3

- i CHAPTER 3: MARKET AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

TABLE OF CO NTENTS

3.1 INTRODUCTION

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 3

- 1 3.2 MARKET ASSESSMENT

................................ ................................ .............................. 3

- 1 3.2.1 Product Definitions

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 3

- 1 3.2.2 Product Classes

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 3

- 10 3.2. 3 Product Test Procedures

................................ ................................ ................................ 3

- 13 3.2.4 Manufacturer Trade Groups

................................ ................................ ........................... 3

- 14 3.2.5 Manufacturer Information

................................ ................................ .............................. 3

- 15 3.2.6 Regulatory Programs

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 3

- 20 3.2.7 Voluntary Programs

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 3

- 21 3.2.8 Saturation in U.S. Homes

................................ ................................ ............................... 3

- 21 3.2.9 Historical Shipments

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 3

- 22 3.2.10 Historical Efficiencies

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 3

- 27 3.2.11 Product Retail Prices

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 3

- 27 3.2.12 Industry Cost Structure

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 3

- 35 3.2.13 Inventory Levels and Capacity Utilization

................................ ................................ .... 3

- 38 3.3 TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMEN T

................................ ................................ .................. 3

- 41 3.3.1 Product Operation

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 3

- 41 3.3.2 Product Operation and Components

................................ ................................ .............. 3

- 44 3.3.3 Technology Options

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 3

- 50 3. 3.4 Energy Efficiency

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 3

- 69 REFERENCES

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 3

- 71

LIST OF TABLES Table 3.2.2: Miscellaneous Refrigeration Product Classes

................................ ....................... 3

- 13 Table 3.2.3 Miscellaneous Residential Refrigeration Product Manufacturers

.......................... 3

- 15 Table 3.2.4 CEC Wine Chiller Standards

................................ ................................ .................. 3

- 20 Table 3.2.5 Household Saturation Estim ates for Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products

.......... 3

- 22 Table 3.2.6 Estimated Historical Shipments of Miscellaneous Refrigeration Prod ucts

............ 3

- 24 Table 3.2.7 Comparison of Estimated Market Shares of Cooled Cabinets by Capacity

........... 3

- 27 Table 3.2.8: Proportion of Shipments (2008

- 2011 Average) by Capacity

................................ 3

- 28 Ta ble 3.2.9: Cooled Cabinet Price Regression Analysis

................................ ........................... 3

- 31 Table 3.2.10 Major Appliance Manufacturing Industry Employment and Earni ngs

................ 3

- 35 Table 3.2.11 Household Refrigerator and Home Freezer Manufacturing Industry Employment and Earnings

................................ ................................ ................. 3

- 36 Table 3.2.12 Major Appliance Manufacturing Industry Materials and Wages Cost

................. 3

- 363

- ii Table 3.2.13 Household Refrigerator and Home Freezer Manufacturing Industry Materials and Wages Cost

................................ ................................ ................. 3

- 37 Table 3.2.14 Industry Cost Structure Using SEC Data, Average 2006

- 2012

............................ 3

- 38 Table 3.2.15 Household Refrigerator and Home Freezer Manufacturing Industry Inventory Levels

................................ ................................ ................................ 3

- 39 Table 3.2.16 Air

- Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment Manufacturing Industry Inventory Levels

................................ ................................ .................. 3

- 39 Table 3.2.17 Full Production Capacity Utilization Rates ,

................................ ......................... 3

- 40 Table 3.3.1: Primary Water System Components

................................ ................................ ...... 3

- 50 Table 3.3.2: Technology Options

................................ ................................ ............................... 3

- 51 Table 3.3.3: Compressor Rating Conditions

................................ ................................ .............. 3

- 52 Table 3.3.4: Maximum Available Compressor Efficiencies for Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products

................................ ................................ ....................... 3

- 54 Table 3.3.5: Efficiencies of Some of Embraco’s Variable

- Speed Compressor Models

............ 3

- 55 Table 3.3.6: Efficiencies of LG’s Current Linear Compressor Models

................................ ..... 3

- 56 Table 3.3.7: Comparison of Various VIP Core Materials

................................ ......................... 3

- 61 Table 3.3.8: Center

- of

- Panel Thermal Conductivity of VIPs

................................ .................... 3

- 62 Table 3.3.9: Comparison of Various Gas

- Filled Panel Core Materials

................................ ..... 3

- 63 Table 3.3.10 Glass Door Resistivity Options

................................ ................................ ............. 3

- 65

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.2.1 Typical Wine Chiller

................................ ................................ ............................... 3

- 3 Figure 3.2.2 Dual

- Zone Wine Chiller

................................ ................................ .......................... 3

- 4 Figure 3.2.3 Typical Non

- Compressor Refrigerator

................................ ................................ .... 3

- 6 Fi gure 3.2.4 Typical Hybrid Refrigeration Product

................................ ................................ ..... 3

- 8 Figure 3.2.5 Typical Portable Ice Maker

................................ ................................ ..................... 3

- 9 Figure 3.2.6 Typical Non

- Portable Ice Maker

................................ ................................ ............. 3

- 9 Figure 3.2.7 Market Shares for the Domestic Cooled Cabinet Product Market

........................ 3

- 18 Figure 3.2.8 Historical Market Sha res of Cooled Cabinet Shipments by Year and Capacity from NPD Group

................................ ................................ ................ 3

- 26 Figure 3.2.9 Average Retail Prices (2009

– 2011) For All Cooled Cabinet Categories

............ 3

- 28 Figure 3.2.10 Vapor

- Compression Cooled Cabinet Retail Price as a Function of % of CEC Baseline Annual Energy Use

................................ ................................ .... 3

- 29 Figure 3.2.11 Average Price Distributions for 1

- 11 Bottle Cooled Cabinets. Note: WC1 indicates survey data

. ................................ ................................ ......................... 3

- 32 Figure 3.2.12 Average Price Distributions for 12

- 19 Bottle Cooled Cabinets. Note: WC1 indicates survey data.

................................ ................................ ......................... 3

- 32 Figure 3.2.13 Average Price Distributions for 20

- 29 Bottle Cooled Cabinets. Note: WC1 indicates survey data.

................................ ................................ ......................... 3

- 33 Figure 3.2.14 Average Price Distributions Across Cooled Cabinet Capacities. Note: WC1 indicates survey data.

................................ ................................ ......................... 3

- 33 Figure 3.2.15 Purchase Prices of Ice Makers

................................ ................................ ............. 3

- 34 Figure 3.3.1 Typical Vapor

- Compression Refrigeration Circuit

................................ ............... 3

- 42 Figure 3.3.2 Batch Icemaking Process

................................ ................................ ....................... 3

- 4 33

- iii Figure 3.3.3 Components of a Vapor

- Compression Refrigerator

- Freezer

................................ 3

- 45 Figure 3.3.4 All Low

- Back

- Pressure R

- 134a Compressors <700 Btu/hr, Excluding Variable

- Speed

................................ ................................ ................................ ... 3

- 53 Figure 3.3.5 Cooled Cabinet Energy Consumption as a Function of Interior Volume

............. 3

- 703

- 1 CHAPTER 3. MARKET AND TECHNOLOG Y ASSESSMENT

3.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter provides a profile of the miscellaneous refrigeration products in the United States. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) developed the preliminary market and technology assessment presented in this chapter primarily from publicly available information. This assessment is helpful in identifying the major manufacturers and their product characteristics, which form the basis fo r the engineering and life

- cycle cost (LCC) analyses. Present and past industry structure and industry financial information help DOE in the process of conducting the manufacturing impact analysis.

3.2 MARKET ASSESSMENT

3.2.1 Product Definitions
The miscellaneous re frigeration products addressed in this rulemaking are consumer refrigeration products that are not currently covered by DOE energy conservation standards. These consumer products include hybrid refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, and freezers ( i.e., prod ucts that include warm compartments such as wine storage compartments as at least half of the refrigerated volume in products that otherwise perform the functions of refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, or freezers), cooled cabinets (including wine chille rs), refrigeration products that do not use vapor

- compression technology ( i.e., products that do not include compressor and condenser unit s as integral part s of the cabinet assembly), and ice makers.
The Rulemaking Framework Document for Wine Chillers and Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products (hereafter referred to as the Framework Document ) initially discussed extending the scope of this rulemaking to address all of the above products. 1 Before the publica tion of the Framework Document, DOE published a coverage determination proposal (hereafter referred to as the November 2011 Coverage Proposal). 76 FR 69147 ( Nov. 8, 2011). In this document, DOE preliminarily determined that consumer refrigeration products that do not incorporate compressors qualify as covered products as defined by th e Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. 6291, et seq.; “EPCA” or, “the Act ”).
After the publication of the Framework Document, DOE published a nother coverage de termination proposal (hereafter referred to as the October 2013 Coverage Proposal). 78 FR 65223 ( Oct. 31, 2013) . In this document , which expands the scope of the November 2011 Coverage Proposal , DOE proposed to add hybrid (or combination) refrigerators, re frigerator

freezers, and freezers ( i.e. , products that include warm compartments such as wine storage3

- 2 compartments in products that otherwise perform the functions of refrigerators, refrigerator

freezers, or freezers); cooled cabinets ( i.e. , products inclu ding wine chillers that are composed entirely of warm compartments ); refrigeration products that do not use vapor

- compression refrigeration systems ( i.e. , products that do not use a compressor and condenser as the refrigeration source ) ; and ice makers as c overed products as defined by EPCA. This proposal would add all of these products under a single new aggregate product coverage category, referred to as “miscellaneous refrigeration products,” which would be distinct from existing categories covering consu mer refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, and freezers. It therefore overrides the November 2011 Coverage Proposal, which had proposed to cover all products that do not use vapor
- compression refrigeration systems in a single product coverage category that would not have included vapor

- compression products.
In a NOPR associated with a simultaneous test procedure rulemaking for miscellaneous refrigeration products (hereafter referred to as the Test Procedure NOPR) , DOE has proposed new test procedures for all the products in this new coverage category. The Test Procedure NOPR proposes to establish a regulatory definition for “miscellaneous refrigeration products” that would collectively define all the products covered in this rulemaking. These miscella neous refrigeration products are introduced and described in the following sections.

Cooled Cabinets 3.2.1.1 DOE propose d adopting the term “cooled cabinet” to denote consumer refrigeration products that do not meet the definition for “refrigerator

. ”

. Such products are typically marketed as wine chillers, wine coolers, wine refrigerators, beverage coolers, and beverage centers, although other types of cooled cabinets exist. DOE had previously used the term “wine chiller” for these products, which is th e term used by the California Energy Commission (CEC) and the Canadian regulations, but proposed to use the more generic “cooled cabinet” to accommodate the fact that not all of these products are designed are marketed specifically for wine storage. Althou gh these products may have different design features, they share the common characteristic of using a refrigeration system to achieve storage temperatures above 39 °F and below ambient temperature. Consequently, they are distinct from refrigerators because they are not capable of achieving internal temperatures that are safe for storing fresh food. In the Test Procedure NOPR, DOE has proposed to define cooled cabinets as follows:
Cooled cabinet means a cabinet that has a source of refrigeration requiring electric energy input only and is capable of maintaining compartment temperature s either (a) no lower than 3 9 °F (3.9 °C) , or (b) in a range that extends no lower than 37 ° F (2.8 ° C) but at least as high as 60 ° F (15.6 ° C). DOE notes that, unlike the defini tions for refrigerators, refrigerator

freezers, and freezers, its proposed cooled cabinet definition does not exclude products that do not have a compressor and condenser as an integral part of the cabinet assembly. This proposed definition also does not l imit coverage to products with alternating current (AC) power input. Therefore, this definition addresses the possibility that these products may be cooled using non

vapor
- compression refrigeration systems, such as thermoelectric systems (which are capable of being powered by direct current [DC] power) or absorption systems. DOE proposes to use the3

- 3 term “non

- compressor” to describe such products. In fact, as described in s ection 3.2.5.1 , the majority of cooled cabinets on the market use thermoelectric refrigeration systems to cool their cabinets. In the Test Procedure NOPR, DOE has proposed to define non

- compressor cooled cabinets as follows:

Non

- compressor cooled cab inet means a cooled cabinet that has a source of refrigeration that does not include a compressor and condenser unit

. A typical cooled cabinet

— in this example, a wine chiller

— is depicted in Figure 3.2

. 1

. Because the primary function of a cooled cabinet is to store beverages (and potentially non

perishable foods), these products feature either shelves (typically found in beverage centers) or bottle racks (typically found in wine chillers). Cooled cabinets are similar in appearance to refrigerators, although cooled cabinets are typically sold with a glass door, rather than the solid, insulated doors found on refrigerators. This feature highligh ts the secondary function of cooled cabinets, which is to display the products ( e.g. , bottles of wine) stored within.

Figure 3.2
. 1 Typical Wine Chiller a Cooled cabinets range in size from countertop units that can store only a few bottles of wine to large cabinets capable of storing more than 100 bottles. Some cooled cabinets feature dual or triple temperature zones, each of which may be independently controlled and some of which have their own external doors. This feature allows users to create separate storage conditions tailored specifically to different types of products; for example, a zone used to store white wine could be set at a lower temperature than a zone used to store red wine. Other units do

a http://salestores.com/stores/images/images_747/WC20SD.jpg3

- 4 not feature distinct temperature zones, but rather use natural temperature stratification within the cabinet to create “zones” that are not actually separated by any physical barrier or boundary. An example of a dual

- zone, independently

- controlled wine ch iller is displayed in Figure 3.2

. 2

.

Figure 3.2
. 2 Dual

- Zone Wine Chiller b

DOE has not been able to confirm than any c ooled cabinets use manual defrost. Although CEC ’s database of certified products lists a small number of manual defrost wine chillers, DOE found that all but one of these wine chillers were no longer for sale; additionally, it was not possible to confirm u sing publicly available data that the remaining unit did indeed use manual defrost. Consequently, DOE’s cooled cabinet analysis is focused solely on automatic defrost units. The vast majority of cooled cabinets use passive off

- cycle defrost, in which any f rost that collects on the evaporator during the compressor on

- cycle melts during the off

- cycle because of the warm compartment temperature typical for these products. Nevertheless, some wine chillers do use an electric resistance defrost heater.
As mentio ned previously , non
- compressor cooled cabinets use either thermoelectric or absorption refrigeration technology to provide cooling. As noted in s ection 3.2.8 , absorption cooled cabinets are mainly utilized in hotels.

b http://www.subzero

- wolf.com/s3/www2.subzero

- wolf.com/images/products/WS

30_product_photo.png?preset=product

- detail3

- 5 Non

- Compressor Refrigerators 3.2.1.2
The section of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) that identifies refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, and freezers as covered consumer products specifies that coverage applies only to products that include compressor and condenser unit s as integral part s of the cabinet assembly; in other words, products that utilize vapor

- compression refrigeration technology. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(1)(B) ) DOE is aware of produc ts that use thermoelectric and/or absorption technology that are sold as refrigerators , but is not aware of any such products that are sold as refrigerator

- freezers or freezers. In the Test Procedure NOPR, DOE has proposed to define such products as follow s:
Non

- compressor refrigerator means a cabinet that has a source of refrigeration that does not include a compressor and condenser unit, requir es electric energy input only , and is capable of maintaining compartment temperatures above 32 °F (0 °C) and below 39 °F (3.9 °C)

. A non
compressor refrigerator may include a compartment capable of maintaining compartment temperatures below 32 °F (0 °C )

. A non

- compressor refrigerator also may include one or more cellar compartments, if the combined refrigerat ed volume of these compartments is less than half the total refrigerated volume of the product.
As illustrated in Figure 3.2

. 3 , such products strongly resemble vapor

- compression refrigerators in that they typically use a solid, insulated door to enclose a refrigerated storage space , although some non

- compressor refrigerators do use glass doors . However, as described in the Test Procedure NOPR, DOE has observed through testing that many non

- compressor refrigerators are unable to maintain temperatures that are safe for food storage (39 °F or below) in 90 °F ambient test conditions. DOE requests comment on whether any non

- compressor refrigerators currently exist that can a chieve storage temperatures of 39 °F or below in 90 °F ambient tests conditions

— see the TSD executive summary.3

- 6 Figure 3.2
. 3 Typical Non

- Compressor Refrigerator c

Hybrid Refrigeration Products 3.2.1.3 DOE propose d adopting the term “hybrid refrigeration product” to denote consumer refrigeration products that combine products that include warm compartments (such as wine storage compartments) that take up at least half, but not all , of the refrigerated volume of prod ucts that otherwise perform the functions of refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, or freezers. DOE also proposes adopting the term “cellar compartment” to denote such warm compartments. Because such products can come in several configurations depending on the combination of compartment types, DOE has proposed in the Test Procedure NOPR the following definitions for all possible configurations of hybrid refrigeration products: Hybrid refrigeration product means a hybrid all

- refrigerator, hybrid refrigerator , hybrid refrigerator

- freezer, hybrid freezer, or hybrid non

- compressor refrigerator as defined below:

• Hybrid all

- refrigerator means a hybrid refrigerator that does not include a compartment capable of maintaining compartment temperatures below 32 °F (0 °C ). It may include a compartment of 0.50 cubic

- foot capacity (14.2 liters) or less for the freezing and storage of ice

. • Hybrid refrigerator means a cabinet that has a source of refrigeration that includes a compressor and condenser unit and requir es electric energy input only , and consists of two or more compartments where (1) at least half but not all of its refrigerated volume is comprised of one or more cellar compartments , (2) at least

c http://ecx.images

- amazon.com/images/I/31RP

- OKLtcL.jpg3

- 7 one of the remaining compartments is capable of maintaining c ompartment temperatures above 32 °F (0 °C) and below 39 °F (3.9 °C) , (3) the cabinet may also include a compartment capable of maintaining compartment temperatures below 32 °F (0 °C), but (4) it does not provide a separate low temperature compartment capab le of maintaining compartment temperatures below 8 °F (−13.3 °C).

• Hybrid refrigerator

- freezer means a cabinet that has a source of refrigeration that includes a compressor and condenser unit and requir es electric energy input only , and consists of t hree or more compartments w here (1) at least half but not all of its refrigerated volume is comprised of one or more cellar compartments , (2) at least one of the remaining compartments is capable of maintaining compartment temperature s above 32 °F (0 °C) and belo w 39 °F (3.9 °C) , and (3) at least one other compartment is capable of maintaining compartment temperatures below 8 °F (−13.3 °C) and may be adjusted by the user to a temperature of 0 °F (−17.8 °C) or below

. • Hybrid freezer means a cabinet that has a source of refrigeration that includes a compressor and condenser unit and requir es electric energy input only , and consists of two or more compartments where (1) at least half but not all of its refrigerated volume is comprised of one or more cellar compartments, and (2) the remaining compartment(s) are capable of maintaining compartment temperature s at 0 °F (

- 17.8 °C) or below

. • Hybrid non

- compressor refrigerator means a non
- compressor refrigerator with at least half of its refrigerated volume compose d of one or more cellar compartments

. Hybrid refrigeration products combine the perishable food storage functionality of a refrigerator, refrigerator

- freezer, or freezer with the beverage or non
- perishable food storage functionality of a cooled cabinet. Th ey consist of two or more compartments, of which at least one is a cellar compartment. Often , the temperatures in these compartments are controlled independently, as the freezer , fresh food compartments , or both must be maintained at lower temperatures tha n the cellar compartments. These compartments may be configured side

- by

- side or in a n over
- under arrangement. Some hybrid refrigeration products also enable the display functionality of a cooled cabinet. Often, hybrid refrigeration products have separate doors for the cellar and the freezer or fresh food compartments; however, some products use a single door to access all compartments. These doors may be either glass, enabling display of the contents, or solid. Frequently, in multiple

- door units, a glass d oor is used for the cellar compartment(s) and a solid door is used for the fresh food or freezer compartment(s); however, DOE is aware of products that use solid doors for all types of compartments, thus eliminating the display function. DOE is also aware of hybrid refrigerators that use glass doors for both the cellar and fresh food compartments; however, there are no hybrid freezers or hybrid refrigerator

- freezers in which access to the freezer compartment is through a glass door

. A typical hybrid refrige ration product that features both a glass door and a solid door is depicted in Figure 3.2

. 4

.3

- 8 Figure 3.2
. 4 Typical Hybrid Refrigeration Product d

Ice Makers 3.2.1.4 In the Test Procedure NOPR, DOE has proposed adopting the following def initi on for

“ ice maker:”

I

ce maker means a consumer product other than a refrigerator, refrigerator

- freezer, freezer, hybrid refrigeration product, non

- compressor refrigerator, or cooled cabinet designed to automatically produce and harvest ice , but excluding a ny basic model that is certified under ANSI/NSF 12

- 2012 Automatic Ice Making Equipment . Such a product may also include a means for storing ice, dispensing ice, or storing and dispensing ice

. As indicated by DOE’s proposed definition, the primary function of a n ice maker is making ice; however, all such products of which DOE is aware also store ice, and some also dispense ice.
Ice makers typically come in two configurations: portable and non

- portable. Portable ice makers are marked by their small size and their use of an on

- board water reservoir, which allows use without a fixed water connection, both of which contribute to their portability. Non

- portable ice makers are similar in size to compact refrigerators and require a fixed water inlet. Some non

-

d http://www.designerhomesurplus.com/images/WF1061.JPG3

- 9 porta ble ice makers also require connection to a drain. Typical portable and non

- portable ice makers are depicted in Figure 3.2

. 5 and Figure 3.2

. 6 , respectively.

Figure 3.2
. 5 Typical Portable Ice Maker e

Figure 3.2
. 6 Typical Non

- Portable Ice Maker f

e http://img1.targetimg1.com/wcsstore/TargetSAS//img/p/10/80/10806854.jpg

f http:/ /www.build.com/imagebase/resized/x800/whynterimages/UIM

- 155_2_bg.jpg3

- 10 As evidenced by Figure 3.2

. 6 , typical ice makers have no provisions to store food and generally do not have sufficient space for foo d storage. This characteristic distinguishes them from freezers , which are designed to store food

.

3.2.2 P roduct Classes EPCA requires that DOE separate covered products into different product classes based on two criteria: (1) type of energy used, and (2) capacity or other performance

- related features such as those that provide utility to the consumer or others deemed appropriate by the Secretary that would justify the establishment of a separate energy conservation standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295 (q)) Based on t hese criteria, DOE intends to separate each product (cooled cabinets, non

compressor refrigerators, ice makers , and hybrid refrigeration products ) into product classes.
For cooled cabinets , DOE proposes to consider one product class : cooled cabinets (CC)

. Currently, two types of products are distinguished in the marketplace that DOE classifies as cooled cabinets according to the performance

- based definition given in s ection 3.2.1 . These are vapor
- compression and non
- compressor wine chillers , also known as wine cellars, wine coolers, wine refrigerators, beverage coolers, or beverage centers. DOE is proposing to establish a single product class that would include both vapor
- compression and non

- compressor cooled cabinets because it has not identified a difference in utility to the consumer that would justify the use of separate classes

. As discussed in Chapter 2 of this technical support document ( TSD ) , CEC classifies wine chillers into two product classes based on whether they use manual or automatic defrost; 2 however, DOE has been unable to identify any manual defrost wine chillers that are currently on the market. Additionally, the vast majority of wine chillers on t he market employ passive off

cycle defrost, although DOE is aware of at least one unit that utilizes active heat defrost. Because active defrost units comprise an extremely small portion of the wine chiller market, and because the use of active defrost rep resents only a three percent increase in energy use (as described in
c hapter 5), DOE proposes not to differentiate cooled cabinet product classes based on defrost type.
For non - compressor refrigerators , DOE proposes to consider a single product class:
non
- compressor refrigerators (NCR). This product class will consist of both thermoelectric and absorption refrigerators. DOE has been unable to identify any manual defrost non

- compressor refrigerators; moreover, DOE has been unable to identify any non

- compress or refrigerators that utilize active heat defrost. Consequently, DOE proposes not to differentiate product classes based on defrost type. Currently, two types of products are distinguished in the marketplace that DOE classifies as non

- compressor refrigerat ors: thermoelectric refrigerators and absorption refrigerators.
For hybrid refrigeration products , DOE propose s to consider product classes based on all existing product classes for refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, and freezers that will apply to pro ducts manufactured on or after September 15, 2014, as currently found at 10 CFR 430.32(a)

.3

- 11 DOE proposes to assign hybrid products to these 40 product classes based on the following criteria: 1) A hybrid product is classified as compact or standard

- sized based on the entire refrigerated volume of the product, including that of the cellar compartment. 2) A hybrid product is classified as a hybrid refrigerator, refrigerator

- freezer, or freezer based on the temperature ranges of the non

- cellar compartments. 3) Automatic defrost and through

- the

- door ice service is determined as for conventional refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, and freezers. 4) Built

- in status is determined as for conventional refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, and freezers. The numbering of the hybrid product classes proposed by DOE corresponds to the numbering of the refrigerator, refrigerator

- freezer, or freezer product classes with the relevant criteria as identified previously in the final rule (76 FR 57516)

. The hybrid p roducts identified by DOE thus far would fall into one of four product classes ; however, additional hybrid products identified by DOE in the future could potentially fall into any of the 40 proposed product classes

. Product class H

- 3A

- BI , based on the prod uct class 3A

- BI for built

- in standard

- sized all

refrigerators with automatic defrost, would comprise built

- in standard

- sized hybrid all

refrigerators with automatic defrost. For such products, the cellar compartment could be located above, below, or beside the fresh food compartment. Product class H

- 9I

- BI , based on the product class 9I

- BI for built

- in standard

- sized upright freezers with automatic defrost and an automatic icemaker, would comprise built

- in standard

- sized hybrid freezers with automatic defros t and an automatic icemaker. Product class H

- 11A, based on the product class 11A for compact all

refrigerators with manual defrost, would comprise compact hybrid all

- refrigerators with manual defrost. Finally, product class H

- 13A, based on the product clas s 13A for compact all

refrigerators with automatic defrost, would comprise compact hybrid all

- refrigerators with automatic defrost. Thus, hybrid refrigeration products in these product classes will be distinguished by their total internal volume, their bui lt

- in status, their defrost type, and their compart ment configuration

. Table 3.2

. 1 lists these and other example hybrid product classes

.3

- 12 Table 3.2
. 1 Example Product Classes for Hybrid Refrigeration Products Product Class Product D escription Defrost Type Ice Maker Built

- in Status Standard

- size d products H

- 3 Refrigerator

- freezer

- cooled cabinets

— top

- mounted freezer Automatic None No

H

- 3

- BI Refrigerator

- freezer

- cooled cabinets

— top

- mounted freezer Automatic None Yes

H

- 3A All refrigerator

- cooled cabinets Automatic None No H

- 3A

- BI All refrigerator

- cooled cabinets Automatic None Yes H

- 5 Refrigerator

- freezer

- cooled cabinets

— bottom

- mounted freezer Automatic None No

H

- 5

- BI Refrigerator

- freezer

- cooled cabinets

— bottom

- mounted freezer Automatic None Yes

H

- 5A Refrigerator

- freezer

- cooled cabinets

— bottom

- mounted freezer Automatic Through

the

- door No

H

- 5A

- BI Refrigerator

- freezer

- cooled cabinets

— bottom

- mounted freezer Automatic Through

the

- door Yes

H

- 7 Refrigerator

- freezer

- cooled cabinets

— side

- mounted freezer Automatic Through

the

- door No

H

- 7

- BI Refrigerator

- freezer

- cooled cabinets

— side

- mounted freezer Automatic Through

the

- door Yes

H

- 9 Upright freezer

- cooled cabinets Automatic None No H

- 9

- BI Upright freezer

- cooled cabinets Automatic None Yes H

- 9I Upright freezer

- cooled cabinets Automatic Internal No H

- 9I

- BI Upright freezer

- cooled cabinets Automatic Internal Yes Compact products H

- 11A Compact all refrigerator

- cooled cabinets Manual None No

H

- 13A Compact all refrigerator

- cooled cabinets Automatic None No

DOE requests comment on whether there are hybrid refrigeration products currently on the market that would not fall into one of the product classes listed in the preceding table . DOE also requests comment on whether it should allow separate product classes for built

- in hybrid refrigeration products

— see the TSD executive summary.
For ice makers , DOE proposes to consider three product classes. One product class will consist of portable ice makers (IM

- P) , which DOE has proposed in the Test Procedure NOPR to define as means an ice maker that does not require connection to a household water supply for ope ration and is operable using one or more on
- board reservoirs that must be manually supplied with water . This style of ice maker is also generally small , typically designed for countertop use.3

- 13 B oth the lack of a fixed water connection and the small size of these units contribute to their portability, which DOE considers a unique utility to consumers. DOE proposes to categorize n on
- portable ice makers either as cooled

- storage or uncooled

- storage ice makers. DOE has proposed in the Test Procedure NOPR to defi ne “cooled

storage ice maker” (IM

- C) as a n ice maker that maintains ice storage bin temperatures below 32 °F. Such units typically produce crescent

- shaped ice that is similar to the type of ice produced by the automatic ice makers found in freezers. A cooled

- storage ice maker is defined to be distinct from an “uncooled

- storage ice maker” (IM

- U), which DOE has proposed in the Test Procedure NOPR to define as a n ice maker that does not maintain ice storage bin temperatures below 32 ° F

. Such units produce clear ice using a process similar to that used in many automatic commercial ice makers and also require a drain connection to remove the melt water that collects in the bin. DOE proposes to use separate product classes for these two t ypes of ice makers because of utility difference s in the types of ice they produce , the requirement for the installation and maintenance of a drain connection , and differences in energy use

. As discussed in c hapter 5 of this TSD, the energy consumption of IM

- C s ranges from 411 to 552 kWh/year, whereas the energy consumption of IM

- U s ranges from 672 to 1,075 kWh/year, indicating significantly higher energy consumption. DOE has not yet identified any cooled

- storage portable ice makers.

T able 3.2

. 2 displays the proposed product classes for each type of covered product. Only four hybrid product classes, representing the classes for which DOE has thus far identified hybrid r efrigeration products, are displayed in this table.
Table 3.2
. 2 Miscellaneous Refrigeration Product Classes Product Class Designation Description

CC C ooled cabinet NCR Non

- compressor refrigerator IM

- P Portable ice maker IM

- C Cooled

- storage ice maker IM

- U Uncooled

- storage ice maker H

- 3A

- BI Built

- in s tandard

- sized * hybrid all

- refrigerators with automatic defrost H

- 9I

- BI Built

- in s tandard

- sized * hybrid freezers with automatic defrost and an automatic icemaker H

- 11A Compact * hybrid all

- refrigerators with manual defrost H

- 13A Compact * hybrid all

- refrigerators with automatic defrost * Note: “Compact” products are defined as having a total compartment volume of less than 7.75 cubic feet; for compartment sizes larger than this, the term “standard

- sized” is used.

3.2.3 P roduct Test Procedures Because cooled cabinets, non
- compressor refrigerators, hybrid refrigeration products, and ice makers are not currently covered products, no DOE test procedure has yet been established3

- 14 for them

. In the Test Procedure NOPR , DOE has proposed to establish new test procedures for all refrigeration products being considered in this rulemaking. The proposed test procedure for vapor

- compression coo led cabinets is almost identical to the procedure used by the CEC to test wine chillers. 2 Like the CEC test procedure, the proposed test procedure would requir e that vapor

- compression cooled cabinets be tested in an ambient temperature of 90 °F, and would require that the test be conducted with the light switch, if any, in the lowest energy position only . However, the proposed procedure also would require the ap plication of a 0.55 usage adjustment factor, which differs from the 0.85 factor used in the CEC procedure. As explained further in the Test Procedure NOPR, DOE selected this usage factor to yield a closer match of cooled cabinet energy test results to the expected actual energy use of these products, as observed from laboratory and field use data. The proposed test procedure for non

- compressor cooled cabinets is similar to the proposed procedure for vapor

- compression cooled cabinets except that it would re quire testing in an ambient temperature of 72 °F, rather than 90 °F. To account for the lower ambient temperature, this test procedure also would require a usage adjustment factor of 1.2, rather than 0.55. DOE proposed a test procedure for non

- compressor r efrigerators that is nearly identical to the existing DOE test procedure for vapor

- compression refrigerators (substituting discussion of refrigeration system cycles for discussion of compressor cycles, for example, when defining test periods). The proposed procedure would require testing in an ambient temperature of 90 °F. However, as discussed in the Test Procedure NOPR , DOE is unaware of any non

- compressor products that can maintain a storage temperature of 39 °F in a 90  ̊F ambient condition . Such units would instead be tested and rated at their coldest temperature setting

. The proposed test procedure for hybrid refrigeration products would require that they be tested as refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, or freezers except that a standardized temperature of 55 °F must be used for all cellar compartments and a usage adjustment factor of 0.85 must be applied to energy test results. The proposed hybrid product test procedure also contains provisions for testing units containing up to three types o f compartments (cellar, fresh food, and freezer)

. Finally, DOE developed and proposed a new test procedure for ice makers. DOE recognized that these products operate differently than automatic commercial ice makers, which are covered under DOE’s commercial standards and have their own test procedure. (10 CFR 431 Subpart H) The proposed test procedure for ice makers would require testing in 72 °F ambient conditions with 72 °F inlet water temperature (except for portable ice makers, which would be tested with their water reservoirs filled initially with 55 °F water). In addition to measuring the energy associated directly with icemaking, the proposed procedure would also measure the energy associated with ice storage.

3.2.4 Manufacturer Trade Groups3

- 15 DOE recognizes t he importance of trade groups in disseminating information and promoting the interests of the industry that they support. To gain insight into the consumer refrigeration industr y that manufactures the products covered in this rulemaking , DOE researched var ious associations available to manufacturers, suppliers, and users of such equipment. The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM), formed in 1967, is the main trade association of the home appliance industry . AHAM provides services to its member s including government relations; certification programs for refrigeration products; an active communications program; and technical services and research. In addition, AHAM conducts other market and consumer research studies

. AHAM also develops and mainta ins technical standards for various appliances to provide uniform, repeatable procedures for measuring specific product characteristics and performance features

.

3.2.5 M anufacturer Information The following section details information regarding manufacturers of cooled cabinets,
non
- compressor refrigerators, hybrid refrigeration products, and ice makers for sale in the United States, including estimated market shares (section 3.2.5.1 ), industry mergers and acquisitions (section 3.2.5.2 ), potential small business im pacts (section 3.2.5.3 ), and product distribution channels (section 3.2.5.4 ).

Manufacturers and Market Shares 3.2.5.1
Table 3.2

. 3 lists miscellaneous refrigeration product manufacturers selling products in the United States. Five out of the ten top cooled cabinet manufacturers by U.S. market share are AHAM members. Table 3.2

. 3 also indicates the types of products that each manufacturer produces. Product types include: vapor

- compression cooled cabinets, ice makers, thermoelectric cool ed cabinets and refrigerators , absorption cooled cabinets and refrigerators, and hybrid refrigeration products. Due to the fact that many cooled cabinet manufacturers have product portfolios that include vapor

- compression and thermoelectric, absorption, an d/or hybrid products, the following discussion of manufacturer market shares will treat all cooled cabinets , non
- compressor refrigerators, and hybrid products as one product class

. Table 3.2
. 3 Miscellaneous Re frigeration Product Manufacturers

Manufacturer Name VC WC TE WC Absorption WC IM TE Refr Absorption Refr Hybrid AB Electrolux^ Y

- - - - - - Frigidaire Y

- - - - - - Aga Marvel

- - - - - - - Marvel Y

- - Y

- - Y Avanti^^ Y Y

- Y Y

- Y3

- 16 Manufacturer Name VC WC TE WC Absorption WC IM TE Refr Absorption Refr Hybrid Bluestone*

- - - Y

- - - BSH Home Appliance Corp.

- - - - - - - Bosch Y

- - - - - - Thermador Y

- - - - - - Gaggenau Y

- - - - - - Chard International LLC*

- - - Y

- - - Conair^^

- - - - - - - Cusinart

- Y

- - - - - Dacor Y

- - - - - - Danby Products Ltd.^ Y Y

- Y Y

- Y Distributions Avantgarde Inc.* Y

- - - - - - Dometic

- Y Y Y

- Y

- Emerson Radio Corp. * ^

- Y

- Y

- - - Fisher & Paykel Appliances Inc.

- - - - - - - DCS

- - - Y

- - - Orien (F&P is OEM)

- - - Y

- - - GE^^ Y

- - Y

- - Y Great Northern*

- - - Y

- - - Haier^

- - - - - - - Aficionado Y

- - Y

- - - Haier Y Y

- Y

- - - Hoshizaki

- - - Y

- - - Kenmore* Y Y

- Y

- - - Koolatron

- Y

- - Y

- - Liebherr

- Export AG Y

- - - - - Y Living Direct

- - - - - - - Edgestar Y Y

- - - - - Koldfront Y

- - - - - - Luma Comfort

- - - Y

- - - Manitowoc

- - - Y

- - - Miele, Inc. Y

- - - - - - Jarden Corporation

- - - - - - - Oster

- - - Y

- - - Perlick Y

- - - - - Y Spectrum Brands

- - - - - - - Salton

- Y

- Y

- - - Scotsman Y

- - Y

- - - Supentown (SPT) Y Y

- Y

- - - Sub

- Zero Y

- - Y

- - Y Summit Appliances* Y Y

- Y

- Y Y3

- 17 Manufacturer Name VC WC TE WC Absorption WC IM TE Refr Absorption Refr Hybrid Thetford Corp.

- - - - - - - Norcold

- - - - - Y

- TRUE Y

- - - - - - U

- Line Y

- - Y

- - Y Vinotemp*^ Y Y

- Y

- - Y Whirlpool Corporation^^

- - - - - - - Whirlpool

- - - Y*

- - - Amana

- - - - - - - Maytag

- - - - - - Y Magic Chef Y

- Y*

- - - Jenn

- Air Y

- - Y*

- - Y KitchenAid Y

- - Y*

- - Y Vissani Y

- - - - - - Whynter* Y Y

- Y

- - - Wine Enthusiast*^^ Y Y

- - - - - Team International Group

- - - - - - - Kalorik

- Y

- - - - - Note: Indented items are brands/operating entities owned by the previous non

- indented entity. Abbreviations used in this table are as follows: “VC” indicates vapor

- compression, “CC” indicates a cooled cabinet or other cooled cabinet, “IM” indicates a n ice maker, “TE” indicates thermoelectric, and “Refr” indicates a refrigerator. *Re

- brand (not a m anufacturer) ^Top 5 manufacturer by market share ^^Top 10 manufacturer by market share Using publicly available data ( e.g
. , market assessments done by third parties ), DOE estimate d the market shares for cooled cabinet manufacturers selling products in the United States

. Manufacturers may offer multiple brand names. Some of the brand names come from formerly independent appliance manufacturers that have been acquired over time, and domestic manufacturers may put their brand on a prod uct manufactured overseas. Companies included in this analysis may also be off

- shore manufacturers that maintain a significant domestic presence via a U.S. entity. DOE estimates that there are approximately 30 manufacturers selling cooled cabinets in the United States . DOE also estimates that roughly 85 percent of cooled cabinets currently in homes use thermoelectric cooling technology and 1 5 percent use vapor

- compression cooling technology 6

. Figure 3.2

. 7 illustrates the estimated market shares for the domestic cooled cabinet market based on third

- party market data for the period from 200 5 through 2011. Offering only small, inexpensive thermoe lectric cooled cabinets, Emerson Radio Corp.’s high market share is consistent with the dominance of thermoelectric cooling technology in the market.3

- 18 Figure 3.2
. 7 Market Shares for the Domestic Cooled Cabin et Product Market

Mergers and Acquisitions 3.2.5.2 Due to mergers and acquisitions (M&A) , the home appliance indu stry continues to consolidate. The large market shares of a few companies provide evidence in support of this characterization. However, despite the c onsolidation witnessed by the home appliance industry in general, the miscellaneous refrigeration industry remains relatively fragmented among both the small and specialized and the larger, more generalized home appliance manufacturers. According to a thi rd

- party source, market data from 2005 to 2011 reveals that three manufacturers, Emerson, AB Electrolux, and Haier, comprised roughly 40 percent of the cooled cabinet market share during that time (with 13 percent, 11 percent, and 16 percent, respectively)

. The remaining 60 percent of the market was split amongst a large number of other manufacturers, with General Electric, Whirlpool, and Avanti holding the largest market shares (10 percent, 8 percent, and 8 percent, respectively).
Recent M&A activities re lating to the U.S. miscellaneous refrigeration product market include the 2012 acquisition of Fisher & Paykel Appliances Inc. by Haier. Fisher & Paykel (F&P) produces ice makers as original equipment manufacturers ( OEM ) and under its DCS brand name, while Haier manufactures both vapor

- compression and thermoelectric cooled cabinets and ice makers. According to Appliance Magazine , t he acquisition is intended to induce3

- 19 an expansion of the F&P brand both locally (in Australia) and globally (including in the United States ), leading to the “largest release of new products ever launched in the 79

- year history of the company.” 3 New refrigeration products will be among the new products. In 2008, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division required the divestiture of the Scotsman and Ice

- O

- Matic brands from Enodis upon the merger of Manitowoc and Enodis, which were two of the three significant commercial ice maker manufacturers at the time. In 2012, ALI Group

— a leading, global designer, manufacturer, an d marketer of commercial and industrial foodservice equipment based in Milan, Italy

— announced plans to acquire Scotsman Industries. 4 ALI Group owns a variety of commercial refrigeration and ice maker companies. Scotsman, although the largest commercial ice machine company in the world, also manufactures consumer products, including cooled cabinets and ice makers. In 2007, two longstanding small household appliance companies, Salton, Inc. and Applica Inc., merged their businesses, and in 2009 the Florida

- bas ed entity changed its name to Russell Hobbs, Inc. In 2010, Spectrum Brands acquired Russell Hobbs. Russell Hobbs sources ice makers and thermoelectric cooled cabinets from China, as does Spectrum Brands’ other home appliance brand, Remington.

Small Busine ss Impacts 3.2.5.3 DOE considers the possibility of small businesses being impacted by the promulgation of energy conservation standards. The manufacturers of the products covered in this rulemaking have a primary NAICS code of 335222: Household Refrigerator and Home Freezer manufacturing or 333415: Air

- Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment and Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing. The Small Business Association defines a small business as a company that has fewer than 750 employees and fewer than 1,000 employees for NAICS codes 335222 and 333415, respectively. At this time, DOE has identified five small business manufacturers that are based in the United States and produce one or more of the covered products.
DOE will conduct f urther analysis on this manufacturer subgroup to estimate any disproportionate impact that a minimum efficiency standard may have on these businesses. This will entail calculating a second set of industry cash flows for the small business group.

Distribution Channels 3.2.5.4
Unde rstanding the distribution channels of miscellaneous refrigeration products is an important facet of the market assessment. DOE gathered information regarding the distribution channels for miscellaneous refrigeration products from preliminary manufacturer interviews. The distribution chain for miscellaneous refrigeration products , and most consumer appliances, differs from that of commercial products, as the majority of consumers purchase their appliances directly from retailers. These retailers include: (1 ) i ndependent appliance retailers ; (2)3

- 20 national big box stores; (3) home improvement and department stores; (4) internet retailers (including big box store websites); and (5) kitchen remodelers. For cooled cabinets, the distribution method tends to vary ac cording to price point, with higher

- end products typically being sold by independent retailers and less expensive products being sold by the national retailers or online. Ice makers are mostly available through independent dealers and contractors.
In the m iscellaneous refrigeration industry, retailers obtain products both directly from manufacturers and from regional distributors.

3.2.6 R egulatory Programs The following section details regulatory programs mandating energy conservation standards for cooled cabinets, non
- compressor refrigerators, hybrid refrigeration products, and ice makers. Section 3.2.6.1 discusses current Federal energy conservation standards, while section 3.2.6.2 provides an overview of existing State standards. In addition, section 3.2.6.3 reviews standards in Canada that may impact the companies servi cing the North A merican market.
Current Federal Energy Conservation Standards 3.2.6.1 This is the first DOE rulemaking to establish standards for cooled cabinets, non
compressor refrigerators, hybrid refrigeration products, and ice makers; as such, there are no current Federal en ergy conservation standards for these products.
State Energy Conservation Standards 3.2.6.2 As part of its Title 20 Appliance Efficiency Regulations, the CEC has established standards for consumer refrigeration products that are not covered by Federal standards, including wine chillers. The CEC standards for wine chillers are presented in Table 3.2

. 4 below.
Table 3.2
. 4 CEC Wine Chiller Standards 2 Appliance Maximum Annual Energy Consu mption (kWh /year ) Wine chillers with manual defrost 13.7V + 267 Wine chillers with automatic defrost 17.4V + 344 V = volume in cubic feet.

Canadi an Energy Conservation Standards 3.2.6.3 Wine chillers are regulated products in Canada under the Canadian Energy Efficiency Regulations. The regulations reference Canadian Standards Association (CSA) CAN/CSA

- C300

- 08, Energy Performance and Capacity of Household Refrigerators, Refrigerator

- Freeze rs, Freezers, and Wine Chillers, for the testing procedure and for maximum annual energy consumption (MAEC) limits for wine chillers. 5 The product classes and MAEC limits in the3

- 21 Canadian regulations are the same as in the CEC standards

. DOE’s proposed test procedure is also very similar to the CSA test procedure except that it requires the application of a different usage adjustment factor and does not require units to be tested with their lights on.

3.2.7 V oluntary P rograms DOE reviewed several voluntary program s promoting energy

- efficient residential appliances in the United States. Many programs, including the Consortium for Energy Efficiency ( CEE ) and the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP), establish voluntary energy conservation standards for consumer r efrigeration products; however, no such voluntary standards exist for the miscellaneous refrigeration products covered in this rulemaking.

3.2.8 Saturation in U.S. Homes
DOE obtained estimates from a study that conducted online surveys 6 on the saturation of miscellaneous refrigeration products in homes. To obtain data regarding cooled cabinets, these surveys asked about wine chillers. Survey results indicated a household saturation of 10.6 percent for wine chillers

. The results also indicated that a pproximately 15 percent of wine chillers use vapor
- compression cooling technology , while 85 percent use thermoelectr ic cooling technology.
The s urveys in the study also asked about non

- compressor refrigerators and freezers. Survey results indicated a hous ehold saturation of 3.9 percent for non

- compressor refrigerators , but there was n o evidence for the presence of non

- compressor freezers. In addition, DOE estimates a national stock of approximately 400,000 absorption refrigerators from material provided by Dometic (Docket EERE

- 2011

- BT

- DET

- 0072 , No. 7 at pp. 40, 42 ) , which are believed to be mostly located in hotels. However, if the saturation is estimated based upon households, DOE can express this stock as a household saturation of 0.3 percent by d ividing by the number of U.S. homes (116 million in 2012). Combining these estimates yields an overall
non
- compressor refrigerator household saturation of 4.2 percent

. Approximately 90.5 percent of
non
- compressor refrigerators use thermoelectric cooling technology , while 9.5 percent use absorption cooling technology.
For ice makers, the study’s surveys found a household saturation of 4.7 percent. Among these ice makers, 69 percent were found to be portable ice makers (IM

- P), with the remaining 31 percent being non
- portable ice makers. Subsequent analysis of available models on the market indicates that approximately 8 percent of all ice makers are cooled

- storage ice makers (IM

- C) and 23 percent are uncooled

- storage ice makers (IM

- U). For hybrid refrigeration products, the online surveys in the study indicate d a household saturation of 3.1 percent for hybrid refrigerators and 0.8 percent for hybrid freezers (product class H

- 9I

- BI) . Analysis of existing models for hybrid refrigerators to gether with estimated product lifetimes indicates that approximately 60 percent are standard

- size d units (product class3

- 22 H

- 3A

- BI) and 40 percent are compact units. g Of the compact units, DOE determined that approximately 20 percent of products had manual de frost (product class H

- 11A), and 80 percent of products had automatic defrost (product class H

- 13A).
Household saturation estimates are summarized in Table 3.2

. 5

. Tabl e 3.2
. 5 Household Saturation Estimates for Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products Product class Product description Household saturation Cooled cabinets CC Vapor compression wine chiller 1.6% Thermoelectric wine chiller 9.0%
Cooled cabinet subtotal 10.6% Non

- compressor refrigerators NCR Thermoelectric refrigerator 3.8% Absorption refrigerator 0.4% Non

- compressor refrigerator subtotal 4.2% Ice makers IM

- P Portable ice maker 3.2% IM

- C Cooled

- storage ice maker 0.4% IM

- U Uncooled

- storage ice maker 1.1% Hybrid products H

- 3A

- BI Built

- in s tandard

- size d hybrid all

- refrigerators with automatic defrost 1 .9 %

H

- 9I

- BI Built

- in s tandard

- size d hybrid freezers with automatic defrost and an automatic ice maker 0.8%

H

- 11A Compact hybrid all

- refrigerators with manual defrost 0

. 2 % H

- 13A Compact hybrid all

- refrigerators with automatic defrost 1.0 %

3.2.9 Historical Shipments Very few data exist for the historical shipments of miscellaneous refrigeration products.
For cooled cabinets , AHAM and NPD Group provided recent historical shipments estimates , while online surveys and Natural Resources Canada ( NRCan ) (for Canadian

g DOE used an estimate that one

- third of hybrid refrigerator shipments were standard

- sized and two

- thirds were compact, together with the estimated lifetimes of these products (17 and 5.6 years, respectively). The estimated share of standard

- sized units out of the total stock is (17)•(1/3) / [(17)•(1/3) + (5.6)•(2/3)] = 60 percent, and the estimated share of compact units out of the total stock is (5.6)•(2/3) / [(17)•(1/3) + (5.6)•(2/3)] = 40 percent.3

- 23 households) provided stock estimates from which shipments could be inferred using a calculated lifetime of products.
The AHAM data indicate that shipments of “wine coolers” (cooled cabinets) amounted to 0.4 percent of all U.S. refrigerator, refrigerator

- freezer , and freezer shipments in 2005

- 2006 , and increased to 0.6 percent in 2007. Using the se pe rcentages with the total estimated annual shipments of refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers , and freezers (that did not include any miscellaneous refrigeration products) from the 2011 Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Refrigerators, Refrigerato r
- Freezers, and Freezers Final Rule (hereafter referred to as the 2011 R/F Final Rule) results in an annual shipments estimate of approximately 60,000 to 90,000 cooled cabinets between 2005 and 2007. 76 FR 57516. See Table 3.2

. 6 , where the top line is the total estimated shipments of refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, and freezers from the 2011 R/F Final Rule

.3

- 24 Table 3.2
. 6 Estimated H istorical S hipments of M iscellaneous R efrigeration P roducts Product class Data S ource Estimated A nnual S hipments (millions) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 All refrigerators, refrigerator

freezers, and freezers DOE 2011 R/F FR 16.73 15.39 15.09 14.37 14.27 15.02 16.29 17.15

Cooled cabinets CC AHAM 0.07 0.06 0.09 NPD Group (low est.) 0.28 0.75 1.03 0.57 0.46 0.46 0.42 NPD Group (high est.) 0.45 1.19 1.64 0.92 0.74 0.73 0.67 Online surveys 2.9 NRCan 1.4 * Non

- compressor refrigerators NCR Online surveys 1.1 Ice makers IM

- P Online surveys 2.24 IM

- C Online surveys 0.26 IM

- U Online surveys 0.75 Hybrid refrigeration products H

- 3A

- BI Online surveys 0.13 H

- 9I

- BI Online surveys 0.04 H

- 11A Online surveys 0.05 H

- 13A Online surveys 0.20 * Based on a Canadian household saturation of 5.3% extrapolated for the United States. See text. NPD Group also provided estimates of “wine cooler” (cooled cabinet) shipments between 2005 and 2011. 7 By their own estimation, reported shipments constituted between 25 percent and 40 percent of the total estimated market share of cooled cabinets . Results for both sets of estimates are shown in Table 3.2

. 6 , indicating shipments that peak in 2007 at between 1.03 and 1.64 million units and drop to an average of between 450,000 and 710,000 units over 2009

- 2011. For the period 2005

- 2007, the NPD Group estimates are between 4 and 19 times larger than the corresponding AHAM data, indicating a large uncertainty between these two sources.
The o nline surveys from the study indicate even higher shipments of wine chillers , but data are only available for 2012. Estimated annual shipments are 2.9 million, based on an estimated stock of 1 2 .3 million divided by the estimated average lifetime of the product (4.3 years; see c hapter 8 ). This estimate is between approximat ely 4 and 6 times larger than the NPD Group’s average for 2009

- 2011.3

- 25 The NRCan study estimated a penetration of “ wine chillers ” (cooled cabinets) in Canadian households of 5.3 percent in 2011. 8 Assuming this penetration is the same in the United States yie lds an estimated stock of 6.1 million. Dividing by the estimated lifetime provides an estimate of 1.4 million annual shipments , lower than the online survey but much higher than either AHAM or NPD Group estimates. The online survey also provided an estimat e of 1.1 million annual shipments of thermoelectric and absorption cooling refrigerators.
For ice makers and hybrid refrigeration products , the only data available are from online surveys. As for cooled cabinets, estimated annual shipments are derived from the estimated stock divided by the estimated average lifetime of the product

. For ice makers, estimated annual shipments are 3.24 million , based on the estimated stock of all ice makers (5.45 million) divided by the estimated average lifetime of the produ ct ( 1.7 years; see c hapter 8 ). This total is further subdivided into the three product classes (IM

- P, IM

- C , and IM

- U) according to the estimated saturations provided in s ection 3.2.8 . See Table 3.2

. 6

. For h ybrid refrigeration products , estimated annual shipments of built

- in standard

- size d hybrid all

- refrigerators with automatic d efrost ( product class H

- 3A

- BI ) are 13 0,000 units , based on the estimated stock of these products ( 2 .2 million) divided by the estimated average lifetime of the product (17 years , see chapter 8 ). Estimated annual shipments of built

- in standard

- size d hybrid freezers with automatic defrost and automatic ice makers ( product class H

- 9I

- BI ) are 40,000 units , based on the estimated stock of these products (900,000) divided by the estimated average lifetime of the product (22 years, see chapter 8 ). Estimated annual shipments of compact hybrid all

- refrigerators ( product class es H

- 11A and H

- 13A) are 25 0,000 units , based on the estimated stock of these products ( 1.4 million) divided by the estimated average lifetime of the product (5.6 years, see chapter 8 ). A s discussed in chapter 7, a pproximately 20 percent of compact hybrid products have manual defrost (product class H

- 11A), and 80 percent have automatic defrost (product class H

- 13A). See Table 3.2

. 6

. NPD Group also provided market share estimates of cooled cabinet shipments by capacity from 2005

- 2011. Market shares by capacity appear to have change d rapidly between 2005 and 2007 and appear relatively stable thereafter. Data are presented in Figure 3.2

. 8

.3

- 26 Figure 3.2
. 8 Historical Market Shares of Cooled Cabinet Shipments by Year and Capacity from NPD Group

Online surveys provided market share estimates of cooled cabinet stock by capacity in 2012. Given the short estimated lifetime of cooled cabinets (4.3 years), th ese data can be compared to averaged NPD Group shipments data over the past few years ( e.g. , 2008

- 2011), especially because NPD Group market shares by capacity appear fairly stable. This comparison is illustrated in Table 3.2

. 7

.3

- 27 Table 3.2
. 7 Comparison of E stimated M arket Shares of Cooled Cabinets by Capacity Capacity (number of wine bottles) Maximum equivalent volume (cubic feet)* Estimated market shares of cooled cabinets Online survey (stock, 2012) NPD Group (shipments, 2008

- 2011 average) 1 to 11 1.3 43.7% 41.7% 12 to 19 2.3 33.2% 36.1% 20 to 29 3.5 14.9% 6.0% 30 to 39 4. 7 4.9% 9.1% 40 to 49 6.0 1.5% 5.5% 50 to 59 7.2 1.1% 1.2% 60 to 89 10.8 0.1% 0.1% 90+ 10.9 + 0.5% 0.3% Total 100.0% 100.0% * Capacities in number of wine bottles were converted to equivalent volumes in cubic feet using the conversion factor 8.22 wine bottles per cubic foot, based on c apacity

- volume regression calculations found in Greenblatt , et al . (2013).

3.2.10 Historical Efficiencies DOE has no data on the historical efficiencies of miscellaneous refrigeration products. Current efficiencies based on market data are presen ted in c hapter 7 of this TSD.

3.2.11 Product Retail Prices

Cooled Cabinets 3.2.11.1 Figure 3.2

. 9 presents the average retail prices (in 2011 nominal dollars) from 2009 through 2011 for cooled cabinets h of all capacities as a fraction of total shipments. Ninety

- five percent of cooled cabi net shipments are priced between $26 and $450, and 50 percent are priced between $26 and $100, implying that a large portion of cooled cabinets sold in the U.S. are small

- capacity units ( able to hold fewer than 20 bottles). DOE estimates that 78 percent of cooled cabinet shipments (2008

- 2011 average) have a capacity of 1 to 19 bottles ( Table 3.2

. 8 ).

h Includes all commercially available cooling types (vapo r compression and thermoelectric).3

- 28 Figure 3.2
. 9 Average Retail Prices (2009

– 2011) For All Cooled Cabinet Categories

Table 3.2
. 8 Proportion of Wine Chiller Shipments (2008

- 2011 A verage ) by Capacity Capacity (# of wine bottles) Proportion of Total Shipments 1 to 11 41.7% 12 to 19 36.1% 20 to 29 6.0% 30 to 39 9.1% 40 to 49 5.5% 50 to 59 1.2% 60 to 89 0.1% 90+ 0.3%
DOE conducted an in

- depth search of consumer retail prices for vapor

- compression cooled cabinets available on the market as of April 2013 by gathering consumer prices from nine major cooled cabinet retailers: Beverage Factory, Home Depot, AJMadison, Abt, RoseHill Wine Cellars, Wine Enthusiast, Appliance Connection, Wine Cel lar Creations, and Lowes. DOE identified a total of 82 standard vapor

- compression cooled cabinet models and 19 different brands available on the online market today. DOE used the CEC i and NRCan j databases to match the rated annual energy consumption data with each cooled cabinet model.

i CEC appliance efficiency database available online at: http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/database/

.3

- 29 Figure 3.2

. 10 summarizes the data collected by DOE. The figure shows th at the association between retail price and efficiency for vapor

- compression cooled cabinets is not easily defined . The consumer retail prices for vapor

- compression cooled cabinets ranged from $198 to $5,499, with an average of $1,292 (this is the average across all 82 models and does not reflect the shipment

- weighted average). In order to analyze cooled cabinet efficiency relative to retail price, and due to the fact that annual energy use is highly related to capacity, DOE uses the “Percent of CEC Baselin e Consumption ” as the metric for efficiency in this analysis. Vapor

compression cooled cabinets are availa ble with annual energy use between 58 percent and 101 percent of the CEC baseline annual energy use at all price

- points, with an averag e of 84 percent of baseline consumption

.

Figure 3.2
. 10 Vapor

- Compression Cooled Cabinet Retail Price as a Function of % of CEC Baseline Annual Energy Use In order to further analyze the relationship between retail price and efficiency level for vapor
- compression cooled cabinets, DOE conducted a regression analysis in which it constructed models controlling for other characteristics (beyond efficiency and capacity) that could have an

j NRCan database available at: http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/pml

- lmp/index.cfm?action=app.search

recherche&appliance=REFRIGERATORS3

- 30 impact on cooled cabinet price (see Table 3.2

. 9 ) . The “best fit” k among these models includes additional explanatory variables for installation type, number of zones, and retailer. The results show that th ere is a significant and positive relationship between vapor compression cooled cabinet capacity and retail price, finding that, on average, every cubic foot increase in internal capacity is associated with a $70 increase in price, holding other variables constant. The results also find a statistically significant relationship between installation types and price, as well as between zone types and price. Specifically, the model finds that, on average, free

- standing vapor
- compression cooled cabinets cost $1, 2 06 less than built

- in cooled cabinets, and units that can be either free

- standing or built

- in cost $1,1 38 less than traditional built

- in units, holding other variables constant. The model finds that, on average, two

- zone cooled cabinets cost $38 3 more tha n single zone cooled cabinets, while “stratified” cooled cabinets cost $ 712 less than single zone cooled cabinets , holding other variables constant. Supporting the initial scatterplot of retail price versus efficiency, our model shows that the relationship between retail price and efficiency is not statistically si gnificant at the 90 percent confidence level , but the trend is toward increasing price with increasing efficiency (decreasing percentage of CEC b aseline) . Likewise, the retailer from which the uni t is purchased is found to have no significant impact on price.

k This model had an adjusted R 2 equal to 0.53. The model specification was as follows: Y = ß 0 + ß 1 (internal volume) + ß 2 (% above standard efficiency) + Σ y i (installation type dummies) + Σ μ i (zone type dummies) + Σσ i (retailer dummies); To avoid multicollinearity , one variable from each dummy variable category is omitted from the model, thereby making it the reference case.3

- 31 Table 3.2
. 9 Cooled Cabinet Price Regression Analysis Coefficients Standard Error t Stat Intercept 2,578 758 3.40 Internal Volume (ft 3 )** 70 21 3.40

% of CEC Baseline (1,007) 808

- 1.25 Free

- Standing** (1,206) 277

- 4.36 Free

- Standing and Built

- In Capable** (1,138) 233

- 4.90

2

- Zone** 383 186 2.06 Stratified* (712) 403

- 1.77 Beverage Factory (251) 512

- 0.49 Home Depot (531) 466

- 1.14 AJ Madison 93 470 0.20 Abt 38 676 0.06 RoseHill Wine Cellars 283 612 0.46 Wine Enthusiast (637) 543

- 1.17 Appliance Connection (401) 634

- 0.63 Wine Cellar Creations 251 691 0.36 **Statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. *Statistically significant at the 90% confidence level.
An in

- depth analysis of the relationship between retail price and efficiency could not be conducted for thermoelectric cooled cabinets due to a lack of available data on the annual energy use of these products. However, DOE does find based upon available information that thermoelectric products tend to be less expensive as well as less efficient than vapor compression products.
DOE also compared the NPD price data to online survey data disaggregated by capacity. Due to data limitations in the survey data, only the 1

- 11, 12

- 19 and 20

- 29 bottle capacities are shown , as well as average prices for all capacities. See Figure 3.2

. 11 through Figure 3.2

. 14

. While some differences can be observed in the details of the distributions, and a bias in the NPD data toward lower prices at all capacities, there is general agreement in the price trends as functions of capacity, and significant overlap in the price ranges between the online survey a nd NPD data, including the clustering at low and high prices in the 20

- 29 bottle capacity data

. It should be noted that the NPD data is based on sales , whereas the survey data is based on stock.3

- 32 Figure 3.2
. 11 Average Price Distributions for 1

- 11 Bottle Cooled Cabinets . Note: WC1 indicates survey data.

Figure 3.2
. 12 Average Price Distributions for 12

- 19 B ottle Cooled Cabinets . Note: WC1 indicates survey data
.3

- 33 Figure 3.2
. 13 Average Price Distributions for 20

- 29 B ottle Cooled Cabinets . Note: WC1 indicates survey data.

Figure 3.2
. 14 Average Price Distributions Across Cooled Cabinet Capacities . Note: WC1 indicates survey data.3

- 34 Non

- Compressor Refrigerators 3.2.11.2 Insufficient data were available on prices paid for non

- compressor refrigerators. However, due to the similarity in design of non

- compressor refrigerators and cooled cabinets, DOE assumes the price ranges would be similar.
Hybrid Refrigeration Products 3.2.11.3
No data were available on prices paid for hybrid refrigeration products.

Ice Makers 3.2.11.4 Figure 3.2

. 15 presents purchase price of new ice makers based on online survey data. All prices are in 2012 nominal dollars, and do not include taxes or rebates. The median purchase price was just over $200, with the highest price paid reported between $2,501 and $3,000.

Figure 3.2
. 15 Purch ase Prices of Ice Makers3

- 35 3.2.12 Industry Cost Structure DOE developed the household appliance industry cost structure from publicly available information from the Annual Survey of Manufacturers ( ASM ) and Economic Census ( Table 3.2.10 and Table 3.2.12 ) and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC ) 10

- K reports filed by publicly owned manufacturers (summarized in Table 3.2.14 ). Table 3.2

. 9 presents the major appliance manufacturing i ndustry (NAICS code 335222) employment levels and earnings from 2002

- 2011. The statistics illustrate a steady decline in the number of production and non

production workers in the industry since 2002. DOE converted the payroll data to constant 2011 dollars using the Gross Domestic Product Implicit Price Deflator published by the U. S. Bureau of Economic Analysis

. 9 Table 3.2
. 10 shows that as industry employment levels decline, the industry payroll in constant 2011 dollars also decreases. The percent decrease in total industry employees tracks relatively closely with the percent decrease in payroll for all U.S.

- based employees

. Table 3.2
. 10 Major Appliance Manufacturing Industry Employment and Earnings 9 Total Payroll (2011 $ Mil)

2011 30,316 34,742 $1,428

2010 31,924 36,475 $1,555

2009 32,875 37,905 $1,564

2008 39,208 45,152 $1,870

2007 45,370 52,045 $2,090

2006 49,360 56,174 $2,355

2005 54,083 62,877 $2,487

2004 57,660 68,213 $2,767

2003 58,289 68,593 $2,804

2002 59,234 70,013 $2,935 All Employees Year Production Workers

$- $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010tayroll (2011 $ ail)No. 9mployees 

### aajor Appliance Industry 9mployment

All 9mployees
troduction Workers Total tayroll

Table 3.2

. 11 presents the employments levels and payroll for just the “household refrigerator and home freezer portion” of the major appliance industry. Statistics for both employment levels and payroll s how a slight decrease from 2002 to 2011. The decrease is of a much larger magnitude than for the major appliance industry overall.3

- 36 Table 3.2
. 11 Household Refrigerator and Home Freezer Manufacturing Industry Em ployment and Earnings 9

Total Payroll
(2011 $ Mil)
2011 7,651 8,582 $360 2010 8,702 9,877 $455 2009 9,156 10,449 $453 2008 10,805 12,310 $581 2007 12,179 13,971 $647 2006 14,714 16,539 $740 2005 17,505 20,319 $812 2004 20,136 23,380 $953 2003 20,162 22,989 $960 2002 20,530 23,487 $1,002 Year Production Workers All Employees

$- $300 $600 $900 $1,200 $1,500

- 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010tayroll (2011 $ ail)No. 9mployees 

### Household Refrigerator and Home Freezer aanufacturing 9mployment

troduction Workers All 9mployees tayroll for All 9mployees

Table 3.2.12 presents the costs of materials and industry payroll as a percentage of value of shipments from 2002

- 2011

. The cost of materials as a percentage of value of shipments has remained fairly cons tant over the 9

- year period, with small fluctuations , particularly between 2008 and 2011 . DOE notes that fluctuations in raw material cost s are common from year to year. The cost of payroll for both production and non

- production workers as a percentage of value of shipments has declined since 200 2

. Table 3.2
. 12 Major Appliance Manufacturing Industry Materials and Wages Cost 9

Table 3.2.13 shows the cost of materials and industry payroll as a percentage of value of shipments for the Household Refrigerator and Home Freezer Manufacturing industry from 2002

-

Year Materials Payroll for Production Workers Payroll for All Other Employees
2011 56% 7% 2%
2010 58% 8% 2%
2009 55% 8% 2%
2008 61% 8% 2%
2007 58% 8% 2%
2006 59% 8% 2%
2005 57% 8% 2%
2004 58% 9% 3%
2003 57% 10% 3%
2002 57% 10% 3% Cost as a Percentage of Value of Shipments (%)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Percentage of Total Shipments(%) M aterials and Wages as P ercentage of Shipments Value

- M ajor Appliances

P ayroll for All Other E mployees

P ayroll for P roduction Workers
Materials3

- 37 2011

. The graph exclude s 2010 and 2011, as materials prices were unavailable for those years. l Material prices as a percentage of value of shipments have remained relatively constant between 2002 and 2009 , with fluctuations from year

- to

- year

. The cost of payroll for production w orkers as a percentage of value of shipments has generally decreased since 2002, from 12 percent to 8.1 percent in 20 11 . The cost of non

- production payroll has remained relatively constant over the 11

- year period, with fluctuations from year

- to

- year. DOE n otes that, overall, wages and cost of materials combined represent a larger percentage of the total shipments value for the other major appliance industry than for the major appliance industry as a whole.
Table 3.2
. 13 Household Refrigerator and Home Freezer Manufacturing Industry Materials and Wages Cost 9

Table 3.2.14 presents the industry cost structure derived from SEC 10

- K reports of U.S.

- based, publicly owned home appliance manufacturers who are cons idered major producers of cooled cabinets . DOE averaged the financial data from 2006

– 2012 of these manufacturers to obtain an industry average. Each financial statement entry is presented as a percentage of total
revenues.

l Materials numbers for 2010 and 2011 were withheld to avoid disclosing data for individual companies.

Year Materials Payroll for Production Workers Payroll for All Other Employees

2011

- 8% 2%

2010

- 10% 3%
2009 54% 9% 3%

2008 62% 10% 3%

2007 57% 8% 2%

2006 53% 9% 2%

2005 58% 10% 2%
2004 61% 11% 2%

2003 56% 11% 3%
2002 59% 12% 3% Cost as a Percentage of Value of Shipments

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009Percentage of Total Shipments(%) 

### M aterials and Wages as P ercentage of Shipments Value

- M ajor Appliances

P ayroll for All Other E mployees P ayroll for P roduction Workers Materials3

- 38 Table 3.2
. 14 Industry Cost Structure Using SEC Data, Average 2006

- 2012 Financial Statement Entry Percent of Revenues Cost of sales 80.9% EBIT 7.1 % Selling, general and administrative 13. 1 % Capital expenditure 1. 3 % Research and development 1. 4 % Depreciation and amortization 1. 5 % Tax Rate 3 0

. 9 % Net plant, property and equipment 8.1 % Working capital 9.4 % A detailed financial analysis is presented in the manufacturer impact analysis ( MIA ) ( C hapter 1 2 of this TSD). This analysis identifies key financial inputs including cost of capital, manufacturer markups, etc.

3.2.13 Inventory Levels and Capacity Utilization
Table 3.2.15 and Table 3.2

. 16 show the end

- of

- year (EOY) inventory for the h ousehold
r efrigerator and h ome f reezer manufacturing as well as the air

- conditioning and warm air heating industries, according to the ASM

. The t rend in the value of EOY inventory expressed as a percentage of the total value of shipments for the h ousehold r efrigerator and h ome f reezer manufacturing industry shows a steady increase between 2006 and 2010, averaging 20

- percent growth per year through that period

. This increase, coupled with the relative steady dollar value of EOY inventories, illustrates the substantial contraction in shipment values through this period. In contrast, the value of the EOY inventories in the air

- conditioning and warm air heating equipment manufacturing industry roughly tracks the value of EOY inventory as a percentage of the value of shipments owing to stable overall shipments through this period.3

- 39 Table 3.2
. 15 H ousehold R ef rigerator and H ome F reezer Manufacturing Industry Inventory Levels 9

Year EOY Inventory (2012 $ Mil) EOY inventory as % of Shipments

Value

2010 344 10%

2009 346 9%

2008 366 8%

2007 363 6%

2006 289 5%

2005 323 5%

Table 3.2
. 16 Air

- Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment Manufacturing Industry Inventory Levels 9

Year EOY Inventory (2012 $ Mil) EOY inventory as % of Shipments

Value

2011 2,667 9%

2010 2,742 9%

2009 2,861 10%

2008 3,254 10%

2007 3,504 11%

2006 3,442 11%

2005 3,294 10%
DOE obtained full production capacity utilization rates from the U.S. Census Bureau ’s Survey of Plant Capacity from 2004

– 200 6

. After 2006, the Census Bureau discontinued this survey, and began a new Quarterly Survey of Plant Capacity Utilization . However, this survey does not collect utilization data beyond the 4 digit NAICS codes for the “all household3

- 40 appliances” m and “v entilation, heating, air

- conditioning, and commercial refrigeration equipmen t” n industries. Table 3.2.17 presents utilization rates for these umbrella industr ies

. Full production capacity is defined as the maximum level of production an establishment could attain under normal operati ng conditions. o In the Survey of Plant Capacity reports, the full production utilization rate is a ratio of the actual level of operations to the full production capacity

. The full production utilization rate for all household appliances was fairly steady between 74 and 77 percent from 2004 through 200 7 , with a more significant decrease to less than 60 percent from 200 8 through 2009 , and then a partial rebound between 2010 and 2012. Plant capacity utilization for ventilation, heating, air

- conditioning, and commercial refrigeration manufacturers peaked in 2008, at 67 percent, and reached a low of 55 percent in 2012.
Table 3.2
. 17 Full Production Capacity Utilization Rates 10 , 11

Year Plant Capacity Utilization Rate s (%)

All Household

Appliances Ventilation, heating, air

conditioning, and commercial refrigeration

equipment mfg.
2012 65% 55% 2011 62% 60% 2010 64% 60% 2009 58% 60% 2008 59% 67% 2007 76% 66% 2006 77% 62% 2005 74% 66% 2004 76% 61%

m “ All Home Appliances” is the umbrell a NAICS category 335 2 that includes NAICS code 3352 22 for “ h ousehold
r efrigerator and h ome f reezer ” manufacturing.

n “ Ventilation, heating, air

- conditioning, and commercial refrigeration equipmen t” is the umbrella NAICS category 33 34 that includes NAICS co de 33 3415 for “ a ir

- conditioning and warm air heating equipment and commercial and industrial refrigeration equipment

. ”

o http://www.census.gov/manufacturing/capacity/defini tions/index.html3

- 41 3.3 TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMEN T The purpose of the technology assessment is to develop a preliminary list of technologies that could potentially be used to improve the efficiency of miscellaneous refrigeration products. Contained in this technology assessment are details about product operation (section 3.3.1 ) , details about baseline equipment components (section 3.3.3 ), an examination of possible technological improvements for each product (section 3.3.4 ) , and a characterization of the product efficiency levels current ly available on the market (section 3.3.4 )

.

3.3.1 Product Operation Cooled cabinets, non

- compressor refrigerators, and hybrid refrigeration products are household appliances designed for the refrigerated storage of food products and/or beverages, such as wine , while ice makers are household appliances designed to produce and store ice

. Definitions for these product types are discussed in section 3.2.1

. A typical consumer refrigeration product consists of a refrigeration system contained within an insulated cabinet . Refrigeration products that are currently being sold in the U.S. market use one of the following three refrigeration technologies to achieve compartment cooling and/or ice production: vapor

- compression, thermoelectric, and absorption cooling. However, DOE is not aware of any thermoelectric or absorption ice makers.
Vapor

- Compression Refrigeration Technology 3.3.1.1 Figure 3.3

. 1 shows a schematic representation of a typical refrigeration circuit used in vapor
- compression refrigeration products, including hybrid refrigeration products, ice makers, and many cooled cabinets. As described by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air

- Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Re frigeration Handbook, 12 the refrigeration process consists of the following steps:
1. Electrical energy is supplied to a motor that drives a compressor, which draws in cold, low

- pressure refrigerant vapor from the evaporator and compresses it.
2. The resulting high

- pressure, high

- temperature discharge gas then passes through the condenser, where it is cooled to saturation condition, condensed to a liquid, and possibly sub

- cooled , while the heat removed from the refrigerant is rejected to the ambient air.
3. Liquid refrigerant passes through a metering (pressure

- reducing) capillary tube to the evaporator, which is at low pressure.
4. The low

- pressure, low

- temperature liquid in the evaporator absorbs heat from its surroundings, evaporating to a gas, which is again withdrawn by the compressor.3

- 42 Figure 3.3
. 1 Typical Vapor

- Compression Refrigeration Circuit

Thermoelectric Refrigeration T echnology 3.3.1.2 Thermoelectric refrigeration systems operate using solid

- state thermoelectric cooling modules , which are powered by DC electric input . These modules function due to the Peltier Effect, which is the temperature differential created across the devi ce when a voltage is placed
across it. This creates a cold side, which cools the cabinet air inside a refrigeration product, and a hot side, which rejects heat to the ambient air behind the product.
Absorption Refrigeration Technology 3.3.1.3 Absorption

- based ref rigeration products work by using a heat source, powered by either electricity or fuel ( e.g. , natural gas or propane), to provide the energy needed to drive the cooling system. Absorption refrigeration products use the ammonia

- water absorption cycle to coo l the storage cabinet. Electrically powered absorption units are typically used by the hotel industry for in

- room refrigeration cabinets as they are quieter than compressor

- based units, while gas or propane units are designed for use in mobile applications and remote locations that do not have access to electricity.

Ice Maker Operation 3.3.1.4
Ice makers are household appliances designed for the production and storage of ice. The process used to make ice differs for the various types of ice. In cooled

- storage ice m akers, ice is formed by circulating cold air over a mold filled with water. When the cubes have fully formed, a heater frees them from their mold and they are mechanically released into the storage bin.3

- 43 In uncooled

- storage and portable ice makers, the ice is formed directly on the evaporator, which is specifically designed to form ice cubes. The cube

- type evaporator is constructed of copper tubing attached to copper or stainless steel ice making surfaces. There may be plastic attached to the ice making surf ace to act as an insulator to promote the formation of individual cubes. In such ice makers, ice is form ed by passing a film of water over the evaporator, allowing some of the water to freeze, while the remaining water falls to the sump to be recirculated by a pump. The ice layer gradually grows, while solids and gases dissolved in the water are carried away b y the remaining liquid. This process allows production of clear ice. Portable ice makers work similarly except that the evaporator consists of downward

- facing prongs around which ice forms. When the batch is complete, the compressor directs hot gas into th e evaporator, which releases the ice. The harvested cubes are then stored in a bin and the remaining sump liquid is drained. Figure 3.3

. 2 illustrates the steps of the batch process.

Figure 3.3
. 2 Batch Icemaking Process

The batch process has the following characteristics : 13

1. The sump usually contains 10 to 40 percent more water than required to make a given batch of ice. This water is cooled to freezing temperatures but then dumped to a drain at the end of the icemaking cycle; thus, the process requires more refrigeration than just the amount required to freeze the harvested ice. 1. Water fills sump.

2. Refrigeration system is activated. Water is circulated over the evaporator.

3. Water cools down and gradually freezes on evaporator. 4. Ice batch

weight is detected. 5. Ice cubes are harvested. 6. Sump water is purged.

Fresh potable water is used to flush the system.3

- 44 2. Ice harvest occurs when the ice maker has produced a sufficient amount of ice. Ice makers can detect batch weight by measuring sump water level, compressor suction pressure, or thickness of ice on the plate.
3. Many ice makers use hot

- gas harvest, in which hot refrigerant vapor is directed from the
c ompressor to the evaporator to warm the evaporator and melt enough ice to free the ice on the plate. Typically, 10 to 20 percent of the ice is melted during the harvest process. Some makers use a limited amount of hot gas for melt combined with mechanical means for removing the ice. Other styles allow a slab of ice to drop onto electric heater wires arranged in a grid pattern so that the slab can be separated into cubes

. In continuous

- type ice makers, an auger is used to drive water upwards through a cylind rical evaporator. The flake

- or nugget

- type evaporator is typically a stainless steel cylinder with an auger that moves ice upward. The cold surface of the evaporator causes ice to form on the inside surface of the cylinder. The ice is pushed through an ex trusion head and directed to the storage bin. The extrusion head for a nugget ice maker has smaller holes than that of a flake ice maker, causing the ice to be compressed into nuggets as it leave s the evaporator.

3.3.2 Product Operation and Components
This sect ion provides a brief description of the components and operation of the different types of miscellaneous refrigeration products. These descriptions provide a basis for understanding the technologies used to improve product efficiency.
The illustration in Figure 3.3

. 3 shows the components and layout of a typical vapor
compression refrigerator

- freezer. The components and layout are similar in hybrid refrigeration products , cooled cabinets, and non

- compressor refrigerators, though cooled cabinets may have only one compartment and non

- compressor refrigerators do not feature the components unique to a vapor
- compression system . The text that follows describes the following ope rations or components that are common to most refrigeration products, regardless of their cooling system : automatic defrost, temperatur e control, lighting , and door seals and hinges.3

- 45 Figure 3.3
. 3 Components of a Vapor

- Compression Refrigerator

- Freezer p

Automatic defrost 3.3.2.1
Manual defrost is still used in cooled

- storage ice makers

. However, all cooled cabinets , uncooled

- storage and portable ice makers, and non

- compressor refrigerators, as well as a lmo st all hybrid refrigeration products , are self

- defrosting. Self

- defrosting refrigeration products automatically melt frost that accumulates in the cabinet and on the evaporator

. Automatic defrost may be passive or it may use an active control sequence . Pas sive defrost units defrost during compressor off

- cycles, when the refrigerant in the evaporator is allowed to warm. Active defrost units use a heater to warm the evaporator to melt frost. The defrost control sequence is generally initiated after a prescrib ed number of compressor running hours

. The typical mechanically

controlled active defrost system has three functional components: a defrost timer, a defrost heater, and a defrost thermostat.

• Defrost timer: The timer is a clock that is energized with the compressor. The timer initiates defrost after a set interval of compressor operation.

p http://www.remodelguide.com/improve/appliances/refrigerators/refrigerators_works.html3

- 46 • Defrost heater: The defrost heater is an elect ric resistance heating element that melts any ice or frost that builds up. A heater is typically also energized in the d rip pan to prevent freeze of melted condensate and clogging of the drip pan drain.

• Drip pan: As the frost and ice melt, the resulting water drips into a drip pan. The pan is connected to a tube that drains the water into a shallow pan underneath the insu lated cabinet floor at the bottom of the refrigerator

- freezer or freezer. The water is then evaporated by air which is drawn by a fan through the condenser and over the compressor shell. In some products which do not use forced convection condensers, a spe cial pan is mounted on top of the compressor shell and the water is evaporated using heat from the compressor.

• Defrost thermostat: The process ends when the defrost thermostat mounted on the evaporator tubing senses that a sufficiently high temperature has been attained.
Temperature control 3.3.2.2 Most refrigeration products have a thermostat or electronic temperature control to maintain the proper temperature. Thermostats are mechanical devices which interrupt the electricity connection to the co mpressor when the temperature is sufficiently low. Electronic control systems generally use thermistors as temperature sensors, using relays mounted on the circuit boards to activate the compressor and other components such as the evaporator and condenser fans.
Lighting 3.3.2.3 Refrigeration products with internal lighting normally have only one functional lighting component , the switch , which is usually a white push

- button mounted to be depressed by operation of the door. Closing the door turns off the light , although some wine chillers also have external light switches to keep the lights on when the door is closed . Refrigeration products traditionally used standard appliance incandescent light bulbs, but many new designs are using LED lighting.

Door Seals 3.3.2.4
All refrigeration products, except for some portable ice makers, have a seal

— a vinyl gasket attached to the door(s). The seal prevents infiltration of warm ambient air into the cabinet. The seal is lined with a magnet which helps to hold the door closed and c reate a tight seal. The magnetic portion of the gasket is aligned to face the steel extension of the cabinet’s external shell which wraps partially around the front face of the cabinet. Some gasket systems use opposing magnets on the cabinet side to improv e door sealing force.3

- 47 Vapor

- Compression Cooling 3.3.2.5 The following text provides descriptions for each of the components found in a vapor

compression refrigeration product

.

• Compressor: The compressor compresses refrigerant, providing the energy input
necessar y to drive the cycle. In most refrigeration products, the compressor is located at the bottom rear of the unit. In built

- in cooled cabinets or hybrid refrigeration products, the compressor is often located on top of the unit behind a grill or grate. The co mpressor runs whenever the thermostat calls for cooling.

• Condenser: The condenser is a heat exchanger located on the outside of the unit. The three most prevalent condenser configurations are as follows:

– Forced

- convention condensers use fans to move a ir through them to provide cooling. These condensers are usually located under or above the unit , near the compressor. They can be fabricated of steel tubes with steel wire fins or copper or aluminum tubes with aluminum fins.

– Natural convection “static” condensers , which do not use fans , are mounted to the back of the unit. They generally have steel tubes and steel wire fins.

– Hot wall condensers are integrated into the outer shell of the unit. A serpentine of tubing is attached to the inside of the sh ell and provided with good thermal contact to the shell. This is a common configuration in compact cooled cabinets

.

• Metering or Flow Control Device (Capillary Tube): The metering device in most vapor
compression consumer refrigeration products is a capi llary tube. T here are two common types of capillary tubes : adiabatic and non

- adiabatic . Non

- adiabatic capillary tubes , which are the most
common , are soldered to the suction line to evaporate the residual liquid and warm the vapor, thereby increasing the r efrigeration capacity of the system

. Adiabatic capillary tubes do not exchange heat with the suction line and therefore allow the refrigerant to expand adiabatically ( i.e. , without heat transfer)

. The capillary tube controls the pressure and flow of the re frigera nt as it enters the evaporator.

• Evaporator: The evaporator is a heat exchanger located inside the unit. Similar to the condenser, there are three main configurations for evaporators:

– Forced

- convection evaporators use fans to move air through th em to provide cooling. They are constructed of aluminum tubes and aluminum fins or copper tubes and aluminum fins. They are generally located on the rear wall of the compartment behind a panel. They can also be located in the mullion separating compartment s, as shown in Figure 3.3

. 3 . The evaporator fan circulates air through the evaporator and into the compartments. Because the evaporator absorbs heat, it is very cold, thereby causing any water vapor in the air to freeze on it as frost. Many refrigeration products using this type of evaporator employ automatic defrost.3

- 48 – Roll

- bond evaporators fabricated from layers of aluminum sheet primarily use natural convection cooling. The refrigerant passages are formed into the ev aporator walls. They are common in cooled cabinets and are configured as a flat plate at the rear of the cabinet. While these evaporators generally use natural convection and do not use an evaporator fan, some products with rear

- mounted flat roll

- bond evap orators use fans for performance enhancement.

– Cold wall evaporators are integrated within the walls of the cabinet. This configuration is used in very compact cooled cabinets . The evaporator consists of tube serpentines attached to the insulation side of the cabinet interior liner. These evaporators use natural convection heat transfer.
Thermoelectric Cooling 3.3.2.6 Besides the thermoelectric modules themselves, which can be connected in series to increase cooling capacity, thermoelectric refrigeration products typically employ aluminum heat sinks on one or both sides of the module in order to maximize heat transfer. Most thermoelectric refrigeration products also employ small, DC

- powered fans, similar to the fans used to cool computers, to improve heat transfer across the heat sinks. Some thermoelectric units employ a “condensing” heat pipe on the rear of the unit. Such heat pipes are filled with refrigerant that carries the heat away from the hot side of the module, reducing the need for fans or heat sinks to i mprove heat transfer

. Absorption Cooling 3.3.2.7 Absorption refrigeration products utilize the Platen

- Munters three

- fluid absorption process first commercialized in 1923 by AB Arctic. The process uses ammonia refrigerant, water sorbent, and hydrogen or helium gas, which is used on the “low

- pressure” side of the system to allow a low refrigerant partial pressure while maintaining total pressure equal to that of the generator and condenser. This allows the system to operate without a pump, instead causing circulation of the sorbent through thermal siphon action, similar to the process used to transfer heated water in a coffee maker. The generator and absorber of an absorption system act as a “thermal compressor” that raises the partial pressure of the ammonia refriger ant drawn from the evaporator to a high level corresponding to a saturation temperature sufficiently high to re

condense the ammonia using ambient air in the condenser. The condenser and evaporator of an absorption refrigerator operate similarly to those f ound in vapor

- compression refrigeration products, although, as mentioned above, a low

- density third fluid is used to maintain high total pressure while the refrigerant has a low partial pressure in the evaporator. The systems’ key components include the fo llowing.

• Evaporator : The evaporator is a heat exchanger located inside the product’s cabinet storage volume. The heat transferred from the cabinet interior evaporates the ammonia supplied from the condenser. Hydrogen or helium mixes with the ammonia between the condenser and3

- 49 evaporator and makes up the balance of the pressure. The gas mixture passes to the absorber after exiting the evaporator

.

• Absorber : In the absorber, the vapor

- phase ammonia is absorbed in the water sorbent, giving off its heat of absorption. The liquid ammonia

- water solution passes to the bottom of the absorber, while the gaseous hydrogen or helium collects at the top and is returned to the condenser exit to recirculate through the evaporator

.

• Generator : In the generator, heat is applied (from either an electric resistance heater or burning fuel), which preferentially evaporates the ammonia, which has a much h igher vapor pressure than water. The boiling action promotes circulation of the solution through the generator and absorber. The vapor exiting the generator is mostly ammonia but includes a small amount of water vapor

.

• Separator: The separator provides s ome ambient cooling of the vapor exiting the generator to preferentially condense out most of the remaining water vapor. This component is oriented such that the liquid flows back to the generator. The operation also relies on some thermal and mass exchang e between the generator and the ambient

- cooled separator to maximize separation of the remaining water vapor

.

• Condenser: As in vapor

- compression refrigeration products, the condenser is a heat exchanger exposed to the ambient air. The condenser transfers heat to the ambient air thus allowing the ammonia to condense

. Icemaking 3.3.2.8 A typical ice maker consist s of a vapor

- compression refrigeration system , a water supply system , and an integrated storage bin contained within an insulated case. The components of the vapor
- compression refrigeration system ( e.g. , the compressor or condenser) are similar to the components found in hybrid refrigeration products and vapor

- compression cooled cabinets , although the evaporator of uncooled storage ice makers and most portable ice makers are designed to freezer water directly, rather than to cool air. The evaporator and ice mold configurations can differ depending on the product class and ice type, as described in section 3.3.1

. The components of the water supply system depend on the configuration of the ice maker. Non

- portable units contain solenoid valves, which are connected to external water supplies and allow fresh water to be admitted to the ice maker , while portable units contain a reservoir that is typically manually filled by the consumer. Uncooled

- storage units use a pump to circulate water from the sump or reservoir to the distribution system that s preads the water over the evaporator surface , and non

- portable uncooled

- storage units contain a drain for removal of melt and waste water. The typical components of a n ice maker’s water supply system are summarized in Table 3.3

. 1

.3

- 50 Table 3.3
. 1 Primary Water System Components Component Description of Typical Unit Potable Water Supply Connection and Water Supply Control Valve (Non

- portable ice makers only) Solenoid valve with connection for external hose or tubing Water Sump Plastic basin Water Circulation Pump Centrifugal sump pump powered by shaded pole motor ( SPM ) Water Circuit Plastic tubing and evaporator water distributor Drain (Uncooled

- storage ice makers only)

3.3.3 Technology Options
Table 3.3

. 2 lists the technology options for improving the efficiency of miscellaneous refrigeration products

. The technology options are categorized by the ir associated component or system

. Each technology option category and the options available for improving the component or system category are discussed below.3

- 51 Table 3.3
. 2 Technology Options Technology Options
Compressor Improved compressor effic iency Variable

- speed compressor Linear compressor
Evaporator Increased surface area Enhanced heat exchanger Forced

- convection evaporator

Condenser Increased surface area Enhanced heat exchanger Forced

- convection condenser Fan and Fan Motor Higher

- efficiency fan motors Higher

- efficiency fan blades

Insulation Improved resistivity of insulation Increased insulation thickness Vacuum

- insulated panels Gas

- filled panels

Gasket Improved gaskets Double

- door gaskets Improved door face frame
Doors Improved resistivity of glass door Solid door Expansion Valve Improved : thermostatic expansion valves (TXV) or electronic expansion valves ( EEV) Cycling Losses Fluid control or solenoid valve

Defrost Off

- cycle defrost Reduced energy Adaptive defrost Hot

- gas bypass Controls Electronic t emperature control Alternative Refrigeration System Conversion to alternative refrigeration system Alternative Heat Transfer Heat pipe Other Component location
Compressor 3.3.3.1 The compressor is the primary energy

- consuming component in a vapor

- compression product

. Consumer refrigeration products use hermetic reciprocating compressors, in which the entire motor

- compressor assembly is hermetically sealed in the welded steel shell.3

- 52 Almost all compressors are directly driven by two

- pole squirrel

- cage induction motors running at approximately 3,000 rpm on 60 Hz power. Three types of induction motors have been used in cooled cabinet compressors: resistance start/induction run (RSIR), capacitor start/induction run (CSIR), and resistance start/capacitor run (RSCR). Of the three motor types, the RSIR motor is the least efficient. As a result of the U.S. energy efficiency standards that took effect in 1993 and 2001, the vast majority of compressor motors now use the RSCR type

. Cooled cabinet and ice maker compressor capacities typically range from approximately 200 to 600 Btu/hr , although most cooled cabinet compressor capacities fall bet ween 300 and 400 Btu/hr . Two organizations have established conditions for rating the performance of refrigerator compressors: ASHRAE and Comité Européen des Constructeurs de Matériel Frigorifique (CECOMAF). q Table 3.3

. 3 below shows the rating conditions of these two organizations. The rating conditions are almost identical, except for the liquid temperature

— this is the temperature leaving the condenser. Because the CECOMAF liquid temperature is higher, compressor capacities and efficiencies under ASHRAE rating conditions are approximately 30 percent higher than for CECOMAF conditions. The actual operatin g conditions for compressors in cooled cabinets under proposed D OE energy test conditions can be significantly different than these rating conditions. Most notably, the evaporating temperatures are generally significantly higher than

- 10  ̊F. However, hybrid refrigeration products and ice makers operate at lower evapora ting temperatures than cooled cabinets do.
Table 3.3
. 3 Compressor Rating Conditions Rating Condition ASHRAE CECOMAF Evaporator

- 10 oF (

- 23.3 oC)

- 10 oF (

- 23.3 oC) Condenser 130 oF (54.4 oC) 131 oF (55 oC) Ambient 90 oF (32.2oC) 89.6 oF (32 oC) Suction Gas 90 oF (32.2oC) 89.6 oF (32 oC) Liquid 90 oF (32.2 oC) 131 oF (55 oC) Compressor efficiency is also a function of refrigeration capacity. As part of the engineering analysis, DOE collected performance data on the low

- back

- pressure R

- 134a compressors typically used in miscellaneous refrigeration products. As evidenced by Figure 3.3

. 4 , which presents these data, efficiency drops off with decreasing cooling capacity. The reduced efficiency for lower

- capacity compressors has been attributed to optimization of performance for higher

- capacity compressors 14 and to the higher importance of mechanical losses and losses associated with re

- expansion of gases left in the clearance volume as the swept volume of the reciprocating piston decreases.

q CECOMAF is a European appliance manufacturer tr ade association formed in 1958. It merged with EUROVENT in 1996 to become EUROVENT/CECOMAF. This organization is now called EUROVENT.3

- 53 Figure 3.3
. 4 All Low

- Ba ck

- Pressure R

- 134a Compressors <700 Btu/hr, Excluding Variable

- Speed

The highest

- efficiency single

- speed compressors identified during this analysis are presented in Table 3.3

. 4

.3

- 54 Table 3.3
. 4 Maximum Available Compressor Efficiencies for Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products

Capacity Range (Btu/h) * Highest EER (Btu/hr

- W) * 201

- 250 4.1 251

- 300 4.4 301

- 350 4.9 351

- 400 4.5 401

- 450 4.9 451

- 500 5.2 501

- 550 5.6 551

- 600 5.6 * Performance based on ASHRAE rating conditions and the use of R

- 134a refrigerant. Improved Compressor Efficiency Conversion to high

- efficiency compressors is fairly straightforward for manufacturers to implement as long as the appropriate compressors are available. As indicated above, most cooled cabinet compressor capacities fall between 300 and 400 Btu/hour. Table 3.3

. 4 indicates that the maximum efficiency in this capacity range is 4.9 Btu/hr

- W , while Figure 3.3

. 4 illustrates that many compressors in this capacity range have EERs between 3.0 and 4.0. This indicates significant potential for efficiency improvement in many cooled cabinets

. Variable

- Speed Compressors Variable

- speed compressors allow efficiency improvement as compared to single

- speed compressors because they can provide a better match of thermal loads during the vast majority of hours when the loads are low. Most of the time, the compressor would operate at low speed with a high percentage of on

- time. This would lower energy consumption by reducing off

- cycle losses
a nd by allowing the heat exchangers to operate with lower mass flow, thus boosting their effectiveness. However, careful consideration must be given to how variable

- sp eed compressors are implemented, because increased fan run times could negate compressor energy savings.
V ariable

- speed compressors use electronics to vary the ir speed. They use either inverter

driven induction motors or permanent magnet motors. Most U.S. consumer r efrigeration products do not currently use variable

- speed compressors, but the use of these c ompressors is becoming more common. Various past studies have illustrated a range of energy savings achievable through use of variable

- speed compressors . Arthur D. Little reported savings of approximately 25 percent compared to single

- speed motor systems in 1999. 15 Research conducted by Tecumseh Products Company demonstrated that energy savings of 15 percent as well as reduction of sound and vibration leve ls. 16 Simulation analyses conducted at the University of Illinois demonstrated that steady

- energy savings ranging from 4 to 14 percent could be realized through the use of a two

speed compressor in concert with multiple

- speed evaporator and condenser fans. The research3

- 55 also demonstrated that an additional 0.5 to 4 percent in energy consumption could be saved through the reduction of cycling frequency, i.e. , the number of starts. 17 Embraco has developed its third generation variable

- speed compressor that utili zes a permanent magnet motor controlled by a programmable electronic unit. 18 Table 3.3

. 5 presents the rated performance of some of Embraco’s variable

- speed compressors. The rated efficiencies of these variable

- speed compressors are not necessarily higher than the best efficiencies of singl e
- speed compressors

— evaluation of the benefits of variable

- speed compressors requires consideration of the system performance rather than just rated performance.
Table 3.3
. 5 Efficiencies of Some of Embraco’s Variable

- Speed Compressor Models Model Capacity Range (Btu/hr) * EER (Btu/hr

- W) * VEGY6H 330

- 510 5.9

- 6.1 VEGY7H 380

- 595 6.0

- 6.2 VEGY8H 450

- 555 5.9

- 6.0 * Based on ASHRAE rating conditions. Models use R

- 134a refrigerant. Minimum and maximum EERs represent the efficiencies at the minimum and maximum capacities, respectively. Linear Compressors Linear compressors employ a different design than either reciprocating or rotary compressors and are reportedly more efficient than either. These compressors use a linear rather than rotary motor, thus eliminating the crankshaft and linkage which converts the rotary motion to the linear motion of the piston of a reciprocating compressor. Elimination of the mechanical linkage reduces friction and side

- forces. The linear motor requires power electronics and a controller to assure proper piston throw. Most lin ear compressor designs use a free piston arrangement and can be controlled for a range of capacities through adjustment of piston displacement. Early work on the concept suggested that the compressors can operate without requiring oil, which could provide additional energy benefit by improving heat transfer in the evaporator. Noise levels can also be reduced by utilizing linear compressors in the same way that can be done with variable

- speed compressors, by operating most of the time at low capacity. 19

An ea rly version of the linear compressor design was developed by Sunpower for integration into refrigerators for the European market using isobut a ne (R

- 600a) as a refrigerant. 20 LG has developed a linear compressor for household refrigerators which does require use of oil. LG claims that its line of linear compressors is up to 20 percent more efficient than reciprocating designs. 21 Table 3.3

. 6 presents the rated efficiencies of LG’s linear compressors that would be appropriate for miscellaneous refrigeration applications ( i.e. , voltage of 115 V, R

- 134a refrigerant, and capacities w ithin the range described above)

. 22 LG reports the efficiency of its linear compressors only at “LG Reference Conditions,” which are significantly different than the ASHRAE rating conditions. Under ASHRAE conditions, compressors are rated with evaporating
a nd condensing temperatures of

- 10oF (

- 23.3oC) and 130oF (54.4oC), respectively, while the “LG Reference Conditions” are based on evaporating and condensing temperatures of

- 14.8oF (

- 26oC) and 100.4oF (38oC), respectively. It is not clear what the liquid and suction vapor temperatures for the LG conditions are

— these temperatures also impact capacity and power input. At the3

- 56 same evaporating and condensing temperatures and with liquid and suction vapor conditions consistent with the ASHRAE test conditions, a hi gh efficiency rotating

- shaft reciprocating compressor such as the Embraco EGX70HLC would have an operating EER of about 6.9 Btu/hr

W. Hence, the LG linear compressor may be about 9 percent more efficient than the best current

technology rotating

- shaft reci procating compressors.
Table 3.3
. 6 Efficiencies of LG’s Current Linear Compressor Models Model Capacity (Btu/hr) * Efficiency (Btu/hr

- W) * DLF81LACT 267 7.2 FB72LACT 237 7.4 * Performance based on LG reference conditions. Models use R

- 134a refrigerant. In the trade press, LG has expressed willingness to license the linear compressor technology to competitors. Additionally, in 2010, Embraco announced that it had developed a
new oil

- less linear compressor design. 23 However, because the LG and Embraco design s are proprietary, the widespread use of linear compressors is uncertain.
Evaporator 3.3.3.2 The evaporator is a key component of the refrigeration system and is located within the cabi net or just on the other side of the cabinet’s inner lining. There are three basic evaporator designs in cooled cabinets: a forced

- convec tion finned

- tube design; a roll

- bond design; and a “coldwall” evaporator that is integrated within the shell of the uni t. In the case of the finned

- tube designs used in larger cooled cabinets , design, modeling, and experimental studies have been conducted to evaluate their heat transfer performance. 24 , 25 Evaporator performance can be enhanced by increasing the heat exchanger surface area or improving the heat exchange performance. As explained further in chapter 5, DOE did not conduct a design option analysis for ice makers; instead, it took an efficiency

- level approach, which calculates the relative costs of achieving increases in efficiency levels without regard to the particular design options used to achieve such increases. However, in order to calculate the costs associated with these efficiency increases, DOE did have to consider whether the ice makers that it directly analyzed and reverse

engineered utilized different evaporator technologies and whether those technologies would be associated with evaporator effi ciency. In portable ice makers, the evaporator consists of downward

- facing prongs around which ice forms. DOE did not observe any design differences between the two portable units that it
reverse
- engineered and is unaware of any design options that would i mprove the efficiency of such an evaporator.
In cooled

- storage ice makers, the evaporator consists of a roll

- bond design that is directly exposed to the cabinet air on four of the inner surfaces of the cabinet. The efficiency of such an evaporator could be improved by increasing its surface area.3

- 57 In uncooled

- storage, non

- portable ice makers, DOE observed two different evaporator designs in the two units that it reverse

- engineered. The less

- efficient unit featured an evaporator similar to those found in auto matic commercial ice makers. Such an evaporator consists of a vertically

- mounted ice cube mold with stainless steel surfaces and harvests ice using hot

- gas bypass, which causes the ice to melt out of the mold and fall to the bin below. The more

- efficient
u nit featured a horizontal evaporator onto which ice was frozen in a single large slab. Such an evaporator harvests ice using hot

- gas bypass to cause the ice slab to slide off the icemaking surface onto electric heater wires arranged in a grid pattern that separates the slab into cubes. Increased Surface Area Increasing the heat exchanger surface area can be achieved by increasing the face area of the evaporator or adding more tube rows. These measures are limited by the geometry of the cooled cabinet . There is a tradeoff between increasing the volume occupied by the heat exchanger and reducing the interior volume of the cooled cabinet

. As discussed in the 2011 residential refrigeration products TSD (hereafter referred to as the 2011 TSD), 26 i n its 1995 Reside ntial Refrigerator TSD, DOE considered increasing the evaporator surface area for most of the product classes analyzed; this resulted in an estimated 1 to 2

- percent reduction in annual energy consumption. In the 1995 TSD, DOE based cost and efficiency impr ovements for this technology on estimates by manufacturers. No details were provided on how exactly the evaporator surface area was increased , and no additional investigation was conducted during the 2011 rulemaking . Therefore, it is uncertain to what exte nt design efforts to increase the evaporator surface area have been employed in current U.S. refrigerator

- freezer , or cooled cabinet, designs. Improved Heat Exchange Improving heat exchanger performance can be achieved through the use of enhanced fins and/ or tubes. These types of fin and tube enhancements are common in air

- conditioning applications where slit and louvered designs are used to enhance the fin surface and different types of internally

- grooved surfaces are used to enhance the tubing. As describ ed in the 2011 TSD, i n its 1995 Residential Refrigeration TSD, DOE considered enhancing the evaporator’s heat exchange performance for many of the product classes analyzed; this resulted in an estimated one to two percent reduction in annual energy consump tion. 26 In the 1995 TSD, DOE based cost and efficiency improvements for this technology on estimates by manufacturers. No details were provided on how exactly the evaporator heat exchange performance was enhanced. Therefore, it is uncertain to what extent design efforts to enhance the evaporator heat exchange performance have been employed in current U.S. cooled cabinet designs.
Ano ther h eat exchanger technolog y that could potentially improve evaporator performance is microchannel heat exchangers. Past research has demonstrated that the use of such heat exchangers in domestic refrigerators can provide system efficiencies comparable to current technologies while r educing refrigerant charge. 27

Forced

- Convection Evaporator3

- 58 Most compact

- size cooled cabinets use coldwall or roll

- bond evaporators, whereas most standard

- size cooled cabinets use forced

- convection evaporators. The forced convection evaporator configuration can provide higher heat transfer effectiveness. However, space for housing a forced convection evaporator and its associated fan is not always available. The consideration of conversion to forced

- convection evaporators will depend on whether a particular product is designed in a way that allows housing of the evaporator and fan in a suitable location.

Condenser 3.3.3.3
The condenser is a nother key component of the refrigeration system and is located on the outside of the cabinet . As discussed in section 3.3.2.5 , there ar e three basic condenser designs: a forced

- convection finned

- tube or wire

- and

- tube design; a wire

- and

- tube “static” desig n which uses natural convection cooling; and a hot wall condenser that is integrated within the shell of the unit. In the case of the static condensers used in compact units, modeling studies have been conducted to evaluate their heat transfer performance. 28 Modeling studies have also been performed on hot

- wall condensers. 29 , 30 Condenser performance can be enhanced by increasing the heat exchanger surface area or improving the heat exchange performance. Increased Surface Area Increasing the heat transfer surfa ce area of condensers can be achieved by (a) increasing the width of the rows of tubes, (b) adding more tube rows along the direction of air flow, or (c) adding more tube rows across the direction of air flow. These measures can be limited by the geometry of the cooled cabinet

. Increasing tube width can also result in an increased refrigerant pressure drop across the condenser, so there is a tradeoff between improving heat transfer and increasing compressor work. Similarly, adding tube rows can increase the air pressure drop through the condenser, so there is a tradeoff between improving heat transfer and increasing fan work. As described in the 2011 TSD, DOE previously evaluated this subject i n its 1995 Residential Refrigerator TSD in which it considered in creasing the condenser surface area for many of the product classes analyzed; this resulted in an estimated 1 to 2

- percent reduction in annual energy consumption. 26 In the 1995 TSD, DOE based cost and efficiency improvements for this technology on estimates by manufacturers. No details were provided on how exactly the condenser surface area was increased. Therefore, it is uncertain to what extent design efforts t o increase the condenser surface area have been employed in current U.S. refrigerator

- freezer , or cooled cabinet, designs. Improved Heat Exchange As for evaporators, i mproving heat exchanger performance can be achieved through the use of enhanced fins and/ or tubes. As described in the 2011 TSD, i n its 1995 Residential Refrigerator TSD, DOE considered enhancing the condenser’s heat exchange performance for some freezer and compact refrigerator product classes; this resulted in approximately a two3

- 59 percent est imated reduction in annual energy consumption. 26 In the 1995 TSD, DOE based cost and efficiency improvements for this technology on estimates by manufacturers. No details were provided on how exactly the condenser heat exchange performance was enhanced. Therefore, it is uncertain to what extent design efforts to enhance the condenser heat exchange performance have been employed in current U.S. cooled cabinet designs.
Other heat exchanger technologies could also be employed to improve condens er performance. As with evaporators, m icrochannel heat exchangers are also applicable to condensers

. Forced

- Convection Condenser Most standard

- size cooled cabinets and all ice makers use forced

- convection condensers. However, some smaller, “countertop” coo led cabinets use hotwall condensers. The forced convection condenser configuration can provide higher heat transfer effectiveness. However, space for housing a forced convection condenser and its associated fan is not always available. The consideration of conversion to forced

- convection condensers will depend on whether a particular product is designed in a way that allows housing of the condenser and fan in a suitable location.

Fan and Fan Motor ( Forced

- convection units only) 3.3.3.4
Fans are used to increase con denser and evaporator heat transfer. Because most miscellaneous refrigeration products use forced

- convection condensers which rely on fans for air movement, fan and fan

- motor technology options for the condenser are applicable. However, many cooled cabinets use static and/or natural convection evaporators and, as a result, do not use fans a nd fan motors for their evaporators.
For those miscellaneous refrigeration products that do utilize fans, refrigerator manufacturers often purchase fan blade s and fan motors from outside vendors. Therefore, conversion to more

- efficient fan motors and blad es can be accomplished relatively easily when
more
- efficient fans and fan motors are available. Higher

- Efficiency Fan Motors Fans used in miscellaneous refrigeration products typically have an axial design. Because the evaporator fan and fan motor are loc ated within the refrigerated cabinet and the electric energy input adds to the refrigeration load, more

- efficient evaporator fan or evaporator fan motor designs contribute to efficiency improvements in two ways: (1) reducing the power consumption of the fa n motor and (2) reducing the power consumption of the compressor due to decreased heat losses into the cabinet from the fan motor.
Most evaporator and condenser fan motors used in miscellaneous refrigeration products today have shaded pole induction design s with efficiencies between 10 and 15 percent and power input ranging from 5 to 25 Watts (W)

. Higher

- efficiency motor designs include p ermanent split3

- 60 capacitor (PSC) induction motors, which reach efficiencies of 20 to 30 percent, and brushless DC motors, w hich reach nearly 65

- percent efficiency. Higher

- Efficiency Fan Blades One source of inefficiency for axial fans lies in their tendency to throw air outward. The Pax GroupTM has developed a fan (PAX fan) that employs streamlined blades with patented geometri cal shapes which reportedly provide better airflow direction and improved efficiency. Tests performed with the PAX fan have demonstrated a reduction in fan

- motor power of 23 percent and an overall reduction in refrigerator energy consumption of 3.9 percent relative to a refrigerator with a typical axial fan blade design. 31 However, because the PAX fan is proprietary, the widespread use of the design is highly uncertain.

Insulation 3.3.3.5 Insulation is used around the evaporator compartment to minimize the thermal l oad through the walls of the cabinet

. Increased thickness and improved resistivity are both options to reduce the thermal load on the refrigeration system, resulting in less energy consumed. Miscellaneous refrigeration product manufacturers typically use polyurethane (PU) foam as insulation. Improved Resistivity of Insulation Past research has investigated improving the resistivity of PU foam insulation through the use of additives in the foam. Research conducted in 1996 demonstrated that adding carbon black provides a means of improving the thermal insulation properties of PU foam. The research showed that PU foam systems using carbon black in conjunction with either HCFC

- 141b or cyclopentane wa s able to lower k

- factors by six to nine percent in panels and in cabinets. 32

Increased Insulation Thickness Current miscellaneous refrigeration product designs include 1 to 2 inches of insulation in their walls , although some portable ice makers contain no insulation

. It is possible to increase the insulation thickness to improve the overall energy efficiency of the product. Although the technology to implement increased insulation thickness is readily available, manufacturers have indicated that s ignifica nt investments would be required in foaming systems, tooling, and molding to accommodate thicker insulation. Increased packaging and shipping costs must also be considered. Greater insulation thickness results in either decreased interior volumes, increase d exterior dimensions, or some combination of both. Because kitchen dimensions and designed spaces for cooled cabinets are limited, there are restrictions on increasing the exterior size of the product. Reduced interior volume is considered undesirable bec ause it impacts consumer utility.3

- 61 Vacuum

- Insulated Panels Vacuum

- insulated panel (VIP) technology is based on the reduction in thermal conductivity which occurs in a low vacuum, the same concept which is used to reduce heat leakage in thermos bottles. VIPs used in refrigeration products consist of a sealed package with a fill material which provides support to prevent the panel from collapsing and interferes with molecular mean free path as the intermolecular spacing increases at lower vacuum levels. VIPs
c an be incorporated into the cabinet walls to decrease the heat leakage and energy required to maintain the cabinet at low temperature , typically by foam ing them in place between the cabinet liner and wrapper . Different configurations are commercially avail able through advances in manufacturing technologies. As a result, VIPs are available in a variety of geometries ( e.g. , flat, curved, cylindrical) with added features ( e.g. , holes, cut

- outs). 33 Typical VIPs generally consist of a core material and an airtigh t envelope. Some VIPs also include absorber to absorb gas which leaks through the envelope. Several core materials have been used in the manufacture of VIPs including polystyrene, open
- cell PU, silica powder, and glass fiber. Research sponsored by the Eur opean Commission has evaluated these core materials based on their cost and characteristics, including density and manufacturing time. Table 3.3

. 7 below summarizes the VIP characteristics manufactured with the above core materials. 34 Each of the core materials has associated advantages and disadvantages that dictate their acceptability f or an appliance application.
Table 3.3
. 7 Comparison of Various VIP Core Materials Property Polystyrene Open

- cell PU Silica Powder Glass Fiber Thermal Conductivity at 10 Pascals (Pa) abs. (0.1 millibar (mbar)) ( mW/m

K

) 4.8

– 5.8 9.7 5.8 2.4
( Btu

in/hr

ft2

- oF ) 0.033

– 0.040 0.067 0.040 0.017 Manufacturing Time Fast Medium Medium Long Density ( kg/m 3 ) 80

– 144 64 192 128 Drying Need No Yes Yes No Thermal Stability Low Medium Good Very Good Recyclability Yes Difficult Yes NA Cost Low Medium High Very High Source: European Commission, 2 000. 34
ORNL also has evaluated the performance of three types of VIPs: a silica powder filler encapsulated in a polymer barrier film; a fibrous glass insulation filler encapsulated in a stainless steel barrier; and an undisclosed insulation filler encapsulated in a stainless steel barrier. Table 3.3

. 8 summarizes the center

- of

- panel thermal conductivities of the panels. For the silica powder and glass fiber filled VIPs, the thermal conductivities in Table 3.3

. 8 are comparable to those in Table 3.3

. 7

. 353

- 62 Table 3.3
. 8 Ce nter
- of

- Panel Thermal Conductivity of VIPs Property Silica Powder Glass Fiber Unknown Thermal Conductivity * (mW/m

- K) 5.2

– 5.4 2.0

– 2.6 2.7

– 3.1 (Btu

- in/hr

- ft

2

- °F) 0.034

– 0.038 0.014

– 0.018 0.019

– 0.022 * For each filler, the reported thermal conductivities are a range of values from nine separate VIPs. Source: Vineyard et al. , 1998. 35
ORNL also determined the thermal performance of the VIPs it stud ied as part of a composite panel. The composite panel consisted of a one

- inch VIP surrounded by PU foam insulation to form a two

- inch

- thick panel. The PU foam insulation was blown with a variety of bowing agents, but, due to the age of the study (from the mid

- 1990s), ORNL considered neither HFC

- nor HC

- based blowing agents. For the three VIPs presented in Table 3.3

. 8 , silica power, glass fiber, and unknown, the average composite panel thermal resistances were 21.5, 20.7, and 20.9 hr

- ft2

- oF/Btu, respectively. 35 The lower thermal conductivities reported in Table 3.3

. 8 for the glass fiber and unknown filled VIPs relative to the silica powder VIP were offset by the heat conduction through their stainless steel encapsulation material. Of significant concern in the use of VIPs is their long

- term thermal conductivity integrity. VIP thermal conductivity increases dramatically as the pressure within the VIP exceeds 100 Pa abs. (1 mbar). The pressure increase in the VIP over time is related to several factors, including: residual gases in the VIP after vacuum, degassing from the VIP core material, and gas diffusion through the envelope pores. Improved envelopes and absorbers have been developed to prevent pressure increases from occurring in VIPs. For example, for the three composite VIPs that it analyzed, ORNL measured only a five

- percent reduction in overall thermal resistance over a three

- year period. ORNL demonstrated that this reduction in thermal resistance was less than the correspondin g reduction for a panel without any VIPs, i.e. , panels consisting only of PU foam insulation. 35 Recent announcements regarding VIPs include the following :

• M atsushita’s VIP technology (trade name of “U

- Vacua”) was awarded the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Prize at the 17th Energy Conservation Awards sponsored by the Energy Conservation Center of Japan in January, 2007. 36 Matsushita claims that its VIP technology has achieved the world’s highest level of insulation efficiency with a thermal conductivity of 1.2 mW/m

- K (0.008 Btu

- in/hr

- ft2

- oF) at 24 oC (75.2 oF). 37

• Electrolux announced in 2003 the use of VIP technology in a freezer that they claimed red uced energy use by 35 percent relative to PU foam insulation. 38 Va

- Q

- tek has recently introduced its Va

- Q

- plus VIP technology. 39

Gas

- Filled Panels Gas

- filled panels (GFPs) use thin polymer films and low

- conductivity gas to create a device with excellent ther mal insulation properties. GFPs are essentially hermetic plastic bags3

- 63 that can take on a variety of shapes and sizes. Inside the outer barrier is a cellular structure called a baffle which is filled with the low

- conductivity gas.
Research conducted at LBN L in the mid

- 1990s demonstrated the effectiveness of GFPs based on the use of different gases, including xenon and krypton. Table 3.3

. 9 below summarizes the thermal performance characteristics of different GFPs, based on their center

- of

- panel and whole

- panel performance. 40 LBNL has also conducted research to demonstrate that GFPs, when used in refrigerator

- freezers, can reduce energy consumption by approximately eight percent relative to PU foam insulation. 41

Table 3.3
. 9 Comparison of Various Gas

- Filled Panel Core Materials

Gas Fill Center of Panel Performance Whole Panel Performance Thermal Conductivity Panel Thickness Mean Temp. Thermal Conductivity mW/m

- K Btu

- in/hr

ft2

- oF mm inches oC oF mW/m

- K Btu

- in/hr

ft2

- oF Xenon 7.4 0.051 24.1 0.95 6.8 44.2 7.4 0.051 Krypton 11.6 0.080 25.2 0.99 11.9 53.4 10.77 0.074 49.8 1.96 12.3 54.1 1.17 0.008 Argon 19.9 0.138 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Air 28.1 0.195 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Source: LBNL 40
In addition, ORNL determined the thermal conductivity of an insulation panel containing radiation baffles within a polymer barrier film and filled with krypton gas at atmospheric pressure. The range of thermal conductivities of nine of these GFPs ranged fr om 0.088 to 0.092 Btu

- in/hr

- ft2

- oF (12.6 to 13.2 mW/m

- K). ORNL also analyzed the GFPs as part of a composite assembly consisting of a one

- inch panel surrounded by PU foam insulation to form a two

- inch

thick panel. The average composite panel thermal resist ance was determined to be 18.2 hr

- ft2

- oF/Btu. Finally, ORNL measured only a five

- percent reduction in overall thermal resistance over a three

- year period, which was less than the reduction observed in a panel consisting only of PU foam insulation. 35 Although research has demonstrated that GFPs have better thermal performance than PU foam insulation, no known refrigeration products are using the technology. A sig nificant problem in using GFPs is their lack of structural integrity in the resulting product.

Gasket 3.3.3.6 A significant portion of the heat gain to miscellaneous refrigeration products occurs around the edges of the doors and through the gaskets on the door ed ges. An analysis of thermal loads on an 18.6 ft 3 top

- mount refrigerator

- freezer revealed that over 28 percent of the total heat load into the cabinet came from ‘edge’ loads, i.e. , loads due to heat transfer into the food3

- 64 compartments via paths around the p erimeter of the cabinet aperture. 42 If the ‘edge’ effect losses can be reduced, the efficiency of the refrigerator can be increased. Improved Gaskets Design of door gaskets is a balance between improving the thermal

- efficiency performance of the gasket and ensuring that the door is not difficult to open. If the gasket magnet force is too strong, it becomes difficult to open the door. Based on a European Commission study, door handles have been designed specifically to facilitate door openings by providing leverage and by freeing a small section of the gasket before the door is opened to reliev e the pressure differential that can build up when the door is closed . Although materials and designs for improving the air tightness of door gaskets exist, apparently no general criteria have been established to enable different designs to be classified. An EPA report from 1992 describes theoretical modeling and ex perimental research on gasket heat loads and concludes that replacing about half of either the metal door flange or cabinet flange with plastic can reduce the heat flow through the gasket region by 25 percent. 43 However, this study did not address the impac ts on the convection on the cabinet side of the gasket associated with different geometries of the “throat” region between the door dikes and the cabinet wedge or with different evaporator air flow rates. As described in the 2011 TSD, b ased on DOE’s 1995 T SD, improvements in gasket design can reduce refrigerator

- freezer annual energy consumption by one to three percent. 26 Due to the age of both the EPA and DOE
re search, the extent to which gaskets can be further improved is uncertain

. Double Door Gaskets A double door gasket is an additional inner door seal gasket that is added to the gasket design. This further reduces heat leakage and infiltration into the refri gerator and freezer. Based on information drawn from DOE’s 1995 TSD, residential refrigeration manufacturers did not introduce double door gaskets in the mid

- 1990s because of performance problems and cost. Ice can form between the gaskets, greatly reducin g their effectiveness. In addition, the gaskets are visually unattractive and they increase the difficulty of meeting safety regulations for minimum door

- opening force. Improved Door Face Frame As discussed above, cabinet heat loads stem not only from cond uction though the cooled cabinet walls but also from conduction along the external metal casing. The metal shell provides the structural integrity; however, its presence means that heat loads are transferred along the metal shell into the cabinet. This hea t transfer into the cabinet is also re ferred to as the ‘edge effect.’ Using a plastic cover on the internal flange can reduce the ‘edge effect’ heat losses by approximately 50 percent. 42 The use of low

- conductivity plastics to reduce conduction losses in this area are already being employed in some current U.S. cooled cabinet designs.3

- 65 Doors 3.3.3.7 Unlike refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, freezers, and ice makers, which enclose their refrigerated compartments with solid insulated doors, cooled cabinets typically utilize double

paned glass doors , which enable the cooled cabinet to act as both a refrigerated compartment and a display case. However, the thermal resista nce of glass doors can be up to three times lower than the thermal resistance of traditional solid, insulated refrigerator doors ; therefore, door losses can account for a substantial portion of the thermal load in a cooled cabinet

. Improved Resistivity of Glass Door The thermal resistance of glass doors can be improved by making improvements to the glass pack such as adding a low

- e missivity coating, a n inert g as ( e.g. , argon, krypton, or xenon) filling, or a third pane of glass. Such design changes could s ignificantly increase the door’s U

value, thus reduc ing conductive and radiative heat transfer through the door. Table 3.3

. 10 presents the U

- values and thermal resisti vities of the three glass door designs that DOE considered in its engineering analysis, a s described further in chapter 5 of this TSD.
Table 3.3
. 10 Glass Door Resistivity Options Door Design U

- Value (W/m 2

- K)* Resistivity (m

- K/W) Baseline (Dual

- pane, no coating, air filling) 3.044 0.016 Medium

- Tech (Dual

- pane, low

- e coating, argon filling) 1.709 0.029 Max

- Tech (Triple

- pane, low

- e coating, krypton filling) 1.143 0.043 * Calculated using the WINDOW 6 software, as described further in chapter 5 of this TSD
Solid Door Alternatively, the glass door can be replaced by a solid, insulated door , identical to the style of door used in refrigerators, refrigerator

- freezers, and freezers. Although this would dra matically reduce heat loss through the door, as the resistivity of PU foam is 50 m

- K/W and thus significantly higher than the resistivity of glass doors , it would also eliminate the cooled cabinet’s function as a display case

. Expansion Valve 3.3.3.8 The metering device in most miscellaneous refrigeration products is a capillary tube. As discussed above in section 3.3.2.5 , there are two common types of capillary tubes

— adiabatic and
non
- adiabatic. In the non

- adiabatic configuration, the capillary tube is soldered to the suction line to evaporate the residual li quid in the suction line and to warm the vapor to near

- ambient temperature. The suction line heat exchanger (or the non

- adiabatic capillary) improves efficiency because it increases the refrigeration capacity of the system by the amount of heat being trans ferred from the capillary to the suction side. Non

- adiabatic capillary tubes are the most3

- 66 common type of metering device in miscellaneous refrigeration products . The other type of metering device, an adiabatic capillary tube, is used in some miscellaneous refrigeration products . In this configuration, the capillary tube does not exchange heat with the suction line and the refrigerant expands from the high pressure to the low pressure adiabatically. Research has been conducted to develop models to study the performance of both types of capillary tubes. 44 , 45 Improved Expansion Valve Automatic, adjustable thermostatic or electronic expansion valves may provide improved performance. The technology for this design option is available; however, a modification in sys tem design is required. In past rulemakings, DOE has not identif ied any data demonstrating that improved expansion valv es will save energy in refrigeration products

. Cycling Losses 3.3.3.9
Off

- cycle refrigerant migration reduces a refrigeration product’s efficienc y by transferring heat from outside the cabinet into the evaporator. Changes in miscellaneous refrigeration product design that reduce this aspect of cycling losses can increase the unit’s efficiency.
Fluid Control or Solenoid Valve A fluid control or solenoid valve installed after the condenser can be used to effectively isolate the evaporator from the condenser during the off

- cycle and prevent any refrigerant migration. Research has demonstrated that solenoid valves can yield substa ntial energy savings. 46 However, there are drawbacks to using solenoid valves. First, refrigeration migration allows the system pressure to equalize, reducing the required starting torque of the compressor motor. A solenoid valve would increase the required starting torque of the compressor motor. Second, adding such a valve could negatively affect system reliability.
Defrost System 3.3.3.10
Section 3.3.2.1 provides a descript ion of typical automatic defrost systems for refrigeration products . Most ice makers are manually defrosted, and most cooled cabinets simply defrost during their off

- cycles; however, there are a few cooled cabinets that use electric heaters to defrost the evaporator. Energy use associated with defrost includes the energy input for the heater and also the refrigeration system energy used to remove the defrost heat from the cabinet. Off

- Cycle Defrost Because cooled cabinets maintain warmer storage temperature s than refrigerators and freezers, they have less need for active defrost, particularly when they are exposed to the warm 90 °F ambient temperature required during an energy test. Therefore, energy savings can be achieved by using off

- cycle (passive) defro st rather than active heater defrost when compartment temperatures are sufficiently warm.3

- 67 Reduced Energy for Automatic Defrost In some cases, the defrost heat supplied is more than required. Thus, energy savings can be achieved by reducing the defrost heat by either using a smaller heater, reducing the heater on

time, reducing the frequency of defrost, or a combination of these.
As described in the 2011 TSD , DOE found in the 1995 TSD that most manufacturers had already significantly reduced the electric he at for auto defrost in order to comply with the energy efficiency standards that became effective in 1993. 26 There may be limited additional energy savings poss ible through optimization of automatic defrost. Adaptive Defrost To reduce the energy used for defrost, adaptive defrost can be used. An adaptive defrost system can control both the defrost time and the amount of defrost heat. Adaptive defrost systems make use of controls to adjust the time between defrost cycles to the appropriate amount for the door opening frequency, ambient conditions, and other consumer usage patterns which affect the introduction of moisture into the cabinet. In a typical automatic de frost system, a mechanical timer initiates defrost after a specified time period, usually 10 to 12 hours of compressor on
- time. By allowing adjustment of the time between defrosts, energy use can be reduced. The DOE energy test procedure includes modified test procedures for evaluating the energy use of products with adaptive defrost. As described in the 2011 TSD, i n its 1995 TSD, DOE estimated that energy consumption can be reduced by three to four percent with adaptive defrost. 26 It is unclear what percentage of the cooled cabinet market currently uses adaptive defrost.
Hot

- Gas Bypass Another method of reducing the energy required for defrost is to eliminate the need for electric heaters by substituting condenser hot gas in their place. In a condenser hot gas defrost system, the compressor continues to run and a valve opens allowing hot compressed refrigerant to flow to the evaporator. Many frost

- free refrigerato r
- freezers in the 1960s and 1970s used such a defrost system.

Controls 3.3.3.11 The control systems discussed here pertain to those controlling the temperature and air

distribution within the miscellaneous refrigeration product

. Electronic Temperature Control Conve ntional thermostats are thermomechanical devices that are not very accurate. The inaccuracy of these devices may produce large temperature fluctuations within the cabinet and, in turn, thermodynamic inefficiencies. Electronic thermostats are available that can provide more precise and repeatable temperature control than conventional thermostats. This can result in improved efficiency. Electronic thermostat systems can also account for more parameters than3

- 68 just the cabinet temperature, such as the room tempe rature, to better regulate product operation and reduce compressor run times.

Conversion to Alternative Refrigeration Systems 3.3.3.12 As discussed earlier in this chapter, three different refrigeration technologies are used in miscellaneous refrigeration products: vapor compression, thermoelectric, and absorption. Vapor compression has been the dominant refrigeration technology for more than 50 years and is found in all standard

- sized refrigeration products, all hybrid refriger ation products, all ice makers, many compact refrigerators, and many cooled cabinets. As discussed in section 3.3.1 , the efficiencies of compressors suitable for m iscellaneous refrigeration products typically range from approximately 3.0 to 4.9 Btu/hr

- W, corresponding to coefficients of performance ( COPs ) of 0.9 to 1.4.

T hermoelectric cooling devices are used in many cooled cabinets and several compact refrigerator s . H owever, the y have comparatively low efficiency. One thermoelectric module manufacturer cites typical module COPs as ranging from 0.3 to 0.7. 47 DOE testing suggests that module COPs are even lower for typical cooled cabinet operating conditions. This tes ting suggests that COPs rang e from 0.1 to 0.2. Like thermoelectric systems, absorption refrigeration systems are also and less efficient than vapor

- compression systems , with typical COPs ranging from 0.5 to 0.8

. 48 The higher efficiency levels associated with vapor compression refrigeration technology suggest that it can be considered as a design option for existing products that use thermoelectric or absorption technology.

Alternative Heat Transfer 3.3.3.13 Heat Pipes One of the thermoelectric refrigerators tested and reverse

- engineered by DOE featured a heat pipe in direct contact with the hot side of the unit’s thermoelectric module. A heat pipe is a heat transfer device containing a working fluid that evaporates at t he heated end of the pipe (the end in contact with the thermoelectric module), travels to the top of the pipe, condenses upon rejecting heat to the ambient air, and trickles back down to the heated end of the pipe via gravity. Integrating a heat pipe with a thermoelectric module can reduce the hot

- side temperature of the module, enabling lower cool

- side temperatures and thus improving cooling performance. It may also reduce the fan power necessary to cool the hot side of the thermoelectric module, thus redu cing energy consumption

. Component Location 3.3.3.14 In its 1995 TSD, DOE saw energy savings potential in more optimal placement of certain components. For example, if the compressor and condenser are located on the top of the cabinet , DOE determined that they can operate more efficiently because heat is more readily convected3

- 69 away from the system and, in addition, the condenser fan can be eliminated. As described previously, traditionally, the compressor and condenser are located at the bottom rather than the top o f the cabinet so the user can have easy access to the food compartments, to key center of gravity low, and to provide air flow and a heat source near the tray which collects defrost water to assure quick re

- evaporation of water. Locating the condenser and compressor at the top of the unit would require modification of product design that may conflict with traditional practice and consumer preference , and that could potentially increase manufacturing costs. Another option is to locate the evaporator fan mot or outside the cabinet to reduce internal loads from the heat loss of the motor. However, it is difficult to prevent air leakage where the motor shaft penetrates the cabinet wall. As described in the 2011 TSD, t he 1995 TSD concluded that the lack of experi mental data prevented the evaluation of component relocation. 26

3.3.4 Energy Efficiency Of the four product types addressed in this rulemaking, only cooled cabinets have energy use information widely available , although at least one ice maker manufacturer report s energy performance based on the DOE test procedure for automatic commercial ice makers

. DOE gathered data on the energy use of cooled cabinets currently available in the marketplace by surveying the CEC and NRCan databases as well as manufacturers’ websites

. Figure 3.3

. 5 show s energy consumption (measured using the test procedure required by the CEC) as a function of interior volume

. As mentioned in Chapter 2 of this TSD, neither of these databases contains energy consumption information on non

- com pressor cooled cabinets; hence, Figure 3.3

. 5 only includes vapor

- compression products.3

- 70 Figure 3.3
. 5 Cooled Cabinet Energy Consumption as a Function of Interior Volume3

- 71 REFERENCES

1 U.S. Department of Energy

– Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office. Rulemaking Framework Document for Wine Chillers and Miscell aneous Refrigeration Products. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_sta ndards/pdfs/wc_misc_refr_framework_02_06_12.pdf

2 California Energy Commission, 2010 Appliance Efficiency Regulations, December 2010. CEC

- 400

- 2010

- 012. http:// www.energy.ca.gov/2010publications/CEC

- 400

- 2010

- 012/CEC

- 400

- 2010

- 012.PDF

.

3 “Fisher & Paykel in Expansion Mode,” Appl iance Magazine .com , March 14, 2013.

4 “ALI Group to Acquire Scotsman Industries from Warburg Pincus,” PR Newsire, November 6, 2012.

5 Cana dian Standards Association. Energy Performance and Capacity of Household Refrigerators, Refrigerator

Freezers, Freezers, and Wine Chillers. CAN/CSA

- C300

- 08.

6 Greenblatt, J

. B., S

. J. Young, H

. - C

. Yang, T

. Long, B

. Beraki, S

. Price, S

. Pratt, H

. Willem, L

. - B

. Desroches , and S. M. Donovan (2013). “U.S. Residential Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products: Results from Amazon Mechanical Turk Surveys,” Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory , LBNL

- 6537E, November.

7 NPD (2011). The NPD Group/NPD Houseworld

– POS . Th e NPD Group, Inc., Port Washington, NY. https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/industry

- expertise/home/

.

8 Parekh, A., P. Wang and T. Strack (2012), “Survey Results of User

- Dependent Electricity Loads in Canadian Homes,” ACEEE Summer Study 2012 , Paper 482, August 12

- 17, Pacific Grove, CA. http://www.aceee.o rg/files/proceedings/2012/data/papers/0193

- 000283.pdf , accessed 23 August 2012; Strack and Associates (2012). Residential Electricity Usage: Electricity Study for the EnerGuide Rating System, Housing Division, Office of Energy Efficiency, Natural Resources Canada, March.

9 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau Economic Analysis. Gross Domestic Product Implicit Price Deflator

. (Last accessed in 2011.) https://bea.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb/TableView.as p#Mid

10 U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Plant Capacity , 2004 to 2006.

11 U.S. Census Bureau, Quarterly Survey of Plant Capacity Utilization , 2007 to 2012.

12 American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air

- Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 2006 ASHRAE Handbook, Refrigeration . Atlanta, GA. Chapter 48, Household Refrigerators and Freezers.

13 U.S. Department of Energy

- Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Building Technologies Program. Energy Savings Potential and R&D Opportunities for Commercial Refrige ration, Final Report , September 23, 2009. Prepared by Navigant Consulting, Inc. Washington, DC. http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/pub lications/pdfs/corporate/commercial_refrig_report_10

- 09.pdf

14 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. State of the art survey of hermetic compressor technology applicable to domestic refrigerator/freezers , 1993. EPA

- 430

- R

- 93

- 010.3

- 72 15 U.S. Department of Energ y, Opportunities for Energy Savings in the Residential and Commercial Sectors with High

- Efficiency Electric Motors, Final Report, December 1, 1999. Prepared by Arthur D. Little, Inc., Washington, DC. No. DE

- AC01

- 90CE23821.

16 DuMoulin, T.R. and Colling, D.A . “Higher Efficiencies by Means of Variable

- Speed Technology in a Domestic Refrigeration Application,” ASHRAE Transactions , 1998, Vol. 104, Pt. 2.

17 Woodall, R.J. and Bullard, C.W. “Simulating Effects of Multispeed Compressors on Refrigerator/Freezer Perfo rmance,” ASHRAE Transactions , 1997, Vol. 103, Pt. 2.

18 Embraco. Embraco VCC® 3rd Generation, The Intelligent Compressor, Version 00 , September 2006. <http://www.embraco.com.br/portugue/produtos/03010.pdf> (Accessed September 26, 2007.)

19 James, Stephen J . "Developments in domestic refrigeration and consumer attitudes," Food Refrigeration and Process Engineering Research Centre (FRPERC) , 2003. University of Bristol, UK. Bulletin of the IIR

- No 2003

- 5. http://www.iifiir.org/en/doc/1051.pdf

20 Unger, R. “Development and Testing of a Linear Compressor Sized for the European Market,” Proceedings of the International Appliance Technology Conference , May, 1999. Sunpower, Inc., Athens, OH. http://www.sunpower.com/lib/sitefil es/pdf/publications/Doc0074.pdf

21 LG Electronics. "Green Technology Linear DIOS," 2004. www.aceee.org_conf_mt04_wbprsnt_Lee

- R3.pdf (Accessed July 25, 2007.)

22 LG Electronics. LG Linear Compressor Models

. http://www.lg.com/gl obal/products/components/compressor/ref

compressor/linear

- identification.jsp (Accessed July 12, 2013 .)

23 ACR News. “Embraco claims oil

- less compressor breakthrough.” ACR News , September 21, 2010. http://www.acr

- news.com/news/news.asp?id=2231

.

24 Bansal, P.K., Wich, T., Browne, M.W., and Chen, J. “Design and Modeling of New Egg

- Crate

- Type Forced Flow Evaporators in Domestic Refrigerators,” ASHRAE Transactions , 2001, Vol. 107, Pt. 2.

25 Bansal, P.K. and van Neuren, O.S. “An Experimental Study on New Egg

- Crate Type Evaporators in Domestic Refrigerators,” ASHRAE Transactions , 1998, Vol. 104, Pt. 2.

26 U.S. Department of Energy

- Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Techno logies Office. Technical Support Document: Energy Conservation Standards for Refrigerators, Refrigerator

- Freezers, and Freezers, September 15, 2011.

27 Goslovich, K.S. and Bullard, C.W. “Potential for Using Enhanced Aluminum Extrusions for Refrigerator Heat Exchangers,” ASHRAE Transactions , 1997, Vol. 103, Pt. 1.

28 Bansal, P.K. and Chin, T.C. “Modeling and optimisation of wire

- and

- tube condenser,” International Journal of Refrigeration , 2003, 26 (2003), 601

- 613.

29 Bansal, P.K. and Chin, T.C. “Design and mode ling of hot

- wall condensers in domestic refrigerators,” Applied Thermal Engineering , 2002, 22 (2002), 1601

- 1617.3

- 73 30 Rebora, A. and Tagliafico , L.A. “Thermal performance analysis for hot

- wall condenser and evaporator configurations in refrigeration appliances,” International Journal of Refrigeration , 1997, Vol. 21, No. 6, 490

- 502.

31 U.S. Department of Energy. Final ENERGY STAR Program Requiremen ts and Criteria for Residential Refrigerators and Freezers , August 3, 2007. Washington, DC. http://www.energystar.gov/ia/part ners/prod_development/revisions/downloads/refrig/REF_ProgramRequirements_2 008.pdf

32 Pisipati, J.S. and Godbey, J.A. “Performance of Carbon Black

- Containing Polyurethane Foam in Domestic Refrigerators,” Journal of Cellular Plastics , 1996. Vol. 32, No. 2, 10 8

- 138. http://cel.sagepub.co m/cgi/content/abstract/32/2/108

33 Manini, P., Rizzi, E., Pastore, G., Gregorio, P. “Advances in VIP Design for Super Insulation of Domestic Appliances,” Applia nce Magazine , June 2003. Presented at the 54th International Appliance Technical Conference, March 10

- 12, 2003, West Lafayette, IN. http://www.appliancemagazine .com/latin/editorial.php?article=45&zone=32&first=1

34 European Commission. Cold II, The revision of energy labeling and minimum energy efficiency standards for domestic refrigeration appliances, Final Report , December 2000. Prepared by ADEME, France and PW Consulting, United Kingdom. http://www.ceecap.org/img_assets/File/Cold%20II.pdf

35 Vineyard, E.A., Stovall, T.K., Wilkes, K.E., and Childs, K.W. “Superinsulation in Refrigerators and Fr eezers,” ASHRAE Transactions , 1998, Vol. 104, Pt.2.

36 Japan for Sustainability. “Matsushita’s Vacuum Insulation Wins 2006 Energy Conservation Award,” Information Center , July 15, 2007. http://www.japanfs.org/db/17 73

- e

37 Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.. U

- Vacua Technical Information , 2007. http://panasonic.co.jp/appliance/environment/eco_h1804.html (Acces sed September 26, 2007.)

38 “Electrolux's New Vacuum Insulated Freezer Technology,” Appliance Magazine , August 2003. http://www.appliancemagazine.com/new_product s.ph p?article=4971&zone=204&first=1

39 Va

- Q

- plus Product Data Sheet. http://www.va

- q
- tec.com/produkte/en/pplus/prod/va

- q
- plus_pdb_en.pdf

40 Lawrence Berkeley National Laborat ory. Gas

- Filled Panels

– How effectively do GFPs insulate? Berkeley, CA. http://gfp.lbl.gov/performance/default.htm (Accessed September 26, 2007.)

41 Griffith, B.T., Arasteh, D., and Turler, D. “Ene rgy Efficiency Improvements for Refrigerator/Freezers Using Prototype Doors Containing Gas

- Filled Panel Insulating Systems,” Proceedings of the 46th International Appliance Technical Conference, May 1995. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA

. http://g fp.lbl.gov/papers/lbl

- 36658.pdf

42 Boughton, B.E., Clausing, A.M., and Newell, T.A. “An Investigation of Household Refrigerator Cabinet Thermal Loads,” HVAC&R Research , 1996, Vol. 2, No. 2. A pril.

43 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Finite Element Analysis of Heat Transfer Through the Gasket Region of Refrigerators/Freezers , October, 1992. Washington, DC. EPA/430/R

- 92/009.3

- 74 44 Bansal, P.K. and Rupasinghe, A.S. “An Homogenous Model for Adiabatic Capillary Tubes,” Applied Thermal Engineering , 1998, Vol. 18, Nos. 3

- 4, 207

- 219.

45 Bansal, P.K. and Rupasinghe, A.S. “An empirical model for sizing capillary tubes,” International Journal of Refrigeration , 1996, Vol. 19, N o. 8, 497

- 505.

46 Coulter, W.H. and Bullard, C.W. “An Experimental Analysis of Cycling Losses in Domestic Refrigerator

Freezers,” ASHRAE Transactions , 1997. Vol. 103, Pt. 1.

47 TE Technology, Inc. “FAQ & Technical Information.” http://www.tetech.com/FAQ

- Technical

Information.html#5

.

48 Erickson, Donald. “Extending the Boundaries of Ammonia Absorption Chillers.” ASHRAE Journal, Volume 49, April 2007.