## CHAPTER 7. ENERGY US E CHARACTERIZATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

7.1 INTRODUCTION

.............................................................................................................. 7-1 7.2 ENERGY USE ANALYSIS FOR REFR IGERATED BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES

...................................................................................................................... .. 7-1 7.3 SELECTION OF EFFICIENCY LEV ELS FOR FURTHER ANALYSES

....................... 7-4 7.4 ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION RESULTS

.......................................................... 7-6 REFERENCES

.................................................................................................................... ...... 7-14

LIST OF TABLES

Table 7.2.1 Configurations of the Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines Analyzed

....... 7-2 Table 7.3.1 Mapping of the Efficiency Levels for the Energy and Life-Cycle Cost Analyses from the Engineering Efficien cy Levels – Class A Equipment

........... 7-6 Table 7.3.2 Mapping of the Efficiency Levels for the Energy and Life-Cycle Cost Analyses from the Engineering Efficien cy Levels – Class B Equipment

........... 7-6 Table 7.4.1 State-by-State Annual Ener gy Consumption for Outdoor B-L-IO Equipment and National Average Annual Energy Consumption for Outdoor and Indoor B-L-IO Equipm ent by Efficiency Levels

............................ 7-7 Table 7.4.2 State-by-State Annual Ener gy Consumption for Outdoor B-M-IO Equipment and National Average Annual Energy Consumption for Outdoor and Indoor B-M-IO Equipm ent by Efficiency Levels

........................... 7-8 Table 7.4.3 State-by-State Annual Ener gy Consumption for Outdoor B-S-IO Equipment and National Average Annual Energy Consumption for Outdoor and Indoor B-S-IO Equipm ent by Efficiency Levels

............................ 7-9 Table 7.4.4 State-by-State Annual Energy C onsumption for All B-L-IO Equipment (Installed both Indoors and Outdoor s) by Efficiency Levels

............................. 7-10 Table 7.4.5 State-by-State Annual Energy C onsumption for All B-M-IO Equipment (Installed both Indoors and Outdoor s) by Efficiency Levels

............................. 7-11 Table 7.4.6 State-by-State Annual Energy C onsumption for All B-S-IO Equipment (Installed both Indoors and Outdoor s) by Efficiency Levels

............................. 7-12 Table 7.4.7 Annual Energy Consumption for Class A Machine, All Sizes and All Locations, by Efficiency Levels

........................................................................ 7-13

7-i BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## CHAPTER 7. ENERGY USE CHARACTERIZATION

7.1 INTRODUCTION

The energy use characterization provides es timates of daily energy consumption and the annual energy consumption for refrigerat ed beverage vending machines used in the subsequent life-cycle cost (LCC) and payba ck period (PBP) analyses (chapter 8 of the technical support document (TSD)) and national impacts analyses (chapter 11 of the TSD). The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) estimated the energy consumption for the two equipment classes analyzed in the engineering analysis (chapter 5 of the TSD).

7.2 ENERGY USE ANALYSIS FOR REFRIGERATED BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES

American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engi neers (ASHRAE) Standard 32.1-2004 1 

## is an industry-developed test procedure for determin ing the energy consumption of beverage vending machines. ASHRAE 32.1-2004 measures the dail y energy consumption for a vending machine under steady-state conditions. Th e use of daily energy consumpti on as a performance metric is an appropriate approach for refrigerated be verage vending machines for several reasons. First, because the useful output of beverage vend ing machines is the ability to display a product while maintaining that product at an adequate te mperature, there is no ea sily quantifiable output metric (such as British thermal units [Btu] of c ooling provided) that can be used to establish a classical “efficiency” measure (useful output divided by energy input). Second, refrigerated beverage vending machines typically provide bo th cold storage and lighting of product with, varying, but often on the same or der of magnitude, energy consumption. DOE’s need for a single metric to describe both makes defi ning a useful output metric difficult.

DOE developed the engineering analysis spr eadsheet, which is based on the engineering analysis in chapter 5 of the TSD, lists up to 13 different engineering e fficiency levels using individual design options that were considered for arriving at the baselin e configuration as well as the higher efficiency models of the bevera ge vending machines. Two equipment classes were considered for analysis:

 

## Class A machine (fully-cooled machine)

o certified for indoor use only

o certified for indoor/outdoor use

o not combination machines

 

## Class B machine (zone-cooled machine)

o certified for indoor/outdoor use

o certified for indoor use only

o not combination machines

Even though Class A machines may be certif ied for indoor/outdoor use, there are not many of these (typically glass-front) machin es installed outdoors because of safety and

7-1 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## vandalism reasons. At the same time, there ar e few Class B machines (typically solid-front machines) certified for indoor use only. DOE focused its final rule analyses on the two predominant applications of the two equipment classes of beverage ve nding machines, namely Class A machines certified for indoor use only and Class B machines cer tified for indoor/outdoor use. For each of those two Class A and Class B machines, DOE analyzed refrigerated beverage vending machines with three different typical si zes (vendible capacities) each. Each of these machines had different refrigerated volume s as measured by ANSI/Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers HRF-1-2004, Energy, Pe rformance and Capacity of Household Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers a nd Freezers, and are shown in Table 7.2.1.

Table 7.2.1 Configurations of the Refrigerate d Beverage Vending Machines Analyzed Configuration Class A Machine * 

### Class B Machine *



### Small Medium Large Small Medium Large (A-S-IN) (A-M-IN) (A-L-IN) (B-S-IO) (B-M-IO) (B-L-IO) Vendible capacity, number of cans 300 400 500 450 650 800 Refrigerated volume, ft 3 

### 17 22 34 17 22 26

* 

### A=Class A; B=Class B; S=small; M=medium; L=large; IN=indoor only; IO=indoor/outdoor



## DOE assumed that all Class A or glass-front machines were installed indoors and subject to the constant indoor ambient conditions of 75 °F and 45 perc ent relative humidity (RH) condition matching one of the test conditions in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004. However, of all the Class B machines (or solid-front m achines), DOE assumed that 25 percent of them were actually placed outdoors and were subject to the local weather conditions in terms of the temperatures and RH conditions during the year depending on the various locations across the United States. 2 

## The remaining 75 percent of these machin es are installed indoors and subject to typical indoor 75 °F and 45 pe rcent RH ambient conditions.

The engineering analysis spreadsheet was orig inally designed to estimate the impact of design options on the daily energy consumption according to the test procedure, which only provides results under two rating conditions: 75 °F and 45 percent RH, and 90 °F and 65 percent RH. Prior to being able to use the engineering analysis spreadsheet for the energy use analysis, certain other spreadsheet design modifications we re made to account for proper operation of the beverage vending machine placed in outdoor loca tions where the air temperatures and RH conditions will differ from the rating conditions. These modifications are listed below:

 

## The nominal saturated evaporator temperature (SET) calculation has been modified such that it is scaled upwards (or downwards) w ith total case refrigeration load based on a linear regression of the change in SET as a f unction of the relative ch ange in total case refrigeration load (in percent) between that established for the 75 °F and 90 °F rating conditions for efficiency level 1. As cooli ng load changes as a function of ambient conditions, the SET for level 1 then varies. The SET for higher efficiency levels is calculated as in the original engineering sp readsheet where indivi dual design options can modify the SET from that calculated for efficiency Level 1.

 

## The nominal saturated condenser temperature (SCT) calculation has been modified such that it is scaled upwards or downwards w ith the outdoor air temperature based on the results at test conditions to maintain a SCT to ambient temp erature differential equivalent to that under the defined 75 °F or 90 °F rating conditions.

7-2 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

###  

## The nominal discharge air temperature (DAT) calculation has been modified such that it is scaled upward or downwards with tota l case refrigeration load based on a linear regression of the change in DAT as a functi on of the relative change in total case refrigeration load (in percent) between that established for the 75 °F and 90 °F rating conditions for efficiency level 1. The DAT for hi gher efficiency levels is calculated as in the original engineering analysis spreadshee t where individual design options can modify the DAT from that calculated for efficiency Level 1.

 

## The total case refrigeration load used in th e compressor calculations was modified such that it cannot be less than 0 for the compressor calculations which is necessary for calculating beverage vending machine refrigerat ion load when the ambient temperatures are less than the beverage vending machine setpoint temperature.

 

## The compressor operating capacity was modified such that it was always greater than 0.

 

## The compressor duty cycle was limited to not go below 0 or above 1.0 based on the calculated refrigeration load and compressor capacity.

 

## The compressor energy consumption calculation was modified to be based on the product of duty cycle and compressor power.

In order to determine the energy consumption of the Class B machines located outdoors, DOE developed a spreadsheet-based beverage vending machine Energy Performance model that used the climate information from the Typical Meteorological Year (T MY2) data (see TSD Appendix D), which expresses the annual averag e weather data for 237 cities in the United States. 3 

## Temperature and RH bins were created with temperatures ranging from 130 °F to -40 °F in 5 °F increments, and percent RH values rangi ng from 100 percent RH to 0 percent RH in 5 percent RH increments. The model creates a be verage vending machine energy performance map by calculating the annual energy consumption of the 13 beverage vending machine design options for each temperature/RH bin using the en gineering analysis spreadsheet. The beverage vending machine energy performance map is used to calculate annual energy use for a beverage vending machine located in each TMY2 city by stepping through the binned weather data. The result is projected energy use of each of 13 beverage vending machine design options for 237 U.S. cities. In addition to beverage vending machine performance based on actual weather data, one additional file was generated to step through the ASHRAE Sta ndard 32.1-2004 indoor test condition of 75 °F/45 percent RH as th e ambient condition throughout the year

DOE estimated annual energy consumption for a Class B machine located indoors as the product of the daily energy consumption calcul ated at the ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004 indoor test condition of 75 °F/45 percent RH and 365 days per year. For Class B beverage vending machines, the average daily energy consumption for a particular TMY2 location is calculated as

E

ann 

## = 25%  E ann, outdoor 

## + 75%  E ann, indoor 

## Eq. 7.1

Where:

E

ann 

## = annual average energy consumption (kWh), E

ann, outdoor 

## = annual average energy consumption for outdoor beverage vending machine (kWh), and

7-3 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## E ann, indoor 

## = annual average energy consumption for indoor beverage vending machine (kWh).

DOE calculated the average annual energy use for each Class B beverage vending machine for all 237 TMY2 stations in the Unite d States. DOE mapped each TMY2 station to a certain state, based on its location. Within each state, DOE assigned a relative weight to each TMY2 station, based on the tota l population of identifiable popul ation centers (c ities, towns, other) that can be shown to be most climati cally similar to that TMY2 location. The annual energy consumption data for the TMY2 locations were then weighted to obtain annual energy consumption data for each State.

For Class A beverage vending machines, DOE assumed that the fraction of units located outdoors was insignificant, and the fraction of units located indoors was assumed to be 100 percent. Although some fraction of Class A machin es may be rated for indoor/outdoor use, DOE assumed that all of Class A beverage vending mach ines were located indoors both because of the comparatively smaller percentage of the total number of these machines in stock and currently shipped, owner concerns that these machines ar e prone to vandalism and damage if installed outdoors, and the difficulty in maintaining de sired product temperatur e under solar loading. Calculating the energy consumption of a Class A machine if located outdoors is significantly more complex because of the solar ra diation loads through the glass front.

DOE estimated the annual energy consumption for Class A machine as the product of the average daily energy consumption from the AS HRAE Standard 32.1-2004 indoor test condition of 75 °F/45 percent RH and 365 days per year. For Class A beverage vending machines, the annual energy consumption did not vary by st ate. The annual energy consumption for each equipment class and at each efficiency level fo r each State are developed as inputs to the LCC and PBP analyses conducted subsequently.

7.3 SELECTION OF EFFICIENCY LEVELS FOR FURTHER ANALYSES

DOE selected eight efficiency levels fo r the Class A equipment class and seven efficiency levels for the Class B equipment class for the subsequent economic analyses, including the LCC and PBP analyses, from the e ngineering efficiency levels described in TSD chapter 5. The selection and naming of levels wa s based on being able to represent a current market baseline efficiency level as Level 0 (rep resentative of current st ock) and an engineering efficiency level that yielded a daily energy c onsumption approximately equal to the ENERGY STAR Tier 1 as Level 1 for both equipment clas ses. Level 1 was identified as the baseline efficiency level for all of DOE’s subsequent analyses.

For Class A beverage vending machines, Le vel 2 was selected as the engineering efficiency level that provided a daily energy consumption approximately equivalent to the ENERGY STAR Tier 2 level. For Class B beve rage vending machines, Level 3 was designated as the engineering efficiency level that prov ided a daily energy consumption approximately equivalent to the ENERGY STAR Tier 2 level. The maximum tec hnical (max tech) engineering efficiency level from the engineering analysis was used as Level 8 for each size of Class A equipment and as Level 7 for each size of Class B equipment.

7-4 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## For Class B equipment each of the remaining le vels corresponds directly to one of the engineering efficiency levels identified in chap ter 5 developed as a specific design option and technology. The selected levels for Class B equi pment generally represent combinations of design options incorporating the same set of t echnologies (not necessarily the same numerical engineering efficiency level) across all equipment sizes within that class. One engineering efficiency level was between the ENERGY STAR Tier 1 and ENERGY STAR Tier 2 equivalent efficiency levels and this was designated as Le vel 2. DOE selected effici ency Levels 4, 5, and 6 from the remaining engineering efficiency levels to incorporate the same set of technologies incorporated for each DOE level across all equipment sizes, and in order of increasing efficiency, with one exception. The combination of technolog ies that provided the next higher efficiency beyond the ENERGY STAR Tier 2 level for medi um and large equipment sizes was actually used as the ENERGY STAR Tier 2 equivalent le vel for small size equipment. To preserve the same number of efficiency levels across all equipment sizes within Class B equipment, DOE used the same engineering efficiency level fo r both Level 3 and 4 for small-size Class B machines.

For Class A equipment, efficiency Levels 5, 6, and 7 were selected to correspond directly to specific engineering efficiency levels, and each of these levels corresponds to the same incorporated technologies (not necessarily the same numerical engineering efficiency level) across all equipment sizes within that class. For example, Leve l 5 was selected as the first engineering efficiency level incorporating li ght emitting diode (LED) for product lighting for each equipment size within Class A.

When it developed the engineering analys is, DOE implemented design options and technologies in order of their incremental cost -effectiveness (i.e., those with the greatest improvement in energy efficiency on a per dollar basis were im plemented first). For Class A equipment, improvements to the lighting system by using LEDs occur fairly early in the design pathway and provide significant energy benefits. As a result, DOE found a large gap in daily energy consumption between the ENERGY STAR Ti er 2 efficiency levels and the engineering efficiency levels using LED technology. In orde r to bridge this gap and provide DOE with additional flexibility in the final ru le, DOE added two intermediate efficiency levels (identified as Levels 3 and 4) to bridge the gap in daily energy consumption between the ENERGY STAR Tier 2 efficiency level (Level 2) and the engineeri ng efficiency level incorporating LED lighting (Level 5). These two levels were selected points along the engineering cost-efficiency (or cost-energy consumption) curve between engineeri ng efficiency Levels 5 and 6 for Class A small and medium size equipment and between engineeri ng efficiency Levels 4 and 5 for Class A large size equipment.

Table 7.3.1 and Table 7.3.2 show the mapping of the efficiency levels used in the downstream economic analyses to th e engineering efficiency levels from the engineering analysis. Each selected energy efficiency level and th e corresponding annual energy consumption calculated from the energy analysis as well as the manu facturer selling price for the beverage vending machines determined in the engineering analys is are inputs to the subsequent LCC and PBP analyses.

7-5 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## Table 7.3.1 Mapping of the Efficiency Levels for the Energy and Life-Cycle Cost Analyses from the Engineering Efficiency Levels – Class A Equipment Size Rating Metric Selected Efficien cy Levels for Energy and LCC Analyses 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (Baseline) Small Engr. Level 1 5 N/A * 

### N/A 6 7 9 11 kWh/day 6.10 5.27 4.75 4.25 3.95 3.73 3.58 3.25 Medium Engr. Level 1 5 N/A N/A 6 7 9 11 kWh/day 6.53 5.51 5.25 4.75 4.19 3.95 3.79 3.43 Large Engr. Level 1 4 N/A N/A 5 6 8 10 kWh/day 6.75 6.21 5.75 5.25 4.89 4.60 4.41 3.94

* 

### N/A means not available. These levels established as intermediate points along the engineering cost curves.



## Table 7.3.2 Mapping of the Efficiency Levels for the Energy and Life-Cycle Cost Analyses from the Engineering Efficiency Levels – Class B Equipment

Size Rating Metric Selected Efficien cy Levels for Energy and LCC Analyses 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (Baseline) Small Engr. Level 1 2 4 4 5 6 7 kWh/day 4.96 4.62 4.31 4.31 4.28 3.78 3.69 Medium Engr. Level 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 kWh/day 5.56 5.20 4.99 4.76 4.72 4.22 4.12 Large Engr. Level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 kWh/day 5.85 5.48 5.33 5.07 5.03 4.52 4.41



## 7.4 ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION RESULTS

For beverage vending machines, the annual ener gy use is a function of the cooling load the equipment must meet. DOE used the beve rage vending machine Energy Performance model described above to estimate the annual energy use for the 25 percent of the Class B machines located outdoors at all th e 237 TMY2 stations in the United St ates. The aggregated state-by-state results were then added to the annual energy c onsumption of the remaining 75 percent of the Class B machines located indoors to come up with the average energy consumption of all Class B machines at a State level. DOE further aggregated the energy use at State level to National average energy use using the 2000 Census population data. 4 

## Table 7.4.1 through Table 7.4.3 show the State-by-State average annual energy co nsumption figures for the three different sizes of Class B equipment located outdoors, as we ll as the national average energy consumption figures for Class B equipment installed indoors and outdoors at the bottom of the tables. Table 7.4.4 through Table 7.4.6 show the State-by-Stat e annual energy consumption figures for the three different sizes of Class B equipment taking into account the assumption for each state that 25 percent are installed outdoors and 75 percent are installed indoors. The national average energy consumption figures for each size of Class B machine are also shown at the bottom of the Table 7.4.4 through Table 7.4.6.

7-6 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## Table 7.4.1 State-by-State Annual Energy Cons umption for Outdoor B-L-IO Equipment and National Average Annual Energy Consum ption for Outdoor and Indoor B-L-IO Equipment by Efficiency Levels State Efficienc y Level kWh/ y ea r 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Market ENERGY ENERGY Max Baseline STAR STAR Tech Tier 1 Tier 2 Alabama 4315 1866 1745 1708 1646 1632 1449 1422 Alaska 3419 1172 1100 1093 1091 1086 910 905 Arizona 4561 2053 1921 1869 1778 1762 1579 1541 Arkansas 4245 1808 1690 1656 1597 1584 1402 1377 California 4138 1722 1606 1576 1537 1524 1342 1319 Colorado 3807 1446 1350 1330 1305 1296 1117 1102 Connecticut 3885 1508 1407 1387 1358 1349 1169 1154 Delaware 3991 1595 1488 1464 1428 1418 1236 1219 Dist. of Columbia 3979 1583 1477 1452 1416 1406 1225 1207 Florida 4672 2167 2032 1981 1885 1867 1684 1647 Georgia 4262 1821 1702 1667 1609 1596 1414 1388 Hawaii 4796 2268 2128 2073 1965 1945 1763 1722 Idaho 3777 1417 1320 1302 1280 1272 1092 1079 Illinois 3856 1494 1397 1376 1346 1337 1158 1142 Indiana 3927 1550 1449 1426 1392 1382 1202 1185 Iowa 3812 1476 1383 1363 1333 1324 1146 1131 Kansas 4031 1636 1531 1503 1458 1447 1267 1247 Kentucky 4006 1610 1504 1479 1440 1429 1249 1230 Louisiana 4449 1979 1852 1810 1736 1720 1537 1506 Maine 3696 1371 1281 1266 1248 1241 1063 1051 Maryland 4008 1608 1501 1476 1437 1427 1246 1227 Massachusetts 3836 1466 1367 1348 1324 1316 1136 1122 Michigan 3778 1429 1336 1318 1295 1287 1108 1095 Minnesota 3702 1402 1316 1299 1275 1267 1090 1077 Mississippi 4332 1877 1754 1716 1651 1636 1454 1426 Missouri 4044 1646 1539 1512 1467 1456 1276 1255 Montana 3678 1357 1268 1253 1235 1228 1049 1038 Nebraska 3889 1534 1436 1413 1378 1369 1189 1173 Nevada 4182 1740 1624 1588 1532 1520 1338 1312 New Hampshire 3732 1398 1308 1291 1269 1261 1083 1071 New Jersey 3968 1574 1468 1445 1410 1400 1219 1202 New Mexico 4002 1593 1484 1458 1420 1410 1229 1209 New York 3917 1535 1432 1410 1379 1370 1189 1173 North Carolina 4145 1722 1608 1578 1530 1518 1336 1313 North Dakota 3643 1361 1279 1262 1241 1234 1057 1045 Ohio 3855 1490 1393 1372 1344 1335 1156 1141 Oklahoma 4190 1763 1648 1616 1560 1548 1366 1342 Oregon 3870 1493 1388 1369 1350 1341 1159 1144 Pennsylvania 3902 1524 1423 1401 1370 1361 1181 1165 Rhode Island 3848 1479 1380 1361 1336 1327 1147 1133 South Carolina 4241 1803 1684 1650 1595 1581 1399 1374 South Dakota 3747 1427 1339 1320 1293 1285 1107 1093 Tennessee 4191 1762 1647 1615 1561 1548 1367 1343 Texas 4439 1967 1841 1799 1723 1708 1525 1494 Utah 3896 1505 1402 1380 1349 1340 1159 1143 Vermont 3703 1391 1304 1287 1266 1259 1081 1068 Virginia 4051 1644 1534 1507 1466 1455 1274 1254 Washington 3806 1440 1338 1321 1308 1300 1118 1105 West Virginia 3950 1567 1462 1438 1405 1395 1214 1197 Wisconsin 3722 1404 1316 1299 1276 1269 1091 1078 Wyoming 3661 1334 1246 1231 1216 1209 1030 1020 National

– Outdoo r 4075 1669 1560 1531 1487 1476 1295 1274 National

– Indoo r 4657 2135 2000 1945 1851 1836 1650 1610



### 7-7 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## Table 7.4.2 State-by-State Annual Ener gy Consumption for Outdoor B-M-IO Equipment and National Average Annual En ergy Consumption for Outdoor and Indoor B-M-IO Equipment by Efficiency Levels State Efficienc y Level kWh/ y ea r 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Market ENERGY ENERGY Max Baseline STAR STAR Tech Tier 1 Tier 2 Alabama 4194 1788 1667 1613 1558 1545 1363 1339 Alaska 3431 1165 1088 1077 1075 1071 894 890 Arizona 4414 1959 1827 1756 1675 1661 1478 1445 Arkansas 4136 1736 1618 1567 1516 1504 1322 1300 California 4038 1661 1546 1500 1465 1454 1272 1251 Colorado 3766 1415 1316 1286 1264 1257 1076 1064 Connecticut 3830 1469 1366 1335 1310 1302 1120 1107 Delaware 3919 1547 1439 1402 1370 1361 1179 1164 Dist. of Columbia 3910 1536 1429 1392 1360 1351 1169 1154 Florida 4500 2053 1920 1847 1762 1746 1563 1531 Georgia 4149 1749 1629 1578 1527 1515 1333 1310 Hawaii 4608 2143 2006 1926 1831 1813 1631 1595 Idaho 3740 1390 1290 1263 1244 1237 1055 1044 Illinois 3808 1455 1355 1324 1298 1290 1110 1097 Indiana 3867 1506 1402 1368 1338 1329 1148 1134 Iowa 3768 1437 1342 1312 1286 1278 1098 1085 Kansas 3956 1582 1475 1435 1395 1386 1205 1187 Kentucky 3934 1559 1452 1414 1380 1370 1189 1173 Louisiana 4308 1888 1762 1701 1635 1621 1438 1411 Maine 3670 1345 1252 1229 1214 1207 1028 1018 Maryland 3935 1559 1450 1412 1379 1369 1187 1171 Massachusetts 3788 1432 1330 1302 1281 1273 1092 1080 Michigan 3741 1398 1301 1274 1254 1247 1067 1056 Minnesota 3674 1369 1281 1255 1234 1227 1049 1038 Mississippi 4210 1798 1676 1620 1563 1550 1367 1343 Missouri 3968 1590 1483 1442 1403 1393 1212 1194 Montana 3652 1334 1241 1218 1203 1197 1017 1007 Nebraska 3835 1489 1390 1356 1325 1317 1137 1122 Nevada 4088 1680 1563 1512 1463 1452 1270 1247 New Hampshire 3702 1369 1276 1250 1231 1224 1045 1034 New Jersey 3900 1529 1421 1386 1356 1347 1165 1150 New Mexico 3930 1548 1438 1399 1366 1357 1174 1158 New York 3857 1493 1388 1355 1329 1320 1138 1125 North Carolina 4049 1661 1546 1501 1459 1448 1266 1246 North Dakota 3620 1332 1247 1223 1205 1198 1020 1010 Ohio 3805 1452 1352 1321 1297 1289 1108 1095 Oklahoma 4090 1696 1581 1533 1484 1473 1291 1270 Oregon 3810 1458 1352 1322 1306 1298 1115 1102 Pennsylvania 3846 1483 1379 1347 1320 1312 1131 1117 Rhode Island 3799 1444 1342 1312 1291 1283 1102 1089 South Carolina 4131 1732 1614 1563 1514 1502 1320 1298 South Dakota 3712 1393 1302 1274 1251 1243 1065 1053 Tennessee 4089 1696 1580 1532 1485 1473 1291 1271 Texas 4302 1878 1753 1691 1625 1611 1428 1401 Utah 3842 1469 1363 1331 1303 1295 1113 1100 Vermont 3677 1360 1271 1246 1228 1221 1042 1031 Virginia 3970 1591 1480 1439 1403 1394 1212 1194 Washington 3756 1412 1308 1281 1269 1262 1080 1068 West Virginia 3885 1522 1415 1380 1351 1342 1160 1145 Wisconsin 3691 1373 1282 1256 1237 1230 1051 1040 Wyoming 3643 1313 1222 1200 1186 1180 1000 991 National

– Outdoo r 3991 1613 1502 1460 1421 1411 1229 1211 National

– Indoo r 4493 2029 1898 1821 1737 1723 1540 1504



### 7-8 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## Table 7.4.3 State-by-State Annual Energy Cons umption for Outdoor B-S-IO Equipment and National Average Annual Energy Consum ption for Outdoor and Indoor B-S-IO Equipment by Efficiency Levels State Efficienc y Level kWh/ y ea r 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Market ENERGY ENERGY Max Baseline STAR STAR Tech Tier 1 Tier 2 Alabama 3919 1602 1492 1410 1410 1400 1219 1199 Alaska 3255 1109 1041 1023 1023 1019 844 841 Arizona 4100 1741 1620 1513 1513 1501 1318 1291 Arkansas 3864 1559 1452 1376 1376 1366 1185 1167 California 3809 1507 1402 1335 1335 1326 1145 1128 Colorado 3550 1313 1224 1180 1180 1174 995 984 Connecticut 3601 1352 1260 1212 1212 1205 1026 1015 Delaware 3678 1412 1315 1259 1259 1252 1072 1059 Dist. of Columbia 3671 1406 1309 1254 1254 1246 1066 1054 Florida 4175 1808 1686 1576 1576 1563 1380 1353 Georgia 3884 1572 1464 1387 1387 1377 1195 1177 Hawaii 4268 1882 1755 1635 1635 1620 1438 1408 Idaho 3524 1292 1203 1162 1162 1156 977 968 Illinois 3579 1341 1251 1204 1204 1197 1019 1008 Indiana 3632 1380 1287 1235 1235 1228 1049 1037 Iowa 3548 1326 1240 1194 1194 1187 1010 999 Kansas 3706 1440 1343 1281 1281 1274 1094 1080 Kentucky 3690 1423 1326 1268 1268 1261 1081 1068 Louisiana 4016 1679 1564 1472 1472 1461 1279 1256 Maine 3466 1255 1172 1136 1136 1131 953 945 Maryland 3692 1422 1325 1267 1267 1259 1079 1066 Massachusetts 3566 1323 1233 1189 1189 1182 1003 994 Michigan 3523 1296 1209 1168 1168 1162 984 975 Minnesota 3468 1272 1193 1152 1152 1147 970 961 Mississippi 3932 1611 1500 1417 1417 1406 1225 1204 Missouri 3717 1446 1349 1287 1287 1279 1100 1085 Montana 3451 1246 1164 1128 1128 1123 945 937 Nebraska 3605 1367 1278 1226 1226 1219 1040 1028 Nevada 3826 1523 1417 1342 1342 1333 1152 1133 New Hampshire 3489 1274 1191 1151 1151 1146 968 959 New Jersey 3663 1399 1303 1249 1249 1241 1062 1049 New Mexico 3696 1420 1320 1262 1262 1255 1074 1060 New York 3626 1371 1277 1227 1227 1220 1041 1029 North Carolina 3798 1504 1400 1332 1332 1323 1143 1126 North Dakota 3423 1243 1166 1129 1129 1124 948 940 Ohio 3580 1339 1249 1202 1202 1196 1017 1007 Oklahoma 3823 1529 1424 1351 1351 1342 1162 1144 Oregon 3600 1343 1248 1203 1203 1197 1017 1006 Pennsylvania 3614 1363 1270 1221 1221 1214 1035 1023 Rhode Island 3575 1331 1240 1195 1195 1189 1010 1000 South Carolina 3868 1559 1452 1376 1376 1367 1185 1167 South Dakota 3499 1292 1209 1166 1166 1160 983 973 Tennessee 3826 1529 1424 1352 1352 1343 1162 1145 Texas 4007 1672 1557 1465 1465 1454 1272 1250 Utah 3610 1355 1261 1211 1211 1205 1025 1013 Vermont 3470 1266 1185 1146 1146 1141 964 955 Virginia 3726 1448 1348 1288 1288 1280 1099 1085 Washington 3552 1306 1214 1174 1174 1168 988 979 West Virginia 3657 1396 1300 1246 1246 1239 1059 1047 Wisconsin 3482 1276 1193 1154 1154 1148 971 962 Wyoming 3439 1231 1150 1116 1116 1111 933 926 National

– Outdoo r 3744 1465 1365 1302 1302 1293 1113 1098 National

– Indoo r 4194 1810 1686 1573 1573 1562 1380 1347



### 7-9 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## Table 7.4.4 State-by-State Annual Energy Co nsumption for All B-L-IO Equipment (Installed both Indoors and Outdoors) by Efficiency Levels

State Efficiency Level kWh/year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Market ENERGY ENERGY Max Baseline STAR STAR Tech Tier 1 Tier 2 Alabama 4572 2068 1936 1886 1799 1785 1600 1563 Alaska 4348 1895 1775 1732 1661 1649 1465 1434 Arizona 4633 2115 1980 1926 1833 1817 1632 1593 Arkansas 4554 2053 1923 1873 1787 1773 1588 1551 California 4528 2032 1902 1853 1772 1758 1573 1537 Colorado 4445 1963 1838 1792 1714 1701 1517 1483 Connecticut 4464 1978 1852 1806 1727 1714 1530 1496 Delaware 4491 2000 1872 1825 1745 1731 1546 1512 Dist. of Columbia 4488 1997 1869 1822 1742 1728 1544 1509 Florida 4661 2143 2008 1954 1859 1844 1658 1619 Georgia 4559 2057 1926 1876 1790 1776 1591 1554 Hawaii 4692 2168 2032 1977 1879 1863 1678 1638 Idaho 4437 1956 1830 1785 1708 1695 1510 1477 Illinois 4457 1975 1849 1803 1724 1711 1527 1493 Indiana 4475 1989 1862 1816 1736 1723 1538 1504 Iowa 4446 1970 1846 1800 1721 1708 1524 1490 Kansas 4501 2011 1883 1835 1752 1739 1554 1519 Kentucky 4494 2004 1876 1829 1748 1734 1550 1515 Louisiana 4605 2096 1963 1912 1822 1807 1622 1584 Maine 4417 1944 1820 1776 1700 1687 1503 1470 Maryland 4495 2004 1875 1828 1747 1734 1549 1514 Massachusetts 4452 1968 1842 1796 1719 1706 1521 1488 Michigan 4438 1959 1834 1789 1712 1699 1514 1481 Minnesota 4419 1952 1829 1784 1707 1694 1510 1476 Mississippi 4576 2071 1939 1888 1801 1786 1601 1564 Missouri 4504 2013 1885 1837 1755 1741 1556 1521 Montana 4413 1941 1817 1772 1697 1684 1500 1467 Nebraska 4465 1985 1859 1812 1732 1719 1535 1500 Nevada 4539 2036 1906 1856 1771 1757 1572 1535 New Hampshire 4426 1951 1827 1782 1705 1692 1508 1475 New Jersey 4485 1995 1867 1820 1741 1727 1542 1508 New Mexico 4494 2000 1871 1824 1743 1729 1545 1510 New York 4472 1985 1858 1812 1733 1719 1535 1501 North Carolina 4529 2032 1902 1854 1770 1756 1571 1536 North Dakota 4404 1942 1820 1775 1698 1685 1502 1469 Ohio 4457 1974 1848 1802 1724 1711 1526 1492 Oklahoma 4540 2042 1912 1863 1778 1764 1579 1543 Oregon 4461 1975 1847 1801 1725 1712 1527 1493 Pennsylvania 4469 1982 1856 1809 1730 1717 1533 1498 Rhode Island 4455 1971 1845 1799 1722 1709 1524 1490 South Carolina 4553 2052 1921 1872 1787 1772 1587 1551 South Dakota 4430 1958 1835 1789 1711 1698 1514 1480 Tennessee 4541 2042 1912 1863 1778 1764 1579 1543 Texas 4603 2093 1960 1909 1819 1804 1619 1581 Utah 4467 1978 1851 1804 1725 1712 1527 1493 Vermont 4419 1949 1826 1781 1704 1692 1508 1474 Virginia 4506 2012 1884 1836 1754 1741 1556 1521 Washington 4445 1962 1835 1789 1715 1702 1517 1483 West Virginia 4481 1993 1866 1819 1739 1726 1541 1506 Wisconsin 4424 1953 1829 1784 1707 1694 1510 1477 Wyoming 4408 1935 1812 1767 1692 1679 1495 1462 National 4512 2019 1890 1842 1760 1746 1561 1526



### 7-10 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## Table 7.4.5 State-by-State Annual Energy Co nsumption for All B-M-IO Equipment (Installed both Indoors and Outdoors) by Efficiency Levels

State Efficiency Level kWh/year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Market ENERGY ENERGY Max Baseline STAR STAR Tech Tier 1 Tier 2 Alabama 4418 1969 1840 1769 1692 1678 1496 1463 Alaska 4228 1813 1696 1635 1572 1560 1379 1350 Arizona 4473 2012 1880 1805 1722 1707 1525 1489 Arkansas 4404 1956 1828 1758 1682 1668 1486 1453 California 4379 1937 1810 1741 1669 1656 1473 1441 Colorado 4311 1876 1752 1688 1619 1606 1424 1394 Connecticut 4327 1889 1765 1700 1631 1617 1435 1405 Delaware 4350 1909 1783 1717 1646 1632 1450 1419 Dist. of Columbia 4347 1906 1781 1714 1643 1630 1448 1416 Florida 4495 2035 1904 1828 1744 1729 1546 1511 Georgia 4407 1959 1831 1760 1685 1671 1488 1455 Hawaii 4522 2058 1925 1847 1761 1745 1563 1527 Idaho 4305 1869 1746 1682 1614 1601 1419 1389 Illinois 4322 1886 1762 1697 1628 1615 1433 1402 Indiana 4337 1898 1774 1708 1638 1624 1442 1411 Iowa 4312 1881 1759 1694 1624 1612 1430 1399 Kansas 4359 1918 1792 1725 1652 1639 1456 1425 Kentucky 4353 1912 1786 1719 1648 1635 1452 1421 Louisiana 4447 1994 1864 1791 1712 1697 1515 1481 Maine 4287 1858 1737 1673 1607 1594 1412 1382 Maryland 4354 1912 1786 1719 1648 1634 1452 1421 Massachusetts 4317 1880 1756 1691 1623 1610 1428 1398 Michigan 4305 1871 1749 1685 1617 1604 1422 1392 Minnesota 4288 1864 1744 1680 1612 1599 1417 1387 Mississippi 4422 1972 1842 1771 1694 1680 1497 1464 Missouri 4362 1920 1794 1727 1654 1640 1458 1426 Montana 4283 1855 1734 1671 1604 1591 1409 1380 Nebraska 4329 1894 1771 1705 1634 1621 1439 1408 Nevada 4392 1942 1814 1744 1669 1655 1473 1440 New Hampshire 4295 1864 1743 1679 1611 1598 1416 1386 New Jersey 4345 1904 1779 1712 1642 1629 1446 1415 New Mexico 4352 1909 1783 1716 1645 1631 1449 1417 New York 4334 1895 1771 1705 1635 1622 1440 1409 North Carolina 4382 1937 1810 1741 1668 1654 1472 1439 North Dakota 4275 1855 1735 1672 1604 1592 1410 1380 Ohio 4321 1885 1761 1696 1627 1614 1432 1402 Oklahoma 4392 1946 1819 1749 1674 1660 1478 1445 Oregon 4322 1887 1762 1696 1629 1616 1434 1403 Pennsylvania 4331 1893 1768 1703 1633 1620 1438 1407 Rhode Island 4320 1883 1759 1694 1626 1613 1431 1400 South Carolina 4403 1955 1827 1757 1682 1668 1485 1452 South Dakota 4298 1870 1749 1685 1616 1603 1421 1391 Tennessee 4392 1946 1818 1749 1674 1660 1478 1445 Texas 4445 1992 1862 1789 1709 1695 1512 1478 Utah 4330 1889 1764 1699 1629 1616 1434 1403 Vermont 4289 1862 1741 1677 1610 1597 1416 1386 Virginia 4362 1920 1793 1726 1654 1640 1458 1426 Washington 4309 1875 1750 1686 1620 1608 1425 1395 West Virginia 4341 1902 1777 1711 1641 1628 1445 1414 Wisconsin 4293 1865 1744 1680 1612 1600 1418 1388 Wyoming 4281 1850 1729 1666 1600 1587 1405 1376 National 4368 1925 1799 1731 1658 1645 1463 1431



### 7-11 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## Table 7.4.6 State-by-State Annual Energy Co nsumption for All B-S-IO Equipment (Installed both Indoors and Outdoors) by Efficiency Levels

State Efficiency Level kWh/year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Market ENERGY ENERGY Max Baseline STAR STAR Tech Tier 1 Tier 2 Alabama 4125 1758 1638 1532 1532 1522 1339 1310 Alaska 3959 1635 1525 1436 1436 1426 1246 1220 Arizona 4170 1793 1670 1558 1558 1547 1364 1333 Arkansas 4111 1748 1628 1524 1524 1513 1331 1302 California 4098 1735 1615 1514 1514 1503 1321 1292 Colorado 4033 1686 1571 1475 1475 1465 1283 1256 Connecticut 4046 1696 1580 1483 1483 1473 1291 1264 Delaware 4065 1711 1593 1495 1495 1485 1303 1275 Dist. of Columbia 4063 1709 1592 1493 1493 1483 1301 1274 Florida 4189 1810 1686 1574 1574 1562 1380 1348 Georgia 4116 1751 1631 1527 1527 1516 1334 1304 Hawaii 4212 1828 1703 1589 1589 1577 1394 1362 Idaho 4026 1681 1565 1470 1470 1461 1279 1252 Illinois 4040 1693 1578 1481 1481 1471 1289 1262 Indiana 4053 1703 1587 1489 1489 1479 1297 1269 Iowa 4032 1689 1575 1478 1478 1469 1287 1260 Kansas 4072 1718 1600 1500 1500 1490 1308 1280 Kentucky 4068 1714 1596 1497 1497 1487 1305 1277 Louisiana 4149 1778 1656 1548 1548 1537 1355 1324 Maine 4012 1672 1558 1464 1464 1454 1273 1246 Maryland 4068 1713 1596 1497 1497 1487 1305 1277 Massachusetts 4037 1689 1573 1477 1477 1467 1286 1259 Michigan 4026 1682 1567 1472 1472 1462 1281 1254 Minnesota 4012 1676 1563 1468 1468 1458 1277 1250 Mississippi 4129 1761 1640 1534 1534 1523 1341 1311 Missouri 4075 1719 1602 1502 1502 1491 1310 1281 Montana 4008 1669 1556 1462 1462 1452 1271 1244 Nebraska 4047 1700 1584 1486 1486 1476 1295 1267 Nevada 4102 1739 1619 1515 1515 1505 1323 1293 New Hampshire 4018 1676 1562 1468 1468 1458 1277 1250 New Jersey 4061 1708 1590 1492 1492 1482 1300 1272 New Mexico 4069 1713 1595 1495 1495 1485 1303 1275 New York 4052 1701 1584 1487 1487 1477 1295 1267 North Carolina 4095 1734 1615 1513 1513 1502 1320 1292 North Dakota 4001 1669 1556 1462 1462 1453 1272 1245 Ohio 4040 1693 1577 1480 1480 1471 1289 1262 Oklahoma 4101 1740 1621 1518 1518 1507 1325 1296 Oregon 4045 1694 1577 1481 1481 1471 1289 1262 Pennsylvania 4049 1699 1582 1485 1485 1475 1293 1266 Rhode Island 4039 1691 1575 1479 1479 1469 1287 1260 South Carolina 4112 1748 1628 1524 1524 1513 1331 1302 South Dakota 4020 1681 1567 1471 1471 1462 1281 1253 Tennessee 4102 1740 1621 1518 1518 1507 1325 1296 Texas 4147 1776 1654 1546 1546 1535 1353 1323 Utah 4048 1697 1580 1483 1483 1473 1291 1263 Vermont 4013 1674 1561 1466 1466 1457 1276 1249 Virginia 4077 1720 1602 1502 1502 1492 1310 1281 Washington 4033 1684 1568 1473 1473 1464 1282 1255 West Virginia 4060 1707 1590 1491 1491 1481 1300 1272 Wisconsin 4016 1677 1563 1468 1468 1459 1277 1251 Wyoming 4005 1666 1552 1459 1459 1449 1268 1242 National 4081 1724 1606 1505 1505 1495 1313 1285



### 7-12 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## Annual energy consumption for each size of Class A machines are shown in Table 7.4.7. National average energy consumpti on figures are identical to Stat e energy consumption figures for Class A machines because they are all assume d to be installed indoors (at the same ambient temperature and RH).

Table 7.4.7 Annual Energy Consumption for Class A Machine, All Sizes and All Locations, by Efficiency Levels

Size Efficiency Level kWh 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Market ENERGY ENERGY Max Baseline STAR STAR Tech Tier 1 Tier 2 Large 3738 2464 2267 2099 1916 1785 1679 1610 1438 Medium 3351 2383 2011 1916 1734 1529 1442 1383 1252 Small 3285 2227 1924 1734 1551 1442 1361 1307 1186



## The energy use characterization presumes that there are no controls which limit display lighting or compressor operation in a beverage vending machine to certain hours of the day or would be affected by occupancy patterns in the building. It is know n, however, that using occupancy sensors and other controllers w ould likely reduce the vending machine’s energy requirements during long periods of non-use, such as overnights and weekends. This occupancy controller option is sometimes used when de-l amping a vending machine is not advisable (i.e., when a vending machine does not have a captive a udience or when de-lamping results in reduced vending sales revenues). The controll ers can either be added on or enabled in certain beverage vending machines, depending on the location and the site owner.

7-13 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc

## REFERENCES

1. American Society of Heating, Refriger ating, and Air-Conditioni ng Engineers, Inc. ANSI / ASHRAE Standard 32.1-2004, Methods of Testi ng for Rating Vending Machines for Bottled, Canned, and Other Sealed Beverages . 2004. Atlanta, GA.

2. McGarrah, B. Personal communication . USA Technologies, Malvern, PA. May 2007.

3. TMY2S National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Typical Meteorological Years Derived from the 1961-1990 National Solar Radiation Database . 1995. Golden, CO.

4. U.S. Census Bureau–Census. 2000. (Last accessed on March 25, 2007.)

< http://factfinder.census.gov/servle t/GCTTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US &­ _box_head_nbr=GCT-PH1&-context=gct&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U&­ tree_id=4001&-format=US-9 >

7-14 BVM_FINAL_FR_TSD_Chapter7_08-14-09.doc