

10

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

"!"j , -" I\.l W ..,. Ul CJ) 

~I 00 cr, 1. r0 I\.l ..,. .... -" CJ) 

IJQ a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 

= 

I 

= ., ., ('t> ('t> 

rO c I rO N 78% Baseline III ~ N 80% I ncr HX Area 1 00 ~ 

~~ W ~ Tn w __ 80% Incr HX Area :J - :J ro ::=Z :J 

>~ 81% Incr HX Area 

.... ~ 

IJQ ..... 81% Incr HXArea tr.i::; 81 % Interrupted Ignition =- s· ~ 00 C':l= 81 % Interrupted Ign~ion 

~~ ., e:. N= Qe:. 1 % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 1itr Q,O o ~ 1 % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod i I ro" 0- cr;r 82% Incr HXArea W 0 ~ 0: 1(}-1 

-=! !ll -=! OJ 

;;~ Ill'" ::=("') IllW 82% Incr HX Area 5l ""ll '-'~ .... ("') 82% Interrupted Ignition 5l 3" 

I KB----1 "" "l "" (Q 

('t> 82% Interrupted Ignition ~a: ~en % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod ~::o '" 'cf!.;;o ~ W D = ~ .!.Jw -.j:J 

- % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod ;gil 83% Incr HX Area , ..... Ul(Q 

...... ~CD 

w '" p" fJl 9. en go 

., 83% Incr HXArea f{0---1 ::r'< ~Ill 83% Interrupted Ignition ~~ ~ 2:0 0 f-{EJ-------i iii" 0 (fJ (]) 83% Interrupted Ignition $(]) ('t> .... 3% Atom Bumer 2-stage Mod "'en '" (]) -" - .... en 

= I ::cg f--[G-------1, "" cO" "!"j 3% Atom Bumer 2-stage Mod Ul:J - 84% Incr HXArea ;go ..... .... #-0 '" ~ -g ., ~ '1:1 go ~ gO ('t> 

Q.. 84% Incr HX Area ffig: 84% Interrupted Ign~ion '#.:J ., "!"j ~ 

84% Interrupted Ign~ion f-[[~}----+ 0 4% Atom Bumer 2-stage Mod = ., .... = % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod -H I ul I 'i'" ~ "!"j 85% Incr HX Area n .... ('t> f--[E]-----1 ., 

85% Interrupted Ignition '" 85% Incr HX Area ('t> 

'> Q.. 

85% Interrupted Ignition r-ITJ-----+ "!"j % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod tr.i 

0 = ., 

N = 

~ Q n Q ('t> 

VI '" 
Table Q.2.5 LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005 Hi h Growth

LCC Payback Period (Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average*

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact

Net

Benefit

80% $16,407

81% $15,983 $149 0% 65% 35% 2.4 2.7

81% 2-stage modulation $16,172 $42 27% 44% 29% 8.2 9.9

82% $15,948 $169 10% 44% 46% 6.0 12

82% 2-stage modulation $16,138 $36 41% 30% 29% 12 32

83% $15,983 $143 26% 30% 44% 11 22

83% 2-stage modulation $16,173 $19 58% 15% 27% 19 47

84% $15,855 $252 17% 15% 68% 6.7 12

84% 2-stage modulation $15,045 $74 56% 6% 38% 17 34

85% $15,023 $94 50% 6% 44% 16 31

85% 2-stage modulation $16,213 ($84) 66% 6% 28% 24 55

86% $16,488 ($343) 73% 6% 21% 29 54

91% $16,536 ($384) 70% 6% 24% 24 40

99% $16,863 ($708) 75% 3% 22% 24 40

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level

indicated, so the household is not affected.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.2.5 LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005 Hi2h Growth) 

LCC Payback Period (Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average* 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact Benefit 

80% $16,407 

81% $15,983 $149 0% 65% 35% 2.4 2.7 

81 % 2-stage modulation $16,172 $42 27% 44% 29% 8.2 9.9 

82% $15,948 $169 10% 44% 46% 6.0 12 

82% 2-stage modulation $16,138 $36 41% 30% 29% 12 32 

83% $15,983 $143 26% 30% 44% 11 22 

83% 2-stage modulation $16,173 $19 58% 15% 27% 19 47 

84% $15,855 $252 17% 15% 68% 6.7 12 

84% 2-stage modulation $15,045 $74 56% 6% 38% 17 34 

85% $15,023 $94 50% 6% 44% 16 31 

85% 2-stage modulation $16,213 ($84) 66% 6% 28% 24 55 

86% $16,488 ($343) 73% 6% 21% 29 54 

91% $16,536 ($384) 70% 6% 24% 24 40 

99% $16,863 ($708) 75% 3% 22% 24 40 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater effiCIency than the level 

indicated, so the household is not affected. 

Q-14 
2500

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

2000 -Median

1500 q Mean

1000

500

o

-500 °

-1000

-1500

-2000

-2500

-3000

C L o o o(6 5

0 0 0

N M V to

W OD LU CO 00

a

U U

(o O)

CO 0)

a -o

0 0 0

a)

Cm 0) 0)

a^ a) a)

m

0

0)

N C\j N

9 n

C

00 aD W

N Co m

00

Figure Q.2.9 National LCC Savings Results for Gas Boilers (AEO

2005 High Growth)

240

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

220 -Median

200 q Mean

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

200 IQ

ZT20

0 0 0 0 L 0 0 0

W

N

Co

'0

N 00

o0

to 00 0)

[O W 0) m

"0

'0 '0

Cm Cm

0

(N

00

CI)

00

rn

W

m

00

Figure Q.2.10 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005

High Growth)

Q-15

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

2500 

2000 -Median -, 

1500 o Mean 

-r1000 

J;~~~~~~$~~ 500 

0 

-500 

-1000 

-1500 

-2000 

-2500 

-3000 :oR 0= oF- 0= oF- 0= 0F- ¢: oF- 0 0= oF- oF- oF- ~ ~ ~ '" '" ;;; N '" v lD c.o cr; m 0 co 0 co 0 co 0 co 0 co m 

() () () () () 

"0 "0 "0 "0 "0 

E EO E E E + + + + + "0 "0 "0 "0 "0 0 0 0 0 0 

2 2 2 2 2 <D <D <D <D <D Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl 

"* 

'" 

"* 

'" U5 U5U5 '" 

N N N N N 

oF- oF- oF- oF- oF-

;;; N '" V lD 00 co co co 

Figure Q.2.9 National LCC Savings Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 

2005 High Growth) 

oF-

~ 

co 

Figure Q.2.10 

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option 

~J:. 

0= oF- '" N 0 co () 

"0 

E 

+ 

"0 

0 

2 

<D 

Cl 

U5 '"

N 

:oR 0 

;;; 

0= :oR 0= ;J< 0= ;J< 0= :oR oF- oF- ~ 0 

~ '" ~ 0 

'" v lD c.o ~ m 0 co 0 co 0 co 0 co m m 

() () t.l () 

"0 "0 "0 "0 

E E E EO + + + + "0 "0 "0 "0 0 0 0 0 

2 2 2 2 <D <D (]) <D Cl Cl Cl Cl 

U5 '"~ U5 '" U5 '"

N N N N 

oF- oF- ;J< oF- N '" V lD co co 00 co 

National PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005 

High Growth) 

Q-15 
Table Q.2.6 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 Hi gh Growth)

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

80% $17,336

81% $17,197 $7 0% 95% 5% 0.9 1.2

81 % Inter Ign $17,167 $10 2% 89% 9% 5.0 7.4

82% $17,062 $21 0% 89% 11% 0.9 1.2

82% Inter Ign $17,033 $26 2% 84% 14% 3.6 6.2

82% Atomized Burner $17,397 ($32) 14% 84% 2% 31 89

83% $16,930 $42 0% 84% 16% 1.0 1.2

83% Inter Ign $16,901 $53 8% 61% 32% 5.2 8.0

83% Atomized Burner $17,265 ($89) 35% 61% 4% 24 40

84% $17,025 $4 24% 61% 16% 19 27

84% Inter Ign $16,996 $23 28% 37% 34% 13 17

84% Atomized Burner $17,360 (2057 59% 37% 4% 56 82

85% $17,131 ($62) 46% 37% 17% 23 31

85% Inter Ign $17,103 ($38) 50% 14% 36% 17 22

85% Atomized Burner $17,466 (3502) 82% 14% 4% 55 79

86% $17,227 ($145) 66% 14% 20% 25 33

86% Inter Ign $17,199 ($119) 64% 7% 29% 20 26

86% Atomized Burner $17,563 (4576) 89% 7% 5% 51 73

90% $17,807 ($683) 83% 7% 10% 30 38

95% $18,144 ($1020) 89% 0% 11% 29 35

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level

indicated, so the household is not affected.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.2.6 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 High Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

80% $17,336 

81% $17,197 $7 0% 95% 5% 0.9 1.2 

81 % Inter Ign $17,167 $10 2% 89% 9% 5.0 7.4 

82% $17,062 $21 0% 89% 11% 0.9 1.2 

82% Inter Ign $17,033 $26 2% 84% 14% 3.6 6.2 

82% Atomized Burner $17,397 ($32) 14% 84% 2% 31 89 

83% $16,930 $42 0% 84% 16% 1.0 l.2 

83% Inter Ign $16,901 $53 8% 61% 32% 5.2 8.0 

83% Atomized Burner $17,265 ($89) 35% 61% 4% 24 40 

84% $17,025 $4 24% 61% 16% 19 27 

84% Inter Ign $16,996 $23 28% 37% 34% l3 17 

84% Atomized Burner $17,360 (2057 59% 37% 4% 56 82 

85% $17,l31 ($62) 46% 37% 17% 23 31 

85% Inter Ign $17,103 ($38 ) 50% 14% 36% 17 22 

85% Atomized Burner $17,466 (3502) 82% 14% 4% 55 79 

86% $17,227 ($145) 66% 14% 20% 25 33 

86% Inter Ign $17,199 ($119) 64% 7% 29% 20 26 

86% Atomized Burner $17,563 (4576) 89% 7% 5% 51 73 

90% $17,807 ($683) 83% 7% 10% 30 38 

95% $18,144 ($1020) 89% 0% 11% 29 35 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater effiCIency than the level 

indicated, so the household is not affected. 

Q-16 
LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

0 0 0

Figure Q.2.11

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%- 95%

400 - ian

350

u Mean

300

250

200

150

L

100

50 T. T

0 -^ ,- - ^ C=am

-50

o C o

'QS

C a) o

M

a

C m

N m

o C C,0

N

a o C Co a

r 'd

&

C

y

C N

9

N

M 0

C

°4-

a

N

0

C

°

n

N

0

i

C

°

N

W 00 Q 00 Q

d

00 '^' cc Q

p

W Q

N

o 0 0

Figure Q.2.12

National LCC Savings for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005

High Growth)

National PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005

High Growth)

Q-17

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

1000r-~~~I~n~r-~~~--r-~~~--r-~~~--~~~~--r-~-. 

Mean 

500 

o 

-500 

-1000 

-1500 

-2000 

:oR c :oR 0 1\J ro .Ql 

a; co 

:s 

;f2. 

ro 

Figure Q.2.11 

400 Ian 

u Mean 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

-50 

;f2. c :oR 0 

ro .Ql ~ 

~ :oR 0 

03 

Figure Q.2.12 

c :oR c :oR c c :oR c :oR :oR :!l, :!l, Q) ;f2. Q) Q) ~ %- 0 0 0 .Ql .Ql .Ql N ~ .Ql N ~ .Ql 

~ .!!l co .!!l co as ~ a; 

:s 

:oR 1\J 

co 

c 

.Ql 

~ 

QJ 

:s 

:oR 1\J 

co 

.9i ~ .9i ! (J) (J) .lll Cj> Cj> N .s N J;; N J;; N N 

E :oR E ;f2. § ;f2. § ;f2. § 

<.( 

.9 co 

~ <.( 

.9 d') « « « ~ ~ 

:oR 1\J :oR 

~ ;f2. ;f2. ;f2. 

National LCC Savings for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 

Hi h Growth) 

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option 

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

L 

n 

QJ :oR c Q) :oR c QJ 0 :oR c QJ %- 1h @' C') .Ql @' .Ql N .Ql N co a; co ~ co 1ii ill If QJ Cj> Cj> N :s N :s N :s N 

§ :oR § :oR § ~ %- :oR 0 § « co « co « ~ « 

;f2. 

N 

:oR c :!l, :oR :oR 1'0 15 0 

co .Ql ~ ill .!!l CJ) 

(J) 

:s N 

;f2. § ~ « 

:oR 1'0 

National PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 

High Growth) 

Q-17 
Q.3 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 2005

LOW GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO

For each product class, this section presents one table and two charts summarizing the

LCC and PBP results using energy prices in the AEO 2005 Low Economic Growth case.

Table Q.3.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low

Growth

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $9,729

80% $9,583 $2 0% 98% 2% 0.9 1.5

80% 2-stage Modulation $9,885 ($197) 62% 36% 2% 50 84

81% $9,578 $0 33% 35% 31% 14 27

81% 2-stage Modulation $9,880 ($200) 61% 35% 3% 43 80

90% $9,525 ($9) 41% 35% 24% 16 24

92% $9,589 ($61) 50% 27% 23% 18 26

92% 2-stage Modulation $9,861 ($324) 82% 4% 15% 27 57

96% Modulation (Continuous) $10,005 ($463) 87% 4% 10% 31 74

96% Modulation (Continuous) $10,305 ($754) 89% 4% 8% 40 91

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Q.3 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 2005 

LOW GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO 

For each product class, this section presents one table and two charts summarizing the 

LCC and PBP results using energy prices in the AEO 2005 Low Economic Growth case. 

Table Q.3.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low 

Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

78% $9,729 

80% $9,583 $2 0% 98% 2% 0.9 1.5 

80% 2-stage Modulation $9,885 ($197) 62% 36% 2% 50 84 

81% $9,578 $0 33% 35% 31% 14 27 

81 % 2-stage Modulation $9,880 ($200) 61% 35% 3% 43 80 

90% $9,525 ($9) 41% 35% 24% 16 24 

92% $9,589 ($61) 50% 27% 23% 18 26 

92% 2-stage Modulation $9,861 ($324) 82% 4% 15% 27 57 

96% Modulation (Continuous) $10,005 ($463) 87% 4% 10% 31 74 

96% Modulation (Continuous) $10,305 ($754) 89% 4% 8% 40 91 

* "No impact" means that the base case fumace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the fonn of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Q-18 
LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

1000 - Median

800 i Mean

600

400

200

0 T T

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000

-1200

-1400

-1600

-1800

0)

_

x a

N N N

o

U

0 0 0 "O

00 00 0)

Figure Q.3.1 National LCC Savings Results for Non-Weatherized Gas

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

400 - is

Mean

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

- 50

rn

x

a) a

(^

x

)

A

C

N C\j N U

cc

00 00

Figure Q.3.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas

Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth)

Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth)

Q-19

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

1000 Ian 

800 J Mean 

600 

400 

200 

0 

-200 

-400 

-600 

-800 

-1000 

-1200 

-1400 

-1600 

-1800 

al 

4: 

x 

::r: 

~ "g 

~ co 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

Madian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

"8 al ~ "g ro "8 0 

8 @ ::2: 4: « ::2: 

~ x ~ x ~ 

~ ::r: .Ill ::r: ~ ti (J) ...: N E N ~ N 

'if2. "g 'if2. "g 0 "g 2 0 00 1\j Sl 00 OJ 

(j) 

13 ~ g ::0 

c: c: 

~ 0 '5 ~ ~ ""0 ""0 

~ ~ "g 

1\j 'if2. 

Figure Q.3.1 NationalLCC Savings Results for Non-Weatherized Gas 

Furnaces AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

400 la 

u Mean 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

-50 

al 

4: 

X 

::r: 

ti 

E 

"g 

~ co 

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option 

Madian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 50/0-95% 

T . ~~gQg 

~ ro ""0 "g 0 ro ""0 Q) (j) 

~ 0 Q) ~ rg 4: OJ 4: ::0 

~ X Q) X Q) g g 

~ N ! c: .Ill ::r: ::r: = (J) ti ...: (J) 8 N N 

"g E "g E 

u N ~ "g ""0 

~ ~ "g 0 "g 1\j 0 ..- 0 

co 00 co Sl OJ ~ "g 0 'if2. N 

Figure Q.3.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas 

Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

Q-19 
Table Q.3.2 LCC and PBP for Weatherized Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth)

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average"

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net

Cost

No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $8,120

80% $8,045 $2 0% 98% 2% 1.3 1.6

81% $8,014 $18 2% 46% 52% 3.0 3.8

82% $7,982 $44 2% 20% 78% 2.7 3.4

83% $7,956 $70 7% 0% 93% 3.7 4.7

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

240 Madian

220 n Mean

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

-20

80% Incr HXArea 82% Incr HXArea

81 % Incr HX Area 83% Incr HX Area

Figure Q.3.3 National LCC Savings Results for Weatherized Gas

Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth)

Q-20

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.3.2 Lee and PBP for Weatherized Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net No Net 

78% 

80% 

81% 

82% 

83% 

* 

** 

Cost Impact* Benefit 

$8,120 

$8,045 $2 0% 98% 2% 1.3 1.6 

$8,014 $18 2% 46% 52% 3.0 3.8 

$7,982 $44 2% 20% 78% 2.7 3.4 

$7,956 $70 7% 0% 93% 3.7 4.7 

"No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater efficiency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

M3dian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

240 'Ivealan 

220 M3an -,--

200 

180 

160 -,-

140 

120 

100 

80 -- n 

60 

40 n 

20 

I I I 0- --~- --------G---- ~ ~,~-~~-~ 

-20 

80% Incr HX Area 82% Incr HX Area 

81% Incr HXArea 83% Incr HX Area 

Figure Q.3.3 National Lee Savings Results for Weatherized Gas 

Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

Q-20 
Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%0-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

12 - ian

i Mean

10

8

6

4

2

^.

n

-2

2 2

X

I

0

Co ccM

Figure Q.3.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces

(AEO 2005 Low Growth)

Table Q.3.3 LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces AEO 2005 Low Growth

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with

-

Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

75% $7,676

80% $7,369 $48 1% 85% 14% 3.0 5.3

80% 2-stage modulation $7,701 ($268) 87% 5% 8% 55 99

81% $7,406 ($13) 72% 5% 23% 24 32

81% 2-stage modulation $7,739 ($304) 88% 5% 7% 57 102

82% $7,379 $38 55% 5% 40% 16 21

82% 2-stage modulation $7,713 ($279) 86% 5% 9% 46 83

90% Condensing $7,311 $103 44% 5% 51% 13 26

**

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

Q-21

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Payback Pericd Ranges By Design Option 

fltBdian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

12.-~~~~la~n--~---~---~---~---~----, 

:J fltBan 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

o ----------~-----~------------ -----------------------

co co co 

~ !!! !!! Q) 

« « ~ 

>< >< >< >< :r: :r: :r: :r: t; ~ t; E () 

.£ .£ .£ 

'Cf2. 0 ~ ~ 0 0 ~ 

..- N C'? 

Figure Q.3.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

Table Q.3.3 LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

75% $7,676 

80% $7,369 $48 1% 85% 14% 3.0 5.3 

80% 2-stage modulation $7,701 ($268) 87% 5% 8% 55 99 

81% $7,406 ($13) 72% 5% 23% 24 32 

81 % 2-stage modulation $7,739 ($304) 88% 5% 7% 57 102 

82% $7,379 $38 55% 5% 40% 16 21 

82% 2-stage modulation $7,713 ($279) 86% 5% 9% 46 83 

90% Condensing $7,311 $103 44% 5% 51% 13 26 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Q-21 
ACC Savings Ranges By Design Option

1000

-Median

800

600

q Mean

400

200

13

0

-200

q q

-400

q

-600

a 0 N o a o

0)

Q ¢ g ¢ c

x

rn x a) x a) a) 0) 0)

U (n U (n U) O

N C N C N U

0 0 0 0 C C

O O N N

00 Co N o) 00 OJ

Figure Q.3.5 National LCC Savings Results for Mobile Home

Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth)

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

450

-Median 400 q Mean

350

300

250

200

150

100

50 q

0

-50

c as 0 (D o a)

m

o U U U

x 0) 0)

_ _

n C C N C

0 0 0 0

O CD C\IN

W 00 N o0 Co

Figure Q.3.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces (AEO

2005 Low Growth)

Q-22

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option 

1000 

-Median 

800 o Mean 

600 

400 

200 

o 

0 

-200 

-400 

-600 ro "0 ro "0 ro "0 0) 

<D 0 <D 0 <D 0 C 

-< :2 -< :2 -< :2 "iii 

c X <D X <D X <D <D 

I 0) I 0) I 0) "0 ro Bl .l!l c t; '1 ~ t; 0 u if) 

oS N oS N oS N () 

"if. ~ "if. "if. "if. "if. 0 ~ 

0 0 N N 0 0 ;;; ;;; (J) co co co co 

Figure Q.3.5 National LCC Savings Results for Mobile Home 

Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option 

450 

400 -Median 

o Mean 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

-50 ro "0 ro "0 ro 

~ 0 l':' 0 

:2 « :2 ~ x <D X <D X I 0) I 0) I .l!l ro t; if) t; '1 t; 

oS N oS N oS 

"if. "if. "if. "if. "if. 0 0 ;;; ;;; N co co co 

Figure Q.3.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces (AEO 

2005 Low Growth) 

Q-22 
Table Q.3.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth)

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net

Cost

No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $11,325

80% $11,156 $7 0% 96% 4% 0.3 0.3

81% $11,079 $54 0% 39% 61% 0.9 1.1

81% Interrupted Ignition $11,012 $100 2% 30% 68% 2.0 2.7

81% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $11,181 ($18) 47% 30% 23% 13 18

82% $11,001 $109 0% 30% 70% 0.7 0.8

82% Interrupted Ignition $11,945 $152 3% 23% 75% 2.1 2.8

82% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $11,104 $28 43% 23% 34% 11 14

83% $11,088 $42 35% 23% 42% 9.0 13

83% Interrupted Ignition $11,032 $89 30% 15% 55% 7.3 9.4

83% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $11,191 ($47) 58% 15% 27% 14 18

84% $11,175 ($32) 55% 15% 30% 14 19

84% Interrupted Ignition $11,119 $19 49% 7% 43% 10 13

84% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $11,279 ($128) 69% 7% 24% 15 20

85% $11,271 ($120) 69% 7% 24% 17 23

85% Interrupted Ignition $11215 ($65) 63% 0% 37% 13 16

85% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $11,375 ($225) 79% 0% 21% 17 22

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.3.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

* 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net No Net 

Cost Impact* Benefit 

78% $11,325 

80% $11,156 $7 0% 96% 4% 0.3 0.3 

81% $11,079 $54 0% 39% 61% 0.9 l.l 

81 % Intemlpted Ignition $11,012 $100 2% 30% 68% 2.0 2.7 

81 % Atom Burner wi 2-stage $11,181 ($18) 47% 30% 23% 13 18 

82% $11,001 $109 0% 30% 70% 0.7 0.8 

82% Intemlpted Ignition $11,945 $152 3% 23% 75% 2.1 2.8 

82% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $11,104 $28 43% 23% 34% 11 14 

83% $11,088 $42 35% 23% 42% 9.0 13 

83% Interrupted Ignition $11,032 $89 30% 15% 55% 7.3 9.4 

83% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $11,191 ($47) 58% 15% 27% 14 18 

84% $11,175 ($32) 55% 15% 30% 14 19 

84% Interrupted Ignition $11,119 $19 49% 7% 43% 10 13 

84% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $11,279 ($128) 69% 7% 24% 15 20 

85% $11,271 ($120) 69% 7% 24% 17 23 

85% Intemlpted Ignition $11215 ($65) 63% 0% 37% 13 16 

85% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $11,375 ($225) 79% 0% 21% 17 22 

"No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater efficIency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the fonn of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Q-23 
-600

-400

-200

800 -

x x

0

- '

0

00 r= 00 ^O

00

CIj

9 OO

E 8E R g

C%4 CY) Lo

Figure Q.3.7 National LCC Savings Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

Median;

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

60 -K/ledieln

, Mean

10

10

20

30

40

50

-

'0

cc -0 mc:0

m

X x a) a, X

00 C: -^L CL C

C

0 0

C\I

M

00 E

Figure Q.3.8 National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces (AEO 2005

Low Growth)

(AEO 2005 Low Growth

Q-24

to 

to 

"'" 

.... 

= ., 

rO 

W 

Co 

t"":Z 

o 

=t 

., 

o -"'d 

...... 0= e"'d 

<;tl 

= 

<;tl =-

., 

o 

.... 

'i" 

., -. Q.. 

= ., 

= 

n 

<;tl 

'> tr:1 

o 

78% Baseline 

80% Incr HXArea 81% Incr HX Area 

81 % Interrupted Ignition 

1 % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

82% Incr HX Area 

82% Interrupted Ignition 

% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

83% I ncr HX Area 

83% Interrupted Ignition 

3% Atom Bumer 2-stage Mod 

84% Incr HXArea 

84% Interrupted Ignition 

% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

85% Incr HX Area 

85% Interrupted Ignition 

, 

..... 

o 

..... ()l Q) 

o 0 r::l <'5 o 0 

I 

r(}-1 

II HI]-------1 

HTI----1 

f---[E}-----1. 

HILI I 

f--[IJ---1 

iii· 0-

.=! Pl 

OJ'" 

o '"0 

X 

'#.;::0 .!..Jill 

!? ffi 

::7'< 

00· 0 

&"m 

:: cO" 

()l:::l 

;,R.o 

"0 

g. '?f!. 

N 

Q 

.... 

= ., 

rO 

W 

.:z 

tr:1=t 00 

Qe:.. N= 

Qt"" 

Ul(j 

rJ1 

., _. 

o = ...... <;tl 

<;tl 

-= 

...... 

<;tl 

., 

80% Incr HXArea 81% Incr HX Area 

81 % Interrupted Ignition 

1 % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

82% I ncr HX Area 

82% Interrupted Ignition 

% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

83% Incr HX Area 

83% Interrupted Ignition 

3% Atom Bumer 2-stage Mod 

84% Incr HX Area 

84% Interrupted Ignition 

o [% Atom Bumer 2-stage Mod 

_. 85%lncrHXArea 8. 85% Interrupted Ignition 

%Atom Burner2-stage Mod 

= ., 

= 

n 

<;tl 

, 

co 

o o 

8 

o 

rZ, 

o o 
Table Q.3.5 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 Low Growth

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

80% $16,485

81% $16,357 $7 0% 95% 5% 1.0 1.2

81% Inter Ign $16,333 $9 2% 89% 9% 5.3 7.9

82% $16,232 $20 0% 89% 11% 1.0 1.2

82% Inter Ign $16,208 $23 2% 84% 14% 3.9 6.5

82% Atomized Burner $16,564 ($33) 15% 84% 1% 33 17

83% $16,110 $39 0% 84% 16% 1.0 1.2

83% Inter Ign $16,087 $48 9% 61% 31% 5.6 8.4

83% Atomized Burner $16,443 ($92) 35% 61% 4% 25 41

84% $16,214 ($2) 25% 61% 15% 19 28

84% Inter Ign $16,191 $12 31% 37% 32% 14 18

84% Atomized Burner $16,547 ($211) 60% 37% 3% 58 85

85% $16,329 ($75) 48% 37% 15% 25 33

85% Inter Ign $16,307 ($56) 53% 14% 33% 18 23

85% Atomized Burner $16,6262 ($361) 83% 14% 3% 58 81

86% $16,435 ($166) 68% 14% 18% 26 35

86% Inter Ign $16,413 ($145) 67% 7% 26% 22 28

86% Atomized Burner $16,768 ($476) 89% 7% 4% 53 76

90% $17,055 ($741) 85% 7% 8% 32 40

95% $17,431 ($1,117) 91% 0% 9% 30 37

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level

indicated, so the household is not affected.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.3.5 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

80% $16,485 

81% $16,357 $7 0% 95% 5% l.0 1.2 

81 % Inter Ign $16,333 $9 2% 89% 9% 5.3 7.9 

82% $16,232 $20 0% 89% 11% l.0 l.2 

82% Inter Ign $16,208 $23 2% 84% 14% 3.9 6.5 

82% Atomized Burner $16,564 ($33) 15% 84% 1% 33 17 

83% $16,110 $39 0% 84% 16% l.0 1.2 

83% Inter Ign $16,087 $48 9% 61% 31% 5.6 8.4 

83% Atomized Burner $16,443 ($92) 35% 61% 4% 25 41 

84% $16,214 ($2) 25% 61% 15% 19 28 

84% Inter Ign $16,191 $12 31% 37% 32% 14 18 

84% Atomized Burner $16,547 ($211 ) 60% 37% 3% 58 85 

85% $16,329 ($75) 48% 37% 15% 25 33 

85% Inter Ign $16,307 ($56) 53% 14% 33% 18 23 

85% Atomized Burner $16,6262 ($361) 83% 14% 3% 58 81 

86% $16,435 ($166) 68% 14% 18% 26 35 

86% Inter Ign $16,413 ($145) 67% 7% 26% 22 28 

86% Atomized Burner $16,768 ($476) 89% 7% 4% 53 76 

90% $17,055 ($741) 85% 7% 8% 32 40 

95% $17,431 ($1,117) 91% 0% 9% 30 37 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater effiCIency than the level 

indicated, so the household is not affected. 

Q-25 
LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

500 - Medialn

MeanTT T TI T

FFq

-500

-1000

-1500

-2000

-2500

-3000

o C 4^

C) YV CC) C

o C o C N o C

(`') C) V C) C)

o

CO

W ^

C N op 0

^

p^

^ W ^0

p^

(6 OD

C

1 O^

N

C ^C

w

N

0 to iTi

C C n) C

Q)

iy

^'i

C

ur

N

E0o E o f o 0f o

00 00 -

00 c Q cc -

Q

f^pp

o0 Q

0 0 0

Figure Q.3.9 National LCC Savings Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

400 - ian

u Mean

350

300

250

200

150

100 Ft

50

0

-50

C o 00 C) n7

CO

C

9

N

0

(O

CO -C)

Co

N

3

-C)

6

cc) -C)

c

O)

b Q) -

=

N

N

N v)

N

N

C N

h w

N

b

N

a0 Co 00 Q

Co Q

CO Q

(0 Q

0 0 0 0 0

Figure Q.3.10

Low Growth)

National PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005

Low Growth)

Q-26

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

-1500 

-2000 

-2500 

0 ~ c ~ ..- .9 ~ co co ffi 

.E 

~ 0 

00 

c 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

fv'edian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

~ c ~ c ~ c eJ, eJ, Ql Ql 8? %- 0 

.9 .9 .9 j 12 .9 .!!l co j .!!l 00 j C/) .ru C/) .ru '{' .ru '{' N .£:: N .£ N .£ N 

~ 

~ E ~ E ~ § ~ § .9 8? .9 0 0 

00 « 00 « Ci!i « 12 « ~ 

~ ~ 8? 0 ~ 0 ~ 

II 

~ c Ql ~ '*- 0 0 

~ ..Ql g> 8 ~ 

j (j) 

N 0 ~ § ~ « 

'*-

Figure Q.3.9 National LCC Savings Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 

Low Growth 

400 Ian 

u Maan 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

-50 

~ c 0 ~ c .9 ~ .9 co Iv ffi 

.E .E 

'*- ~ 

~ !Xi 00 

Figure Q.3.10 

Payback Pericx:i Ranges By Design Option 

Madian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

L 

n 

Ql ~ c Ql ~ c Ql ~ c Ql 0 %- th g> (') .9 

~ .9 j .9 00 j ffi co ffi 00 Iv if '{' '{' 

N .E N .E N .E N 

§ ~ § ~ § ~ § 8? %- 0 

« 00 « 00 « 12 « 0 ~ 

N 

~ c eJ, ~ ~ &l ~ 0 

00 ..Ql ~ Iv .!!l CJ) 

.E :z 

'*- § ~ « 

~ 0 

CD 

National PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2005 

Low Growth) 

Q-26 
Table Q.3.6 LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005 Low Growth)

LCC Payback Period (Years)

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average*

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact

Net

Benefit

80% $15,440

81% $15,053 $135 0% 65% 35% 2.4 2.8

81% 2-stage modulation $15,239 $30 28% 44% 29% 8.4 10

82% $15,028 $150 11% 44% 45% 6.1 12

82% 2-stage modulation $15,215 $19 43% 30% 27% 13 33

83% $15,074 $117 29% 30% 42% 12 22

83% 2-stage modulation $15,260 ($42) 60% 15% 25% 20 48

84% $15,955 $218 19% 15% 66% 6.9 12

84% 2-stage modulation $15,141 $43 59% 6% 35% 17 34

85% $15,132 $52 53% 6% 41% 17 31

85% 2-stage modulation $15,318 ($124) 69% 6% 26% 24 54

86% $15,606 ($394) 76% 6% 18% 30 55

91% $15,697 ($480) 74% 6% 20% 25 41

99% $16,084 ($857) 78% 3% 19% 25 41

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level

indicated, so the household is not affected.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.3.6 LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

LCC Payback Period (Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average* 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact Benefit 

80% $15,440 

81% $15,053 $l35 0% 65% 35% 2.4 2.8 

81 % 2-stage modulation $15,239 $30 28% 44% 29% 8.4 10 

82% $15,028 $150 11% 44% 45% 6.1 12 

82% 2-stage modulation $15,215 $19 43% 30% 27% l3 33 

83% $15,074 $117 29% 30% 42% 12 22 

83% 2-stage modulation $15,260 ($42) 60% 15% 25% 20 48 

84% $15,955 $218 19% 15% 66% 6.9 12 

84% 2-stage modulation $15,141 $43 59% 6% 35% 17 34 

85% $15,132 $52 53% 6% 41% 17 31 

85% 2-stage modulation $15,318 ($124) 69% 6% 26% 24 54 

86% $15,606 ($394) 76% 6% 18% 30 55 

91% $15,697 ($480) 74% 6% 20% 25 41 

99% $16,084 ($857) 78% 3% 19% 25 41 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater efficIency than the level 

indicated, so the household is not affected. 

Q-27 
2000

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

1500 -Median

q Mean

1000

500

o I u I °

-500 q

-1000 °

-1500

-2000

-2500

-3000

0 0 0 0

N B co

0 0 0 0

00 N Q 00 ro 0

U

_0 "0 V

CO O)

co 00 O)

C

V

0

N

O CD 0)

a) a) 0

0)

n

cli N

OD 00 co m

Figure Q.3.11 National LCC Savings Results for Gas Boilers

(AEO 2005 Low Growth)

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

2000

1500 -Median

q Mean

1000

500

0 _FT.7 _T_ rT_I,I T °

-500 q

-1000 °

-1500

-2000

-2500

-3000

o

O

o V o V o C o

N O CO O I m CC)

L o 0 0

O C )

co 0

U

V

t

00 0 00 0 00 C`5 00

V V V

U U U

o 0

0 00 0 0)

O

V

C

+

'a

C C C

+ + +

70 0 "a

C

+

'a

O 0 0 0 0

N

0)

N

t

ro N N

O) 0) 0)

6 0 6

f N to

N

0)

C6

o t

N

0

00

n

N

0 0 0

N CO d'

00 00 n0

o

0

LO

00

Figure Q.3.12 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005

Low Growth)

Q-28

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

2000 r-~--~--~--~---r--~--~--~--~~r-~--~--~---r--~--. 

1500 

1000 

500 

o 

-500 

-1000 

-1500 

-2000 

-2500 

-Median 

o Mean 

-3000L-~--~--~--~--~~--~--~--~--~~--~--~--~--~~ 

~ "" 0 

~ ro 0 

() 

"0 

E 

+ 

"0 

0 

~ 

Q) 

Ol 

~ ~ 

0"-

ro 

Figure Q.3.11 

2000 

1500 -Median 

0 Mean 

1000 

500 

0 

-500 

-1000 

-1500 

-2000 

-2500 

-3000 

0"- "" ro 0 '" 

() 

"0 

E 

+ 

"0 

0 

~ 

Q) 

Ol 

<r '" 

N 

0"-

ro 

Figure Q.3.12 

0"- "" 0"- "" 0"- "" 0"- "" 0"- 0"- 0"- ~ ~ '" '" N '" -0- II) CD ;;; '" co 0 co 0 co 0 co 0 co 

'-' () () () '" "0 "0 "0 "0 

E E E E + + + + "0 "0 "0 "0 0 0 0 0 

~ ~ ~ ~ Q) Q) Q) Q) 

Ol Ol Ol Ol 

'" '" '" 1i5 1i5 1i5 1i5 '" ~ ~ ~ ~ 

0"- 0 ~ 0"- 0"- N '" -0- II) 

co co co co 

National LCC Savings Results for Gas Boilers 

(AEO 2005 Low Growth) 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

0"- "" 0"- "" ~ "" 0"- '" '" 0 '" N '" -0- II) 

co 0 co 0 co 0 co "" 0"- ~ CD 

0 co 

'-' '-' () 

"0 "0 "0 () 

"0 

E E E E + + + + "0 "0 "0 0 0 0 "0 

0 

~ ~ ~ ~ 

Q) Q) Q) 

Ol Ol Ol 

1i5 '" 1i5 '" '" 1i5 ~ ~ ~ 

Q) 

Ol 

~ ~ 

~ 0 0"- 0"- 0"- N '" -0- II) 

co co co co 

National PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2005 

Low Growth) 

Q-28 
Q.4 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 2006

HIGH GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO

For each product class, this section presents one table and two charts summarizing the

LCC and PBP results using energy prices in the AEO 2006 High Economic Growth case.

Table Q.4.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 High

Growth)

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $11,471

80% $11,291 $2 0% 98% 2% 0.8 1.6

80% 2-stage Modulation $11,600 -$200 62% 36% 2% 49.3 82.2

81% $11,268 $10 30% 36% 34% 11.4 22.2

81% 2-stage Modulation $11,577 -$194 61% 35% 4% 40.0 74.6

90% $11,080 $76 34% 35% 30% 13.3 19.9

92% $11,116 $42 43% 27% 30% 14.8 21.4

92% 2-stage Modulation $11,393 -$225 77% 4% 19% 22.6 47.5

96% Modulation (Continuous) $11,532 -$360 82% 4% 15% 25.5 63.3

96% Modulation (Continuous) $11,783_ 1 -$604 84% 4% 12% 32.7 73.6

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level

indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely large

paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is probably a

better indicator.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

QA LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 2006 

HIGH GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO 

F or each product class, this section presents one table and two charts summarizing the 

LCC and PBP results using energy prices in the AEO 2006 High Economic Growth case. 

Table QA.l LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 High 

Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

78% $11,471 

80% $11,291 $2 0% 98% 2% 0.8 1.6 

80% 2-stage Modulation $11,600 -$200 62% 36% 2% 49.3 82.2 

81% $11,268 $10 30% 36% 34% 11.4 22.2 

81 % 2-stage Modulation $11,577 -$194 61% 35% 4% 40.0 74.6 

90% $11,080 $76 34% 35% 30% 13.3 19.9 

92% $11,116 $42 43% 27% 30% 14.8 21.4 

92% 2-stage Modulation $11,393 -$225 77% 4% 19% 22.6 47.5 

96% Modulation (Continuous) $11,532 -$360 82% 4% 15% 25.5 63.3 

96% Modulation (Continuous) $11,783 -$604 84% 4% 12% 32.7 73.6 

* "No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level 

indicated, so the household is not affected. 

* * From the fonn of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely large 

paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is probably a 

better indicator. 

Q-29 
LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

1400 - Median

1200 q Mean

1000

800

600

400

200

0

-I-

-200

-400 =

-600

-800

-1000

-1200

-1400

-1600

_ = Pn c

n n49

N N N

0 5

U (^

]

0o 0 0N '

ss

0

o 00

Figure Q.4.1 National LCC Savings Results for NonWeatherzied Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 High

Growth)

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

260

240

-Medis

j Mean

220

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

L-^

-20

m n

- 51:

P 5 5

C

\°

W

c'

coW a0

5 N U U

o N

00 C

0 0

Figure Q.4.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas

Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth)

Q-30

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

1400 Ian 

1200 ~ Mean 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

-200 

-400 

-600 

-800 

-1000 

-1200 

-1400 

-1600 

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option 

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

~ ~ 0 co 8 ~ 

« ~ x .!ll I (/) ..: 

'" ~ <f'. ~ 1:0 8-J 

'" 

"8 Sl 

:2 4: ~ x 

tl I 

'" ti ~ 1: 0 <f'. as 00 

"8 

:2 

~ 

tl 

<f'. '"

8J 

en en 

i3 ::J 

::J g c .b E 

0 "6 ~ ~ "0 "0 

~ ~ ~ 8-J <f'. 

Figure QA.l National LCC Savings Results for NonWeatherzied Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 High 

Growth) 

Payback Period Ranges By Design Optbn 

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

260r-~~~la~--~--~--~--~----~--~--~--~--~---' 

240 ~ Mean 

220 

200 

180 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

o 

-20~--~--~--~--~--~----~--~--~--~--~--~--~ 

Sl ~ co "0 ~ co "0 Q) 

~ :5 ~ ~ 4: 

en ~ 4: '" ::J 

X ~ X Q) X Q) g g 

F ~ c c I .!ll I I 5 § ti (/) '{' ti '" u 1: N N ~ ~ ~ .E <f'. .E ~ ~ :5 <f'. <f'. 8-J "0 

:5 co 1:0 00 Sl ~ '" co ~ 

<f'. <f'. 

Figure QA.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas 

Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth) 

Q-30 
Table Q.4.2 LCC and PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 High

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net

Cost

No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $9,029

80% $8,937 $2 0% 98% 2% 1.1 1.4

81% $8,896 $23 1% 46% 53% 2.4 3.0

82% $8,856 $55 1% 20% 79% 2.3 2.9

83% $8,822 $89 5% 0% 95% 3.1 3.9

**

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback . In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

Growth)

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

300 Medbn

j Mean

250

200

150

100

50

0

-50

80%Incr I-DC Area 82% Incr HX Area

81% Incr HXArea 83% Incr FIX Area

Figure Q.4.3 National LCC Savings Results for Weatherized

Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth)

Q-31

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.4.2 Lee and PBP Results for Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 High 

Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net No Net 

78% 

80% 

81% 

82% 

83% 

* 

** 

Cost Impact* Benefit 

$9,029 

$8,937 $2 0% 98% 2% l.l 1.4 

$8,896 $23 1% 46% 53% 2.4 3.0 

$8,856 $55 1% 20% 79% 2.3 2.9 

$8,822 $89 5% 0% 95% 3.l 3.9 

"No Impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

M3dian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

300 "1ve<Jlan 

.J M3an -,-

250 

200 

--

150 

100 

50 

0 ----------1,.-. --. .~ , ----'---. 

-50 

80% Incr HX Area 82% Incr HX Area 

81% Incr HXArea 83% Incr HXArea 

Figure Q.4.3 National Lee Savings Results for Weatherized 

Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth) 

Q-3l 
Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

12 - ian

an

10

8

6

4

2

0

-2 -^-

m

V?

X X

U U

C C

0 0

Figure Q.4.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas

Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Payback Period Rarges By Design Optbn 

I'kdian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

12r-~~~~lan~----r-----~------~------~------r------, 

..J I'kan 

10 

8 

----

6 

4 II 

2 

u 

0 ------- --- -------

-2 -!;l--

-4 

ro ro ro 1 !!' !!' « « ~ '" x x x X I I I I 

t; t; t; .£; .£; E ~ ?f2. ?f2. ~ :J2. 

2 N (') 

Figure Q.4.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas 

Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth) 

Q-32 
Table Q.4.3 LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth)

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

75% $9,719

80% $9,233 $76 1% 85% 14% 2.2 3.5

80% 2-stage modulation $9,573 -$248 83% 5% 12% 49.2 94.3

81% $9,254 $55 63% 5% 32% 20.0 27.0

81% 2-stage modulation $9,595 -$268 84% 5% 11% 55.8 95.4

82% $9,213 $95 41% 5% 54% 13.5 17.5

82% 2-stage modulation $9,553 -$229 82% 5% 13% 41.3 74.4

90% Condensing $9,034 $265 31% 5% 64% 10.4 20.7

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

1400 -Median

n Mean

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

-200

-400

-600

? 4

C

Co

N £

CO

N

U

C

U) (g

N

o c o o c

g

N 00 (^

OD ^

Figure Q.4.5 National LCC Savings Results for Mobile Home

Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth)

Q-33

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table QA.3 Lee and PBP Results for Mobile Horne Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

75% $9,719 

80% $9,233 $76 1% 85% 14% 2.2 3.5 

80% 2-stage modulation $9,573 -$248 83% 5% 12% 49.2 94.3 

81% $9,254 $55 63% 5% 32% 20.0 27.0 

81 % 2-stage modulation $9,595 -$268 84% 5% 11% 55.8 95A 

82% $9,213 $95 41% 5% 54% 13.5 17.5 

82% 2-stage modulation $9,553 -$229 82% 5% 13% 41.3 74A 

90% Condensing $9,034 $265 31% 5% 64% lOA 20.7 

* "No lmpact" means that the base case furnace asslgned to the household has greater efficlency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

1400 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

-200 

-400 

-600 

Ian 

'1 lVean 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

IVedian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

Figure QA.5 National Lee Savings Results for Mobile Horne 

Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth) 

Q-33 
Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

450 - Median

Mean

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

-50

HHHI

O W O 00

Figure Q.4.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

450 Ian 

-' Mean 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

-50 (IJ 

c 

'ill 

~ fll 

~ 

~ 

Payback Perioo Rarges By Design Optbn 

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

"8 '" [I! :2 « &, x 

'" I 

(j) ts '" £; 

~ ~ 

1:0 

"0 

~ (IJ 

@' 

(j) 

~ '" (\J 

00 

Figure Q.4.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) 

Q-34 
Table Q.4.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth)

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net

Cost

No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $15,030

80% $14,773 $10 0% 96% 4% 0.2 0.2

81% $14,653 $84 0% 39% 61% 0.6 0.8

81% Interrupted Ignition $14,612 $112 3% 30% 67% 1.9 2.7

81% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $14,812 -$29 48% 30% 22% 14.0 20.2

82% $14,534 $168 0% 30% 70% 0.5 0.6

82% Interrupted Ignition $14,503 $191 4% 23% 74% 1.7 2.8

82% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $14,691 $44 41% 23% 37% 9.9 14.6

83% $14,579 $133 21% 23% 57% 6.1 8.8

83% Interrupted Ignition $14,548 $159 23% 15% 62% 6.0 8.0

83% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $14,736 -$2 53% 15% 32% 12.0 16.9

84% $14,627 $93 38% 15% 47% 9.2 12.7

84% Interrupted Ignition $14,595 $122 38% 7% 54% 8.3 11.0

84% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $14,783 -$52 62% 7% 30% 13.4 18.2

85% $14,684 $40 51% 7% 41% 11.3 15.3

85% Interrupted Ignition $14,652 $72 51% 0% 49% 10.1 13.0

85% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $14,839 -$115 71% 0% 29% 14.6 19.5

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.4.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth) 

* 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net No Net 

Cost Impact* Benefit 

78% $15,030 

80% $14,773 $10 0% 96% 4% 0.2 0.2 

81% $14,653 $84 0% 39% 61% 0.6 0.8 

81 % Interrupted Ignition $14,612 $112 3% 30% 67% l.9 2.7 

81 % Atom Burner w/2-stage $14,812 -$29 48% 30% 22% 14.0 20.2 

82% $14,534 $168 0% 30% 70% 0.5 0.6 

82% Interrupted Ignition $14,503 $191 4% 23% 74% 1.7 2.8 

82% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $14,691 $44 41% 23% 37% 9.9 14.6 

83% $14,579 $133 21% 23% 57% 6.1 8.8 

83% Intemlpted Ignition $14,548 $159 23% 15% 62% 6.0 8.0 

83% Atom Burner w/2-stage $14,736 -$2 53% 15% 32% 12.0 16.9 

84% $14,627 $93 38% 15% 47% 9.2 12.7 

84% Interrupted Ignition $14,595 $122 38% 7% 54% 8.3 1l.0 

84% Atom Burner w/2-stage $14,783 -$52 62% 7% 30% 13.4 18.2 

85% $14,684 $40 51% 7% 41% 1l.3 15.3 

85% Interrupted Ignition $14,652 $72 51% 0% 49% 10.1 13.0 

85% Atom Burner w/2-stage $14,839 -$115 71% 0% 29% 14.6 19.5 

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Q-35 
0

L I L

L L

°

2 _

ff

Y

°

-200 Y

-400 J I

-800

-600

C&

c c a

g w

co 00 r=

ED Ca Co m

Figure Q.4.7 National LCC Savings Results for Oil-Fired

Furnaces (AEO 2006 High Growth)

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

60 K/Iedidn

Mean

10

20

30

40

50

r

10

S = S S S

00

^0

C

0

C

o

C

U

FJ (^7 M v

Co a0 co co a)

Co -4, Co _81

Co Co E

04 Co

Figure Q.4.8 National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

(AEO 2006 High Growth)

Q-36

, w c'o m .b. rG .j>. 01 0) c/O. I 

,... a a a a a a a a a a a a 

a a a a a 

= = (D (D t to 

:1 L I to 78% Baseline 80"10 Incr HXArea Qo 

.. 

III :..:. h

80"/0 Incr HX Area ::J - 

::J 81 % Incr HX Area 

--z 81% Incr HXArea GH = 81% Interrupted Ignition t'"j:::; .... I I:J = ,... 00 81 % Interrupted Ignition 0 1% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod N= g = 

1 % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 5)" 0- Oe. (D -=! Pl - 82% Incr HXArea 0 (JJ" --r 

O'\""e 82% Incr HX Area 82% Interrupted Igniton 

::=c:; 

82% Interrupted Ignition H-D3----1 [)la 

c/O.""e (f2.:;:o 0('"') % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

D III % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

;gca 83% Incr HX Area , w Cl(D 5'.9l 

0\ 83% Incr HX Area 83% Interrupted Ignition o = ::J"'< ,... 

::;' or 0 ::== 

.... 83% I nterrupted Ignition $<D 3% Atom Burner 2-stege Mod 

=- .. ' cO' Ul 

3% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod O1::J =- 84% Incr HX Area 

I cf2.0 

''0 

84% Incr HXArea (D 84% Interrupted Ignition 01 o· 0 cf2.:::J o 

,... 84% Interrupted Ignition S. 4% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

-

I .... .... 

,... % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod '-' 85% Incr HX Area 

(D 

:::lo 85% Incr HX Area !.f-[EI--t 85% Interrupted Ignition 

85% Interrupted Ignition I· +-[[J-----i 0 % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod = ,... 

-

I 

= 1 1 ! ,... 

(D (D :::lo 
Table Q.4.5 LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2006 Hi h Growth)

LCC Payback Period (Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average*

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact

Net

Benefit

80% $18,113

81% $17,617 $174 0% 65% 35% 2.0 2.3

81% 2-stage modulation $17,801 $70 25% 44% 31% 6.8 8.2

82% $17,564 $203 9% 44% 48% 5.1 10.0

82% 2-stage modulation $17,749 $74 38% 30% 32% 10.6 29.3

83% $17,583 $190 23% 30% 47% 9.6 19.1

83% 2-stage modulation $17,768 $32 55% 15% 31% 16.3 40.2

84% $17,438 $313 14% 15% 71% 5.7 10.1

84% 2-stage modulation $17,623 $139 50% 6% 44% 13.8 27.4

85% $17,589 $171 45% 6% 49% 13.5 26.4

85% 2-stage modulation $17,774 -$4 60% 6% 34% 19.8 45.3

86% $18,039 -$252 69% 6% 25% 24.6 47.0

91% $18,013 -$228 64% 6% 30% 20.3 34.0

99% $18,237 -$448 68% 3% 29% 20.5 34.1

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level

indicated, so the household is not affected.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

T a bi e Q 4 5 LCC d PBP R It:t G B"l " " an esu s or as 01 ers (AEO 2006 H" 19l h G row th) 

LCC Payback Period (Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average* 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact Benefit 

80% $18,113 

81% $17,617 $174 0% 65% 35% 2.0 2.3 

81 % 2-stage modulation $17,801 $70 25% 44% 31% 6.8 8.2 

82% $17,564 $203 9% 44% 48% 5.l 10.0 

82% 2-stage modulation $17,749 $74 38% 30% 32% 10.6 29.3 

83% $17,583 $190 23% 30% 47% 9.6 19.1 

83% 2-stage modulation $17,768 $32 55% 15% 31% 16.3 40.2 

84% $17,438 $313 14% 15% 71% 5.7 10.1 

84% 2-stage modulation $17,623 $l39 50% 6% 44% 13.8 27.4 

85% $17,589 $171 45% 6% 49% 13.5 26.4 

85% 2-stage modulation $17,774 -$4 60% 6% 34% 19.8 45.3 

86% $18,039 -$252 69% 6% 25% 24.6 47.0 

91% $18,013 -$228 64% 6% 30% 20.3 34.0 

99% $18,237 -$448 68% 3% 29% 20.5 34.1 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficIency than the level 

indicated, so the household is not affected. 

Q-37 
LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

3000 - an

Mean

2000

1000

0

-1000

-2000

-3000

0

O O D a

C

Co

C C C

-per a

t t t t

0

49 49

N N N

m

0 0

Figure Q.4.9 National LCC Savings Results for Gas Boilers

(AEO 2006 High Growth)

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

200 -K/IeUan

180 Mean

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

-20

00 c6 00 00 CO c0 W Y) m

aU

49 49 49 49 m U) M (n m

Figure Q.4.10 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO

2006 High Growth)

Q-38

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option 

fv'edian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

3000~=r~~a~n~r-=r--~~--~--~~---r--~~--~--~~--, 

[ill fv'ean 

2000 

-3000 

;ft 

0; 

Figure Q.4.9 

200 Ian 

180 "I fv'ean 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

-20 

;ft 

0; 

Figure Q.4.10 

;ft ;ft >!< ;ft 

~ ~ "" 0 

~ ~ ~ '" co ~ d5 ~ 

0 0 

-l:l " " -l:l " "0 

~ "0 

E E E E 

+ + + + + "0 

~ "0 "8 ~ ~ :::;; ~ [Ij, [Ij, <1> & & 

ill .!9 F ill .!9 

'" cr cr N N N N N 

;ft ;ft >!< 

~ ;ft >!< lb 

National LCC Savings Results 

(AEO 2006 High Growth) 

~ 0 

~ " 

+ 

~ [Ij, 

.!9 

N '"

~ 

Payback Period Ranges By Design Optbn 

fv'edian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

>!< >!< >!< ;ft 1\J ~ ~ ~ ~ co co co ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 

~ " " " " ~ ~ ~ + + + + 

~ ~ ~ ~ [Ij, [Ij, [Ij, [Ij, 

.!9 .!9 .!9 .!9 

N '" '" '" '" N N N

;ft >!< ;ft N ~ 

>!< ;ft ;ft fo 

co C;; as 

for Gas Boilers 

;ft >!< >!< 0 8) 18 C;; <J) 

National PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 

2006 High Growth) 

Q-38 
Table Q.4.6 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2006 High Growth

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

80% $22,636

81% $22,433 $10 0% 95% 5% 0.6 0.8

81% Inter Ign $22,421 $12 3% 89% 8% 4.6 9.0

82% $22,235 $31 0% 89% 11% 0.7 0.8

82% Inter Ign $22,223 $33 3% 84% 13% 3.0 7.0

82% Atomized Burner $22,563 -$21 13% 84% 3% 20.3 28.6

83% $22,042 $61 0% 84% 16% 0.7 0.8

83% Inter Ign $22,030 $66 12% 61% 27% 5.7 10.1

83% Atomized Burner $22,370 -$67 32% 61% 7% 15.7 25.9

84% $22,076 $47 17% 61% 22% 13.0 18.4

84% Inter Ign $22,064 $55 28% 37% 34% 12.3 16.3

84% Atomized Burner $22,405 -$158 56% 37% 7% 35.9 48.8

85% $22,124 $17 35% 37% 28% 16.6 22.1

85% Inter Ign $22,112 $27 46% 14% 40% 15.0 19.2

85% Atomized Burner $22,452 -$265 77% 14% 9% 36.4 49.6

86% $22,163 -$16 50% 14% 36% 17.2 23.2

86% Inter Ign $22,151 -$6 52% 7% 41% 16.2 21.1

86% Atomized Burner $22,492 -$322 82% 7% 11% 33.7 46.0

90% $22,540 -$366 70% 7% 23% 22.1 27.5

95% $22,631 -$457 72% 0% 28% 20.5 25.3

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level

indicated, so the household is not affected.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.4.6 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2006 High Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

80% $22,636 

81% $22,433 $10 0% 95% 5% 0.6 0.8 

81 % Inter Ign $22,421 $12 3% 89% 8% 4.6 9.0 

82% $22,235 $31 0% 89% 11% 0.7 0.8 

82% Inter Ign $22,223 $33 3% 84% 13% 3.0 7.0 

82% Atomized Burner $22,563 -$21 13% 84% 3% 20.3 28.6 

83% $22,042 $61 0% 84% 16% 0.7 0.8 

83% Inter Ign $22,030 $66 12% 61% 27% 5.7 10.1 

83% Atomized Burner $22,370 -$67 32% 61% 7% 15.7 25.9 

84% $22,076 $47 17% 61% 22% 13.0 18.4 

84% Inter Ign $22,064 $55 28% 37% 34% 12.3 16.3 

84% Atomized Burner $22,405 -$158 56% 37% 7% 35.9 48.8 

85% $22,124 $17 35% 37% 28% 16.6 22.1 

85% Inter Ign $22,112 $27 46% 14% 40% 15.0 19.2 

85% Atomized Burner $22,452 -$265 77% 14% 9% 36.4 49.6 

86% $22,163 -$16 50% 14% 36% 17.2 23.2 

86% Inter Ign $22,151 -$6 52% 7% 41% 16.2 21.1 

86% Atomized Burner $22,492 -$322 82% 7% 11% 33.7 46.0 

90% $22,540 -$366 70% 7% 23% 22.1 27.5 

95% $22,631 -$457 72% 0% 28% 20.5 25.3 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater efficIency than the level 

indicated, so the household is not affected. 

Q-39 
2000

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

-Medidn

Mean

1500

1000

500

^ -Tl'

-500

-1000

-1500

-2000

-2500

Fn

OC) -

& --Co' C o C CD

00 00 OC)

Q) 0

- S,

a)

4g 4g

N y

N C N N

-t6

N

g E M E o g

Q C

9 op

Es

.

00 W

W Q Q

a

0 0

00

0 0

Figure Q.4.11 National LCC Savings Results for Oil

Boilers (AEO 2006 High Growth)

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

120 '-Median

Mean

100

80

60

40 u

20 LI

20

a)

c^ oo ci oo

a)

w10 ^ -Q'

N N N N N

(O

00 W Q W 00 Q Q Q

0 0 0 0 0

Figure Q.4.12 National PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO

2006 High Growth)

Q-40

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

M3dian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

2000~~·nh.Med~lila~rn~--~~~~~--~~~~~--~~~~~--~~~ 

.J M3an 

1500 

1000 

-2000 

?F- ~ "" 8;J ro Q; o::J 

! 

?Fro 

Figure Q.4.11 

~ 2j, ?F- e 2j, "" c Q) ?F- e Q) ?F- e Q) ?F- "" ~ 0 '" .2' .2' N Kl .Ql N ffi .Ql i l!l o::J l!l o::J @ ~ } 

"" 8;J 

o::J 

.ill .ill .Ei .Ei UJ en '{' '{' N .EO N .s N .s N .s N 

E "" E ?F- § ?F- § ?F- § ~ o::J 

~ « 

.9 a; <e Kl <e ffi <e 

?F- "" N ~ ?F- ?F- ?FNational LCC Savings Results for Oil 

Boilers (AEO 2006 High Growth) 

Payback Period Ranges By Design Optbn 

M3dian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

120r-~~~ra~n~~~--~~~~--~~~~--~~~~~--~~' 

., ,M3an 

?F- ~ ?F- ~ Q) 

ro ~ i ~ } N 

?F- "" § 8;J 00 o::J <e 

Figure Q.4.12 

?F- ~ Q) "" ~ Q) "" ~ Q) ?F- e 2j, ?F- ?F- M i ~ N l}, N <0 .Ql a o::J ~ Q; o::J ! o::J ! o::J 

~ l!l (J) 

'{' '{' '{' ! N N N N 

"" § "" § "" § ?Fo::J 

~ ~ 0 

~ <e o::J <e Kl <e ffi « 

?F-

<0 

National PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 

2006 High Growth) 

Q-40 
Q.5 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 2006

LOW GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO

For each product class, this section presents one table and two charts summarizing the

LCC and PBP results using energy prices in the AEO 2006 Low Economic Growth case.

Table Q.5.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low

Growth

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $10,963

80% $10,792 $2 0% 98% 2% 0.8 1.6

80%2-stage Modulation $11,108 -$205 63% 36% 1% 52.8 84.4

81% $10,774 $7 31% 36% 33% 11.6 22.8

81%2-stage Modulation $11,090 -$201 61% 35% 3% 42.0 78.6

90% $10,627 $51 36% 35% 28% 13.6 20.5

92% $10,671 $12 45% 27% 28% 15.2 22.1

92% 2-stage Modulation $10,954 -$261 79% 4% 18% 23.5 50.0

96% Modulation (Continuous) $11,086 -$390 83% 4% 13% 26.3 65.8

96% Modulation (Continuous) $11,351 -$647 85% 4% 11% 33.9 75.9

*

**

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback . In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Q.5 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING AEO 2006 

LOW GROWTH PRICE SCENARIO 

For each product class, this section presents one table and two charts summarizing the 

LCC and PBP results using energy prices in the AEO 2006 Low Economic Growth case. 

Table Q.5.1 LCC and PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low 

Growth) 

Lce Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

78% $10,963 

80% $10,792 $2 0% 98% 2% 0.8 1.6 

80% 2-stage Modulation $11,108 -$205 63% 36% 1% 52.8 84.4 

81% $10,774 $7 31% 36% 33% 11.6 22.8 

81 % 2-stage Modulation $11,090 -$201 61% 35% 3% 42.0 78.6 

90% $10,627 $51 36% 35% 28% 13.6 20.5 

92% $10,671 $12 45% 27% 28% 15.2 22.1 

92% 2-stage Modulation $10,954 -$261 79% 4% 18% 23.5 50.0 

96% Modulation (Continuous) $11,086 -$390 83% 4% 13% 26.3 65.8 

96% Modulation (Continuous) $11,351 -$647 85% 4% 11% 33.9 75.9 

* "No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Q-41 
1200

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

- ian

1000 q Mean

800

600

400

200

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000

-1200

-1400

-1600

-1 800

a: cc -

N

7- 1- m

N oO

N G

N N

0

of

0

W

(0N^

W

O

RI

Figure Q.5.1 National LCC Savings Results for NonWeatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low

Growth)

260

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

Madiari

240 Mean

220

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

-20

Q)

2 2

0 N

(D

2

N o 0

C N C N C N U U

N W

W N

a

0 0

Figure Q.5.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas

Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth)

Q-42

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

M3dian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

1200~==~~lamn~--~--~----~--~--~--~--~----r---~--, 

1000 .J M3an 

SOO 

600 

400 

200 

o 

-200 

-400 

-600 

-SOO 

-1000 

-1200 

-1400 

-1600 

-1S00 L--__ ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ~ ____ ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ___' ____ ~ __ ~ __ _l 

III "B ~ ~ <f< CIl "B en en ~ ::2: &l I!! ::2: (3 ::J <>: g x )lj, x )lj, x )lj, ::J 

C .\; I -lJl I .lll I CIl :e "5 ~ ti (J) ...: 1il a N 10 N .§ N 8 8 <f< ~ <f< <f< <f< 0 ~ "0 "0 

0 @ ro ct) ro 8.J 

O"l Sl ~ ~ ~ <f< 8.J 

Figure Q.5.1 National LCC Savings Results for NonWeatherized Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low 

Growth) 

Paybcck Period Ranges By Design Optbn 

M3dian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

260 -Iveman 

240 .J ·M3an -c:r220 

200 

1S0 --

160 

140 

.., T 120 

100 

SO 

T~l~~g~ 60 

40 

20 

0 1 u .0-" _ . 8 

-20 

~ ~ CIl "0 ~ CIl "0 6 en ~ ~ ~ O"l ~ ~ ::J 

X )lj, X Ql X Ql g g 

, N c J; I .lll I I ~ c ti (J) ti ti 'f a a 

10 N .£ N .£ N 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ 6 <f< 0 <f< 8.J "0 

6 

ct) 

ct) 00 ro Sl O"l ~ ~ 

Figure Q.5.2 National PBP Results for Non-Weatherized Gas 

Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

Q-42 
Table Q.5.2 LCC and PBP for Weatherized Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth)

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net

Cost

No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $8,773

80% $8,686 $2 0% 98% 2% 1.1 1.4

81% $8,648 $22 1% 46% 53% 2.5 3.1

82% $8,610 $52 2% 20% 78% 2.3 3.0

83% $8,579 $84 5% 0% 95% 3.2 4.1

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

280 i n

260 Mean

240

220

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

-20

80% Incr HX Area 82% Incr HX Area

81 % Incr HX Area 83% Incr FIX Area

Figure Q.5.3 National LCC Savings Results for Weatherized

Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.5.2 Lee and PBP for Weatherized Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net No Net 

78% 

80% 

81% 

82% 

83% 

* 

** 

Cost Impact* Benefit 

$8,773 

$8,686 $2 0% 98% 2% l.l 1.4 

$8,648 $22 1% 46% 53% 2.5 3.1 

$8,610 $52 2% 20% 78% 2.3 3.0 

$8,579 $84 5% 0% 95% 3.2 4.1 

"No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater efficIency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

M3dian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

280 . Median 

260 :l M3an -,---

240 

220 

200 

180 -,---

160 

140 

120 

100 

-- 80 

60 

- 40 

20 I n I 

0 r 

-20 

80% Incr HXArea 82% Incr HX Area 

81% Incr HXArea 83% Incr HXArea 

Figure Q.5.3 National Lee Savings Results for Weatherized 

Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

Q-43 
Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

12 - ian

Mean

10

8

6

4

2

0

-2 s-

-41

a

x x

z

U U

C C

x

0 0

m

Figure Q.5.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas

Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

Ian 

-' Mean 

Payback Pericd Rarges By Design Opton 

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

n 

o ------ -- ----------- ---~--------- -------

-2 -0---

-4 

'" '" ro Sl 2! 2! Q) 

<t: <t: .0: <e x >< x X I I I I 

t3 t3 t3 t; £; £; E E ~ 0 t< t< t< ~ N '" co 

Figure Q.5.4 National PBP Results for Weatherized Gas 

Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

Q-44 
Table Q.5.3 LCC and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth)

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

75% $9,069

80% $8,638 $67 1% 85% 14% 2.4 3.8

80% 2-stage modulation $8,983 -$261 84% 5% 11% 50.0 97.3

81% $8,664 $42 66% 5% 29% 20.8 28.0

81% 2-stage modulation $9,009 -$286 85% 5% 10% 57.4 99.4

82% $8,628 $77 45% 5% 50% 14.1 18.1

82% 2-stage modulation $8,972 -$251 83% 5% 12% 43.4 77.7

90% Condensing $8,484 $213 34% 5% 61% 11.1 21.8

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

1200

1000

- ian

Mean

800

600

400

200

0

-200

-400

-600

a

_ }g' ? ?

C N C N C N

J U 0 U CO U

2

o c o o o

N

W 00 W 0)

(^ CJ

Figure Q.5.5 National LCC Savings Results for Mobile Home

Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth)

Q-45

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.5.3 Lee and PBP Results for Mobile Home Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUElElectricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

75% $9,069 

80% $8,638 $67 1% 85% 14% 2.4 3.8 

80% 2-stage modulation $8,983 -$261 84% 5% 11% 50.0 97.3 

81% $8,664 $42 66% 5% 29% 20.8 28.0 

81 % 2-stage modulation $9,009 -$286 85% 5% 10% 57.4 99.4 

82% $8,628 $77 45% 5% 50% 14.1 18.1 

82% 2-stage modulation $8,972 -$251 83% 5% 12% 43.4 77.7 

90% Condensing $8,484 $213 34% 5% 61% 11.1 21.8 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace assIgned to the household has greater efficiency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

-200 

-400 

-600 

Ian 

., M9an 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

M9dian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

Ol 

C 

·w 

ffi 

"E 

8 

Figure Q.5.5 National Lee Savings Results for Mobile Home 

Gas Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

Q-45 
Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

450 - Median

Wan

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

T

-50

2i <

'! U V1 j

N C N N

FJ

00 00

R,

W

Figure Q.5.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Gas

Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Payback Perial Rarges By Design Optbn 

rvBdian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

450r-~=n~la~n~----~--~----~----~--~----~--~----' 

-' rvBan 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

01-------~ 

Q) OJ 

~ !ll "8 OJ "0 C 

~ (l! ii -0': :2! « ~ 

~ x 2l, x 2l, x Q) 

I .l9 I OJ I g> ~ b Cf( ~ U5 b U5 0 tl c{, N te .EO N .EO .£ 

~ ~ 

~ ~ 't2. ~ 15 0 

0 8-J co 10 co 

Figure Q.5.6 National PBP Results for Mobile Home Gas 

Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

Q-46 
Table Q.5.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average**

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net

Cost

No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

78% $14,841

80% $14,588 $10 0% 96% 4% 0.2 0.2

81% $14,470 $82 0% 39% 61% 0.6 0.8

81% Interrupted Ignition $14,438 $104 4% 30% 66% 1.9 2.8

81% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $14,648 -$43 51% 30% 19% 14.9 21.6

82% $14,353 $165 0% 30% 70% 0.5 0.6

82% Interrupted Ignition $14,330 $182 4% 23% 73% 1.8 2.9

82% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $14,529 $27 43% 23% 34% 10.5 15.5

83% $14,401 $128 21% 23% 56% 6.2 9.0

83% Interrupted Ignition $14,378 $147 24% 15% 61% 6.2 8.3

83% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $14,576 -$21 55% 15% 30% 12.6 17.9

84% $14,450 $87 39% 15% 46% 9.4 12.9

84% Interrupted Ignition $14,427 $108 40% 7% 52% 8.6 11.3

84% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $14,624 -$75 64% 7% 28% 14.0 19.3

85% $14,509 $32 52% 7% 40% 11.6 15.6

85% Interrupted Ignition $14,485 $56 53% 0% 47% 10.4 13.5

85% Atom Burner w/ 2-stage $14,682 -$141 73% 0% 27% 15.2 20.5

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the

level indicated, so the household is not affected.

From the form of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is

probably a better indicator.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.5.4 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

* 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average** 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net No Net 

Cost Impact* Benefit 

78% $14,841 

80% $14,588 $10 0% 96% 4% 0.2 0.2 

81% $14,470 $82 0% 39% 61% 0.6 0.8 

81 % Interrupted Ignition $14,438 $104 4% 30% 66% l.9 2.8 

81 % Atom Burner wi 2-stage $14,648 -$43 51% 30% 19% 14.9 2l.6 

82% $14,353 $165 0% 30% 70% 0.5 0.6 

82% Intemlpted Ignition $14,330 $182 4% 23% 73% l.8 2.9 

82% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $14,529 $27 43% 23% 34% 10.5 15.5 

83% $14,401 $128 21% 23% 56% 6.2 9.0 

83% Interrupted Ignition $14,378 $147 24% 15% 61% 6.2 8.3 

83% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $14,576 -$21 55% 15% 30% 12.6 17.9 

84% $14,450 $87 39% 15% 46% 904 12.9 

84% Intemlpted Ignition $14,427 $108 40% 7% 52% 8.6 1l.3 

84% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $14,624 -$75 64% 7% 28% 14.0 19.3 

85% $14,509 $32 52% 7% 40% 1l.6 15.6 

85% Interrupted Ignition $14,485 $56 53% 0% 47% lOA 13.5 

85% Atom Burner wi 2-stage $14,682 -$141 73% 0% 27% 15.2 20.5 

"No Impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the 

level indicated, so the household is not affected. 

** From the fonn of the payback calculation, a very small change in operating cost can result in extremely 

large paybacks. These extremely large paybacks will skew the average payback. In these cases, median is 

probably a better indicator. 

Q-47 
^^ T 0 r

-200 T T

-600

-400

800 -

c -so

_0 Ca

- Q U U N C C

C C N CL C^

Co Co N W W Co

g o (off 'd-j 47 moo}

C f=

CO o -.1 m

SBE ;SE 009

-4 4

Figure Q.5.7 National LCC Savings Results for Oil-Fired

Furnaces (AEO 2006 Low Growth)

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

60 - i n

Mean

10

20

30

40

50

0

-10

x x a) a x cc) a)

c 'fig. c oa ^ C '^ c

g o

C11

o ci

C

o

L C

0

m ao c C 1 j ^

ttl Co ED

00 Co E

Figure Q.5.8 National PBP Results for Oil-Fired Furnaces

(AEO 2006 Low Growth)

Q-48

10 

-I>. 

00 

Io"I"j 

.... 

= ., 

to 

1.Il 

00 

00· 

= IIW N Q 

Q -

0\",,= 

o ""= ::E 

78% Baseline 

80% Incr HX Area 81% Incr HXArea 

81 % Interrupted Ignition 

1 % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

82% Incr HX Area 

82% Interrupted Ignition 

C) :;0 12% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

., 

o '" 83% Incr HX Area 

83% Interrupted Ignition 

::E S. 

.......... ::-'" 

'-' 

13% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

., 

o 

.... 

'j'" 

Io"I"j 

.... 

., 

Q.. 

Io"I"j 

= ., 

= IIW 

(') 

'" 

84% Incr HX Area 

84% Interrupted Ignition 

% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

85% Incr HX Area 

85% Interrupted Ignition 

, 

o o 

I 

[I' 

o 

I'V 

o 

w 

o 

-I>-

o ()1 '" o 0 

I 

w: 

::J 

KE-----1. 

5r cr 

"=< Pl 

OJ"" o "U X III 

?f..;o 

.!.Jill 

2, ffi 

::r,< en' 0 

@eD 

, .. cO" '" 

()1 ::J 

?flo '"0 

rfi.:::J 

Io"I"j 

.... 

., = 

to 

1.Il 

., = ..... IIW = .... IIW 0 (') = IIW 

'" 

-

t.'!'.:ICj OCj 

QIIW 

0\< 

r S· 

::E '" 

C):;O 

., 

o '" 

::E = 

..... 

-

::-iZ 

'-' 

., 

o 

.... 

-

I 

.... 

., 

80% Incr HX Area 

81 % Incr HX Area 

81% Interrupted Ignition 

,1 % Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

82% Incr HX Area 

82% Interrupted Ignition 

% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

83% Incr HX Area 

83% Interrupted Ignition 

3% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

84% Incr HX Area 

84% Interru,xed Ignition 

4% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

85% Incr HX Area 

85% Interrupted Ignition 

% Atom Burner 2-stage Mod 

gg 8 

o o 0 o 0 

Q.. 
Table Q.5.5 L.CC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers AEO 2006 Low Growth)

LCC Payback Period

(Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact*

Net

Benefit

80% $22,431

81% $22,230 $10 0% 95% 5% 0.7 0.8

81% Inter Ign $22,224 $11 3% 89% 7% 5.0 9.6

82% $22,035 $31 0% 89% 11% 0.7 0.8

82% Inter Ign $22,029 $32 3% 84% 13% 3.1 7.6

82% Atomized Burner $22,361 -$21 13% 84% 3% 20.8 29.0

83% $21,844 $61 0% 84% 16% 0.7 0.9

83% Inter Ign $21,838 $63 13% 61% 26% 6.1 10.8

83% Atomized Burner $22,170 -$67 32% 61% 7% 15.9 25.9

84% $21,881 $46 17% 61% 22% 13.3 18.8

84% Inter Ign $21,874 $50 30% 37% 32% 12.8 17.1

84% Atomized Burner $22,207 -$159 56% 37% 7% 36.6 49.3

85% $21,930 $14 35% 37% 28% 16.8 22.5

85% Inter Ign $21,924 $20 48% 14% 38% 15.6 19.9

85% Atomized Burner $22,257 -$266 78% 14% 8% 37.2 50.4

86% $21,972 -$21 51% 14% 35% 17.6 23.7

86% Inter Ign $21,965 -$16 54% 7% 39% 16.7 21.7

86% Atomized Burner $22,299 -$325 82% 7% 11% 34.3 46.9

90% $22,363 -$384 71% 7% 22% 22.6 28.2

95% $22,462 -$483 73% 0% 27% 21.0 25.9

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level

indicated, so the household is not affected.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.5.5 LCC and PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

LCC Payback Period 

(Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact* Benefit 

80% $22,431 

81% $22,230 $10 0% 95% 5% 0.7 0.8 

81 % Inter Ign $22,224 $11 3% 89% 7% 5.0 9.6 

82% $22,035 $31 0% 89% 11% 0.7 0.8 

82% Inter Ign $22,029 $32 3% 84% 13% 3.l 7.6 

82% Atomized Burner $22,361 -$21 13% 84% 3% 20.8 29.0 

83% $21,844 $61 0% 84% 16% 0.7 0.9 

83% Inter Ign $21,838 $63 13% 61% 26% 6.l 10.8 

83% Atomized Burner $22,170 -$67 32% 61% 7% 15.9 25.9 

84% $21,881 $46 17% 61% 22% 13.3 18.8 

84% Inter Ign $21,874 $50 30% 37% 32% 12.8 17.1 

84% Atomized Burner $22,207 -$159 56% 37% 7% 36.6 49.3 

85% $21,930 $14 35% 37% 28% 16.8 22.5 

85% Inter Ign $21,924 $20 48% 14% 38% 15.6 19.9 

85% Atomized Burner $22,257 -$266 78% 14% 8% 37.2 50.4 

86% $21,972 -$21 51% 14% 35% 17.6 23.7 

86% Inter Ign $21,965 -$16 54% 7% 39% 16.7 2l.7 

86% Atomized Burner $22,299 -$325 82% 7% 11% 34.3 46.9 

90% $22,363 -$384 71% 7% 22% 22.6 28.2 

95% $22,462 -$483 73% 0% 27% 2l.0 25.9 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace aSSIgned to the household has greater effiCIency than the level 

indicated, so the household is not affected. 

Q-49 
LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

2000 - i n

an

1500

1000

500

T T

T

-500

-1000

-1500

-2000

-2500

M M

c

00 6 0000 -p/ -O -O

N c C N N N

E E c O o 0 a

00 Q N

am}

W Q N

^

Q

p

CO Q

0

N

Co Co

0 0 0

Figure Q.5.9 National LCC Savings Results for Oil Boilers

(AEO 2006 Low Growth)

Payback Period Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

120 ian

u Mean

100

80

60

40

20 T T

o ^_T T I° q ° Y T

-20

00 ' Ri ^ 00 00 0000

b3

c

t b3

N N

F

00 00 O] W Q

^ Q

aD Q

0

N

0 0 0

to

0

CO

Figure Q.5.10 National PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO

2006 Low Growth)

Q-50

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

Madian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

2000~~·~Med~lIla~rn~--~~~~~--~~~~~--~~~~~--~~' 

,J Maan 

1500 

1000 

500 

o 

-500 

-1000 

-1500 

-2000 

-2500 

<f< 

00 ~ 

ffi 

E 

<f< 

00 

Figure Q.5.9 

:$! 

~ ~ :$! c ~ :$! c Q) :$! c Q) :$! 1\i ~ %- 0 0 E> E> B' lB E> co B' ~ ffi .m co .m co .ill 2 en Sl en cp E ~ '" E '" E N E :$! E :$! E <f< § :$! § 1\i .9 ~ .9 0 

OC> « co « S « lB « 

<f< <f< :$! :$! 0 0 N '" l!) 

National LCC Savings Results 

(AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

Payback Period Ranges By Design Optbn 

Madian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

c Q) <f< :$! 0 

E> 2' @ ~ 2 

E ~ <f< § ~ « 

:$! 0 

for Oil Boilers 

120r-~~~la~n~~~--~.-~~--r-~~-.~~~.-~~--~~~ 

,J Maan 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

01----,.,....,-= -<-_I::":'[;:. T 

<f< ~ <f< ~ Q) 

00 ~ 2' lD ffi 1ii 

E E N 

<f< :$! § 1\i ro co « 

<f< 

N 

Figure Q.5.10 

<f< ~ Q) :$! 

~ Q) :$! ~ Q) :$! c ~ :$! :$! 

~ ih ?o 6 0 '" i B' B' co E> ~ ffi } OC> OC> .m O"l 

cp lD cp lD cp E N N E N E N 

:$! § :$! § <f< § :$! 

~ ~ %- 0 

OC> « co « lB « ~ 

<f< <f< <f< l!) CD 

National PBP Results for Oil Boilers (AEO 

2006 Low Growth) 

Q-50 
Table Q.5.6 LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2006 Low Growth

LCC Payback Period (Years)

Design Option : Average Average Households with Median Average*

AFUE/Electricity Savings

Net Cost No

Impact

Net

Benefit

80% $17,348

81% $16,882 $163 0% 65% 35% 2.0 2.3

81% 2-stage modulation $17,064 $61 25% 44% 31% 6.9 8.4

82% $16,837 $189 9% 44% 47% 5.2 10.2

82% 2-stage modulation $17,020 $61 39% 30% 31% 10.9 29.6

83% $16,864 $169 25% 30% 46% 9.8 19.7

83% 2-stage modulation $17,046 $14 56% 15% 29% 16.8 40.4

84% $16,726 $286 15% 15% 70% 5.8 10.5

84% 2-stage modulation $16,909 $115 52% 6% 43% 14.2 27.7

85% $16,885 $137 47% 6% 47% 13.9 27.2

85% 2-stage modulation $17,068 -$35 62% 6% 32% 20.4 46.1

86% $17,341 -$292 71% 6% 23% 25.4 48.2

91% $17,349 -$300 67% 6% 27% 20.8 35.1

99% $17,620 -$565 71% 3% 26% 21.0 35.0

"No impact" means that the base case furnace assigned to the household has greater efficiency than the level

indicated, so the household is not affected.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Q.5.6 LCC and PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

LCC Payback Period (Years) 

Design Option: Average Average Households with Median Average* 

AFUE/Electricity Savings Net Cost No Net 

Impact Benefit 

80% $17,348 

81% $16,882 $163 0% 65% 35% 2.0 2.3 

81 % 2-stage modulation $17,064 $61 25% 44% 31% 6.9 8.4 

82% $16,837 $189 9% 44% 47% 5.2 10.2 

82% 2-stage modulation $17,020 $61 39% 30% 31% 10.9 29.6 

83% $16,864 $169 25% 30% 46% 9.8 19.7 

83% 2-stage modulation $17,046 $14 56% 15% 29% 16.8 40.4 

84% $16,726 $286 15% 15% 70% 5.8 10.5 

84% 2-stage modulation $16,909 $115 52% 6% 43% 14.2 27.7 

85% $16,885 $137 47% 6% 47% 13.9 27.2 

85% 2-stage modulation $17,068 -$35 62% 6% 32% 20.4 46.1 

86% $17,341 -$292 71% 6% 23% 25.4 48.2 

91% $17,349 -$300 67% 6% 27% 20.8 35.1 

99% $17,620 -$565 71% 3% 26% 21.0 35.0 

* "No Impact" means that the base case furnace aSSIgned to the household has greater effiCIency than the level 

indicated, so the household is not affected. 

Q-51 
LCC Savings Ranges By Design Option

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

3000 an

N1 an

2000

1000

-1000

-2000

-3000

0 0 0 0 o a o 0

q o 0 0

v

c

-moo a -moo

c c ^

N N N

0 0

M

Figure Q.5.11 National LCC Savings Results for Gas

Boilers (AEO 2006 Low Growth)

Payback Period Ranges By Design Opton

IV^dian; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95%

200 - ian

180 Mean

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

-20

^

00

R1 M

07 ^ ^ ^

^

CO ^

Figure Q.5.12 National PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO

2006 Low Growth)

Q-52

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

3000 an 

Q23Mean 

2000 

1000 

0 

-1000 

-2000 

-3000 

?f< <Ie ro ~ 

0 

.g 

.!: 

+ 

"0 

~ 

fIj, 

ro 

1i5 

N 

?f< 

Figure Q.5.11 

?f< 

00 ~ 0 

<J 

~ 

+ 

~ fIj, 

.ill 

en 

N 

~ 

Figure Q.5.12 

Lee Savings Ranges By Design Option 

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

?f< 

Rl 

?f< ?f< ?f< ""'- ?f< ""'- ~ ~ ~ ~ fo 0 

'" ro S 12 ro C;; 8l 0 0 <J <J .g <J "0 :g "0 

..5 ..5 .!: + + + + 

~ "0 ""8 ~ :::!: ~ fIj, (J) fIj, fIj, .ill N -£l .ill en <{l <{l N N N N 

?f< ""'-

~ ?f< ""'- fh 

National LCC Savings Results for Gas 

Boilers (AEO 2006 Low Growth) 

Paybock Period Ranges By Design Optkln 

Median; Box: 25%-75%; Whisker: 5%-95% 

""'- e\i 

ro 

~jl ""'- ""'- ?f< ?f< ""'- ""'- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 8) ro ro 12 ~ 0; (J) 

0 0 0 0 U U U U 

~ ~ ~ ~ + + + + 

~ ~ ~ ~ fIj, fIj, fIj, 2l, .ill .ill .ill .ill C/J en en !/) 

N N N N 

?f< ""'- ?f< ?f< N ~ 

National PBP Results for Gas Boilers (AEO 

2006 Low Growth) 

Q-52 
REFERENCES

I. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy

Outlook 2005: With Projections Through 2025. February, 2005. Washington, DC.

Report No. DOE/EIA-0383(2005). .

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2005).pdf>

2. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy

Outlook 2006: With Projections Through 2030. February, 2006. Washington, DC.

Report No. DOE/EIA-0383(2006).

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2006).pdf>

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy 

Outlook 2005: With Projections Through 2025. February, 2005. Washington, DC. 

Report No. DOE/EIA-0383(2005) .. 

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2005).pdf> 

2. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy 

Outlook 2006: With Projections Through 2030. February, 2006. Washington, DC. 

Report No. DOE/EIA-0383(2006). 

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2006).pdf> 

Q-53 
APPENDIX R. NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS AND NET PRESENT VALUE USING

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

R.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................... R.1-1

R.2 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS .......... R.1-1

R.2.1 NES/NPV Results Using High Economic Growth Scenario ................... R.1-1

R.2.2 NES/NPV Results Using Low Economic Growth Scenario ................... R.14

R.3 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOSCOMPARISON (AEO 2005) .......................................... R.1-7

R.3.1 National Energy Savings (NES) ........................................ R.1-7

R.3.2 Net Present Value (NPV) ........................................... R.1-11

R.4 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOSCOMPARISON (AEO 2006) ......................................... R.1-14

R.4.1 National Energy Savings (NES) ....................................... R.1-14

R.4.2 Net Present Value (NPV) ............................................. R.1-18

LIST OF TABLES

Table R.2.1

Table R.2.2

Table R.2.3

Table R.2.4

Table R.2.5

Table R.2.6

Table R.2.7

Table R.2.8

Table R.2.9

Table R.2.10

Table R.2.11

Table R.2.12

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (High Growth) ................... R.1-1

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Weatherized Gas Furnaces (High Growth) ....................... R.1-2

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Mobile Home Gas Furnaces (High Growth) ...................... R.1-2

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Non-Weatherized Oil-Fired Furnaces (High Growth) ............... R.1-2

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Hot Water Gas Boilers (High Growth) .......................... R.1-3

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Oil-Fired Boilers (High Growth) ............................... R.1-3

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (Low Growth) .................... R.1-4

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Weatherized Gas Furnaces (Low Growth) ........................ R.1-4

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Mobile Home Gas Furnaces (Low Growth) ....................... R.1-5

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Oil-Fired Furnaces (Low Growth) .............................. R.1-5

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

for Hot Water Gas Boilers (Low Growth) ........................... R.1-5

Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value

R-i

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX R. NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS AND NET PRESENT VALUE USING 

AL TERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

R.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................... R.1-1 

R.2 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS .......... R.l-l 

R.2.1 NES/NPV Results Using High Economic Growth Scenario ................... R.l-l 

R.2.2 NES/NPV Results Using Low Economic Growth Scenario ................... R.1-4 

R.3 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOSCOMPARISON (AEO 200S) .......................................... R.l-7 

R.3.1 National Energy Savings (NES) ........................................ R.1-7 

R.3.2 Net Present Value (NPV) ........................................... R.l-ll 

R.4 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOSCOMPARISON (AEO 2006) ......................................... R.1-14 

R.4.1 National Energy Savings (NES) ....................................... R.I-14 

R.4.2 Net Present Value (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. R.I-18 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table R.2.1 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Non -Weatherized Gas Furnaces (High Growth) ................... R.l-l 

Table R.2.2 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Weatherized Gas Furnaces (High Growth) ....................... R.I-2 

Table R.2.3 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Mobile Horne Gas Furnaces (High Growth) ...................... R.I-2 

Table R.2.4 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Non-Weatherized Oil-Fired Furnaces (High Growth) ............... R.I-2 

Table R.2.S Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Hot Water Gas Boilers (High Growth) .......................... R.I-3 

Table R.2.6 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Oil-Fired Boilers (High Growth) ............................... R.I-3 

Table R.2.7 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Non -Weatherized Gas Furnaces (Low Growth) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R.I-4 

Table R.2.8 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Weatherized Gas Furnaces (Low Growth) ........................ R.I-4 

Table R.2.9 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Mobile Horne Gas Furnaces (Low Growth) ....................... R.l-S 

Table R.2.1 0 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Oil-Fired Furnaces (Low Growth) .............................. R.l-S 

Table R.2.11 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

for Hot Water Gas Boilers (Low Growth) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R.l-S 

Table R.2.12 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value 

R-i 
for Oil-Fired Boilers (Low Growth) ............................... R.1-6

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure R.3.1 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data(NES) .............................................. R.1-7

Figure R.3.2 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data (NES) .............................................. R.1-8

Figure R.3.3 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data (NES) .............................................. R.1-8

Figure R.3.4 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data (NES) .............................................. R.1-9

Figure R.3.5 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price Data (NES) ... R.1-9

Figure R.3.6 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data (NES) ............................................. R.1-10

Figure R.3.7 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data (NPV) ............................................. R.1-11

Figure R.3.8 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data (NPV) ............................................. R.1-11

Figure R.3.9 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenario Using AEO 2005

Price Data(NPV) ............................................. R.1-12

Figure R.3.10 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data(NPV) ............................................. R.1-12

Figure R.3.11 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price Data (NPV) .. R.1-13

Figure R.3.12 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data (NPV) ............................................. R.1-13

Figure R.4.1 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data(NES) ............................................. R.1-14

Figure R.4.2 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data (NES) ............................................. R.1-15

Figure R.4.3 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data(NES) ............................................. R.1-15

Figure R.4.4 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data (NES) ............................................. R.1-16

Figure R.4.5 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price Data (NES) .. R.1-16

Figure R.4.6 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data (NES) ............................................. R.1-17

Figure R.4.7 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data (NPV) ............................................. R.1-18

Figure R.4.8 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data(NPV) ............................................. R.1-18

Figure R.4.9 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenario Using AEO 2006

Price Data(NPV) ............................................. R.1-19

R-ii

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

for Oil-Fired Boilers (Low Growth) ............................... R.I-6 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure R.3.1 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NES) .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R.I-7 

Figure R.3.2 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NES) .............................................. R.I-8 

Figure R.3.3 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NES) ............................................. , R.I-8 

Figure R.3A Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NES) ............................................. , R.I-9 

Figure R.3.5 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price Data (NES) .. , R.I-9 

Figure R.3.6 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NES) .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. R.I-I0 

Figure R.3.7 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R.l-ll 

Figure R.3.8 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. R.l-ll 

Figure R.3.9 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenario Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. R.I-12 

Figure R.3.1O Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R.I-12 

Figure R.3.11 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price Data (NPV) .. R.1-13 

Figure R.3.12 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. R.I-13 

Figure RA.1 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NES) .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. R.I-14 

Figure R.4.2 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NES) .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R.I-15 

Figure R.4.3 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NES) .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R.I-15 

Figure R.4A Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NES) ............................................. R.I-16 

Figure R.4.5 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price Data (NES) .. R.I-16 

Figure R.4.6 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NES) ............................................. R.I-17 

Figure RA.7 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. R.I-18 

Figure R.4.8 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. R.I-18 

Figure RA.9 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenario Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R.I-19 

R-ii 
Figure R.4.10 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data (NPV) ............................................. R.1-19

Figure R.4.11 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price Data (NPV) .. R.1-20

Figure R.4.12 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data (NPV) ............................................. R.1-20

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Figure R.4.10 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NPV) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. R.1-19 

Figure R.4.11 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price Data (NPV) .. R.1-20 

Figure R.4.12 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NPV) ............................................. R.1-20 

R-iii 
APPENDIX R. NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS AND NET PRESENT VALUE USING

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS

R.1 INTRODUCTION

This appendix presents national energy savings (NES) and net present value (NPV)

results for alternative installation costs (for non-weatherized gas furnaces and gas boilers), and

alternative energy price scenarios from Energy Information (EIA)'s Annual Energy Outlook

2005 (AEO 2005)' and Annual Energy Outlook 2006 (AEO 2006)2 for all product classes. DOE

explained the calculations of NES and NPV using the reference installation costs and the default

energy price forecast in Chapter 10, National Impact Analysis.

R.2 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS

For each product class, DOE calculated NES and NPV using energy price scenarios from

the High and Low Economic Growth cases in AEO 2005 and AEO 2006. The NES results are

the same in each energy price scenario. As one would expect, the NPV is most favorable using

prices in the High Growth scenario, and least favorable using prices in the Low Growth scenario.

R.2.1 NES/NPV Results Using High Economic Growth Scenario

Table R.2.1 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 80% AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.04

2 80% AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.04

3 81% AFUE 0.32 0.34 0.02 0.11

4 90% AFUE 2.87 2.98 -0.01 0.73

5 96% AFUE 4.91 5.18 -14.25 -12.72

Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (High Growth

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX R, NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS AND NET PRESENT VALUE USING 

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS 

R,1 INTRODUCTION 

This appendix presents national energy savings (NES) and net present value (NPV) 

results for alternative installation costs (for non-weatherized gas furnaces and gas boilers), and 

alternative energy price scenarios from Energy Information (EIA)'s Annual Energy Outlook 

2005 (AEO 2005Y and Annual Energy Outlook 2006 (AEO 2006? for all product classes. DOE 

explained the calculations ofNES and NPV using the reference installation costs and the default 

energy price forecast in Chapter 10, National Impact Analysis. 

R,2 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOS 

For each product class, DOE calculated NES and NPV using energy price scenarios from 

the High and Low Economic Growth cases in AEO 2005 and AEO 2006. The NES results are 

the same in each energy price scenario. As one would expect, the NPV is most favorable using 

prices in the High Growth scenario, and least favorable using prices in the Low Growth scenario. 

R,2.1 NES/NPV Results Using High Economic Growth Scenario 

Table R,2.1 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (High Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006 

1 80%AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.04 

2 80%AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.04 

3 81% AFUE 0.32 0.34 0.02 0.11 

4 90%AFUE 2.87 2.98 -0.01 0.73 

5 96%AFUE 4.91 5.18 -14.25 -12.72 

R-l 
Table R.2.2 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 80% AFUE 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.05

2 83% AFUE 0.10 0.11 0.21 0.23

3 83% AFUE 0.10 0.11 0.21 0.23

4 83% AFUE 0.10 0.11 0.21 0.23

5 83% AFUE 0.10 0.11 0.21 0.23

Table R.2.3 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 80% AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.06

2 80% AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.06

3 81% AFUE 0.01 0.01 -0.004 0.05

4 90% AFUE 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.24

5 90% AFUE 0.06 0 .06 0.07 0.24

Table R.2.4 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 80% AFUE 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.004

2 82% AFUE 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.06

3 82% AFUE 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.06

4 84% AFUE 0.05 0.05 -0.02 0.01

5 85% AFUE 0.06 0.06 -0.06 -0.02

Weatherized Gas Furnaces (High Growth)

Mobile Home Gas Furnaces (High Growth

Non-Weatherized Oil-Fired Furnaces (High Growth

R-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table R.2.2 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Weatherized Gas Furnaces (Hi2h Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006 

1 80%AFUE 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.05 

2 83%AFUE 0.10 0.11 0.21 0.23 

3 83%AFUE 0.10 0.11 0.21 0.23 

4 83%AFUE 0.10 0.11 0.21 0.23 

5 83%AFUE 0.10 0.11 0.21 0.23 

Table R.2.3 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Mobile Home Gas Furnaces (Hi2h Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006 

1 80%AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.06 

2 80%AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.06 

3 81% AFUE 0.01 0.01 -0.004 0.05 

4 90%AFUE 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.24 

5 90%AFUE 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.24 

Table R.2.4 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Non-Weatherized Oil-Fired Furnaces (Hi2h Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AE02005 AEO 2006 

1 80%AFUE 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.004 

2 82%AFUE 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.06 

3 82%AFUE 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.06 

4 84%AFUE 0.05 0.05 -0.02 0.01 

5 85%AFUE 0.06 0.06 -0.06 -0.02 

R-2 
Table R.2.5 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 82% AFUE 0.14 0.15 0.25 0.28

2 84% AFUE 0.25 0.26 0.36 0.41

3 84% AFUE 0.25 0.26 0.36 0.41

4 84% AFUE 0.25 0.26 0.36 0.41

5 99% AFUE 1.10 1.16 -2.30 -2.24

Table R.2.6 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 83% AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04

2 83% AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04

3 83% AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04

4 84% AFUE 0.02 0.02 -0.01 0.02

5 95% AFUE 0.27 0.28 -0.96 -0.63

Hot Water Gas Boilers Hi h Growth

Oil-Fired Boilers (High Growth)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table R.2.5 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Hot Water Gas Boilers (High Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AE02006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006 

1 82%AFUE 0.14 0.15 0.25 0.28 

2 84%AFUE 0.25 0.26 0.36 0.41 

3 84%AFUE 0.25 0.26 0.36 0.41 

4 84%AFUE 0.25 0.26 0.36 0.41 

5 99%AFUE l.10 l.16 -2.30 -2.24 

Table R.2.6 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Oil-Fired Boilers (High Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AE02006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006 

1 83%AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 

2 83%AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 

3 83%AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 

4 84%AFUE 0.02 0.02 -0.01 0.02 

5 95%AFUE 0.27 0.28 -0.96 -0.63 

R-3 
R.2.2 NES/NPV Results Using Low Economic Growth Scenario

Table R.2.7 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 80% AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04

2 80% AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04

3 81% AFUE 0.29 0.28 -0.06 0.14

4 90% AFUE 2.53 2.47 -0.75 1.04

5 96% AFUE 4.35 4.30 -14.02 -10.18

Table R.2.8 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 80% AFUE 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.005

2 83% AFUE 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.21

3 83% AFUE 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.21

4 83% AFUE 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.21

5 83% AFUE 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.21

Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (Low Growth

Weatherized Gas Furnaces (Low Growth

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

R.2.2 NESINPV Results Using Low Economic Growth Scenario 

Table R.2.7 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces (Low Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006 

1 80%AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 

2 80%AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.04 

3 81%AFUE 0.29 0.28 -0.06 0.14 

4 90%AFUE 2.53 2.47 -0.75 1.04 

5 96%AFUE 4.35 4.30 -14.02 -10.18 

Table R.2.8 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Weatherized Gas Furnaces (Low Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006 

1 80%AFUE 0.002 0.002 0.004 0.005 

2 83%AFUE 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.21 

3 83%AFUE 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.21 

4 83%AFUE 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.21 

5 83%AFUE 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.21 

R-4 
Table R.2.9 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 80% AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.06

2 80% AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.06

3 81% AFUE 0.01 0.01 -0.01 0.05

4 90% AFUE 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.26

5 90% AFUE 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.26

Table R.2.10 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 80% AFUE 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.004

2 82% AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.06

3 82% AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.06

4 84% AFUE 0.05 0.04 -0.03 0.02

5 85% AFUE 0.06 0.05 -0.07 -0.01

Table R.2.11 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (TSL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 82% AFUE 0.13 0.13 0.20 0.28

2 84% AFUE 0.23 0.23 0.26 0.41

3 84% AFUE 0.23 0.23 0.26 0.41

4 84% AFUE 0.23 0.23 0.26 0.41

5 99% AFUE 1.01 1.01 -2.40 -1.72

Mobile Nome Gas Furnaces (Low Growth)

Oil-Fired Furnaces (Low Growth

Hot Water Gas Boilers Low Growth

R-5

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table R.2.9 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Mobile Home Gas Furnaces (Low Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006 

1 80%AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.06 

2 80%AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.06 

3 81% AFUE 0.01 0.01 -0.01 0.05 

4 90%AFUE 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.26 

5 90%AFUE 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.26 

Table R.2.10 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Oil-Fired Furnaces (Low Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006 

1 80%AFUE 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.004 

2 82%AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.06 

3 82%AFUE 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.06 

4 84%AFUE 0.05 0.04 -0.03 0.02 

5 85%AFUE 0.06 0.05 -0.07 -0.01 

Table R.2.n Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Hot Water Gas Boilers (Low Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006 

1 82%AFUE 0.13 0.13 0.20 0.28 

2 84%AFUE 0.23 0.23 0.26 0.41 

3 84%AFUE 0.23 0.23 0.26 0.41 

4 84%AFUE 0.23 0.23 0.26 0.41 

5 99%AFUE 1.01 1.01 -2.40 -1.72 

R-5 
Table 8.2.12 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for

Oil-Fired Boilers (Low Growth

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (wads) NPV (billion 2004 $)

Level (1 SL) (AFUE)

AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AEO 2005 AEO 2006

1 83% AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03

2 83% AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03

3 83% AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03

4 84% AFUE 0.02 0.02 -0.01 0.02

5 95% AFUE 0.25 0.25 -0.94 -0.54

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table R.2.12 Cumulative National Energy Savings and Consumer Net Present Value for 

Oil-Fired Boilers (Low Growth) 

Trial Standard Efficiency Level NES (Quads) NPV (billion 2004 $) 

Level (TSL) (AFUE) AEO 2005 AEO 2006 AE02005 AEO 2006 

1 83%AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 

2 83%AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 

3 83%AFUE 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 

4 84%AFUE 0.02 0.02 -0.01 0.02 

5 95%AFUE 0.25 0.25 -0.94 -0.54 

R-6 
R.3 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOSCOMPARISON (AEO 2005)

The following figures graphically display the NES and NPV using AEO 2005 for all

product classes under the low growth, the reference case, and the high growth energy price

scenarios.

R.3.1 National Energy Savings (NES)

0

E3 Reference

Ell-ow Economic Grow[h

EI High Economic Growth

78% AFUE - Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81% AFUE- 90% AFUE 96% AFUEIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HX Area Modulation

(Continuous)

Figure R.3.1 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using

AEO 2005 Price Data (NES)

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

R.3 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOSCOMPARISON (AEO 2005) 

The following figures graphically display the NES and NPV using AEO 2005 for all 

product classes under the low growth, the reference case, and the high growth energy price 

scenanos. 

R.3.1 National Energy Savings (NES) 

00 

"C 

§ 3 

Q. 

~ ~--~---------- - -~----~- ~~----~-----------------------------~-~----------

00 

Cl 

~ 

.~ 

Vi 

~ 2~----------------------------------------- o 

Vi 

1 ---~----------- ~---------~.--------------------------------

78% AFUE - Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81%AFUEIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HX Area 

90% AFUE 96% AFUEModulation 

(Continuous) 

Figure R.3.1 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using 

AEO 2005 Price Data (NES) 

R-7 
0 . 12

D Reference

0 10 ®Low Economic Growth.

D High Economic Growth

0.08 -___._ ----- ----- -----..

v

a

a

m

0.06

m

m

U

J

N

0 . 04 -------

--

0. 00 - - - --

78% AFUE- 80%AFUE- 83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 83% AFUEBaseline Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea

Figure R.3.2 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO

2005 Price Data (NES)

0 .07

0 06

D Reference

. ------ ®Low Economic Growth - "- _ -

q High Economic Growth

0.05 - ---- _ .__.__ ----------- - -.

D

O 0.04.

m

___.--- __

C

5,

0.03 u

N

0. 02

0. 01 - -- --

0. 00 -- - -- -

75% AFUE-Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81% AFUE- 90% AFUE 90% AFUE

Increased HX Area Increased HX Area Increased HX Area Condensing Condensing

Figure R.3.3 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data (NES)

R-8

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

"0 " " Q. " 

" 0> 

c 

.~ 

UJ 

~ 

e 

" 0 

UJ 

0.12 ,-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

im-~f~-;~~~-~--~ ~ 

0.10 1111 Low Economic Growth 1--____ _ 

: ~_~_i~_~_ ~~_~~<?~J~_ ~~~~~h_ 

0.08 

0.06 

0.04 

0.02 i-----------------------------

0.00 -'--____ ~---.lI--IC::L~ 

78% AFUEBaseline 80% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUEIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea 

Figure R.3.2 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 

2005 Price Data (NES) 

0.07r---------------------------------------------------------------------------------, 

"0 " " 

1m Reference 

0.06 ~-~--- I'm Low Economic Growth 

DHigh Economic Growth 

0.05 

~ 0.04 1--------------------------------·--------------------------

" 0> 

C 

.~ 

UJ 

~ 0.03+--------------------------------------------------------

" o 

UJ 

0.02 -1--------------

0.01 1--------------

0.00 1-------------.-

75% AFUE - Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81% AFUEIncreased HX Area Increased HX Area Increased HX Area 90% AFUE 

Condensing 

90% AFUE 

Condensing 

Figure R.3.3 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NES) 

R-8 
0 .07

El Reference

0.06 ® Low Economic Growth

^O High Economic Growth

0 .05 -

0.04

0.03 - ---- - --------- ----

0.02 ._.___

0. 01

0. 00

78%AFUE- Baseline 80%AFUE- 82%AFUE 82%AFUE 84%AFUE 85%AFUE

- -

IncreasedHXArea Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition

Figure R.3.4 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price

Data (NES)

1 .20

©Reference

1.00 ® Low Economic Growth

L13 High Economic Growth

0 80

9

.

a

m

n

m

0.40 ---------.__---

0.20 - -

0 .00

80% AFUE- 82% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 99% AFUE

Baseline Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat

Transfer Coef & Transfer Coef & Transfer Coat & Transfer Coat &

Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition

Figure R.3.5 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price Data

(NES)

R-9

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

0.Q7 

0.06 

0.05 1------------------------------------------------------------------

U> 

." 

.. 

~ 0.04+--------------------------------------------------------

U> 

'" C 

.~ 

UJ 

~ 0.03 

~ 

o 

UJ 

0.02 

0.01 +------------------

0.00 .\-__ -.-_~-'li--=::L78%AFUE - Baseline 80%AFUE- 82%AFUE 82%AFUE 84%AFUE 85%AFUE 

IncreasedHXArea Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition 

Figure R.3.4 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price 

Data (NES) 

1.20 

1.00 

0.80 U> 

." 

.. 

~ 

e. 

U> 

'" c 0.60 .:; 

.. 

UJ 

!e " 

~ 

0 

UJ 

0.40 ---------------------------------.---

0.20 i------------------~--------~------------

0.00 

80% AFUE- 82% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 99% AFUE 

Baseline Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat 

Transfer Coef & Transfer Coet & Transfer Coef & Transfer Coet & 

Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition 

Figure R.3.5 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price Data 

(NES) 

R-9 
0.30

® Reference

0 .25 ®Low Economic Growth

q High Economic Growth

0.20

N

__ --

a

a

N

m

0. 15

m

v

0

y

0.10 ------ _-- -- --_------ - --- - -

0. 05 ----- ----- --- --

0.00

Base Case 83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 95% AFUE

IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea

Figure R.3.6 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price

Data (NES)

R-10

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

"' "0 

ro 

Q. " 

<I> 

'" c ':; 

ro 

rn 

@ 

" 0 

rn 

0.30,----------------------------------------------------------------------------, 

r§]~R~i;renc~--

0.25 -'-____ ,I-- ~ .... Economic Growth 1--__________________________________________ _ 

_ g_~_i_~_~_~~~~~mi~_~rowth 

0.20 

0.15 

0.10 

0.00 +-__________ ~---"------'--__ ----'----L~-"'-------' __ -- Base Case 83%AFUEIncreasedHXArea 

83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 84%AFUEIncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea 

95%AFUE 

Figure R,3.6 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price 

Data (NES) 

R-IO 
R.3.2 Net Present Value (NPV)

2

0

78%AFUE-Baseline 80%AFUE- 80%AFUE- 81%AFUE- a%nr` E nFt 1EIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HX Area M dula on

-2 (Co ilinu us)

13 Reference

4

v

E3 Low Economic Growth

q High Economic Growth

°o

c

N

O

-8

Z

-10

12

-14

- 16

Figure R.3.7 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using

0 .25

`® Reference

E3 Low Economic Growth

0 20 q High Economic Growth.

a

0. 15 - ------- - - ---

N

C

--

G

O

a

a 0. 10

z

0.05 ------------ -

0.00 .

78% AFUE- 80%AFUE- 83%AFUE- 83%AFU E- 83%AFUE- 83%AFUEBaseline Increased HXArea Increased H XArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea

Figure R.3.8 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO

2005 Price Data (NPV)

AEO 2005 Price Data (NPV

R-11

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

R.3.2 Net Present Value (NPV) 

2y---------------------------------------------------------------------, 

78% AFUE - Baseline 80%AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81% AFUEIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HX Area 

-2 

-4 

'" 0 

0 

l;t -6 .5 

0 

c 

~ 

B -8 1--------------- - ---- ----- -----------------------

> a. 

z 

-10 ------------------- ----------~----------------------------------

-12 

-14+--------------------------------

-16-L------------------------------------~ 

Figure R.3.7 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using 

AEO 2005 Price Data (NPV 

0.25 ,---------------------------------------, 

0.20 r-------{-=.~=:=-::::: ':'rovv~n.J------__I 

'" :5 0.15 

l;t 

.5 

o 

c 

~ 

~ 

6: 0.10 +------------- z 

0.05 +-------------------------------------

0.00 +-. _____ ~---iiiC=:I.---

78% AFUEBaseline 

80% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUEIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea 

Figure R.3.8 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 

2005 Price Data (NPV) 

R-ll 
0 . 08

0 .07 OReference ^,

®Low Economic Growth !,

q High Economic Growth ^'^.

0.06 - ..--- -___. -... -------

0.05 - ----- - -------- - -----.__--- --_. _------..

v

°o

^ 0. 04 -

c

N

O

a_ 0.03 - ..__._ .__---- ------ -----

z

0.02 -- --

0 . 01

0 00 - ------- ---_. . - ^

_.^..- _- ^__ -

75%AFUE-Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- -:7r AF E- 90% AFUE 90% AFUE

Increased HX Area Increased HX Area Ir ^ ".na. ed X Area Condensing Condensing

-0. 01

Figure R.3.9 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenario Using AEO 2005

Price Data (NPV)

o . os

0 04

®Reference

. ®Low Economic Growth

q High Economic Growth

0 .02

0.00 - ,- --f_.......^- -T- -^-. ..-^-

78%AFUE-Baseline 80%AFUE- 82%AFUE 82%AFUE 84 /oAF E 85 %AF E

IncreasedHXArea Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition Ir -.er«i fed gniti n I erru ted gniti n

-o . oz - --- -- -

-o . oa -- --- --------

-0.06 - -- ---._. _.------

-0 .08

Figure R.3.10 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO

2005 Price Data (NPV)

R-12

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

0.08 

0.07 

0.06 

0.05 

~ 

" N 

.. 0.04 . 5 

~ 

c 

~ 

e 0.03 

> Q. 

z 

0.02 

0.01 

0.00 

Increased HX Area 

-0.01 '----------------------

Figure R.3.9 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenario Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NPV) 

0.06,--------------------------------------, 

0.04 

0.02 +-------------

~ ~ 0.00 I _______ ~---.I!! •• IL=:J_~-

~ 

c 

~ 

78%AFUE - Baseline 80%AFUE- 82%AFUE 82%AFUE 

IncreasedHXArea Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition 

:;; 

;;- -0.02 1--------------------------------

Q. 

Z 

-0.04 1---------------------------- ---.-------------------------

-0.06 

-0.08.L.---------------------------------------' 

Figure R.3.10 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 

2005 Price Data (NPV) 

R-12 
0.50

0.00

v

0

N

-1.50

-2.00

-2.50

Figure R.3.11 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price

Data (NPV)

0 . 20

0 00 f-1-I-I.

..-.-

Base Case 83%AFUE- 83%AFUE- 83%AFUE- 84%AFUE- 95% AP E

IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea

-0.20 EIeference

ow Eonomic Growth

w

Economic Gro

_-

;h

c

c -0 .40 0

a_

IL

-0.50 --- - ---------

-0 .80

- 1 . 00

Figure R.3.12

- F__1 [Tfl

qfl

80% AFUE- 82% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- ' 99% A UE

Baseline Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat

Transfer Coef & Transfer Coef & Transfer Coot & Transfer Coef &

---- -FiP s c Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition

® Reference

Ell Low Economic Growth

q High. Economic_ Growth

---------- - -------

-0.50

Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005

Price Data (NPV)

R-13

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

;;:-

g 

~ 

.5 

0.50 ,--------------------------------------------------------------------------------, 

0.00 +--------------~ 

-0.50 

80% AFUEBaseline Improved Heat 

Transfer Coef & 

) 

_ _ _ _ _ ""Pd,~n C Ignition I! Reference 

iii Low Economic Growth 

o HlfLh ~~ono~~~ G~o~h 

Improved Heat Improved Heat 

Transfer Coef & Transfer Coef & 

Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition 

~ -1.00 

~ ;e. 

a: 

z 

-1.50 

-2.00 

-2.50 '-----------------------------------------------------------' 

Figure R.3.11 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 Price 

Data (NPV) 

C> 

~ 

N 

'" .5 

0.20.------------------------------------------------------------------------------. 

0.00 

-0.20 

Base Case 83% AFUEIncreasedHXArea 83% AFUEIncreasedHXArea 83% AFUE- 84% AFUEIncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea 

~ -0040 +---------------------------------------------------------------------

~ ;§. 

a: 

z 

-0.60 .---.. ----.---------------------.-

-0.80 +---------------------------------------------------------------------

-1.00 .L... ______________________________________________________________________________ ---' 

Figure R.3.12 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2005 

Price Data (NPV) 

R-13 
R.4 RESUI,'I'S USING AI,'I'ERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOSCOIi^IPARISON (AEO 2006)

The following figures graphically display the NES and NPV using AEO 2006 for all

product classes under the low growth, the reference case, and the high growth energy price

scenarios.

R.4.1 National Energy Savings (NES)

6

®Reference

5

®Low Economic Growth I

q High Economic Growth

4

N

'O

J

d

OI

c 8

vl

U

U)

2 .

- -____. -

___

1 _._._ ___--------------_.---

0- -

)8% AFUE- Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 61 %AFUE- 90% AFUE 96% AFUEIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HX Area Modulation

(Continuous)

Figure R.4.1 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using

AEO 2006 Price Data (NES)

R-14

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

R.4 RESULTS USING ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PRICE SCENARIOSCOMPARISON (AEO 2006) 

The following figures graphically display the NBS and NPV using ABO 2006 for all 

product classes under the low growth, the reference case, and the high growth energy price 

scenanos. 

R.4.1 National Energy Savings (NES) 

21--~----~~-----~---~---------

78% AFUE - Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81% AFUEIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HX Area 

90% AFUE 96%AFUEModulation 

(Continuous) 

Figure R.4.1 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using 

AEO 2006 Price Data (NES) 

R-14 
0 . 12

`® Reference

100

®Low Economic Growth

.

q High Economic Growth

0.08 ----------

N

A

d

N

m

E 0. 06

7

W

U 

W

0.04

0.02

0 00 _1..._....

78% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 83% AFU E- 83% AFU E- 83% AFU E- 83% AFU EBaseline Increased HXArea In creased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea

Figure R.4.2 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO

2006 Price Data (NES)

0.07

8 Reference

0.06- -- ® Low Economic Growth -_- "--- -

q High Economic Growth

0.05 - ----------------

N

p 0 . 04

N

C

rn

0 .03

p

0

y

0.02

0.01- -- -- - - --

0. 00 . - --- - --

75%AFUE- Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81% AFUE- 90% AFUE 90% AFUE

Increased HX Area Increased HX Area Increased HX Area Condensing Condensing

Figure R.4.3 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data (NES)

R-15

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

<il 

." 

m 

~ 

Q. 

~ 

C> 

c .s: 

m 

If) 

~ 

~ 

~ 

0 

If) 

0.12 ,--------------------------------------..., 

0.10 

0.08 

0.06 

0.04 

0.02 

0.00 .t------.--J---=::::J.~-

78% AFUEBaseline 80% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUEIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea 

Figure R.4.2 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 

2006 Price Data (NES) 

0.07r----------------------------------------------------------------------------, 

<il 

." 

m 

0.06 1m Reference 

---- III Low Economic Growth 

o High Economic Growth 

0.05 1------- ---------.----------------------.- ---------------

Q. 0.04 

:g, 

c 

.~ 

If) 

@ 0.03 +---------------------------------------------

~ 

o 

If) 

0.02 +--------------------------------

0.01 1---------··------------

0.00 +----------~ 

75% AFUE - Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81% AFUEIncreased HX Area Increased HX Area Increased HX Area 90% AFUE 

Condensing 

90% AFUE 

Condensing 

Figure R.4.3 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NES) 

R-15 
0 . 06

q Reference

0.05 17 Low Economic Growth

q High Economic Growth

0.04

N

A

Q

N

.E 0.03 -------

m

N

U

J

N

0.02.-__

0.01

0. 00

78%AFUE-Baseline 80%AFUE- 82%AFUE 82%AFUE 84%AFUE 85%AFUE

IncreasedHXArea Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition

Figure R.4.4 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price

Data (NES)

1 . 20

[MIReference

1.00 ®Low Economic Growth

q High Economic Growth

0 80

N

A

.

a

m 0. 60

2

0

q

0 40 - ----------- - . - --

0.20

0. 00

80% AFUE- 82% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 99% AFUE

Baseline Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat

Transfer Coef & Transfer Coef & Transfer Coef & Transfer Coef &

Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition

Figure R.4.5 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price Data

(NES)

R-16

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

"' ~ 

::s 

Q. 

~ 

Cl 

~ .s: 

~ 

In 

.. 

~ ::s 

0 

In 

0.06 ,-----------------------------------------, 

0.05 

0.04 

0.03 

0.02 

mJReference ---- --or 

: (I Low Economic Growth ., 

:8.Higl1.§conomic.Gco.wtll 

0.01 +-----.----.-- ------------------

0.00 -I-____ ~....I!!i!!--::::J--

78%AFUE - Baseline 80%AFUE- 82%AFUE 82%AFUE 84%AFUE 85%AFUE 

IncreasedHXArea Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition 

Figure R.4.4 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price 

Data (NES) 

1.20 

1.00 

0.80 

"' ~ 

::s 

Q. 

~ 

Cl 

~ 0.60 .s: 

~ 

In 

.. 

~ ::s 

0 

In 

0.40 

0.20 

0.00 

80% AFUE- 82% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 99% AFUE 

Baseline Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat 

Transfer Coef & Transfer Coet & Transfer Coef & Transfer Coef & 

Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition 

Figure R.4.5 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price Data 

(NES) 

R-16 
0. 30

13 Reference

0.25 !® Low Economic Growth

0 High Economic Growth

0.20

N

A

Q

N

.E 0. '15

7

UI

U

7

m

0.10

0.05

0 .00 -

Base Case 83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 95% AFUE

IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea Increased H)(Area

Figure R.4.6 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price

Data (NES)

R-17

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

0.30,---------------------------------------, 

Reference 

0.25 -I--__ - Low Economic Growth 1-_____________________ _ 

~ H~i~_h Economic Gr~wth 

0.20 

" "0 

.. 

:t 

Q. 

~ 

C> 

c 0.15 .s: 

.. 

rn 

~ 

~ 

:t 

0 

rn 

0.10 

0.05 

0.00 "---______ --'-----L.-_-""'--'---'-_--"'--IIlIIL---''--~ 

Base Case 83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 84%AFUE- 95% AFUE 

IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea 

Figure R.4.6 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price 

Data (NES) 

R-17 
R.4.2 Net Present Value (NPV)

2

78%AFUE-Baseline 80%AFUE- 80%AFUE- 81%AFUE- 90%AFUE i,, lEIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HX Area MA duly on

(Cu Rinu pus)

®Reference

®Low Economic Growth

qHigh Economic Growth

------- ---

-6

-8 - ------ - ----------- -------- ---- ----------

-10-

-14

Figure R.4.7 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using

0.25 

[OR.eference

Econmic Growt

0 20 High Economic Growth .

v

0 . 15 -

N

----- - --- ----

C

.N

O

Z

a 0. 10

z

0.05 ----- -

0 00 :..

78% AFUE- 80%AFUE- 83% AFU E- 83% AFU E- 83% AFU E- 83% AFU EBaseline Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea In creased H XArea Increased HXArea

Figure R.4.8 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO

2006 Price Data (NPV)

AEO 2006 Price Data NPV)

R-18

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

R.4.2 Net Present Value (NPV) 

78% AFUE - Baseline 80%AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81% AFUE- 90% AFUE 

Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HX Area 

-2+---------~~--------------------------------------------------

~ -4 ----- ----- ---- -------------------

N 

'" .5 

~ -6+---------------------------------------------------------------

e 

&: 

z -8t--------------------- --- ------------ ----------------------------------

-10+-------------------------------------------------------------~ 

-12 ------------ -------- ~---- --------------

-14 L-______________________________________________________________________ ~ 

Figure R.4.7 Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using 

AEO 2006 Price Data NPV) 

0.25 ,--------------------------------------------------------------------------, 

0.20 t-----:'::'.':"l!'.'."':""""""'-="'~J-----

:;;:-

g 0.15 1--------------------·-----------

::i 

.5 

00 

c 

~ ;[ 

&: 0.10 +------------------------ z 

0.05 i----------

0.00 -'-____ ~----=:::::J.~-

78% AFUEBaseline 

80% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUE - 83% AFUEIncreased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea Increased HXArea 

Figure R.4.8 Weatherized Gas Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 

2006 Price Data (NPV) 

R-18 
0.30

El Reference

0 25 ^® Low Economic Growth

.

q High Economic Growth

0.20

v

°o

---

N

C

C 0. 15 0

a_

z

0.10._...__._.------------------------- ----------

0.05

0. 00

75% AFUE - Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81% AFUE- 90% AFUE 90% AFUE

Increased HX Area Increased HX Area Increased HX Area Condensing Condensing

Figure R.4.9 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenario Using AEO 2006

Price Data (NPV)

0 . 07

0 . 06 0Reference

®Low Economic Growth

q High Economic Growth)

0 05 -

----

. --------- -- ---

0.04 ------ -

0.03

0.02 ----- -- - -- -

0.01 - --- --_-_-----------------

0. 00 ------ ------T--

78%AFUE - Baseline 80%AFUE- 82%AFUE 82 %AFUE 84%AFUE 85 / AF E

IncreasedHXArea Interrupted Ignition Interru pted Ignition Interrupted Ignition li Perm ted gniti n

-0 . 01

-0 .02

Figure R.4.10 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO

2006 Price Data (NPV)

R-19

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

0.30 ,----------------------------------------, 

0.25 

0.20 

~ 

'" l;i 

.5 

~ '" 0.15 

e 

6: 

z 

0.10 

0.05 

0.00 +------~-

75% AFUE - Baseline 80% AFUE- 80% AFUE- 81% AFUEIncreased HX Area Increased HX Area Increased HX Area 90% AFUE 

Condensing 

90% AFUE 

Condensing 

Figure R.4.9 Mobile Home Furnace Energy Price Scenario Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NPV) 

0.07 -,----------------------------------------, 

0.06 

0.05 

0.04 

~ ~ 0.03 ------------~--.-~--

.5 

'" c 

~ ;§. 0.02 1---·-·------------------

6: 

z 

0.01 1-------·-

0.00 1-----------

78%AFUE - Baseline 80%AFUE- 82%AFUE 82%AFUE 84%AFUE 

IncreasedHXArea Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition Interrupted Ignition 

-0.01 +---------------------------------

-0.021..----------------------------------------' 

Figure R.4.10 Oil-Fired Furnace Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 

2006 Price Data (NPV) 

R-19 
o .so

o.oo

80% AFUE- 82% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 99'6 A UE

Baseline Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat Improved Heat

Transfer Coef & Transfer Coef & Transfer Coef & Transfer Coef &

Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition

-0.50 _ I®Reference _.__.---- - -- ^ -- _.. __ -.

®Low Economic Growth

o

^OHigh Economic Growth

C_

c -1.00 -

O

-__

a_

Z

-1.50 -- -

-2.00 - - - -

-2.50

Figure R.4.11 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price

Data (NPV)

0 . ,0

0.60 --- - -- ^^LITQ-1-l__, Q^ _,--^ - - --

Base Case 83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 83% AFUE- 84% AFUE- 95 , A JE

IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea IncreasedHXArea

-0 . 10

D Reference

.-. -0.20

®Low Economic Growth

c

0

w

q High Economic Growth

c

c -0 . 30

0

a_

a

Z -0.40 _.-.--------------

-0.50 ^ --- - --._.... _.--^ - ----

-0 . 60

-0 . 70

Figure 8.4.12 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006

Price Data (NPV)

R-20

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

" '" 

~ '" 

.5 

0.50 ,-----------------------------------------, 

0.00 +--------

-0.50 

80% AFUEBaseline 

82% AFUEImproved Heat 

Transfer Coef & 

84% AFUEImproved Heat 

Transfer Coaf & 

84% AFUEImproved Heat 

Transfer Coef & 

Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition Electronic Ignition 

-~rm1Rcl~~~~~--------- -------1- ----- --~--------- ----- ---".-------- "-" 'iii Low Economic Growth 

i 0 Hi~}~~o~~n:~ ~E9~t~ 

84% AFUEImproved Heat 

Transfer Coaf & 

Electronic Ignition 

w 

~ -1.00 

e 

~ z 

-1.50 

-2.00 1-----------

-2.501------------------------------------....1 

Figure R.4.11 Gas Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 Price 

Data (NPV) 

0.10,-----------------------------------------. 

0.001------·-

Base Case 83%AFUEIncreasedHXArea 83%AFUEIncreasedHXArea 83% AFUEIncreasedHXArea 84% AFUEIncreasedHXArea 

-0.10 +---------------------------------

" -0.20 

'" 

~ .5 

w 

~ -0.30 

e 

> a. 

Z -0040 

-0.50 1---------··-----------·--·-···· 

-0.60 +--------------------------------------1 

-0.70L----------------------------------------~ 

Figure R.4.12 Oil-Fired Boiler Energy Price Scenarios Using AEO 2006 

Price Data (NPV) 

R-20 
REFERENCES

U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy

Outlook 2005: With Projections Through 2025. February, 2005. Washington, DC.

Report No. DOE/EIA-0383(2005)..

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2005).pdf>

2. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy

Outlook 2006: With Projections Through 2030. February, 2006. Washington, DC.

Report No. DOE/EIA-03 83 (2006).

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2006).pdf>

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy 

Outlook 2005: With Projections Through 2025. February, 2005. Washington, DC. 

Report No. DOE/EIA-0383(2005) .. 

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2005).pdf> 

2. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy 

Outlook 2006: With Projections Through 2030. February, 2006. Washington, DC. 

Report No. DOE/EIA-0383(2006). 

<http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2006).pdf> 

R-21 
APPENDIX S. USER INSTRUCTIONS FOR SHIPMENTS AND NATIONAL ENERGY

SAVINGS SPREADSHEET MODEL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.1 USER INSTRUCTIONS ................................................ S-1

S.1.1 Startup ........................................................ S-1

S.1.2 Description of National Energy Savings Worksheets .................... S-1

S.1.3 Basic Instructions for Operating the National Energy Savings Spreadsheet ... S-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX S. USER INSTRUCTIONS FOR SHIPMENTS AND NATIONAL ENERGY 

SAVINGS SPREADSHEET MODEL 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

S.l USER INSTRUCTIONS ................................................ S-l 

S.l.l Startup ........................................................ S-l 

S.1.2 Description of National Energy Savings Worksheets .................... S-l 

S.1.3 Basic Instructions for Operating the National Energy Savings Spreadsheet ... S-3 

S-i 
APPENDIX S. USER INSTRUCTIONS FOR SHIPMENTS AND NATIONAL ENERGY

SAVINGS SPREADSHEET MODEL

S.1 USER INSTRUCTIONS

The results obtained in this analysis can be examined and reproduced using the Microsoft

Excels spreadsheet available on the U. S. Department of Energy Building Technologies website at:

http : //www. eere. energy. gov/buildings/appliance standards/residential/xx. html.

5.1.1 Startup

The spreadsheet is called "NES.xls" and it enables the user to perform National Energy

Savings (NES) analyses for trial standard levels for residential furnace and boilers. To execute the

spreadsheet, the Department assumes that the user has access to a PC with a hardware configuration

capable of running Windows NT/2000/XP. To use the furnace and boiler NES spreadsheet, the user

requires Microsoft Excel' 2000 or later installed under the Windows operating system.

5.1.2 Description of National Energy Savings Worksheets

The NES spreadsheet performs calculations to forecast the change in national energy use and

net present value of financial impacts due to a revised energy efficiency standard. Analyses for all

product classes are contained in a single NES spreadsheet. The energy use and associated costs for

a given standard are determined by first calculating the shipments and then the energy use and costs

for all furnace and boilers shipped under that standard. The differences between the standards and

base case can then be compared and the overall energy savings and net present values determined.

The NES spreadsheet or workbook consists of the following worksheets:

National The National Impacts Summary sheet contains user input selections, source energy

Impacts savings results matrix, net present value results matrix, a summary table for

eachproduct class

Summary and charts of national impacts for each product class.

Shipments The Shipments Summary sheet contains a tabular summary and chart of the annual

Summary shipments forecasts for each product class at each trial standard level.

Flow Chart The Flow Chart sheet contains a diagram of the structure of the inputs and outputs

used to derive the NES.

NES Gas The NES Gas Furnace - NW sheet contains non-weatherized gas furnace

calculations for

Furnace - NW the base case and the shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at

each trial standard level.

S-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX S. USER INSTRUCTIONS FOR SHIPMENTS AND NATIONAL ENERGY 

SAVINGS SPREADSHEET MODEL 

S.l USER INSTRUCTIONS 

The results obtained in this analysis can be examined and reproduced using the Microsoft 

Excel®spreadsheet available on the U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies website at: 

http://www. eere.energy. gov /buildings/appliance _ standards/residentiallxx.html. 

S.1.1 Startup 

The spreadsheet is called "NES.xls" and it enables the user to perform National Energy 

Savings (NES) analyses for trial standard levels for residential furnace and boilers. To execute the 

spreadsheet, the Department assumes that the user has access to a PC with a hardware configuration 

capable of running Windows NT/2000/XP. To use the furnace and boiler NES spreadsheet, the user 

requires Microsoft Excel® 2000 or later installed under the Windows operating system. 

S.1.2 Description of National Energy Savings Worksheets 

The NES spreadsheet performs calculations to forecast the change in national energy use and 

net present value of financial impacts due to a revised energy efficiency standard. Analyses for all 

product classes are contained in a single NES spreadsheet. The energy use and associated costs for 

a given standard are determined by first calculating the shipments and then the energy use and costs 

for all furnace and boilers shipped under that standard. The differences between the standards and 

base case can then be compared and the overall energy savings and net present values determined. 

The NES spreadsheet or workbook consists of the following worksheets: 

National 

Impacts 

Summary 

Shipments 

Summary 

Flow Chart 

NES Gas 

The National Impacts Summary sheet contains user input selections, source energy 

savings results matrix, net present value results matrix, a summary table for 

eachproduct class 

and charts of national impacts for each product class. 

The Shipments Summary sheet contains a tabular summary and chart ofthe annual 

shipments forecasts for each product class at each trial standard level. 

The Flow Chart sheet contains a diagram of the structure of the inputs and outputs 

used to derive the NES. 

The NES Gas Furnace - NW sheet contains non-weatherized gas furnace 

calculations for 

Furnace - NW the base case and the shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at 

each trial standard level. 

S-l 
NES Gas The NES Gas Furnace - W sheet contains weatherized gas furnace calculations for

the base

Furnace - W case and the shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at each trial

standard level.

NES Gas The NES Gas Furnace - MH sheet contains mobile home gas furnace calculations

for the

Furnace - MH base case and the shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at each

trial standard level.

NES Oil The NES Oil Furnace sheet contains oil furnace calculations for the base case and

the

Furnace shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at each trial standard

level.

NES Gas The NES Gas Boiler sheet contains gas boiler calculations for the base case and the

Boiler shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at each trial standard

level.

NES Oil The NES Oil Boiler sheet contains oil boiler calculations for the base case and the

Boiler shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at each trial standard

level.

Base Case The Base Case Shipments sheet contains data for shipments for each product class.

It also

Shipments includes calculations of replacements, conversions, efficiency upgrades, central gas

heating retrofit for non-weatherized gas furnaces, percentage of shipments which

are to existing homes for each product class, new housing, modeled new

construction installations, modeled shipments - sum of replacements, conversions

and new housing and oil replacements less conversions for both furnaces and

boilers.

Change in The Change in Shipments sheet contains the projected change in shipments from

standards for

Shipments non-weatherized gas furnaces and for mobile home furnaces at trail standard

efficiency levels.

New Housing The New Housing Market Share sheet contains new housing market shares data for

Market Share single and multi-family homes and mobile homes.

Market Share The Market Share Model sheet contains the calculations that determine

Model the market share model elasticities.

Historic The Historic Market Shares Data sheet contains data of historic market shares in

S-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

NES Gas The NES Gas Furnace - W sheet contains weatherized gas furnace calculations for 

the base 

Furnace - W case and the shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at each trial 

standard level. 

NES Gas The NES Gas Furnace - MH sheet contains mobile home gas furnace calculations 

for the 

Furnace - MH base case and the shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at each 

trial standard level. 

NES Oil 

Furnace 

NESGas 

Boiler 

NES Oil 

Boiler 

Base Case 

Shipments 

Change in 

Shipments 

The NES Oil Furnace sheet contains oil furnace calculations for the base case and 

the 

shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at each trial standard 

level. 

The NES Gas Boiler sheet contains gas boiler calculations for the base case and the 

shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at each trial standard 

level. 

The NES Oil Boiler sheet contains oil boiler calculations for the base case and the 

shipments and stock energy savings and net present value at each trial standard 

level. 

The Base Case Shipments sheet contains data for shipments for each product class. 

It also 

includes calculations of replacements, conversions, efficiency upgrades, central gas 

heating retrofit for non-weatherized gas furnaces, percentage of shipments which 

are to existing homes for each product class, new housing, modeled new 

construction installations, modeled shipments - sum of replacements, conversions 

and new housing and oil replacements less conversions for both furnaces and 

boilers. 

The Change in Shipments sheet contains the projected change in shipments from 

standards for 

non-weatherized gas furnaces and for mobile home furnaces at trail standard 

efficiency levels. 

New Housing The New Housing Market Share sheet contains new housing market shares data for 

Market Share single and multi-family homes and mobile homes. 

Market Share The Market Share Model sheet contains the calculations that determine 

Model the market share model elasticities. 

Historic The Historic Market Shares Data sheet contains data of historic market shares in 

S-2 
Market new homes.

Shares Data

LCC Inputs The LCC Inputs sheet contains inputs from the LCC spreadsheet for each product

class.

Retirement The Retirement Function sheet calculates the lifetime distribution of furnaces and

Function boilers.

New Housing The New Housing Forecast sheet provides projected new housing construction

Forecast completions and manufactured home placements.

Fuel Prices The Fuel Prices and Heat Rates sheet contains projected energy price trends and

Heat Rates heat rates.

Market Shift The Market Shift Heating Load sheet contains the heating load of houses that

Heating Load shifted away from gas due to new standards.

Price Indices The Price Indices sheet contains equipment and energy price indices used in the

determination of price elasticities for market share forecasts.

Chart GF The Chart GF Shipments sheet contains a chart of gas furnace shipment

Shipments components.

Chart GF The Chart GF Market Share sheet contains a chart of fraction gas versus electric

equipment for

Market Share new households with central heating.

Chart NWGF The Chart NWGF Financial Impacts sheet contains charts of financial impacts at

Financial each trial standard level.

Impacts

S.1.3 Basic Instructions for Operating the National Energy Savings Spreadsheet

Basic instructions for operating the NES spreadsheet are as follows:

Once the NES spreadsheet file has been downloaded from the Web, open the file using

Excelm Click "Enable Macro" when prompted and then click on the tab for the worksheet

National Impacts Summary.

2. Use Excel's® View/Zoom commands at the top menu bar to change the size of the display to

make it fit your monitor.

S-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Market 

Shares Data 

new homes. 

LCC Inputs The LCC Inputs sheet contains inputs from the LCC spreadsheet for each product 

class. 

Retirement The Retirement Function sheet calculates the lifetime distribution of furnaces and 

Function boilers. 

New Housing The New Housing Forecast sheet provides projected new housing construction 

Forecast completions and manufactured home placements. 

Fuel Prices 

Heat Rates 

The Fuel Prices and Heat Rates sheet contains projected energy price trends and 

heat rates. 

Market Shift The Market Shift Heating Load sheet contains the heating load of houses that 

Heating Load shifted away from gas due to new standards. 

Price Indices The Price Indices sheet contains equipment and energy price indices used in the 

determination of price elasticities for market share forecasts. 

Chart GF The Chart GF Shipments sheet contains a chart of gas furnace shipment 

Shipments components. 

Chart GF The Chart GF Market Share sheet contains a chart of fraction gas versus electric 

equipment for 

Market Share new households with central heating. 

Chart NWGF The Chart NWGF Financial Impacts sheet contains charts of financial impacts at 

Financial each trial standard level. 

Impacts 

S.1.3 Basic Instructions for Operating the National Energy Savings Spreadsheet 

Basic instructions for operating the NES spreadsheet are as follows: 

1. Once the NES spreadsheet file has been downloaded from the Web, open the file using 

Excel® Click "Enable Macro" when prompted and then click on the tab for the worksheet 

National Impacts Summary. 

2. Use Excel's® View/Zoom commands at the top menu bar to change the size ofthe display to 

make it fit your monitor. 

S-3 
3. The user can change the parameters under the title "National Impacts Summary". The

default parameters are:

a. Discount Rate: Defaults to 7%. To change value, click on cell C5 and enter value

(7% or 3%).

b. Current Year: Defaults to 2005. To change value, click on cell C6 and enterdesired

year.

C. Economic Growth: Defaults to Reference Case. To change value, use the dropdown arrow and select the desired level (Reference Case, Low Economic Growth

or High Economic Growth).

The results are automatically updated and are reported in the source energy savings matrix,

net present value matrix, summary table for each product class and charts of national impacts

for each product class.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

3. The user can change the parameters under the title "National Impacts Summary". The 

default parameters are: 

a. Discount Rate: Defaults to 7%. To change value, click on cell C5 and enter value 

(7% or 3%). 

b. Current Year: Defaults to 2005. To change value, click on cell C6 and enterdesired 

year. 

c. Economic Growth: Defaults to Reference Case. To change value, use the dropdown arrow and select the desired level (Reference Case, Low Economic Growth 

or High Economic Growth). 

The results are automatically updated and are reported in the source energy savings matrix, 

net present value matrix, summary table for each product class and charts of national impacts 

for each product class. 

S-4 
APPENDIX T. LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING

ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL PRICE SCENARIOS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

T.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................... T.4-1

T.2 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING

ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL PRICE SCENARIOS ........................ T.4-1

LIST OF TABLES

Table T.2.1 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios,

Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces .................................. T.4-2

Table T.2.2 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios,

Table T.2.3

Weatherized Gas Furnaces .......................................

LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios,

T.4-2

Table T.2.4

Mobile Home Gas Furnaces ......................................

LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios,

T.4-3

Table T.2.5

Oil-Fired Furnaces .............................................

LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios,

T.44

Table T.2.6

Gas Boilers ...................................................

LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios,

T.4-5

Oil-Fired Boilers .............................................. T.4-6

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX T. LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING 

ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL PRICE SCENARIOS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

T.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................... T.4-1 

T.2 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING 

ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL PRICE SCENARIOS ........................ T.4-1 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table T.2.1 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, 

Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces .................................. T.4-2 

Table T.2.2 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, 

Weatherized Gas Furnaces ....................................... T.4-2 

Table T.2.3 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, 

Mobile Horne Gas Furnaces ...................................... T.4-3 

Table T.2.4 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, 

Oil-Fired Furnaces ............................................. T.4-4 

Table T.2.S LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, 

Gas Boilers ................................................... T.4-S 

Table T.2.6 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, 

Oil-Fired Boilers .............................................. T.4-6 

T-i 
APPENDIX T. LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING

ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL PROLE SCENARIOS

TA INTRODUCTION

This appendix presents life-cycle cost (LCC) and payback results using alternative

material price scenarios. The Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) based the

payback periods on the calculation methodology used in Chapter 8: Life-Cycle Cost and

Payback Period Analysis.

Core steel is one of the major cost drivers of a distribution transformer and is

fundamentally linked to the efficiency of the finished transformer. When looking at energy

conservation standards for distribution transformers, it is important to understand core steel

pricing and influences on that pricing. In the ANOPR analysis, the Department used a five-year

average material price (2000 through 2004). The Department received several comments on the

ANOPR analysis that material prices, and particularly core steel, were experiencing a rapid

increase. Therefore, in addition to its analysis on a five-year average material price (2000

through 2004), the Department developed a "high price" scenario using prices as of the first

quarter 2005, and also a "low price" scenario for the LCC sensitivity analysis. The low price

scenario is based on material prices in 2002 (the calender year with the lowest $/pound for M6

core steel) and reduces all the material prices in that year by 15%.

This Appendix presents the key life-cycle cost and PBP results for the three alternative

material price scenarios. Chapter 8 of the TSD provides more detailed life-cycle cost results for

the 2000-2004 average material price scenario.

This Appendix refers to the Q 12005 material price as the "high" price scenario, the fiveyear average material price as the "medium" scenario, and the 2002 material prices as the "low"

price scenario.

T.2 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING

ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL PRICE SCENARIOS

For each product class, this section presents key LCC and PBP results using the

alternative material price scenarios.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX T. LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING 

ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL PROCE SCENARIOS 

T.1 INTRODUCTION 

This appendix presents life-cycle cost (LCC) and payback results using alternative 

material price scenarios. The Department of Energy (nOE or the Department) based the 

payback periods on the calculation methodology used in Chapter 8: Life-Cycle Cost and 

Payback Period Analysis. 

Core steel is one of the major cost drivers of a distribution transformer and is 

fundamentally linked to the efficiency of the finished transformer. When looking at energy 

conservation standards for distribution transformers, it is important to understand core steel 

pricing and influences on that pricing. In the ANOPR analysis, the Department used a five-year 

average material price (2000 through 2004). The Department received several comments on the 

ANOPR analysis that material prices, and particularly core steel, were experiencing a rapid 

increase. Therefore, in addition to its analysis on a five-year average material price (2000 

through 2004), the Department developed a "high price" scenario using prices as of the first 

quarter 2005, and also a "low price" scenario for the LCC sensitivity analysis. The low price 

scenario is based on material prices in 2002 (the calender year with the lowest $/pound for M6 

core steel) and reduces all the material prices in that year by 15%. 

This Appendix presents the key life-cycle cost and PBP results for the three alternative 

material price scenarios. Chapter 8 of the TSD provides more detailed life-cycle cost results for 

the 2000-2004 average material price scenario. 

This Appendix refers to the Q 1 2005 material price as the "high" price scenario, the fiveyear average material price as the "medium" scenario, and the 2002 material prices as the "low" . . pnce scenano. 

T.2 LIFE-CYCLE COST AND PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS USING 

ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL PRICE SCENARIOS 

For each product class, this section presents key LCC and PBP results using the 

alternative material price scenarios. 

T-l 
Table T.2.1 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, NonWeatherized Gas Furnaces

Average LCC Savings Households with LCC Savings Median Payback Period

> $0 (%) (Years)

Design High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low

Option : Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price

AFUE Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario

78%

80% $2 $2 $2 2% 2% 2% 1.0 0.8 0.7

80%2-stage ($196) ($194) ($193) 2% 2% 2% 48.9 48.4 48.0

Modulation

81% $0 $2 $3 31% 32% 32% 13.9 13.2 12.7

81% 2-stage ($199) ($196) ($194) 4% 4% 4% 41.5 41.0 40.6

Modulation

90% ($49) $5 $24 21% 25% 27% 17.5 15.4 14.6

92% ($114) ($45) ($40) 20% 24% 24% 19.4 17.2 17.3

92% 2-stage ($373) ($304) ($299) 14% 16% 16% 28.2 25.8 25.7

Modulation

96% ($516) ($447) ($442) 9% 11% 11% 32.8 30.0 29.8

Modulation

(Continuous)

96% ($986) ($731) ($612) 5% 8% 10% 46.5 38.8 35.0

Modulation

(Continuous)

Table T.2.2 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, Weatherized

Gas Furnaces

Average LCC Savings Households with LCC Savings Median Payback Period

> $0 (%) (Years)

Design High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low

Option : Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price

AFUE Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario

78%

80% $2 $2 $2 2% 2% 2% 1.6 1.3 1.1

80%2-stage $18 $19 $20 50% 52% 53% 4.0 2.9 2.1

Modulation

81% $44 $46 $47 77% 78% 78% 2.9 2.7 2.4

81%2-stage $69 $73 $75 91% 94% 95% 4.2 3.6 3.1

Modulation

T-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table T.2.1 Lee and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, NonWeatherized Gas Furnaces 

Average Lee Savings Households with Lee Savings Median Payback Period 

> $0 (%) (Years) 

Design High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low 

Option: Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price 

AFUE Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario 

78% 

80% $2 $2 $2 2% 2% 2% l.0 0.8 0.7 

80% 2-stage ($196) ($194) ($193) 2% 2% 2% 48.9 48.4 48.0 

Modulation 

81% $0 $2 $3 31% 32% 32% 13.9 13.2 12.7 

81% 2-stage ($199) ($196) ($194) 4% 4% 4% 41.5 4l.0 40.6 

Modulation 

90% ($49) $5 $24 21% 25% 27% 17.5 15.4 14.6 

92% ($114) ($45) ($40) 20% 24% 24% 19.4 17.2 17.3 

92% 2-stage ($373) ($304) ($299) 14% 16% 16% 28.2 25.8 25.7 

Modulation 

96% ($516) ($447) ($442) 9% 11% 11% 32.8 30.0 29.8 

Modulation 

(Continuous) 

96% ($986) ($731) ($612) 5% 8% 10% 46.5 38.8 35.0 

Modulation 

(Continuous) 

Table T.2.2 Lee and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, Weatherized 

Gas Furnaces 

Average Lee Savings Households with Lee Savings Median Payback Period 

> $0 (%) (Years) 

Design High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low 

Option: Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price 

AFUE Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario 

78% 

80% $2 $2 $2 2% 2% 2% l.6 1.3 l.l 

80% 2-stage $18 $19 $20 50% 52% 53% 4.0 2.9 2.1 

Modulation 

81% $44 $46 $47 77% 78% 78% 2.9 2.7 2.4 

81% 2-stage $69 $73 $75 91% 94% 95% 4.2 3.6 3.1 

Modulation 

T-2 
Table T.2.3 L,CC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, Mobile

Rome Gas Furnaces

Average LCC Savings Households with LCC Savings

> $0 (%)

Median Payback Period

(Years)

Design

Option :

AFUE

High

Price

Scenario

Medium

Price

Scenario

Low

Price

Scenario

High

Price

Scenario

Medium

Price

Scenario

Low

Price

Scenario

High

Price

Scenario

Medium

Price

Scenario

Low

Price

Scenario

75%

80% $51 $51 $51 14% 14% 14% 2.9 2.9 2.9

80% 2-stage

Modulation

($262) ($262) ($262) 9% 9% 9% 52.2 52.2 52.2

81% $18 $18 $18 24% 24% 24% 23.7 23.7 23.7

81%2-stage

Modulation

($296) ($296) ($296) 8% 8% 8% 56.0 56.0 56.0

82% $45 $45 $45 42% 42% 42% 16.1 16.1 16.1

82% 2-stage

modulation

($269) ($296) ($269) 10% 10% 10% 44..3 44.3 44.3

90% $107 $124 $139 51% 53% 55% 13.6 13.0 12.4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table T.2.3 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, Mobile 

Home Gas Furnaces 

Average Lee Savings Households with Lee Savings Median Payback Period 

>$0 (%) (Years) 

Design High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low 

Option: Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price 

AFUE Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario 

75% 

80% $51 $51 $51 14% 14% 14% 2.9 2.9 2.9 

80% 2-stage ($262) ($262) ($262) 9% 9% 9% 52.2 52.2 52.2 

Modulation 

81% $18 $18 $18 24% 24% 24% 23.7 23.7 23.7 

81% 2-stage ($296) ($296) ($296) 8% 8% 8% 56.0 56.0 56.0 

Modulation 

82% $45 $45 $45 42% 42% 42% 16.1 16.1 16.1 

82% 2-stage ($269) ($296) ($269) 10% 10% 10% 44 .. 3 44.3 44.3 

modulation 

90% $107 $124 $139 51% 53% 55% 13.6 13.0 12.4 

T-3 
Table T.2.4 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, Oil-Fired

Furnaces

Average LCC Savings Households with LCC Savings Median Payback Period

> $0 (%) (Years)

Design High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low

Option : Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price

AFUE Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario

78%

80% $7 $7 $7 4% 4% 4% 0.3 0.3 0.3

81% $55 $56 $57 61% 61% 61% 1.1 0.9 0.7

81%int. $105 $105 $105 68% 68% 68% 1.9 1.9 1.9

ignition

81%2-stage ($12) ($11) ($10) 24% 25% 25% 12.7 12.7 12.6

modulation

82% $111 $113 $114 70% 70% 70% 0.8 0.7 0.5

82% int. $157 $159 $160 75% 75% 75% 2.1 2.0 1.9

ignition

82% 2-stage $37 $39 $40 36% 36% 36% 10.2 10.1 10.0

modulation

83% $46 $49 $50 43% 44% 44% 8.9 8.7 8.6

83% int. $96 $98 $100 56% 57% 57% 7.2 7.0 7.0

ignition

83% 2-stage ($36) ($34) ($32) 28% 29% 29% 13.0 13.0 12.9

modulation

84% ($27) ($23) ($20) 30% 31% 32% 13.4 13.2 13.1

84% int. $28 $32 $34 45% 45% 46% 10.2 10.1 10.0

ignition

84% 2-stage ($116) ($112) ($110) 25% 25% 25% 14.9 14.8 14.7

modulation

85% ($115) ($109) ($104) 25% 25% 26% 16.4 16.2 16.0

85% int. ($56) ($50) ($46) 38% 39% 40% 12.5 12.4 12.3

ignition

85%2-stage ($212) ($206) ($201) 23% 23% 23% 16.6 16.4 16.3

modulation

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table T.2.4 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, Oil-Fired 

Furnaces 

Average Lee Savings Households with Lee Savings Median Payback Period 

> $0 (%) (Years) 

Design High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low 

Option: Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price 

AFUE Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario 

78% 

80% $7 $7 $7 4% 4% 4% 0.3 0.3 0.3 

81% $55 $56 $57 61% 61% 61% 1.1 0.9 0.7 

81 % int. $105 $105 $105 68% 68% 68% 1.9 1.9 1.9 

ignition 

81 % 2-stage ($12) ($11) ($10) 24% 25% 25% 12.7 12.7 12.6 

modulation 

82% $111 $113 $114 70% 70% 70% 0.8 0.7 0.5 

82% int. $157 $159 $160 75% 75% 75% 2.1 2.0 1.9 

ignition 

82% 2-stage $37 $39 $40 36% 36% 36% 10.2 10.1 10.0 

modulation 

83% $46 $49 $50 43% 44% 44% 8.9 8.7 8.6 

83% int. $96 $98 $100 56% 57% 57% 7.2 7.0 7.0 

ignition 

83% 2-stage ($36) ($34) ($32) 28% 29% 29% 13.0 13.0 12.9 

modulation 

84% ($27) ($23) ($20) 30% 31% 32% 13.4 13.2 13.1 

84% int. $28 $32 $34 45% 45% 46% 10.2 10.1 10.0 

ignition 

84% 2-stage ($116) ($112) ($110) 25% 25% 25% 14.9 14.8 14.7 

modulation 

85% ($115) ($109) ($104) 25% 25% 26% 16.4 16.2 16.0 

85% int. ($56) ($50) ($46) 38% 39% 40% 12.5 12.4 12.3 

ignition 

85% 2-stage ($212) ($206) ($201) 23% 23% 23% 16.6 16.4 16.3 

modulation 

T-4 
Table T.2.5 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, Gas Boilers

Average LCC Savings Households with LCC Savings

> $0 (%)

Median Payback Period

(Years)

Design

Option :

AF'UE

High

Price

Scenario

Medium

Price

Scenario

Low

Price

Scenario

High

Price

Scenario

Medium

Price

Scenario

Low

Price

Scenario

High

Price

Scenario

Medium

Price

Scenario

Low

Price

Scenario

80%

81% $141 $141 $141 35% 35% 35% 2.4 2.4 2.4

81%2-stage

Modulation

$35 $35 $35 29% 29% 29%

8.2

8.2 8.2

82% $158 $158 $158 46% 46% 46% 6.0 6.0 6.0

82% 2-stage

Modulation

$26 $26 $26 28% 28% 28% 12.4 12.4 12.4

83% $128 $128 $128 42% 42% 42% 11.2 11.2 11.2

83% 2-stage

Modulation

($32) ($32) ($32) 26% 26% 26% 19.4 19.4 19.4

84% $225 $232 $235 67% 67% 66% 6.7 6.6 7.1

84% 2-stage

Modulation

$48 $56 $59 37% 37% 36% 15.9 16.3 17.0

85% $52 $69 $76 42% 43% 41% 15.9 15.6 16.7

85%2-stage

Modulation

($124) ($107) ($101) 27% 27% 26% 23.7 23.4 24.5

86% ($388) ($373) $361) 19% 20% 19% 29.0 28.6 29.5

91% $469 $442 $420 22% 22% 21% 23.8 23.5 24.3

99% $840) ($795) ($742) 20% 21% 19% 24.1 23.6 24.5

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table T.2.5 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, Gas Boilers 

Average Lee Savings Households with Lee Savings Median Payback Period 

>$0 (%) (Years) 

Design High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low 

Option: Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price 

AFUE Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario 

80% 

81% $141 $141 $141 35% 35% 35% 2.4 2.4 2.4 

81% 2-stage $35 $35 $35 29% 29% 29% 8.2 8.2 

Modulation 8.2 

82% $158 $158 $158 46% 46% 46% 6.0 6.0 6.0 

82% 2-stage $26 $26 $26 28% 28% 28% 12.4 12.4 12.4 

Modulation 

83% $128 $128 $128 42% 42% 42% 11.2 11.2 11.2 

83% 2-stage ($32) ($32) ($32) 26% 26% 26% 19.4 19.4 19.4 

Modulation 

84% $225 $232 $235 67% 67% 66% 6.7 6.6 7.1 

84% 2-stage $48 $56 $59 37% 37% 36% 15.9 16.3 17.0 

Modulation 

85% $52 $69 $76 42% 43% 41% 15.9 15.6 16.7 

85% 2-stage ($124) ($107) ($101) 27% 27% 26% 23.7 23.4 24.5 

Modulation 

86% ($388) ($373) ($361) 19% 20% 19% 29.0 28.6 29.5 

91% ($469) ($442) ($420) 22% 22% 21% 23.8 23.5 24.3 

99% ($840) ($795) ($742) 20% 21% 19% 24.1 23.6 24.5 

T-5 
Table T.2.6 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, Oil-Fired

Boilers

Average LCC Savings Households with LCC Savings

> $0 (%)

Median Payback Period

(Years)

Design

Option :

AFUE

High

Price

Scenario

Medium

Price

Scenario

Low

Price

Scenario

High

Price

Scenario

Medium

Price

Scenario

Low

Price

Scenario

High

Price

Scenario

Medium

Price

Scenario

Low

Price

Scenario

80%

81% $7 $7 $7 5% 5% 5% 1.1 0.9 0.9

81% int.

ignition

$10 $10 $10 9% 9% 9% 5.2 5.1 5.0

82% $20 $20 $20 11% 11% 11% 1.1 1.0 0.9

82% int.

ignition

$24 $24 $24 14% 14% 14% 3.9 3.7 3.7

82%2-stage

modulation

($33) ($33) ($33) 1% 1% 1% 32.3 32.2 32.1

83% $40 $40 $40 16% 16% 16% 1.2 1.0 0.9

83% int.

ignition

$50 $50 $51 31% 31% 31% 5.4 5.3 5.3

83% 2-stage

modulation

($91) ($90) ($90) 4% 4% 4% 24.5 24.2 24.2

84% $0 $1 $1 15% 15% 15% 19.1 19.0 18.9

84%int.

ignition

$16 $17 $17 33% 33% 33% 13.3 13.2 13.2

84% 2-stage

modulation

($209) ($208) ($207) 3% 3% 3% 56.7 56.5 56.5

85% ($72) ($69) ($68) 15% 16% 16% 24.4 24.1 24.0

85% int.

ignition

($50) ($47) ($47) 34% 34% 34% 17.4 17.3 17.2

85% 2-stage

modulation

($358) ($355) ($355) 3% 3% 3% 57.1 56.8 56.7

86% ($161) ($156) ($154) 18% 19% 19% 25.5 25.1 25.0

86% int.

ignition

($139) ($133) ($132) 27% 27% 28% 21.1 20.9 20.8

86% 2-stage

modulation

($472) ($466) ($465) 4% 4% 4% 52.1 51.7 51.6

90% ($716) ($713) ($701) 9% 9% 9% 31.2 31.1 30.8

95% ($1,105) ($1,070) ($1,042) 10% 10% 11% 29.9 29.4 29.1

T-6

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table T.2.6 LCC and PBP Results for Alternative Material Price Scenarios, Oil-Fired 

Boilers 

Average Lee Savings Households with Lee Savings Median Payback Period 

>$0 (%) (Years) 

Design High Medium Low High Medium Low High Medium Low 

Option: Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price Price 

AFUE Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario 

80% 

81% $7 $7 $7 5% 5% 5% l.l 0.9 0.9 

81 % int. $10 $10 $10 9% 9% 9% 5.2 5.1 5.0 

ignition 

82% $20 $20 $20 11% 11% 11% l.l 1.0 0.9 

82% int. $24 $24 $24 14% 14% 14% 3.9 3.7 3.7 

ignition 

82% 2-stage ($33) ($33) ($33) 1% 1% 1% 32.3 32.2 32.1 

modulation 

83% $40 $40 $40 16% 16% 16% 1.2 1.0 0.9 

83% int. $50 $50 $51 31% 31% 31% 5.4 5.3 5.3 

ignition 

83% 2-stage ($91) ($90) ($90) 4% 4% 4% 24.5 24.2 24.2 

modulation 

84% $0 $1 $1 15% 15% 15% 19.1 19.0 18.9 

84% int. $16 $17 $17 33% 33% 33% 13.3 13.2 13.2 

ignition 

84% 2-stage ($209) ($208) ($207) 3% 3% 3% 56.7 56.5 56.5 

modulation 

85% ($72) ($69) ($68) 15% 16% 16% 24.4 24.l 24.0 

85% int. ($50) ($47) ($47) 34% 34% 34% 17.4 17.3 17.2 

ignition 

85% 2-stage ($358) ($355) ($355) 3% 3% 3% 57.l 56.8 56.7 

modulation 

86% ($161) ($156) ($154) 18% 19% 19% 25.5 25.1 25.0 

86% int. ($139) ($133) ($132) 27% 27% 28% 21.1 20.9 20.8 

ignition 

86% 2-stage ($472) ($466) ($465) 4% 4% 4% 52.l 51.7 51.6 

modulation 

90% ($716) ($713) ($701) 9% 9% 9% 31.2 31.1 30.8 

95% ($1,105) ($1,070) ($1,042) 10% 10% 11% 29.9 29.4 29.1 

T-6 
APPENDIX U. INTERPOLATION OF UTILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS

FROM HEMS-BT OUTPUT

TABLES

Table U.1 Set of Multipliers for Each Trial Standard Level ...................... U-2

FIGURE

Figure U.1

S

An Example of Interpolation of a Trial Standard Level: Difference in Coal

Capacity ...................................................... U-3

Figure U.2 Example of Trial Standard Level: X1 Marginal Nox Emissions ........... U-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX U. INTERPOLATION OF UTILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 

FROM NEMS-BT OUTPUT 

TABLES 

Table U.l Set of Multipliers for Each Trial Standard Level ...................... U-2 

FIGURES 

Figure U.l An Example ofInterpolation of a Trial Standard Level: Difference in Coal 

Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. U-3 

Figure U.2 Example of Trial Standard Level: Xl Marginal Nox Emissions ........... U-4 

U-i 
APPENDIX U. INTERPOLATION OF UTILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS

FROM NEMS-BT OUTPUT

The effects of proposed furnace and boiler energy-efficiency standards on the

electricity and natural gas industries were analyzed using a variant of U.S. DOE/EIA's National

Energy Modeling System (NEMS) called NEMS-BT, together with some exogenous calculationsa.

Because the relative size of the energy savings being implemented in NEMS-BT is too small to be

seen in the context of the whole electricity and natural gas utility sector, NEMS-BT is not used

directly. Rather, exploratory runs are conducted to estimate marginal effects, which are then used

to calculate the small effects due to each proposed trial standard level.

To run a simulation in NEMS-BT, the Residential Demand Module space heating

load is reduced annually according to the energy savings estimated by the National Energy Savings

model (see Chapter 13) for each trial standard level. These energy savings increase over time and

are distinguished by fuel type (electricity, natural gas, LPG, and oil).

The magnitude of the energy decrement that would be required for NEMS-BT to

produce stable results safely out of the range of numerical noise is greater than even the most

stringent standard under consideration. Therefore, it has been necessary, in both the utility analysis

and environmental assessment, to estimate results in the range of the standard levels effects using

interpolation. Interpolated values are derived from a series of higher decrement simulations based

on the standard levels. The actual annual savings attributed to each standard level are compared

between standard levels, and those with similar energy savings patterns over time are grouped

together. One set of simulations is run for each of the savings groups. The standard levels for the

residential furnace and boilers analysis were divided into two groups:

Standard Level 4: used to model Standard Levels 1, 2, and 3

Standard Level 5: modeled independently

To preserve the pattern of energy savings over time for a trial standard level, savings

in each year were multiplied by the same factor. This factor varies between standards because the

magnitude of the savings changes. An appropriate set of multipliers was chosen to augment the

savings to a magnitude that produces credible results. Using professional judgement, sets of three

multipliers were selected for each of the trial standard levels as shown in Table U.1.

Table U.1 Set of Multipliers for Each Trial Standard Level

`' For more information on NEMS, please refer to the U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration documentation.

A useful summary is National Energy Modeling System: An Overview 2003. DOE/EIA-0581(2003), March 2003. DOE/ETA

approves use of the name NEMS to describe only an official version of the model without any modification to code or data. Because

our analysis entails some minor code modifications and the model is run under policy scenarios that are variations on DOE/ETA

assumptions, the name NEMS-BT refers to the model as used here (BT is DOE's Building Technologies office, under whose aegis

this work has been performed).

U-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX U. INTERPOLATION OF UTILITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 

FROM NEMS-BT OUTPUT 

The effects of proposed furnace and boiler energy-efficiency standards on the 

electricity and natural gas industries were analyzed using a variant of u.s. DOE/EIA's National 

Energy Modeling System (NEMS) called NEMS-BT, together with some exogenous calculationsa

. 

Because the relative size of the energy savings being implemented in NEMS-BT is too small to be 

seen in the context of the whole electricity and natural gas utility sector, NEMS-BT is not used 

directly. Rather, exploratory runs are conducted to estimate marginal effects, which are then used 

to calculate the small effects due to each proposed trial standard level. 

To run a simulation in NEMS-BT, the Residential Demand Module space heating 

load is reduced annually according to the energy savings estimated by the National Energy Savings 

model (see Chapter 13) for each trial standard level. These energy savings increase over time and 

are distinguished by fuel type (electricity, natural gas, LPG, and oil). 

The magnitude of the energy decrement that would be required for NEMS-BT to 

produce stable results safely out of the range of numerical noise is greater than even the most 

stringent standard under consideration. Therefore, it has been necessary, in both the utility analysis 

and environmental assessment, to estimate results in the range of the standard levels effects using 

interpolation. Interpolated values are derived from a series of higher decrement simulations based 

on the standard levels. The actual annual savings attributed to each standard level are compared 

between standard levels, and those with similar energy savings patterns over time are grouped 

together. One set of simulations is run for each of the savings groups. The standard levels for the 

residential furnace and boilers analysis were divided into two groups: 

Standard Level 4: used to model Standard Levels 1,2, and 3 

Standard Level 5: modeled independently 

To preserve the pattern of energy savings over time for a trial standard level, savings 

in each year were multiplied by the same factor. This factor varies between standards because the 

magnitude of the savings changes. An appropriate set of multipliers was chosen to augment the 

savings to a magnitude that produces credible results. Using professional judgement, sets of three 

multipliers were selected for each of the trial standard levels as shown in Table D.1. 

Table U.l Set of Multipliers for Each Trial Standard Level 

a For more information on NEMS, please refer to the U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration docLUnentation. 

A useful summary is National Energy Modeling System: An Overview 2003. DOEIEIA-05S1(2003), March 2003. DOEIEIA 

approves lise of the name NEMS to describe only an official version ofthe model without any modification to code or data. Because 

our analysis entails some minor code modifications and the model is run under policy scenarios that are variations on DOEIEIA 

assumptions, the name NEMS-BT refers to the model as used here (BT is DOE's Building Technologies office, under whose aegis 

this work has been perfonned). 

U-I 
Trial Standard Level 4

Trial Standard Level 5

5,7,9

3,4,5

The output for electricity generation and capacity by fuel type for each of the

iterations (e.g., 3, 4, and 5 times the standard level) was then regressed, with the y-intercept forced

through the origin, and the actual standard level forecast is interpolated along this regression line.

The linear regression is forced through the origin because a zero change must be the case with no

standard in place and because the target points of interpolation are close to the origin (i.e., at low

energy decrements).

Figure U.1 shows an example of the interpolation approach for a proposed trial

standard level XL The magnitude of the energy savings multiplier is plotted on the x-axis against

the reduction in coal installed generating capacity for each reported year, as shown by the various

plotted lines. In general, results for the various NEMS-BT runs are reasonably stable and linear,

with the noisy behavior appearing below the first multiplier of the trial standard level savings

decrement.

The Department used the estimated reduction in total fuel generation at each trial

standard level as determined by interpolation to determine emissions savings. Wherever possible,

the environmental assessment analysis used marginal emissions rates over average emissions rates.

However, as will be discussed further in this appendix, difficulties arose with using marginal rates

in all circumstances and alternative methods needed to be used. Marginal emissions rates

incorporate both effects of the standards-the emissions saved by the reduction in total generation

and the slight change in the emissions characteristics of the whole power sector that result from the

slight change in dispatch and capacity expansion plan. The net effect on the entire system is very

small and, typically, the overall effect on emissions can be fully attributed to the decremental

generation. The annual marginal emissions rates at the trial standard level was extrapolated from

these rates (at multipliers of the trial standard level savings) by taking a simple average.

Figure U.2 shows an example of the extrapolation for NOX emissions rates for trial

standard level Xl. In this case, marginal rates for NOX emissions are shown for each year. As is

evident in the figure, more stable results are produced at higher levels of demand decrement. At

lower decrement levels (i.e., both on the left-hand side of the figure and in years with small

standards impacts), the emissions rate is quite variable. The dashed lines show the earlier years of

the imposed standard-those in which the decrements to demand are smallest. The constant

emissions rates at higher decrement levels are therefore assumed to hold in the range of small

decrements commensurate with the various standard levels, and the implied marginal emissions rates

are used to estimate emissions reductions.

Wherever possible, the Department calculated annual marginal emissions rates for

each of the simulations in each standard level, based on the actual output from NEMS-BT.

Unfortunately, the marginal rate often proved unstable with this high-natural-gas-saving standard,

therefore requiring an alternative approach to estimating the CO2 and NOX emissions savings.

U-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Trial Standard Level 4 5,7,9 

Trial Standard Level 5 3,4,5 

The output for electricity generation and capacity by fuel type for each of the 

iterations (e.g., 3, 4, and 5 times the standard level) was then regressed, with the y-intercept forced 

through the origin, and the actual standard level forecast is interpolated along this regression line. 

The linear regression is forced through the origin because a zero change must be the case with no 

standard in place and because the target points of interpolation are close to the origin (i.e., at low 

energy decrements). 

Figure UI shows an example of the interpolation approach for a proposed trial 

standard level Xl. The magnitude ofthe energy savings multiplier is plotted on the x-axis against 

the reduction in coal installed generating capacity for each reported year, as shown by the various 

plotted lines. In general, results for the various NEMS-BT runs are reasonably stable and linear, 

with the noisy behavior appearing below the first multiplier of the trial standard level savings 

decrement. 

The Department used the estimated reduction in total fuel generation at each trial 

standard level as determined by interpolation to determine emissions savings. Wherever possible, 

the environmental assessment analysis used marginal emissions rates over average emissions rates. 

However, as will be discussed further in this appendix, difficulties arose with using marginal rates 

in all circumstances and alternative methods needed to be used. Marginal emissions rates 

incorporate both effects of the standards-the emissions saved by the reduction in total generation 

and the slight change in the emissions characteristics ofthe whole power sector that result from the 

slight change in dispatch and capacity expansion plan. The net effect on the entire system is very 

small and, typically, the overall effect on emissions can be fully attributed to the decremental 

generation. The annual marginal emissions rates at the trial standard level was extrapolated from 

these rates (at multipliers of the trial standard level savings) by taking a simple average. 

Figure U2 shows an example of the extrapolation for NOx emissions rates for trial 

standard level Xl. In this case, marginal rates for NOx emissions are shown for each year. As is 

evident in the figure, more stable results are produced at higher levels of demand decrement. At 

lower decrement levels (i.e., both on the left-hand side of the figure and in years with small 

standards impacts), the emissions rate is quite variable. The dashed lines show the earlier years of 

the imposed standard-those in which the decrements to demand are smallest. The constant 

emissions rates at higher decrement levels are therefore assumed to hold in the range of small 

decrements commensurate with the various standard levels, and the implied marginal emissions rates 

are used to estimate emissions reductions. 

Wherever possible, the Department calculated annual marginal emissions rates for 

each of the simulations in each standard level, based on the actual output from NEMS-BT. 

Unfortunately, the marginal rate often proved unstable with this high-natural-gas-saving standard, 

therefore requiring an alternative approach to estimating the CO2 and NOx emissions savings. 

U-2 
Because of the significant natural gas savings associated with the proposed furnace/boiler energy

efficiency standards, the marginal emissions rates were largely unstable compared with proposed

energy efficiency standards dominated by electricity savings. The instability was due to the

increased natural gas generation in the power sector as a result of significant natural gas reductions

in the residential sector that make power sector natural gas use more economically attractive. To

rectify this problem, the Department estimated marginal CO2 emissions rates by fuel type (coal,

natural gas, and petroleum) rather than collectively as thermal generation to accommodate the

opposing trends of each fuel. This was possible because NEMS-BT tracks CO2 well and in more

detail than NO, Thus, the Department estimated CO2 emissions reductions using marginal

emissions rates calculated separately by changes in coal, natural gas, and petroleum and then

summed to estimate the overall impact from each trial standard level. For NO,,, however, emissions

tracking is more rudimentary so the Department assumed average emissions rates for this pollutant

because marginal rates were too unstable. Total emissions savings in each year are the product of

the annual marginal/average emissions rate and the reduction in generation (by fuel or collectively)

for that year (as calculated by the interpolation method described above).

0

-2

-4

-6

-8

-10

-12

-14

No Std, Lvl. 6x Std vt. X1 8x Std. LA. X1 10x Std. LA. Xl

.-•-._ • ...... .. ......

4 5

-

---

F----L:2-000

2005

-x"2010

X2015

2020

2005 Regression

2010 Regression

- " - - 2015 Regression

--------2020 Regression

Savings Multiplier

Figure U.1 An Example of Interpolation of a Trial Standard Level: Difference in

Coal Capacity

U-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Because of the significant natural gas savings associated with the proposed furnace/boiler energy 

efficiency standards, the marginal emissions rates were largely unstable compared with proposed 

energy efficiency standards dominated by electricity savings. The instability was due to the 

increased natural gas generation in the power sector as a result of significant natural gas reductions 

in the residential sector that make power sector natural gas use more economically attractive. To 

rectify this problem, the Department estimated marginal CO2 emissions rates by fuel type (coal, 

natural gas, and petroleum) rather than collectively as thermal generation to accommodate the 

opposing trends of each fuel. This was possible because NEMS-BT tracks CO2 well and in more 

detail than NOx ' Thus, the Department estimated CO2 emissions reductions using marginal 

emissions rates calculated separately by changes in coal, natural gas, and petroleum and then 

summed to estimate the overall impact from each trial standard level. For NOx, however, emissions 

tracking is more rudimentary so the Department assumed average emissions rates for this pollutant 

because marginal rates were too unstable. Total emissions savings in each year are the product of 

the annual marginal/average emissions rate and the reduction in generation (by fuel or collectively) 

for that year (as calculated by the interpolation method described above). 

No Std, LvI. 6x Std, LvI. XI 8x Std, LvI. XI lOx Std, LvI. XI 

o .. ~' - _j'_:~: ~'''~''~'.'~:~: ~.: ~'.'~'.'~~~ :~: ................ . 

-.-. ·2 --.-. 

-4 

·6 

~ 

C 

·8 ' -------~~~~-~-

r-=;~~ .. ~----

, ---+-2000 

-2005 

·10 -2010 

~2015 

--lIE-- 2020 

·12 2005 Regression 

• ~ ~ M. ~2010 Regression 

_. _. 2015 Regression 

- - ~ - 2020 Regression 

·14 

Savings Multiplier 

Figure V.l An Example of Interpolation of a Trial Standard Level: Difference in 

Coal Capacity 

U-3 
8

6

4

2

..

0

..

-- -- = b__ - - P- ---

Y -z -- _ _,

- - - _ -- -- --- --- -- - - - - - -

-4

_ g

fi

- 10

Std. LvI. XI 6x Std. LvI. XI 8x Std. LA. XI

Savings Multiplier

Figure U.2 Example of Trial Standard Level: XI Marginal Nox Emissions

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

6+-------------------------------------------------------------------~ 

e. 

'. 4+-------------,~~--------------------------------------------------~ 

o 0 Z 

.c 

~ ·2 

:;: .... "- ... 

----------------- ---~--. . ". ,~~~~-

·1OL---------------+---------------------------------------------------, 

Std. LvI. Xl 6x Std. LvI. Xl 8xStd. LvI. Xl 

Sa~ngs Multiplier 

Figure U.2 Example of Trial Standard Level: Xl Marginal Nox Emissions 

U-4 
APPENDIX V. HEMS-BT2 EXTENSION MODELING BEYOND 2025

TABLES

Table V.1 Summary of Active NEMS-BT2 Modules ........................... V-2

FIGURES

Figure V.1 Modified Residential Delivered Natural Gas Price ..................... V-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table Vol 

APPENDIX V. NEMS-BT2 EXTENSION MODELING BEYOND 2025 

TABLES 

Summary of Active NEMS-BT2 Modules 000000000000000000000000000 V-2 

FIGURES 

Figure V.I Modified Residential Delivered Natural Gas Price 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V-3 

V-i 
APPENDIX V. HEMS-BT2 EXTENSION MODELING BEYOND 2025

The current forecast horizon of NEMS-BT is 2025; however some aspects of the residential

furnace and boiler energy efficiency standard rulemaking analysis extend beyond this date to the

last year of improved efficiency equipment shipments, 2038.

Past utility analyses and environmental assessments have relied on replicating 2025 results

to the end of the forecast. However, more recent energy efficiency standards are tending to have

more distant onset years making NEMS-BT inadequate for capturing the entire life cycle of

appliances subject to proposed standards. For example, the first year of proposed residential furnace

and boiler savings is 2015, only 10 years before the NEMS-BT horizon. A three to five year lead

time for power plant construction further reduces noticeable impacts. Although replicating the 2025

results has served as a simple and reasonable approach in the past, it seems increasingly inadequate

for recent rulemakings.

To address this concern, the Department has developed a limited form adjunct version of the

NEMS model, called NEMS-BT2, capable of modeling to 2050. The NEMS-BT2 2050 extension

model, based on the 2004 version of NEMS-BT, was developed by OnLocation, Inc., under a

subcontract to the Department. Because extensive code and input file changes were required to

allow NEMS-BT2 to run to 2050, it has been impossible to date to extend the AE02005 version.

Therefore, the Department used the 2005 version ofNEMS-BT to conduct the analysis through 2025

and the 2004 NEMS-BT2 2050 extension version for the 2026-2038 period. Also, some

assumptions and adjustments were required to ease the transition from year 2025 to 2026

compensating for the inherent differences between these two versions.

The NEMS-BT2 extension model to 2050 does not run all modules. Table Z.1 summarizes

the active and inactive modules. Because the NEMS-BT2 2050 extension module was developed

for the primary purpose of modeling energy efficiency standards, the residential and commercial

demand modules as well as the electricity module are needed. The renewables module is closely

tied to the electricity module so is active for that reason, while the coal module is active because it

was extended in a previous project. Many of the other modules are much less relevant to the furnace

and boiler analysis and were, therefore, not extended. Obviously, the natural gas price forecast is

important and yet the oil and natural gas module was not extended, rather a forecast price trajectory

is imposed, as explained later in this appendix.

To extend NEMS-BT2 to 2050 required four types of modifications:

• resize the huge data array that holds all the annualized variables,

• extend exogenous inputs,

• extend endogenous variables, and

• change algorithms in the source source code.

V-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX V. NEMS-BT2 EXTENSION MODELING BEYOND 2025 

The current forecast horizon ofNEMS-BT is 2025; however some aspects of the residential 

furnace and boiler energy efficiency standard rulemaking analysis extend beyond this date to the 

last year of improved efficiency equipment shipments, 2038. 

Past utility analyses and environmental assessments have relied on replicating 2025 results 

to the end of the forecast. However, more recent energy efficiency standards are tending to have 

more distant onset years making NEMS-BT inadequate for capturing the entire life cycle of 

appliances subject to proposed standards. For example, the first year of proposed residential furnace 

and boiler savings is 2015, only 10 years before the NEMS-BT horizon. A three to five year lead 

time for power plant construction further reduces noticeable impacts. Although replicating the 2025 

results has served as a simple and reasonable approach in the past, it seems increasingly inadequate 

for recent rulemakings. 

To address this concern, the Department has developed a limited form adjunct version of the 

NEMS model, called NEMS-BT2, capable of modeling to 2050. The NEMS-BT2 2050 extension 

model, based on the 2004 version of NEMS-BT, was developed by OnLocation, Inc., under a 

subcontract to the Department. Because extensive code and input file changes were required to 

allow NEMS-BT2 to run to 2050, it has been impossible to date to extend the AE02005 version. 

Therefore, the Department used the 2005 version ofNEMS-BT to conductthe analysis through 2025 

and the 2004 NEMS-BT2 2050 extension version for the 2026-2038 period. Also, some 

assumptions and adjustments were required to ease the transition from year 2025 to 2026 

compensating for the inherent differences between these two versions. 

The NEMS-BT2 extension model to 2050 does not run all modules. Table Z.1 summarizes 

the active and inactive modules. Because the NEMS-BT2 2050 extension module was developed 

for the primary purpose of modeling energy efficiency standards, the residential and commercial 

demand modules as well as the electricity module are needed. The renewables module is closely 

tied to the electricity module so is active for that reason, while the coal module is active because it 

was extended in a previous project. Many of the other modules are much less relevant to the furnace 

and boiler analysis and were, therefore, not extended. Obviously, the natural gas price forecast is 

important and yet the oil and natural gas module was not extended, rather a forecast price trajectory 

is imposed, as explained later in this appendix. 

To extend NEMS-BT2 to 2050 required four types of modifications: 

resize the huge data array that holds all the annualized variables, 

extend exogenous inputs, 

extend endogenous variables, and 

change algorithms in the source source code. 

V-I 
Because not all modules run, many endogenous variables need to be modified, and are turned

into fixed variables. For example, commercial floorspace growth and retirements are usually

calculated in NEMS-BT's macro module. When this module is turned off in a forecast to 2025,

NEMS-BT solves using a previous forecast of commercial floorspace through 2025, creating a new

forecast to 2050. But, as there is no previous forecast to 2050 from which to borrow; fixed inputs

from 2026 -2050 are created by calculating the average growth from 2000-2025 by building type

by region, and making a simple extrapolation. Similar simple extrapolations have been made for

numerous variables, especially for macroeconomic quantities.

Establishing deviations from EIA's 20-year ahead estimates and creating a 45-year ahead

estimate would be fraught with difficulty, so most of the inputs that describe values that can't be

assumed to grow, for example, the cost and technology characteristics for distributed generation,

were extended by flat-lining the 2025 values through 2050. The code changes, while tedious, were

straight forward compared to establishing input and endogenous variable changes.

Table VA Summary of Active NEMS-BT2 Modules

Residential Demand Module

Commercial Demand Module

Transportation Demand Module

Industrial Demand Module

Oil and Gas Supply Module

Natural Gas Transmission and

Distribution Module

Coal Market Module

Renewable Fuels Module

Macroeconomic Activity Module

International Energy Module

Electricity Market Module

Petroleum

ON

ON

OFF

OFF

. OFF

OFF

ON

ON

OFF

OFF

ON

OFF

Since the NEMS-BT2 2050 extension model is intended to project the NEMS-BT 2005

version results beyond 2025 as accurately as possible, it was tailored to behave more similarly by

modifying the critical residential delivered natural gas price. This gas price forecast is assumed

V-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Because not all modules run, many endogenous variables need to be modified, and are turned 

into fixed variables. For example, commercial floorspace growth and retirements are usually 

calculated in NEMS-BT's macro module. When this module is turned off in a forecast to 2025, 

NEMS-BT solves using a previous forecast of commercial floorspace through 2025, creating a new 

forecast to 2050. But, as there is no previous forecast to 2050 from which to borrow; fixed inputs 

from 2026 -2050 are created by calculating the average growth from 2000-2025 by building type 

by region, and making a simple extrapolation. Similar simple extrapolations have been made for 

numerous variables, especially for macroeconomic quantities. 

Establishing deviations from EIA's 20-year ahead estimates and creating a 45-year ahead 

estimate would be fraught with difficulty, so most of the inputs that describe values that can't be 

assumed to grow, for example, the cost and technology characteristics for distributed generation, 

were extended by flat-lining the 2025 values through 2050. The code changes, while tedious, were 

straight forward compared to establishing input and endogenous variable changes. 

Table V.l Summary of Active NEMS-BT2 Modules 

Residential Demand Module ON 

Commercial Demand Module ON 

Transportation Demand Module OFF 

Industrial Demand Module OFF 

Oil and Gas Supply Module OFF 

Natural Gas Transmission and 

OFF Distribution Module 

Coal Market Module ON 

Renewable Fuels Module ON 

Macroeconomic Activity Module OFF 

International Energy Module OFF 

Electricity Market Module ON 

Petroleum OFF 

Since the NEMS-BT2 2050 extension model is intended to project the NEMS-BT 2005 

version results beyond 2025 as accurately as possible, it was tailored to behave more similarly by 

modifying the critical residential delivered natural gas price. This gas price forecast is assumed 

V-2 
in other parts of the residential furnace and boiler rulemaking analysis to be the AE02005 with

an extension beyond 2025 based on the growth rate from 2015-2025, so for consistency, this

same price trajectory is also assumed in the NEMS-BT2 2050 extension. The 2005 version of

NEMS-BT forecasted higher natural gas prices than AE02004 , so modifications were made to

increase the natural gas prices in the 2004 NEMS-BT2 2050 extension model to match . Figure

Z.1 shows before and after changes to the modified residential natural gas price . The AE02004

price (green triangle line) represents the lower gas prices in the 2004 NEMS -BT2 2050 extension

model before the forced increase . The AE02005 (blue circle) line represents the 2005 NEMSBT forecast extended to 2050 assuming the continued 2015-2025 growth rate mentioned above.

The actual extension model price is shown as the red square line. This change is particularly

important for the residential furnace and boiler analysis because standards can influence the

overall natural gas price, which can in turn could have a significant effect on the generation fuel

mix.

Residential Natural Gas Price

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Year

Figure V.l Modified Residential Delivered Natural Gas Price

As previously mentioned, some techniques were necessary to produce a smooth and

believable transition from year 2025 to year 2026 results when using the 2005 version of NEMSBT forecast to 2025 followed by results from the 2004 NEMS-BT2 2050 extension model. For

example, the AE02005 model forecasts lower overall installed generating capacity yet higher

electricity demand. To address this discrepancy , a simple adder was applied to all years 2026-

2050 that represents the 2025 difference between the two models. This adder was applied to all

results in the utility analysis and environmental assessment. The impacts from each modeled

trial standard level are determined using the interpolation method discussed in Appendix U and

are reported without further smoothing during the extrapolation period 2026-2050.

V-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

in other parts of the residential furnace and boiler rulemaking analysis to be the AE02005 with 

an extension beyond 2025 based on the growth rate from 2015-2025, so for consistency, this 

same price trajectory is also assumed in the NEMS-BT2 2050 extension. The 2005 version of 

NEMS-BT forecasted higher natural gas prices than AE02004, so modifications were made to 

increase the natural gas prices in the 2004 NEMS-BT2 2050 extension model to match. Figure 

Z.1 shows before and after changes to the modified residential natural gas price. The AE02004 

price (green triangle line) represents the lower gas prices in the 2004 NEMS-BT2 2050 extension 

model before the forced increase. The AE02005 (blue circle) line represents the 2005 NEMSBT forecast extended to 2050 assuming the continued 2015-2025 growth rate mentioned above. 

The actual extension model price is shown as the red square line. This change is particularly 

important for the residential furnace and boiler analysis because standards can influence the 

overall natural gas price, which can in tum could have a significant effect on the generation fuel 

mIX. 

Residential Natural Gas Price 

13 .-------------------------------------------~ 

12 

~ 11 

III 

:!: 

~ 10 

(II") 

! --Q-AE 02005 Extended --~-; 

I --8-AE02004 High Gas 

-1--1 -A-AE 02004 Ref 

N g 9 +---~~----------~~~~----------------------------I 

8 

7 

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 

Year 

Figure V.I Modified Residential Delivered Natural Gas Price 

As previously mentioned, some techniques were necessary to produce a smooth and 

believable transition from year 2025 to year 2026 results when using the 2005 version ofNEMSBT forecast to 2025 followed by results from the 2004 NEMS-BT2 2050 extension model. For 

example, the AE02005 model forecasts lower overall installed generating capacity yet higher 

electricity demand. To address this discrepancy, a simple adder was applied to all years 2026-

2050 that represents the 2025 difference between the two models. This adder was applied to all 

results in the utility analysis and environmental assessment. The impacts from each modeled 

trial standard level are determined using the interpolation method discussed in Appendix U and 

are reported without further smoothing during the extrapolation period 2026-2050. 

V-3 
Additionally, to be consistent with the AE02005 TMY System Load Reference Case, all

AE02004 2050 extension runs substitute the NEMS system load shapes with the TMY system

load shape.

The NEMS-BT2 2050 extension model was not modified to run the High and Low Economic

Growth sensitivity cases because it would not be reasonable to extend these trajectories so far

out, so extensions to these cases were interpolated from the Reference Case results. The High

and Low Economic Growth sensitivities were run for the 2005 NEMS Reference Case with

TMY System Load runs for Trial Standard Levels 1-5, yielding results for the 2005-2025

forecast period. However, beyond 2025, High and Low Economic Growth Case results were

derived by using fixed adders to the 2026-2050 results representing the 2025 economic growth

rate above or below the Reference Case. For the High (Low) Growth Cases, the fixed adder

represents an 11 percent increase (decrease) over the Reference Case results for total electricity

consumption, generation, and capacity. This adder represents the 2025 growth rate difference

between the High and Low Growth Cases relative to the Reference Case. To estimate the High

and Low Growth results, impacts as the difference from the Reference Case were assumed to be

five percent higher or lower than the corresponding Reference Case results for each Trial

Standard Level. This adjustment was determined using professional judgement based on

previous analyses using the Economic Growth sensitivity cases. All adjustments made to derive

the results during the 2026-2050 period were applied both to the utility analysis results as well as

to the corresponding environmental assessment impacts.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Additionally, to be consistent with the AE02005 TMY System Load Reference Case, all 

AE02004 2050 extension runs substitute the NEMS system load shapes with the TMY system 

load shape. 

The NEMS-BT2 2050 extension model was not modified to run the High and Low Economic 

Growth sensitivity cases because it would not be reasonable to extend these trajectories so far 

out, so extensions to these cases were interpolated from the Reference Case results. The High 

and Low Economic Growth sensitivities were run for the 2005 NEMS Reference Case with 

TMY System Load runs for Trial Standard Levels 1-5, yielding results for the 2005-2025 

forecast period. However, beyond 2025, High and Low Economic Growth Case results were 

derived by using fixed adders to the 2026-2050 results representing the 2025 economic growth 

rate above or below the Reference Case. For the High (Low) Growth Cases, the fixed adder 

represents an 11 percent increase ( decrease) over the Reference Case results for total electricity 

consumption, generation, and capacity. This adder represents the 2025 growth rate difference 

between the High and Low Growth Cases relative to the Reference Case. To estimate the High 

and Low Growth results, impacts as the difference from the Reference Case were assumed to be 

five percent higher or lower than the corresponding Reference Case results for each Trial 

Standard Level. This adjustment was determined using professional judgement based on 

previous analyses using the Economic Growth sensitivity cases. All adjustments made to derive 

the results during the 2026-2050 period were applied both to the utility analysis results as well as 

to the corresponding environmental assessment impacts. 

V-4 
APPENDIX W. EMISSIONS FACTORS FOR FUEL COMBUSTION FROM

NATURAL GAS, LPG, AND OIL-FIRED RESIDENTIAL FURNACES AND BOILERS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

W.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................ W-1

W.2 EMISSIONS FACTORS BY FUEL TYPE ................................. W-2

W.2.1 All Fuels: Carbon Dioxide ....................................... W-2

W.2.2 Natural Gas ................................................... W-3

W.2.2.1 Oxides of Nitrogen ............................ W-3

W.2.2.2 Sulfur Dioxide ............................... W-3

W.2.3 Fuel Oil #2 ................................................. W-3

W.2.3.1 Oxides of Nitrogen ............................ W-3

W.2.3.2 Sulfur Dioxide ............................... W-4

W.2.4 LPG ......................................................... W-4

W.2.4.1 Oxides of Nitrogen ............................ W-4

W.2.4.2 Sulfur Dioxide ............................... W-5

W.3 SUMMARY ......................................................... W-2

TABLES

Table W.1.1 Estimated National Average Emissions Factors for Household Fuel

Combustion of Natural Gas, Fuel Oil #2, and LPG ..................... W-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX W. EMISSIONS FACTORS FOR FUEL COMBUSTION FROM 

NATURAL GAS, LPG, AND OIL-FIRED RESIDENTIAL FURNACES AND BOILERS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

W.l OVERVIEW ........................................................ W-l 

W.2 EMISSIONS FACTORS BY FUEL TYPE ................................. W-2 

W.2.1 All Fuels: Carbon Dioxide ....................................... W-2 

W.2.2 Natural Gas ................................................... W-3 

W.2.2.1 Oxides of Nitrogen ............................ W-3 

W.2.2.2 Sulfur Dioxide ............................... W-3 

W.2.3 Fuel Oil #2 ................................................. W-3 

W.2.3.1 Oxides of Nitrogen ............................ W-3 

W.2.3.2 Sulfur Dioxide ............................... W-4 

W.2.4 LPG ......................................................... W-4 

W.2.4.1 Oxides of Nitrogen ............................ W-4 

W.2.4.2 Sulfur Dioxide ............................... W-5 

W.3 SUMMARY ......................................................... W-2 

TABLES 

Table W.l.l Estimated National Average Emissions Factors for Household Fuel 

Combustion of Natural Gas, Fuel Oil #2, and LPG ..................... W-2 

W-i 
APPENDIX W. EMISSIONS FACTORS FOR FUEL COMBUSTION FROM NATURAL

GAS, LPG, AND OIL-FIRED RESIDENTIAL FURNACE AND BOILERS

WA OVERVIEW

The modified version of the National Energy Modeling System (HEMS) used for the furnace

and boiler energy-efficiency standards analysis, called NEMS-BT, comprehensively considers a

wide range of aspects of energy use. However, this model does not consider household emissions

of NOX and SO2 from the combustion of natural gas, residential heating fuel oil #2 (i.e., high-sulfur

distillate fuel oil), and LPG. Because an efficiency standard could result in changes in these

emissions, the Department has performed some elementary research to determine appropriate

emissions factors for COD NO,,, and S02 from household appliances. Specifically, this work focuses

on emissions rates from the use of furnace and boilers and is used to calculate emissions savings

from proposed efficiency standards. Because a majority of the savings from this standard are from

furnaces, emissions factors for furnaces are presented over small-scale boilers whenever both are

available.

This analysis attempts to verify that the emissions factors from the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) for CO2, NO., and SO2 from natural gas, fuel oil #2, and LPG combustion

are representative of the U.S.' The EPA cautions against the use of these emissions factors as

representative of actual emissions. Rather, they are to be used, and are used here, as general

approximations of national average emissions factors in order to calculate emissions savings that

result from proposed furnace and boiler energy-efficiency standards. This analysis compares the

EPA's emissions factors with those from other sources and with regional regulations.

Table W.1.1 summarizes the emissions factor estimates for the three fuels of interest. The

values presented here are based on the EPA's assessment of combustion emissions (with the

exception of SO2 from LPG, see discussion below). These emissions estimates represent an

approximate emissions factor for the U.S. as a whole. They are used, together with estimated

energy savings, to calculate end-use site emissions savings. The emissions factors discussed in this

analysis are represented as mass (g or kg) of the specific emission of interest per gigajoule (GJ) of

energy input to the furnace and boiler!

. 0.454 kg = 1 lb; 1.055 GJ = 1 MBtu

W-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX W. EMISSIONS FACTORS FOR FUEL COMBUSTION FROM NATURAL 

GAS, LPG, AND OIL-FIRED RESIDENTIAL FURNACE AND BOILERS 

W.l OVERVIEW 

The modified version of the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) used for the furnace 

and boiler energy-efficiency standards analysis, called NEMS-BT, comprehensively considers a 

wide range of aspects of energy use. However, this model does not consider household emissions 

of NO x and S02 from the combustion of natural gas, residential heating fuel oil #2 (i.e., high-sulfur 

distillate fuel oil), and LPG. Because an efficiency standard could result in changes in these 

emissions, the Department has performed some elementary research to determine appropriate 

emissions factors for CO2, NOx, and S02 from household appliances. Specifically, this work focuses 

on emissions rates from the use of furnace and boilers and is used to calculate emissions savings 

from proposed efficiency standards. Because a majority of the savings from this standard are from 

furnaces, emissions factors for furnaces are presented over small-scale boilers whenever both are 

available. 

This analysis attempts to verify that the emissions factors from the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) for CO2, NOx, and S02 from natural gas, fuel oil #2, and LPG combustion 

are representative of the U.S. 1 The EPA cautions against the use of these emissions factors as 

representative of actual emissions. Rather, they are to be used, and are used here, as general 

approximations of national average emissions factors in order to calculate emissions savings that 

result from proposed furnace and boiler energy-efficiency standards. This analysis compares the 

EPA's emissions factors with those from other sources and with regional regulations. 

Table W.l.l summarizes the emissions factor estimates for the three fuels of interest. The 

values presented here are based on the EPA's assessment of combustion emissions (with the 

exception of S02 from LPG, see discussion below). These emissions estimates represent an 

approximate emissions factor for the U.S. as a whole. They are used, together with estimated 

energy savings, to calculate end-use site emissions savings. The emissions factors discussed in this 

analysis are represented as mass (g or kg) of the specific emission of interest per gigajoule (GJ) of 

energy input to the furnace and boiler. * 

, 0.454 kg = lib; 1.055 GJ = 1 MBtu 

W-l 
Table W.1.1 Estimated National Average Emissions Factors for Household Fuel Combustion

of Natural Gas, Fuel Oil #2, and LPG

CO2

(kg/GJ)

NO,,

(g/GJ)

SO2

(g/GJ)

Natural Gas 50.6 40 0

Fuel Oil #2 68.6 55 218

LPG 58.7 66 7

There are significant differences in state regulations, making it difficult to generalize about

localized emissions. For residential fuel oil combustion, stricter state standards exist in the

northeastern United States and southern California than elsewhere. State and local agencies like

southern California's South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)2, the New Jersey

Department of Environmental Protection, and the New York Department of Environmental

Conservation have established regulations for residential fuel combustion emissions. These

regulations, however, are local to individual counties and do not apply to all regions in the Northeast

or even all of California.

W.2 EMISSIONS FACTORS BY FUEL TYPE

W.2.1 All Fuels: Carbon Dioxide

NEMS-BT tracks C02 well, but factors are included here for completeness. The C02

estimates in Table W.1.1 are based on EPA's assessment of CO2 combustion from natural gas, fuel

oil #2, and LPG use. Other sources of information include the U.S. DOE's Energy Information

Administration (EIA), Oregon State EPA, and the Gas Research Institute (GRI). All agree to within

± 2.0 percent of EPA's assessed estimate of CO2 emissions. EPA's CO2 emissions factors for

natural gas, fuel oil #2, and LPG combustion are therefore a reasonable evaluation of nationally

averaged C02 emissions rates.

Carbon monoxide (CO) can be formed by incomplete carbon oxidization, causing a severe

health hazard. Carbon monoxide emissions only result from poorly functioning appliances, and

since NEMS-BT assumes that all furnaces and boilers are functioning properly, it is unlikely that

these emissions will change.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

Table W.1.1 Estimated National Average Emissions Factors for Household Fuel Combustion 

of Natural Gas, Fuel Oil #2, and LPG 

CO2 NOx S02 

(kg/GJ) (g/GJ) (g/GJ) 

Natural Gas 50.6 40 0 

Fuel Oil #2 68.6 55 218 

LPG 58.7 66 7 

There are significant differences in state regulations, making it difficult to generalize about 

localized emissions. For residential fuel oil combustion, stricter state standards exist in the 

northeastern United States and southern California than elsewhere. State and local agencies like 

southern California's South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD?, the New Jersey 

Department of Environmental Protection, and the New York Department of Environmental 

Conservation have established regulations for residential fuel combustion emissions. These 

regulations, however, are local to individual counties and do not apply to all regions in the Northeast 

or even all of California. 

W.2 EMISSIONS FACTORS BY FUEL TYPE 

W.2.1 All Fuels: Carbon Dioxide 

NEMS-BT tracks CO2 well, but factors are included here for completeness. The CO2 

estimates in Table W.l.l are based on EPA's assessment of CO2 combustion from natural gas, fuel 

oil #2, and LPG use. Other sources of information include the u.s. DOE's Energy Information 

Administration (EIA), Oregon State EPA, and the Gas Research Institute (GRI). All agree to within 

± 2.0 percent of EPA's assessed estimate of CO2 emissions. EPA's CO2 emissions factors for 

natural gas, fuel oil #2, and LPG combustion are therefore a reasonable evaluation of nationally 

averaged CO2 emissions rates. 

Carbon monoxide (CO) can be formed by incomplete carbon oxidization, causing a severe 

health hazard. Carbon monoxide emissions only result from poorly functioning appliances, and 

since NEMS-BT assumes that all furnaces and boilers are functioning properly, it is unlikely that 

these emissions will change. 

W-2 
W.2.2 Natural Gas

W.2.1.1 Oxides of Nitrogen

Emissions of NO, that result from the combustion of natural gas from appliances are also

covered by regulations in some jurisdictions. The EPA's estimated NO, emissions factor of 40 g/GJ

from gas-fired furnaces is roughly equivalent to the regulation set by the state of New York. The

SCAQMD limits NO,, emissions to 40 g/GW from gas-fired residential furnaces, equivalent to

EPA's AP-42 estimate. The San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District also mandates the same

NO,, limit from furnaces. The SCAQMD also provided performance test results from numerous

commercially available residential gas furnaces. In general, the emissions rates ranged from 35-40

g/GJ NO,, with some higher efficiency units emitting between 26-35 g/GJ NO, New Jersey's state

regulation mandates no more than 43 g/GJ NO, emissions from natural gas combustion in small

boilers and furnaces. The absence of regulations in. other states suggests that most have emissions

rates comparable to the EPA's estimated value.

W.2.1.2 Sulfur Dioxide

S02 emissions from natural gas combustion are assumed to be zero.

W.2.3 Fuel Oil #2

W.2.3.1 Oxides of Nitrogen

NO. formation in combustion processes is significantly more complex than the formation

of S02 or C02. NO,, can result from oxidization of N2 in the fuel, but the larger source is N2 in the

combustion intake. This process is sensitive to combustion chemistry, and therefore, quite variable.

It also implies that appliance design can lower NO,, emissions. An added difficulty is that the

potential hazard of residential NO,, emissions is hard to quantify. NO,, is both an acid precipitation

and ozone (03) precursor, but because residential appliances are a relatively small and dispersed

(i.e., hard to monitor) source, these emissions tend to play a small role in NO,, control strategies.

The 03 hazards of NO. emissions are highly variable both spatially and over time, as weather

conditions favor or disfavor 03 formation. One would, therefore, expect NOx emissions rules to vary

significantly across jurisdictions.

The value estimated by EPA of 55 g of NOx/GJ is for residential oil-fired furnaces.

Additional research into specific state regulations reveals good matches with EPA's emissions

factor: New Hampshire limits NO, emissions to 60 g/GJ for non-utility boilers and New York and

New Jersey regulations cap emissions at 52 g of NOx/GJ. These state limits confirm that EPA's

estimate can serve as a reasonable national average.

W-3

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

W.2.2 Natural Gas 

W.2.1.1 Oxides of Nitrogen 

Emissions of NO x that result from the combustion of natural gas from appliances are also 

covered by regulations in some jurisdictions. The EPA's estimated NOx emissions factor of 40 g/GJ 

from gas-fired furnaces is roughly equivalent to the regulation set by the state of New York. The 

SCAQMD limits NOx emissions to 40 g/GW from gas-fired residential furnaces, equivalent to 

EPA's AP-42 estimate. The San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District also mandates the same 

NOx limit from furnaces. The SCAQMD also provided performance test results from numerous 

commercially available residential gas furnaces. In general, the emissions rates ranged from 35-40 

g/GJNOx with some higher efficiency units emitting between 26-35 g/GJNOx' New Jersey's state 

regulation mandates no more than 43 g/GJ NOx emissions from natural gas combustion in small 

boilers and furnaces. The absence of regulations in other states suggests that most have emissions 

rates comparable to the EPA's estimated value. 

W.2.1.2 Sulfur Dioxide 

S02 emissions from natural gas combustion are assumed to be zero. 

W.2.3 Fuel Oil #2 

W.2.3.1 Oxides of Nitrogen 

NOx formation in combustion processes is significantly more complex than the formation 

of S02 or CO2, NOx can result from oxidization ofN2 in the fuel, but the larger source is N2 in the 

combustion intake. This process is sensitive to combustion chemistry, and therefore, quite variable. 

It also implies that appliance design can lower NOx emissions. An added difficulty is that the 

potential hazard of residential NOx emissions is hard to quantify. NOx is both an acid precipitation 

and ozone (03) precursor, but because residential appliances are a relatively small and dispersed 

(i.e., hard to monitor) source, these emissions tend to playa small role in NOx control strategies. 

The 0 3 hazards of NOx emissions are highly variable both spatially and over time, as weather 

conditions favor or disfavor 0 3 formation. One would, therefore, expect NOx emissions rules to vary 

significantly across jurisdictions. 

The value estimated by EPA of 55 g of NO/GJ is for residential oil-fired furnaces. 

Additional research into specific state regulations reveals good matches with EPA's emissions 

factor: New Hampshire limits NOx emissions to 60 g/GJ for non-utility boilers and New York and 

New Jersey regulations cap emissions at 52 g ofNO/GJ. These state limits confirm that EPA's 

estimate can serve as a reasonable national average. 

W-3 
W.2.3.2 Sulfur Dioxide

Emissions of S02 are a direct function of the sulfur content of the fuel. Assuming complete

combustion of sulfur to S02 makes it easy to assess and compare emissions across data sources.

Individual state and county regulations limiting the amount of sulfur in residential fuel oil, however,

reveal substantial variability in S02 emissions factors from EPA's estimate of 218g of SO2/GJ of

fuel energy content for both residential furnaces and boilers. This is roughly equivalent to 0.5

percent sulfur content by weight using an emissions factor for fuel oil #2 of 43,950 g/GJ weight per

unit energy content. A straight multiplication of the fuel energy content and the percentage of sulfur

content in the fuel provide the emissions factor.

In the state of New York, SO2 emissions limits range from 88-659 g/GJ depending on the

county. In New Hampshire , the emissions rate of SO2 from high -sulfur distillate fuel oil combustion

cannot exceed 176 g/GJ. In Maine and Michigan, the regulations are higher than EPA's assessment,

limiting S02 emissions from fuel oil to 500 g of SO,/GJ of heat input. Such broad ranges and

varying limits in certain regions are a strong argument for using EPA's averaged national value over

a regionally weighted average incorporating the various state and county regulations.

Comparing the sulfur content of fuel oil from different refineries also demonstrates regional

variability. Most sources were obtained through online websites detailing product specifications.

Mobil Corporation's residential heating fuel oil (#2 high-sulfur) for most states contains a maximum

0.5% sulfur by mass (219 g of S02/GJ of heat input), which is very close to EPA's emissions factor.

Mobil also markets fuel with lower sulfur content to some regions in the Northeast. For example,

Mobil's lowest sulfur content residential heating fuel oil contains 0.2 percent sulfur by weight (88

g/GJ), as required in New York City, Philadelphia, parts of Delaware, and most of New Jersey.

Other regional regulations adhered to by Mobil are 132 g/GJ for most of Pennsylvania and parts of

New Jersey, a limit of 127 g of S02/GJ of heat input for the state of Illinois, and an SO2 emissions

factor of 145 g/GJ in Massachusetts. The sulfur contents of distillate fuel oil from Chevron, Phillips

66, and the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) exactly match EPA's estimate,

substantiating the use of the latter for the analysis. Considerable variation does exist among counties

and states, especially in the Northeast. Nonetheless, EPA provides a reasonable estimate of

emissions from residential oil-fired furnaces and boilers that are representative of the national

average.

W.2.4 LPG

W.2.4.1 Oxides of Nitrogen

Although NES results are presented for LPG, EPA estimates emissions for only propane and

butane, fuels within the LPG family of gases. In the United States, the composition of LPG is

typically 90 percent propane (CA) by liquid volume, 5 percent propylene (C3H6), and 2.5 percent

butane (C4H10).3°4 This analysis uses EPA's propane emissions estimate to verify its comparability

W-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

W.2.3.2 Sulfur Dioxide 

Emissions ofS02 are a direct function ofthe sulfur content of the fuel. Assuming complete 

combustion of sulfur to S02 makes it easy to assess and compare emissions across data sources. 

Individual state and county regulations limiting the amount of sulfur in residential fuel oil, however, 

reveal substantial variability in S02 emissions factors from EPA's estimate of218g ofSOiGJ of 

fuel energy content for both residential furnaces and boilers. This is roughly equivalent to 0.5 

percent sulfur content by weight using an emissions factor for fuel oil #2 of 43,950 g/GJ weight per 

unit energy content. A straight multiplication ofthe fuel energy content and the percentage of sulfur 

content in the fuel provide the emissions factor. 

In the state of New York, S02 emissions limits range from 88-659 g/GJ depending on the 

county. In New Hampshire, the emissions rate of S02 from high-sulfur distillate fuel oil combustion 

cannot exceed 176 g/GJ. In Maine and Michigan, the regulations are higher than EPA's assessment, 

limiting S02 emissions from fuel oil to 500 g of SOiGJ of heat input. Such broad ranges and 

varying limits in certain regions are a strong argument for using EPA's averaged national value over 

a regionally weighted average incorporating the various state and county regulations. 

Comparing the sulfur content of fuel oil from different refineries also demonstrates regional 

variability. Most sources were obtained through online websites detailing product specifications. 

Mobil Corporation's residential heating fuel oil (#2 high-sulfur) for most states contains a maximum 

0.5% sulfur by mass (219 g ofSOiGJ of heat input), which is very close to EPA's emissions factor. 

Mobil also markets fuel with lower sulfur content to some regions in the Northeast. For example, 

Mobil's lowest sulfur content residential heating fuel oil contains 0.2 percent sulfur by weight (88 

g/GJ), as required in New York City, Philadelphia, parts of Delaware, and most of New Jersey. 

Other regional regulations adhered to by Mobil are 132 g/GJ for most of Pennsylvania and parts of 

New Jersey, a limit of 127 g ofSOiGJ of heat input for the state of Illinois, and an S02 emissions 

factor of 145 glGJ in Massachusetts. The sulfur contents of distillate fuel oil from Chevron, Phillips 

66, and the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) exactly match EPA's estimate, 

substantiating the use ofthe latter for the analysis. Considerable variation does exist among counties 

and states, especially in the Northeast. Nonetheless, EPA provides a reasonable estimate of 

emissions from residential oil-fired furnaces and boilers that are representative of the national 

average. 

W.2.4 LPG 

W.2.4.1 Oxides of Nitrogen 

Although NES results are presented for LPG, EPA estimates emissions for only propane and 

butane, fuels within the LPG family of gases. In the United States, the composition of LPG is 

typically 90 percent propane (C3HS) by liquid volume, 5 percent propylene (C3H6), and 2.5 percent 

butane (C4HlO).3,4 This analysis uses EPA's propane emissions estimate to verify its comparability 

W-4 
with LPG combustion or determines a more suitable estimate from other sources that best represents

LPG emissions rates.

EPA estimates an emissions factor of 66 g of NO,,/GJ of energy input from propane-fired

furnaces and boilers, which is slightly higher than the natural gas estimate. The University of New

Hampshire's Energy Office estimates an emissions factor of 43 g/GJ from LPG combustion for the

state of New Hampshire. In contrast, the state of New Jersey's EPA establishes an 86 g/GJ

emissions factor. Both sources, therefore, support EPA's national assessment of NO,, emissions

from residential propane combustion.

W.2.4.2 Sulfur Dioxide

The sulfur content of LPG is very low', although a few regulations exist in certain parts of

the country. EPA's SO2 emissions estimate is derived from the sulfur content of the propane fuel.

With 90% of LPG comprised of propane, the EPA's propane emissions factor is a reasonable value

for LPG emissions rates. Under the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES)

regulation, the maximum sulfur content allowable is 13.3 g/GJ of SO2 from LPG combustion. The

San Diego County Air Pollution Control District enforces a stricter limit of only 8.8 g of SOZ/GJ of

energy input using EPA's recommended value. Both the ASTM and Santa Barbara County Air

Pollution Control District specify a sulfur standard of 0.0185 percent sulfur by weight, which

approximates an emissions factor of 4.0 g of SO2/GJ of energy input. This calculation is based on

an LPG weight per unit energy of 21,756 g/GJ. Even lower, Nett Technologies Inc. estimates a

0.012 percent sulfur content by mass LPG average for the United States as well as Canada, which

is approximately 2.6 g of SO2/GJ of heat input.

The wide range of emissions factors for SO2 makes it difficult to determine a representative

estimate for the emissions factor and the very small net effect of any energy-efficiency standard

argue against making a significant research effort. The obtained estimates range in magnitude from

approximately 4 to 13 g/GJ of energy input. The statistical average or arithmetic mean of these four

estimates is 7.2 g/GJ, the value provided in Table W.1.1. The averaged emissions factor estimate

of 7.2 g/GJ energy input is reasonable to explain three of the five sources presented and suitably

accounts for the average among the two extreme estimates. Table W.1.1 therefore adequately

represents national SO2 emissions from residential LPG combustion.

W.3 SUMMARY

This investigation of emissions factors from natural gas-, fuel oil-, and LPG-fired residential

furnaces and boilers indicates that using the values estimated by EPA's AP-42 is a robust and

credible basis for analysis with NES output. This analysis indicates that regulations at the state and

county level, especially in the northeastern region of the United States, are generally not good

estimators of the national average set forth by the EPA AP-42 report. This is especially true for SO2

W-5

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

with LPG combustion or determines a more suitable estimate from other sources that best represents 

LPG emissions rates. 

EPA estimates an emissions factor of 66 g of NOjGJ of energy input from propane-fired 

furnaces and boilers, which is slightly higher than the natural gas estimate. The University of New 

Hampshire's Energy Office estimates an emissions factor of 43 g/GJ from LPG combustion for the 

state of New Hampshire. In contrast, the state of New Jersey's EPA establishes an 86 g/GJ 

emissions factor. Both sources, therefore, support EPA's national assessment of NO x emissions 

from residential propane combustion. 

W.2.4.2 Sulfur Dioxide 

The sulfur content of LPG is very lows, although a few regulations exist in certain parts of 

the country. EPA's S02 emissions estimate is derived from the sulfur content of the propane fuel. 

With 90% of LPG comprised of propane, the EPA's propane emissions factor is a reasonable value 

for LPG emissions rates. Under the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (DES) 

regulation, the maximum sulfur content allowable is 13.3 g/GJ ofS02 from LPG combustion. The 

San Diego County Air Pollution Control District enforces a stricter limit of only 8.8 g of SOz/GJ of 

energy input using EPA's recommended value. Both the ASTM and Santa Barbara County Air 

Pollution Control District specify a sulfur standard of 0.0185 percent sulfur by weight, which 

approximates an emissions factor of 4.0 g of SOz/GJ of energy input. This calculation is based on 

an LPG weight per unit energy of21,756 g/GJ. Even lower, Nett Technologies Inc. estimates a 

0.012 percent sulfur content by mass LPG average for the United States as well as Canada, which 

is approximately 2.6 g of SOz/GJ of heat input. 

The wide range of emissions factors for S02 makes it difficult to determine a representative 

estimate for the emissions factor and the very small net effect of any energy-efficiency standard 

argue against making a significant research effort. The obtained estimates range in magnitude from 

approximately 4 to 13 g/GJ of energy input. The statistical average or arithmetic mean of these four 

estimates is 7.2 g/GJ, the value provided in Table W. 1. 1. The averaged emissions factor estimate 

of7.2 g/GJ energy input is reasonable to explain three of the five sources presented and suitably 

accounts for the average among the two extreme estimates. Table W.l.l therefore adequately 

represents national S02 emissions from residential LPG combustion. 

W.3 SUMMARY 

This investigation of emissions factors from natural gas-, fuel oil-, and LPG-fired residential 

furnaces and boilers indicates that using the values estimated by EPA's AP-42 is a robust and 

credible basis for analysis with NES output. This analysis indicates that regulations at the state and 

county level, especially in the northeastern region of the United States, are generally not good 

estimators of the national average set forth by the EPA AP-42 report. This is especially true for S02 

W-5 
emissions factors from fuel oil combustion where individual state and county regulations are highly

variable. Thus, although it is worthwhile examining regional legislation to support the national

average, this analysis demonstrates the complexity that would be required to establish a weighted

regional calculation for each emission. The EPA's own lack of data on the sulfur content of LPG

made it difficult to derive a nationally representative emissions factor for the country as a whole.

External sources were therefore incorporated in the Table W.1.1 estimate for SO2 emissions from

LPG combustion.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

emissions factors from fuel oil combustion where individual state and county regulations are highly 

variable. Thus, although it is worthwhile examining regional legislation to support the national 

average, this analysis demonstrates the complexity that would be required to establish a weighted 

regional calculation for each emission. The EPA's own lack of data on the sulfur content of LPG 

made it difficult to derive a nationally representative emissions factor for the country as a whole. 

External sources were therefore incorporated in the Table W.l.l estimate for S02 emissions from 

LPG combustion. 

W-6 
REFERENCES

1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Compilation ofA ir Pollutant Emission Factors, AP42, Fifth Edition, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources. 1998. (Posted October)

<htip://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/qp42.html>

2. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 1995. March.

<hqp://www.aqmd.gov/rules/rl 121.htm1>

3. United States Hemispheric Clean Cities Program. 1994.

<http://www.hemisphreiccities.doe.gov/altfuels/propane.html>

4. New Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection. September 1993.

<hlt2://www.state.nj.us/dep/agm/2719968.htm#Boilers>

5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Compilation ofAirPollutantEmission Factors, AP42, Fifth Edition, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources, Chapter 1, External

Combustion Sources. 1998. (Posted October) <http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42cl.html>

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP42, Fifth Edition, Volume 1: Stationary Point and Area Sources. 1998. (Posted October) 

<http://www.epa.gov/ttnlchief/ap42.html> 

2. 

3. 

4. 

South Coast Air Quality Management District. 

<http://www.aqmd. gov /rules/r 1121.html> 

1995. March. 

United States Hemispheric Clean Cities Program. 1994. 

<http://www .hemisphreiccities .doe.gov / altfuels/propane.html> 

New Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection. 

<http://www.state.nj.us/dep/aqrn/2719968.htm#Boilers> 

September 1993. 

5. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP42, Fifth Edition, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources, Chapter 1, External 

Combustion Sources. 1998. (Posted October) <http://www .epa. gov /ttnl chief/ ap4 2c l.html> 

W-7 
APPENDIX X. USING IMPLEMENTATION CURVES TO ESTIMATE MARKET

PENETRATION OF NON-REGULATORY POLICIES

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure X.1.1 Comparison of Exponential and Logistic Curves Showing External

and Internal Influences on Consumers .............................. X-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX X. USING IMPLEMENTATION CURVES TO ESTIMATE MARKET 

PENETRATION OF NON-REGULATORY POLICIES 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure X.l.l Comparison of Exponential and Logistic Curves Showing External 

and Internal Influences on Consumers .............................. X-2 

X-i 
APPENDIX X. USING IMPLEMENTATION CURVES TO ESTIMATE MARKET

PENETRATION OF NON-REGULATORY POLICIES

X.1 Penetration of Non-Regulatory Policies

There is extensive economic literature on the diffusion process of new products as

technologies evolve. Some of the literature focuses primarily on the development of analytical

models of diffusion patterns of new products for individual consumers or for technologies from

competing firms.',',',' One study records researchers' attempts to investigate underlying factors that

drive diffusion processes.' Because of distinct characteristics of diverse new products, few studies

are conclusive in terms of developing a universally applicable model. Some key findings, however,

seem to gain wide recognition in academia and industry.

First, new technologies may not be adopted by all potential users, regardless of their

economic benefits and technological merits. Therefore, a ceiling of adoption rate exists for many

products. Second, not all adopters purchase new products at the same time; some act earlier to

purchase new products, while others respond slowly, waiting for products to become more mature.

Third, diffusion processes can be approximately characterized by asymmetric S-curves, depicting

three stages of the diffusion: starting, accelerating, and decreasing as the adoption ceiling is being

reached.

An important diffusion model, the epidemic model, is widely used in marketing and social

studies on diffusion. It assumes a) that consumers value the benefits of a new product identically

and b) that the cost of a new product is constant or declines monotonically over time. What induces

a consumer to purchase the new product is information about the availability and the benefits of the

product. In other words, it is information diffusion that drives new product adoption by individual

consumers.' The model embraces information diffusion from both internal sources (news spread

by word of mouth from early adopters) and external sources (the announcement effect by

government or commercial advertising programs) by superimposing a logistic function with an

exponential function."'

The degree of relative dominance of influence by internal or external sources will determine

the general shape of diffusion curve of a specific product.',' For instance, if the adoption of one

particular product is more influenced by external sources of information diffusion (announcement

effect) than by internal sources (word of mouth among earlier adopters to prospective adopters), the

rate of diffusion at the beginning stage of the diffusion process is much higher. This reflects the

immediate information exposure to a significant number of prospective adopters brought about by

external sources, in contrast to the more gradual exposure to internal sources such as news

propagation by earlier adopters, a small proportion of the population, to other prospective adopters.

Graphically speaking, a relatively dominant external source of information diffusion will give an

immediate jump-start to the adoption of a new product in the first years, forming a concave curve

with respect to the Y axis (see the exponential curve in Figure X.1.1). Adoption of a new product

with a stronger influence by internal sources of information diffusion (such as a socially tightened

x-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX X. USING IMPLEMENTATION CURVES TO ESTIMATE MARKET 

PENETRATION OF NON-REGULATORY POLICIES 

X.l Penetration of Non-Regulatory Policies 

There is extensive economic literature on the diffusion process of new products as 

technologies evolve. Some of the literature focuses primarily on the development of analytical 

models of diffusion patterns of new products for individual consumers or for technologies from 

competing firms. 1,2,3,4 One study records researchers' attempts to investigate underlying factors that 

drive diffusion processes.2 Because of distinct characteristics of diverse new products, few studies 

are conclusive in terms of developing a universally applicable model. Some key findings, however, 

seem to gain wide recognition in academia and industry. 

First, new technologies may not be adopted by all potential users, regardless of their 

economic benefits and technological merits. Therefore, a ceiling of adoption rate exists for many 

products. Second, not all adopters purchase new products at the same time; some act earlier to 

purchase new products, while others respond slowly, waiting for products to become more mature. 

Third, diffusion processes can be approximately characterized by asymmetric S-curves, depicting 

three stages of the diffusion: starting, accelerating, and decreasing as the adoption ceiling is being 

reached. 

An important diffusion model, the epidemic model, is widely used in marketing and social 

studies on diffusion. It assumes a) that consumers value the benefits of a new product identically 

and b) that the cost of a new product is constant or declines monotonically over time. What induces 

a consumer to purchase the new product is information about the availability and the benefits of the 

product. In other words, it is information diffusion that drives new product adoption by individual 

consumers.2 The model embraces information diffusion from both internal sources (news spread 

by word of mouth from early adopters) and external sources (the announcement effect by 

government or commercial advertising programs) by superimposing a logistic function with an 

exponential function. \,3 

The degree of relative dominance of influence by internal or external sources will determine 

the general shape of diffusion curve of a specific product. I, 3 For instance, if the adoption of one 

particular product is more influenced by external sources of information diffusion (announcement 

effect) than by internal sources (word of mouth among earlier adopters to prospective adopters), the 

rate of diffusion at the beginning stage of the diffusion process is much higher. This reflects the 

immediate information exposure to a significant number of prospective adopters brought about by 

external sources, in contrast to the more gradual exposure to internal sources such as news 

propagation by earlier adopters, a small proportion of the popUlation, to other prospective adopters. 

Graphically speaking, a relatively dominant external source of information diffusion will give an 

immediate jump-start to the adoption of a new product in the first years, forming a concave curve 

with respect to the Y axis (see the exponential curve in Figure X.I.1). Adoption of a new product 

with a stronger influence by internal sources of information diffusion (such as a socially tightened 

X-I 
network formed by prospective adopters) may start with a few early adopters and gradually increase

as the number of adopters grows, and thus form a convex curve (see the logistic curve in Figure

X.1.1).

100%

90%

Year

Figure X.1 . 1 Comparison of Exponential and Logistic Curves Showing

External and Internal Influences on Consumers

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

network formed by prospective adopters) may start with a few early adopters and gradually increase 

as the number of adopters grows, and thus form a convex curve (see the logistic curve in Figure 

X.1.I). 

-Ill-Logistic F,mction --Modified Exponential Function 

100% ,....-__ .!;;;;;;=========;;;,...._;;.,..;;....;.;.;c;;;,....-'========-___ ---, 

90% 

80% -------

70% 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

O%~~~~~r_------~--------~---------.----------------~ 

o 5 10 15 20 25 30 

Year 

Figure X.t.1 Comparison of Exponential and Logistic Curves Showing 

External and Internal Influences on Consumers 

X-2 
REFERENCES

1. Geroski, P. A. Models of Technology Diffusion. Research Policy. 2000. 29: pp. 603-625.

2. Hall, B. H. and B. Khan. Adoption of New Technology. 2003. Department of Economics,

University of California, Berkeley, CA. Working Paper No. E03-330.

3. Lekvall. P and C. Wahlbin. A Study of Some Assumptions Underlying Innovation

Diffusion Functions. Swedish Journal of Economics. 1973. 75: pp. 362-377.

4. Van den Bulte, C. Want to Know How Diffusion Speed Varies Across Countries and

Products? Try a Bass Model. PDMA Visions. 2002. 26(4): pp. 12-15.

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

REFERENCES 

1. Geroski, P. A. Models of Technology Diffusion. Research Policy. 2000. 29: pp. 603-625. 

2. Hall, B. H. and B. Khan. Adoption of New Technology. 2003. Department of Economics, 

University of Cali fomi a, Berkeley, CA. Working PaperNo. E03-330. 

3. Lekvall. P and C. Wahlbin. A Study of Some Assumptions Underlying Innovation 

Diffusion Functions. Swedish Journal of Economics. 1973.75: pp. 362-377. 

4. Van den Bulte, C. Want to Know How Diffusion Speed Varies Across Countries and 

Products? Try a Bass Model. PDMA Visions. 2002. 26(4): pp. 12-15. 

X-3 
APPENDIX Y. GOVERNMENT REGULATORY IMPACT MODEL (GRIM)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Y.1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ...................................... Y-1

Y.2 MODEL DESCRIPTION .............................................. Y-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX Y. GOVERNMENT REGULATORY IMPACT MODEL (GRIM) 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

V,1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ...................................... Y-l 

V,2 MODEL DESCRIPTION .............................................. Y-l 

Y-i 
APPENDIX Y. GOVERNMENT REGULATORY IMPACT MODEL (GRIM)

Y.1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

The purpose of the Government Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM) is to help identify the

effects of various efficiency regulations and other regulations on manufacturers. The basic mode

of analysis is to determine the change in value of the manufacturers(s) following a regulation or

a series of regulations. The model structure also allows an analysis of multiple products with

regulations taking effect over a period of time, and of multiple regulations on the same product.

Industry value is defined, for the purposes of this analysis as the present value of cash

flows for the manufacturer(s) in question. The model calculates the actual cash flows by year

and then determines the present value of those cash flows both without regulations, base case,

and under different trial standard levels (TSLs).

Output comes from the model in terms of summary financial metrics, graphs of major

variables, and, when appropriate, access to the complete cash flow calculation.

Y.2 MODEL DESCRIPTION

The basic structure of the GRIM is a standard annual cash flow analysis that uses price

and volume information as an input, builds on fundamental base cost information, and accepts a

set of regulatory conditions as changes in costs and investments. The cash flow analysis is

separated into two major blocks: income and cash flow. The income calculation determines the

profit after taxes but before financial charges. The cash flow calculation converts profit after

taxes into an annual cash flow by including investment and non-cash items. Below are

definitions of listed items on the printout of the output sheet. (see Section Y.3)

(I) Unit Sales: Total annual shipments for the industry were obtained from the National

Energy Savings Spreadsheet. The distribution of shipments by efficiency level was modified

based on feedback from manufacturers regarding the ability to sell baseline and premium

products depending on the standard level proposed;

(2) Revenues: Annual revenues - computed by multiplying equipment unit price at each

efficience level by the appropriate manufacturer markup;

(3) Labor. Factory direct labor and fringe benefit costs;

(4) Material: Purchased materials and components;

(S) Overhead. Factory overhead excluding depreciation;

Y-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

APPENDIX Y. GOVERNMENT REGULATORY IMPACT MODEL (GRIM) 

Y.I INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 

The purpose of the Government Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM) is to help identify the 

effects of various efficiency regulations and other regulations on manufacturers. The basic mode 

of analysis is to determine the change in value of the manufacturers ( s) following a regulation or 

a series of regulations. The model structure also allows an analysis of multiple products with 

regulations taking effect over a period of time, and of multiple regulations on the same product. 

Industry value is defined, for the purposes of this analysis as the present value of cash 

flows for the manufacturer(s) in question. The model calculates the actual cash flows by year 

and then determines the present value of those cash flows both without regulations, base case, 

and under different trial standard levels (TSLs). 

Output comes from the model in terms of summary financial metrics, graphs of major 

variables, and, when appropriate, access to the complete cash flow calculation. 

Y.2 MODEL DESCRIPTION 

The basic structure of the GRIM is a standard annual cash flow analysis that uses price 

and volume information as an input, builds on fundamental base cost information, and accepts a 

set of regulatory conditions as changes in costs and investments. The cash flow analysis is 

separated into two major blocks: income and cash flow. The income calculation determines the 

profit after taxes but before financial charges. The cash flow calculation converts profit after 

taxes into an annual cash flow by including investment and non-cash items. Below are 

definitions oflisted items on the printout of the output sheet. (see Section y'3) 

(1) Unit Sales: Total annual shipments for the industry were obtained from the National 

Energy Savings Spreadsheet. The distribution of shipments by efficiency level was modified 

based on feedback from manufacturers regarding the ability to sell baseline and premium 

products depending on the standard level proposed; 

(2) Revenues: Annual revenues - computed by multiplying equipment unit price at each 

efficience level by the appropriate manufacturer markup; 

(3) Labor: Factory direct labor and fringe benefit costs; 

(4) Material: Purchased materials and components; 

(5) Overhead: Factory overhead excluding depreciation; 

Y-l 
(6) Freight: Annual shipping costs computed as a percentage ofRevenues (2);

(7) Depreciation: Annual depreciation computed as a percentage ofRevenues (2);

(8) Standard SG&A: Selling, general and administrative costs are computed as a percentage of

Revenues (2);

(9) R&D: GRIM separately accounts for ordinary R&D of 1.3 percent ofRevenues (2);

(10) Product Conversion: conversion expenses are one-time investments in research,

development, testing, and marketing focused on making product designs comply with the new

efficiency standard. GRIM allocates these costs over the period between the standard's

announcement and effective dates;

(11) Earnings Before Interest and Taxes (EBIT): includes profits before deductions for interest

paid and taxes;

(12) Stranded Assets: A one time write-down on stranded assets is computed as the difference

between the GRIM two capital expenditures scenarios;

(13) EBIT as a Percentage of Sales: the GRIM calculates EBIT as a percentage of sales as a

comparison with the industry's average reported in financial statements;

(14) Taxes: Taxes on EBIT (11) are calculated by multiplying the tax rate contained in Major

Assumptions by EBIT (11).

(15) Net Operating Profits After Taxes (NOPAT): Profit after taxes and any financing costs;

computed by subtracting Cost of Sales ((3) to (7)), SG&A (8), R&D (9), and Product

Conversion (10) from Revenues (2);

(16) NOPAT repeated: NOPAT is repeated in the Statement of Cash Flows;

(17) Depreciation repeated: depreciation is repeated in the Statement of Cash Flows;

(18) Change in Working Capital: change in cash tied up in accounts receivable, inventory, and

other cash investments necessary to support operations is calculated by multiplying working

capital as a percentage ofRevenues (2) by the change in annual revenues.

(19) Cash Flow From Operations: calculated by taking NOPAT (16), adding back non-cash

items such as a Depreciation (17), and subtracting out Change in Working Capital (18);

(20) Ordinary Capital Expenditures: ordinary investments in property, plant, and equipment to

maintain and replace existing production assets computed as a percentage of Revenues (2);

Y-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

(6) Freight: Annual shipping costs computed as a percentage of Revenues (2); 

(7) Depreciation: Annual depreciation computed as a percentage of Revenues (2); 

(8) Standard SG&A: Selling, general and administrative costs are computed as a percentage of 

Revenues (2); 

(9) R&D: GRIM separately accounts for ordinary R&D of 1.3 percent of Revenues (2); 

(10) Product Conversion: conversion expenses are one-time investments in research, 

development, testing, and marketing focused on making product designs comply with the new 

efficiency standard. GRIM allocates these costs over the period between the standard's 

announcement and effective dates; 

(11) Earnings Before Interest and Taxes (EBIT): includes profits before deductions for interest 

paid and taxes; 

(12) Stranded Assets: A one time write-down on stranded assets is computed as the difference 

between the GRIM two capital expenditures scenarios; 

(13) EBIT as a Percentage of Sales: the GRIM calculates EBIT as a percentage of sales as a 

comparison with the industry'S average reported in financial statements; 

(14) Taxes: Taxes on EBIT (11) are calculated by multiplying the tax rate contained in Major 

Assumptions by EBIT (11). 

(15) Net Operating Profits After Taxes (NOPAT): Profit after taxes and any financing costs; 

computed by subtracting Cost of Sales ((3) to (7)), SG&A (8), R&D (9), and Product 

Conversion (10) from Revenues (2); 

(16) NOPAT repeated: NOPAT is repeated in the Statement of Cash Flows; 

(17) Depreciation repeated: depreciation is repeated in the Statement of Cash Flows; 

(18) Change in Working Capital: change in cash tied up in accounts receivable, inventory, and 

other cash investments necessary to support operations is calculated by multiplying working 

capital as a percentage of Revenues (2) by the change in annual revenues. 

(19) Cash Flow From Operations: calculated by taking NOPAT (16), adding back non-cash 

items such as a Depreciation (17), and subtracting out Change in Working Capital (18); 

(20) Ordinary Capital Expenditures: ordinary investments in property, plant, and equipment to 

maintain and replace existing production assets computed as a percentage of Revenues (2); 

Y-2 
(21) Conversion Capital Expenditures: conversion capital-expenditures are one-time

investments in property, plant, and equipment to adapt or change existing production facilities so

that new product designs can be fabricated and assembled under the new regulation;

(22) Capital Investments: Total investments in property, plant, and equipment is computed by

adding Ordinary Capital Expenditures (19) and Conversion Capital Expenditures (20);

(23) Net Cash Flow: Annual cash flow from operations and investments; computed by

subtracting Cash Used in Investments (21) from Cash Flow from Operations (18);

(24) Terminal Value: estimate of the continuing value of the industry after 2035 and computed

by growing the Free Cash Flow in year 2038 at a constant rate in perpetuity;

(25) Present Value Factor: Factor used to calculate an estimate of the present value of an

amount to be received in the future;

(26) Discounted Cash Flow: Net Cash Flows (23) multiplied by the Present Value Factor (25).

For 2035 the discounted cash flow includes the discounted Terminal Value (24);

(27) Industry Net Present Value: The sum ofDiscounted Cash Flows (26);

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

(21) Conversion Capital Expenditures: conversion capital-expenditures are one-time 

investments in property, plant, and equipment to adapt or change existing production facilities so 

that new product designs can be fabricated and assembled under the new regulation; 

(22) Capital Investments: Total investments in property, plant, and equipment is computed by 

adding Ordinary Capital Expenditures (19) and Conversion Capital Expenditures (20); 

(23) Net Cash Flow: Annual cash flow from operations and investments; computed by 

subtracting Cash Used in Investments (21) from Cash Flow from Operations (18); 

(24) Terminal Value: estimate of the continuing value of the industry after 2035 and computed 

by growing the Free Cash Flow in year 2038 at a constant rate in perpetuity; 

(25) Present Value Factor: Factor used to calculate an estimate of the present value of an 

amount to be received in the future; 

(26) Discounted Cash Flow: Net Cash Flows (23) multiplied by the Present Value Factor (25). 

For 2035 the discounted cash flow includes the discounted Terminal Value (24); 

(27) Industry Net Present Value: The sum of Discounted Cash Flows (26); 

Y-3 
STANDARD CASE SCENARIO

Income Statement (nilw

(1) Unit Sales

(2) Revenues

Cost of Sales

(3) Labor

(4) Material

(5) Overhead

(6) Freight

(7) Depreciation

Selling, General and Administrative

(8) Standard SG&A

(9) R&D

(10) Product Conversion Expense

(11) EBIT

(12) One-time writeoff on stranded assets

(13) EBT as % of Revenues

(14) Taxes

(15) NOPAT

(16)

(17)

(18)

(19)

h I Inn ^1.0cn1c [it

NOPAT

Depreciation

Change in Working Capital

Cash Flows from Operations

(20) Ordinary Capital Expenditures

(21) Conversion Capital Expenditures

(22) Cash Used In Investment

(23) Net Cash Flow

(24) Terminal Value

(25) Present Value Factor

(26) Discounted Cash Flow

(27) Industry Value thru 2038

15.9%

46.3%

5.0%

4.5%

Announcem

Base Year ent Year

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

0.127 0.119 0.113 0.107 0.104 0.102 0.101 0.100 0.098 0.095 0.092 0.090

$ 105 $ 99 $ 94 $ 89 $ 86 $ 85 $ 84 $ 83 $ 81 $ 78 $ 76 $ 74

$ 17 $ 16 $ 15 $ 14 $ 14 $ 13 $ 13 $ 13 $ 13 $ 13 $ 12 $ 12

$ 49 $ 46 $ 43 $ 41 $ 40 $ 39 $ 39 $ 38 $ 38 $ 36 $ 35 $ 34

$ 5 $ 5 $ 5 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4

$ 5 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 3 $ 3

2.00% $ 2.10 1.98 $ 1.87 $ 1.77 1.73 1.69 $ 1.68 $ 1.65 1.62 1.57 1.52 $ 1.48

21.0% $ 22 $ 21 $ 20 $ 19 $ 18 $ 18 $ 18 $ 17 $ 17 $ 16 $ 16 $ 16

1.2% $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ $ - $ $ 0.2 $ 1.4 $ 3.0 $ 3.7

3.7% $ 4.29 $ 4.03 $ 3.82 $ 3.62 $ 3.52 $ 3.45 $ 3.42 $ 3.37 $ 3.14 $ 1.78 $ 0.10 $ (0.72)

$ 3

4.08% 4.08% 4.08% 4.08% 4.08% 4.08% 4.08% 4.08% 3.87% 2.27% 0.13% -0.98%

42.5% $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 1 $ 0 $ -

$ 29.28

$ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 1 $ 0 $ (1)

2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.23% 1.31% 0.08% -0.98%

$ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 1 $ 0 $ (1)

$ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 1

$ - $ 0.83 $ 0.69 $ 0.64 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0

$ 5 $ 5.13 $ 4.76 $ 4.49 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 3 $ 2 $ 1

$ (1.79) $ (1.68) $ (1.59) $ (1.51) $ (1.47) $ (1.44) $ (1.42) $ (1.40) $ (1.38) $ (1.33) $ (1.29) $ (1.26)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (0.1) $ (1.2) $ (2.5) $ (3.2)

$ (2) $ (2) $ (2) $ (1.51) $ (1) $ (1) $ (1) $ (1) $ (2) $ (3) $ (4) $ (4)

$ 3 $ 3 $ 3 $ 2.99 $ 3 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 0 $ (2) $ (3)

1.00 0.94 0.89 0.84 0.79 0.74 0.70 0.66 0.62 0.59 0.55 0.52

$ 3 $ 3 $ 3 $ 2.50 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 1 $ 0 $ (1) $ (2)

Y-4

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

STANDARD CASE SCENARIO 

(1) Unit Sales 

(2) Revenues 

Cost a/Sales 

(3) Labor 

(4) Material 

(5) Overhead 

(6) Freight 

(7) Depreciation 

(8) 

(9) 

(10) 

(11) 

(12) 

(13) 

Selling, General and Administrative 

Standard SG&A 

R&D 

Product Conversion Expense 

EBIT 

One-time writeoff on stranded assets 

EBT as % of Revenues 

(14) Taxes 

(15) NOPAT 

(16) 

(17) 

(18) 

(19) 

NOPAT 

Depreciation 

Change in Working Capital 

Cash Flows from Operations 

(20) Ordinary Capital Expenditures 

(21) Conversion Capital Expenditures 

(22) Cash Used In Investment 

(23) Net Cash Flow 

(24) Terminal Value 

(25) Present Value Factor 

(26) Discounted Cash Flow 

(27) Industry Value thru 2038 

$ 

15.9"1. o $ 

46.3"1. 

5.0"1. 

4.5"1. 

o $ 

o $ 

o $ 

2003 

0.127 

105 

17 

49 

5 

5 

Base Year 

2004 2005 

0.ll9 0.ll3 

$ 99 $ 94 

$ 16 $ 15 

$ 46 $ 43 

$ 5 $ 5 

$ 4 $ 4 

2006 

0.107 

$ 89 

$ 14 

$ 41 

$ 4 

$ 4 

Announcem 

ent Year 

2007 

0.104 

$ 86 

$ 14 

$ 40 

$ 4 

$ 4 

2008 

0.102 

$ 85 

$ 13 

$ 39 

$ 4 

$ 4 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 

0.101 0.100 0.098 0.095 0.092 0.090 

$ 84 $ 83 $ 81 $ 78 $ 76 $ 74 

$ 13 $ 13 $ 13 $ 13 $ 12 $ 12 

$ 39 $ 38 $ 38 $ 36 $ 35 $ 34 

$ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 

$ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 4 $ 3 $ 3 

2.00% $ 2.10 $ 1.98 $ 1.87 $ 1.77 $ 1.73 $ 1.69 $ 1.68 $ 1.65 $ 1.62 $ 1.57 $ 1.52 $ 1.48 

21.0% $ 

1.2% $ 

$ 

3.7% $ 

22 $ 

$ 

$ 

4.29 $ 

4.08% 

21 $ 

$ 

$ 

4.03 $ 

4.08% 

20 $ 

$ 

$ 

3.82 $ 

4.08% 

19 $ 

1 $ 

$ 

3.62 $ 

4.08% 

18 $ 

1 $ 

$ 

$ 

3.52 $ 

4.08% 

18 $ 

1 $ 

$ 

3.45 $ 

4.08% 

18 $ 

$ 

$ 

3.42 $ 

4.08% 

17 $ 

1 $ 

$ 

3.37 $ 

4.08% 

17 $ 

1 $ 

0.2 $ 

3.14 $ 

3.87% 

16 $ 

1 $ 

1.4 $ 

1.78 $ 

2.27% 

16 $ 16 

1 $ 1 

3.0 $ 3.7 

0.10 $ (0.72) 

$ 3 

0.13% -0.98% 

42.5%-i$ii_--;:2___;;$:_-""2-;;:$----,2~~$-~2~$ii_-~1___;;$:_-_i;1___:;;$,.---ii;_1__;;,$-__;1';__'$;;_--il;---i$ii_--i--ii$:_-""O___:;;$--,::-;- $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ 2 $ $ 0 $ (1) 

$ 29.28 

$ 

$ 

$ 

$ 

2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.35% 2.23% 

2 $ 

2 $ 

$ 

5 $ 

2 $ 

2 $ 

0.83 $ 

5.13 $ 

2 $ 

2 $ 

0.69 $ 

4.76 $ 

2 $ 

2 $ 

0.64 $ 

4.49 $ 

2 $ 

2 $ 

o $ 

4 $ 

2 $ 

2 $ 

o $ 

4 $ 

2 $ 

2 $ 

o $ 

4 $ 

2 $ 

2 $ 

o $ 

4 $ 

2 $ 

2 $ 

o $ 

4 $ 

1.31% 

$ 

2 $ 

o $ 

3 $ 

0.08% -0.98% 

o $ 

2 $ 

o $ 

2 $ 

(1) 

1 

o 

$ (1.79) $ (1.68) $ (1.59) $ (1.51) $ (1.47) $ (1.44) $ (1.42) $ (1.40) $ (1.38) $ (1.33) $ (1.29) $ (1.26) 

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ (0.1) $ (1.2) $ (2.5) $ (3.2) 

$ (2) $ (2) $ (2) $ (1.51) $ (1) $ (1) $ (1) $ (1) $ (2) $ (3) $ (4) $ (4) 

$ 

$ 

$ 

3 $ 3 $ 

$ $ 

1.00 0.94 

3 $ 3 $ 

Y-4 

3 $ 2.99 $ 

$ $ 

0.89 0.84 

3 $ 2.50 $ 

3 $ 

$ 

0.79 

2 $ 

2 $ 

$ 

0.74 

2 $ 

2 $ 

$ 

0.70 

2 $ 

2 $ 

$ 

0.66 

2 $ 

2 $ 

$ 

0.62 

1 $ 

o $ 

$ 

0.59 

o $ 

(2) $ 

$ 

0.55 

(1) $ 

(3) 

0.52 

(2) 
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIA'T'IONS

AC: alternating current

ACCA: Air Conditioning Contractors of America

ACEEE: American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy

AEC: annual energy consumption

AEO: Annual Energy Outlook

AFUE: Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency

AGA: America Gas Association

AHP: air power

ANOPR: Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

ANSI: American National Standards Institute

ART: Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute

ASHRAE: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers

ASTM: American Society for Testing and Materials

BOH: burner operating hours

BOM: bill of materials

cfm: cubic feet per minute

CFR: Code of Federal Regulations

CO: carbon monoxide

C02: carbon dioxide

CPI: Consumer Price Index

DF: draft factor

DHR: design heating requirement

DOE: U.S. Department of Energy (also "the Department")

DOT: U.S. Department of Justice

EAE: average annual auxiliary electricity consumption

ECM: electronically commutated motor

ETA: DOE's Energy Information Administration

EPACT: Energy Policy Act

EPCA: Energy Policy and Conservation Act

FEMP: Federal Energy Management Program

GAMA: Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association

GDP: Gross Domestic Product

GRI: Gas Research Institute

GRIM: Government Regulatory Impact Model

GTI: Gas Technology Institute

HCL: house cooling load

HDD: heating degree-days

HHL: house heating load

HSI: hot surface ignitor

HTPV: high temperature plastic vents

HVAC: heating, ventilation, and air conditioning

AA-1

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

AC: 

ACCA: 

ACEEE: 

AEC: 

AEO: 

AFUE: 

AGA: 

AHP: 

ANOPR: 

ANSI: 

ARI: 

ASHRAE: 

ASTM: 

BOH: 

BOM: 

cfm: 

CFR: 

CO: 

CO2 : 

CPI: 

DF: 

DHR: 

DOE: 

DOJ: 

EAE : 

ECM: 

EIA: 

EPACT: 

EPCA: 

FEMP: 

GAMA: 

GDP: 

GRI: 

GRIM: 

GTI: 

HCL: 

HDD: 

HHL: 

HSI: 

HTPV: 

HVAC: 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

alternating current 

Air Conditioning Contractors of America 

American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy 

annual energy consumption 

Annual Energy Outlook 

Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency 

America Gas Association 

mrpower 

Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

American National Standards Institute 

Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute 

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers 

American Society for Testing and Materials 

burner operating hours 

bill of materials 

cubic feet per minute 

Code of Federal Regulations 

carbon monoxide 

carbon dioxide 

Consumer Price Index 

draft factor 

design heating requirement 

U.S. Department of Energy (also "the Department") 

U.S. Department of Justice 

average annual auxiliary electricity consumption 

electronically commutated motor 

DOE's Energy Information Administration 

Energy Policy Act 

Energy Policy and Conservation Act 

Federal Energy Management Program 

Gas Appliance Manufacturers Association 

Gross Domestic Product 

Gas Research Institute 

Government Regulatory Impact Model 

Gas Technology Institute 

house cooling load 

heating degree-days 

house heating load 

hot surface ignitor 

high temperature plastic vents 

heating, ventilation, and air conditioning 

AA-l 
HX: heat exchanger

ICS: isolated combustion system

IM: installation model

in.w.g.: inches water gauge

kWh: kilowatt hours (10' watt-hours)

LCC: life-cycle cost

LPG: liquid petroleum gas

MHF: mobile home furnace

MHI: Manufactured Housing Institute

MIA: manufacturer impact analysis

MMBtu: million Btu

NAECA: National Appliance Energy Conservation Act

NECPA: National Energy Conservation Policy Act

NEMS: National Energy Modeling System

NES: national energy savings

NFGC: National Fuel Gas Code

NFPA: National Fire Protection Association

NOPR: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

NOX: oxides of nitrogen

NPGA: National Propane Gas Association

NPV: net present value

NRCan: Natural Resources Canada

OIRA: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs

OMB: Office of Management and Budget

PBP: payback period

PSC: permanent split capacitor

psig: pounds per square inch gauge

PVC: polyvinylchloride

quads: quadrillion (1015) Btu

R&D: research and development

RECS: Residential Energy Consumption Survey

rpm revolutions per minute

S&P: Standard & Poor's

SCF: standard cubic feet

SEER: Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio

SI: standard units

SG&A: selling, general, and administration costs

S02: sulfur dioxide

SSE: steady state efficiency

TPV: thermophotovoltaic

TSD: Technical Support Document

UEC: unit energy consumption

UL: Underwriters Laboratories

AA-2

 EE-RM/STD-01-350 COMMENT 104.2

HX: 

ICS: 

IM: 

m.w.g.: 

kWh: 

LCC: 

LPG: 

MHF: 

MHI: 

MIA: 

MMBtu: 

NAECA: 

NECPA: 

NEMS: 

NES: 

NFGC: 

NFPA: 

NOPR: 

NOx: 

NPGA: 

NPV: 

NRCan: 

OIRA: 

OMB: 

PBP: 

PSC: 

pSlg: 

PVC: 

quads: 

R&D: 

RECS: 

rpm 

S&P: 

SCF: 

SEER: 

SI: 

SG&A: 

S02: 

SSE: 

TPV: 

TSD: 

UEC: 

UL: 

heat exchanger 

isolated combustion system 

installation model 

inches water gauge 

kilowatt hours (10l watt-hours) 

life-cycle cost 

liquid petroleum gas 

mobile home furnace 

Manufactured Housing Institute 

manufacturer impact analysis 

million Btu 

National Appliance Energy Conservation Act 

National Energy Conservation Policy Act 

National Energy Modeling System 

national energy savings 

National Fuel Gas Code 

National Fire Protection Association 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

oxides of nitrogen 

National Propane Gas Association 

net present value 

Natural Resources Canada 

Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

Office of Management and Budget 

payback period 

permanent split capacitor 

pounds per square inch gauge 

polyvinylchloride 

quadrillion (1015) Btu 

research and development 

Residential Energy Consumption Survey 

revolutions per minute 

Standard & Poor's 

standard cubic feet 

Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio 

standard units 

selling, general, and administration costs 

sulfur dioxide 

steady state efficiency 

thermophotovoltaic 

Technical Support Document 

unit energy consumption 

Underwriters Laboratories 

AA-2