CHAPTER 7. ENERGY USE CHARACTERIZATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

7.1	 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 7­1
 

7.2	 ENERGY USE ANALYSIS FOR REFRIGERATED BEVERAGE VENDING

MACHINES........................................................................................................................ 7­1

7.3	 SELECTION OF EFFICIENCY LEVELS FOR FURTHER ANALYSES....................... 7­4
 

7.4 ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION RESULTS .......................................................... 7­5
 

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 7­10
 

LIST OF TABLES

Table 7.2.1 Configurations of the Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines Analyzed .......... 7­2

Table 7.4.1 Mapping of the Efficiency Levels for Subsequent Economic Analyses to

the Engineering Efficiency Levels....................................................................... 7­5

Table 7.3.1 State­by­State Annual Energy Consumption for B­L­IO, by Efficiency

Levels, kWh ......................................................................................................... 7­6

Table 7.3.2 State­by­State Annual Energy Consumption for B­M­IO, by Efficiency

Levels, kWh ......................................................................................................... 7­7

Table 7.3.3 State­by­State Annual Energy Consumption for B­S­IO, by Efficiency

Levels, kWh ......................................................................................................... 7­8

Table 7.3.4 Annual Energy Consumption for Class A Machine, All Sizes and All

Locations, by Efficiency Levels, kWh................................................................. 7­9
 

7­i

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22
        

                       

                       

                             

                              

                         

               

           

               

                 

                     

                        

                            

                      

                               

                           

                                 

                      

                         

                              

                       

                     

                                 

                           

                            

       

          

          

       

          

       

         

                           

                              

                                    

                             

                           

                                  

CHAPTER 7. ENERGY USE CHARACTERIZATION
 

7.1 INTRODUCTION
 

The energy use characterization provides estimates of daily energy consumption and the

annual energy consumption for refrigerated beverage vending machines (BVM), which are used

in the subsequent life­cycle cost (LCC) and payback period (PBP) analyses (chapter 8 of the

TSD) and national impacts analyses (chapter 10 of the TSD). The U.S. Department of Energy

(DOE) estimated the energy consumption for the two equipment classes analyzed in the

engineering analysis (chapter 5 of the TSD).

7.2 ENERGY USE ANALYSIS FOR REFRIGERATED BEVERAGE VENDING

MACHINES

American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American Society of Heating,

Refrigerating, and Air­Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 32.1­2004,1 is an industrydeveloped test procedure for determining the energy consumption of beverage vending

machines. ASHRAE 32.1­2004 measures the daily energy consumption for a vending machine

under steady­state conditions. The use of daily energy consumption as a performance metric is

an appropriate approach for refrigerated beverage vending machines for several reasons.

First, because the useful output of beverage vending machines is the ability to display a product

while maintaining that product at an adequate temperature, there is no easily quantifiable output

metric (such as British thermal units (Btu) of cooling provided) that can be used to establish a

classical “efficiency” measure (useful output divided by energy input). Second, refrigerated

beverage vending machines typically provide both cold storage and lighting of product with,

varying, but often on the same order of magnitude, energy consumption. DOE’s need for a

single metric to describe both makes defining a useful output metric difficult.

DOE developed the engineering analysis spreadsheet based on the engineering analysis

(see chapter 5 of the TSD for more details) listing up to 13 different engineering efficiency levels

using individual design options that were considered for arriving at the baseline configuration as

well as the higher efficiency models of the beverage vending machines. Two equipment classes

were considered for analysis:

• Class A machine (fully­cooled machine)

o certified for indoor use only

o certified for indoor/outdoor use

• Class B machine (zone­cooled machine)

o certified for indoor/outdoor use

o certified for indoor use only

Even though Class A machines may be certified for indoor/outdoor use, there are not

very many of these machines installed outdoors because of safety and vandalism reasons. At the

same time, there are hardly any Class B machines that are certified for indoor use only. So, DOE

decided to focus its ANOPR analyses on the two predominant applications of the two equipment

classes of beverage vending machines, namely, Class A machines certified for indoor use only

and Class B machines certified for indoor/outdoor use. For each of those two Class A and Class

7­1

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22
                       

                          

                

                    

           

                 

   

     

   

                         

                             

                        

                               

                               

                       

                            

                          

                       

                           

                                  

                             

                           

                           

               

                     

                             

                                 

                         

                            

                              

                       

                             

           

                     

                             

                         

                             

         

                                                

                         

B machines, DOE analyzed refrigerated beverage vending machines with three different typical

sizes (vendible capacities) each. Each of these machines had different refrigerated volumes as

measured by ANSI/HRF­1­2004 and shown in Table 7.2.1.

Table 7.2.1 Configurations of the Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines Analyzed

Class A machine Class B machine

Small Medium Large Small Medium Large

Configuration (A­S­IN) (A­M­IN) (A­L­IN) (B­S­IO) (B­M­IO) (B­L­IO)

Vendible Capacity

(number of cans)

270 350 410 450 650 800

Refrigerated Volume

(ft3

)

19 31 35 19 24 31

DOE assumed that all Class A machines (or glass­front machines) were installed indoors

and subject to the constant indoor ambient conditions of 75°F and 45 percent relative humidity

(RH) condition matching one of the test conditions in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1­2004.

However, of all the Class B machines (or solid­front machines), DOE assumed that 25 percent of

them were actually placed outdoors and were subject to the local weather conditions in terms of

the temperatures and relative humidity conditions during the year depending on the various

locations across the United States2. The remaining 75 percent of these machines are installed

indoors and subject to typical indoor 75°F and 45 percent RH ambient conditions.a

The engineering analysis spreadsheet was originally designed to estimate the impact of

design options on the daily energy consumption according to the test procedure, which only

provides results under two rating conditions: 75°F and 45% RH, and 90°F and 65% RH. Prior to

being able to use the engineering analysis spreadsheet for the energy use analysis, certain other

spreadsheet design modifications were made to account for proper operation of the BVM placed

in outdoor locations where the air temperatures and relative humidity conditions will differ from

the rating conditions. These modifications are listed below:

•	 The nominal saturated evaporator temperature (SET) calculation has been modified such

that it is scaled upwards (or downwards) with total case refrigeration load based on a

linear regression of the change in SET as a function of the relative change in total case

refrigeration load (in percent) between that established for the 75°F and 90°F rating

conditions for efficiency level 1. As cooling load changes as a function of ambient

conditions, the SET for level 1 then varies. The SET for higher efficiency levels is

calculated as in the original engineering spreadsheet where individual design options can

modify the SET from that calculated for level 1.

•	 The nominal saturated condenser temperature (SCT) calculation has been modified such

that it is scaled upwards or downwards with the outdoor air temperature based on the

results at test conditions to maintain a SCT to ambient temperature differential equivalent

to that under the defined 75°F or 90°F rating conditions.

a Based on personal conversation with Bob McGarrah of USA Technologies, May 2007.

7­2

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22
                         

                           

                               

                         

                              

                     

                             

                 

                         

                               

                        

                         

                         

                         

       

                                 

               

                         

         

                           

                         

                       

                              

                           

                                  

                           

                         

                            

                                  

                                    

                           

                           

                              

         

                           

                         

                                  

                     

                        

         

•	 The nominal discharge air temperature (DAT) calculation has been modified such that it

is scaled upward or downwards with total case refrigeration load based on a linear

regression of the change in DAT as a function of the relative change in total case

refrigeration load (in percent) between that established for the 75°F and 90°F rating

conditions for efficiency level 1. The DAT for higher efficiency levels is calculated as in

the original engineering analysis spreadsheet where individual design options can modify

the DAT from that calculated for level 1.

•	 The total case refrigeration load used in the compressor calculations was modified such

that it cannot be less than 0 for the compressor calculations which is necessary for BVMs

placed in climates that have temperatures less than the BVM setpoint temperature.

•	 The compressor operating capacity was modified such that it was always positive or

greater than 0.

•	 The compressor duty cycle was limited to not go below 0 or above 1.0 based on the

calculated refrigeration load and compressor capacity.

•	 The compressor energy consumption calculation was modified to be based the product of

duty cycle and compressor power.

In order to determine the energy consumption of the Class B machines located outdoors,

DOE developed a spreadsheet­based BVM Energy Performance model that used the climate data

from the Typical Meteorological Year (TMY2) data, which expresses the annual average

weather data for 237 cities in the United States3

. Temperature and relative humidity bins were

created with temperatures ranging from 130°F to ­40°F in 5°F increments, and percent relative

humidity values ranging from 100 percent RH to 0 percent RH in 5 percent RH increments. The

model creates a BVM energy performance map by calculating the annual energy consumption of

the 13 BVM design options for each temperature/relative humidity bin using the engineering

analysis spreadsheet. The BVM energy performance map is used to calculate annual energy use

for a BVM located in each TMY2 city by stepping through the binned weather data. The result

is projected energy use of each of 13 BVM design options for 237 U.S. cities. In addition to

BVM performance based on actual weather data, one additional file was was generated to step

through the ASHRAE Standard 32.1­2004 indoor test condition of 75°F/45 percent RH as the

ambient condition throughout the year. This file is used to calculate the energy consumption for

the vending machines installed indoors.

DOE estimated annual energy consumption for a Class B machine located indoors as the

product of the daily energy consumption calculated at the ASHRAE Standard 32.1­2004 indoor

test condition of 75°F/45 percent RH and 365 days per year. For Class B BVMs, the average

daily energy consumption for a particular TMY2 location is calculated as

Eann = 25% x Eann, outdoor + 75% x Eann, indoor	 Eq. 0.1

Where

Eann = Annual average energy consumption

7­3

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22
                 

                 

                               

                              

                                

                         

                                

                          

                         

           

                           

                            

                                 

                             

                           

                           

                    

                           

                               

   

                             

                       

                              

         

                           

                             

   

           

                       

                              

                                   

                                

                                   

                                  

                                 

                          

                               

                        

                         

Eann, outdoor = Annual average energy consumption for outdoor BVM

Eann, indoor = Annual average energy consumption for indoor BVM

DOE calculated the average annual energy use for each Class B BVM for all 237 typical

meteorological year (TMY2) stations in the United States. DOE mapped each TMY2 station to a

certain state, based on its location. Within each state, DOE assigned a relative weight to each

TMY2 station, based on the total population of identifiable population centers (cities, towns,

other) that can be shown to be most climatically similar to that TMY2 location. The detailed

methodology for developing the weighting factors is discussed in appendix D. The annual

energy consumption data for the TMY locations were then weighted to obtain annual energy

consumption data for each State.

For Class A BVMs, the department assumed that the fraction of units located outdoors

was insignificant and the fraction of units located indoors was assumed to be 100%. Although

some fraction of Class A machines may be rated for indoor/outdoor use, DOE assumed that all of

Class A BVMs were located indoors both because of the comparatively smaller percentage of the

total number of these machines in stock and currently shipped, owner concerns that these

machines are prone to vandalism and damage if installed outdoors, and the difficulty in

maintaining desired product temperature under solar loading. Calculating the energy

consumption of this Class of a machine if located outdoors is significantly more complex

because of the solar radiation loads through the glass front and also on the opaque exterior

surfaces.

DOE estimated the annual energy consumption for Class A as the product of the average

daily energy consumption from the ASHRAE Standard 32.1­2004 indoor test condition of

75°F/45 percent RH and 365 days per year. For Class A BVMs, the annual energy consumption

did not vary by state.

The annual energy consumption for each equipment class and at each efficiency level for

each State are developed as inputs for the life­cycle cost (LCC) and payback period (PBP)

analyses conducted subsequently.

7.3 SELECTION OF EFFICIENCY LEVELS FOR FURTHER ANALYSES

DOE selected nine efficiency levels for each equipment class for the subsequent

economic analyses, including the LCC and PBP analyses. The selection was based on being able

to represent a market baseline efficiency level as Level 0 and a level that yielded a daily energy

consumption level of just below the ENERGY STAR Tier 1 level as Level 1. ENERGY STAR

Tier 2 level was designated as Level 3 and the max tech level picked in the engineering analysis

was designated as Level 8. One intermediate level was picked between the Tier 1 and Tier 2

levels, while three intermediate levels were picked between the Tier 2 and the max tech levels to

represent some combinations of design options that would yield a smooth LCC curve.

Table 7.3.1 shows the mapping of the standard levels that will be used in the downstream

economic analyses to the engineering efficiency levels from the engineering analysis. These

nine levels and the corresponding annual energy consumption figures as well as the manufacturer

7­4

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22
                           

         

                         

     

       

     

       

         

       

         

           

                   

           

                   

           

           

           

           

               

       

                             

                            

                                   

                                

                             

                                

                               

                      

                            

                       

selling price for the beverage vending machines determined in the engineering analysis will be

inputs to the subsequent LCC analysis.

Table 7.3.1	 Mapping of the Efficiency Levels for Subsequent Economic Analyses to the

Engineering Efficiency Levels

Efficiency Levels for LCC

and PBP Analyses

Engineering Efficiency Levels for

Class A machine (all sizes)

Engineering Efficiency Levels for

Class B machine (all sizes)

Level 0 Level 0 Level 0

Level 1 (ENERGY STAR Tier 1) Level 1 Level 1

Level 2 Level 3 Level 3

Level 3 (ENERGY STAR Tier 2) Level 4 Level 4

Level 4 Level 7 Level 6

Level 5 Level 8 Level 7

Level 6 Level 9 Level 9

Level 7 Level 11 Level 10

Level 8 (Max Tech) Level 13 Level 11

7.4 ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION RESULTS

For the beverage vending machines, the annual energy use is a function of the cooling

load the equipment must meet. DOE used the BVM Energy Performance model described above

to estimate the annual energy use for the 25 percent of the Class B machines located outdoors at

all the 237 TMY2 stations in the U.S. The aggregated state­by­state results were then added to

the annual energy consumption of the remaining 75 percent of the Class B machines located

indoors to come up with the total energy consumption of all Class B machines. DOE further

aggregated the energy use at State level to National average energy use using the 2000 Census

population data.4 Tables 7.3.1 through 7.3.3 show the State­by­State annual energy consumption

figures for the three different sizes of Class B, machine. The national average energy

consumption figures for each size Class B machine are also shown.

7­5

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22
                   

   

   

     

   

                 

   

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

         

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

      

        

        

        

        

        

        

      

      

      

      

        

        

        

      

      

      

      

      

      

        

      

      

Table 7.4.1 State­by­State Annual Energy Consumption for B­L­IO, by Efficiency

Levels, kWh

State

Level 0

(Market

Baseline)

Level 1

(ENERGY

STAR

Tier1) Level 2

Level 3

(ENERGY

STAR

Tier2) Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7

Level 8

(MaxTech)

Alabama 4080 2289 1946 1780 1634 1569 1379 1366 1345

Alaska 3908 2131 1788 1643 1512 1448 1273 1263 1244

Arizona 4122 2325 1982 1810 1661 1597 1399 1387 1363

Arkansas 4067 2275 1932 1768 1623 1559 1369 1357 1336

California 4044 2256 1913 1749 1605 1541 1356 1344 1323

Colorado 3980 2191 1848 1694 1557 1492 1311 1300 1280

Connecticut 3997 2207 1864 1709 1569 1505 1323 1312 1292

Delaware 4017 2227 1884 1726 1585 1520 1336 1325 1304

Dist. Of Columbia 4014 2223 1880 1723 1582 1517 1334 1322 1302

Florida 4151 2358 2015 1841 1690 1625 1427 1413 1390

Georgia 4070 2278 1935 1770 1625 1560 1371 1359 1337

Hawaii 4175 2381 2038 1861 1708 1644 1442 1429 1405

Idaho 3974 2184 1841 1688 1551 1486 1306 1295 1275

Illinois 3991 2204 1861 1706 1568 1503 1321 1310 1290

Indiana 4005 2217 1874 1717 1578 1513 1330 1319 1298

Iowa 3983 2200 1857 1703 1566 1501 1319 1308 1288

Kansas 4025 2236 1893 1734 1593 1528 1343 1331 1310

Kentucky 4020 2230 1887 1729 1588 1523 1339 1328 1307

Louisiana 4107 2315 1972 1802 1655 1590 1396 1384 1361

Maine 3960 2175 1832 1681 1545 1481 1302 1291 1272

Maryland 4020 2230 1887 1728 1587 1522 1338 1326 1306

Massachusetts 3987 2197 1854 1700 1561 1497 1316 1305 1285

Michigan 3976 2189 1846 1693 1556 1492 1311 1300 1280

Minnesota 3963 2183 1840 1689 1554 1489 1309 1298 1278

Mississippi 4083 2290 1947 1781 1635 1570 1379 1367 1345

Missouri 4028 2238 1895 1736 1595 1530 1344 1333 1312

Montana 3956 2172 1828 1678 1542 1478 1299 1288 1268

Nebraska 3998 2213 1870 1714 1575 1511 1328 1316 1296

Nevada 4049 2255 1911 1749 1605 1541 1352 1340 1319

New Hampshire 3967 2181 1838 1687 1551 1486 1306 1295 1276

New Jersey 4013 2222 1879 1721 1581 1516 1333 1321 1301

New Mexico 4016 2224 1881 1722 1581 1516 1332 1321 1300

New York 4003 2213 1870 1714 1574 1509 1327 1316 1295

North Carolina 4047 2256 1913 1750 1607 1542 1356 1344 1323

North Dakota 3951 2173 1830 1680 1546 1482 1302 1291 1271

Ohio 3991 2203 1860 1705 1567 1502 1321 1309 1289

Oklahoma 4056 2265 1922 1759 1615 1550 1362 1350 1329

Oregon 3993 2204 1861 1704 1564 1499 1320 1308 1288

Pennsylvania 4000 2210 1868 1712 1572 1508 1326 1314 1294

Rhode Island 3990 2201 1858 1703 1564 1499 1319 1307 1287

South Carolina 4065 2274 1931 1767 1622 1557 1368 1356 1335

South Dakota 3970 2188 1845 1693 1557 1492 1311 1300 1280

Tennessee 4056 2265 1922 1759 1615 1550 1362 1350 1329

Texas 4104 2311 1968 1799 1652 1587 1393 1381 1358

Utah 3996 2204 1861 1705 1566 1502 1319 1308 1288

Vermont 3962 2181 1838 1686 1551 1486 1306 1295 1276

Virginia 4028 2238 1895 1735 1593 1528 1343 1332 1311

Washington 3980 2192 1849 1694 1554 1490 1312 1300 1281

West Virginia 4009 2220 1877 1719 1579 1514 1331 1320 1300

Wisconsin 3966 2184 1841 1689 1553 1488 1308 1297 1278

Wyoming 3952 2166 1823 1673 1538 1473 1295 1284 1265

7­6

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22
   

                     

   

   

       

   

                   

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

     

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

    

    

    

    

    

    

  

  

  

  

    

    

    

  

  

  

  

  

  

    

  

National 4033 2244 1901 1740 1598 1533 1348 1336 1315

Table 7.4.2 State­by­State Annual Energy Consumption for B­M­IO, by Efficiency Levels,

kWh

State

Level 0

(Market

Baseline)

Level 1

(ENERGY

STAR

Tier 1) Level 2

Level 3

(ENERGY

STAR

Tier 2) Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7

Level 8

(Max

Tech)

Alabama 3937 2145 1800 1656 1517 1455 1275 1265 1245

Alaska 3796 2012 1667 1541 1416 1354 1187 1178 1161

Arizona 3974 2177 1832 1684 1542 1480 1294 1283 1262

Arkansas 3926 2134 1789 1646 1509 1447 1267 1257 1238

California 3907 2119 1773 1632 1495 1432 1257 1247 1228

Colorado 3856 2064 1720 1586 1454 1392 1220 1210 1192

Connecticut 3869 2077 1732 1597 1464 1402 1229 1219 1201

Delaware 3886 2094 1749 1611 1477 1415 1240 1230 1212

Dist. Of Columbia 3884 2091 1746 1609 1475 1412 1238 1228 1210

Florida 3995 2202 1857 1706 1564 1502 1314 1303 1282

Georgia 3928 2137 1792 1649 1510 1448 1269 1259 1239

Hawaii 4015 2221 1876 1723 1579 1517 1327 1316 1294

Idaho 3851 2059 1714 1581 1449 1387 1216 1206 1189

Illinois 3865 2074 1729 1594 1462 1400 1227 1218 1200

Indiana 3877 2085 1740 1604 1471 1409 1235 1225 1207

Iowa 3858 2070 1726 1591 1460 1398 1225 1216 1198

Kansas 3893 2101 1756 1618 1483 1421 1245 1235 1217

Kentucky 3889 2096 1752 1614 1479 1417 1242 1232 1214

Louisiana 3959 2167 1822 1675 1535 1472 1290 1279 1259

Maine 3840 2050 1706 1574 1444 1382 1212 1202 1185

Maryland 3889 2096 1751 1613 1479 1416 1242 1232 1213

Massachusetts 3861 2069 1724 1590 1457 1395 1224 1214 1196

Michigan 3853 2062 1717 1584 1453 1391 1219 1210 1192

Minnesota 3841 2056 1711 1579 1450 1388 1216 1207 1189

Mississippi 3940 2147 1802 1657 1518 1456 1275 1265 1245

Missouri 3895 2103 1758 1620 1485 1423 1247 1237 1218

Montana 3836 2047 1703 1571 1441 1379 1209 1200 1182

Nebraska 3871 2081 1736 1601 1469 1407 1232 1223 1205

Nevada 3914 2119 1774 1632 1495 1433 1254 1244 1225

New Hampshire 3845 2055 1710 1578 1448 1386 1215 1206 1188

New Jersey 3882 2090 1745 1608 1473 1411 1237 1227 1209

New Mexico 3886 2092 1747 1610 1475 1412 1238 1228 1209

New York 3874 2082 1738 1601 1468 1406 1232 1223 1205

North Carolina 3910 2118 1773 1632 1495 1433 1256 1246 1227

North Dakota 3831 2048 1703 1572 1444 1382 1211 1202 1184

Ohio 3865 2073 1729 1594 1462 1400 1227 1217 1199

Oklahoma 3918 2125 1780 1639 1502 1440 1261 1251 1232

Oregon 3865 2075 1730 1594 1460 1398 1227 1217 1199

Pennsylvania 3872 2080 1735 1599 1466 1404 1231 1221 1203

Rhode Island 3864 2072 1727 1592 1460 1397 1225 1216 1198

South Carolina 3925 2133 1788 1645 1508 1445 1267 1256 1237

South Dakota 3848 2061 1716 1583 1453 1391 1219 1209 1192

Tennessee 3918 2125 1781 1639 1502 1440 1261 1251 1232

Texas 3957 2164 1819 1673 1532 1470 1287 1277 1257

Utah 3870 2075 1731 1595 1462 1400 1226 1217 1199

Vermont 3841 2054 1709 1577 1448 1386 1215 1205 1188

Virginia 3895 2103 1758 1619 1484 1422 1246 1236 1217

Washington 3855 2065 1720 1585 1452 1390 1220 1211 1193

West Virginia 3879 2088 1743 1606 1472 1410 1236 1226 1208

Wisconsin 3844 2057 1712 1580 1450 1388 1216 1207 1189

7­7

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22
  

                     

   

   

       

   

                   

   

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

     

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

    

    

    

    

    

    

  

  

  

  

    

    

    

  

  

Wyoming 3834 2043 1698 1567 1438 1376 1206 1197 1179

National 3899 2108 1763 1623 1488 1426 1250 1240 1221

Table 7.4.3 State­by­State Annual Energy Consumption for B­S­IO, by Efficiency Levels,

kWh

State

Level 0

(Market

Baseline)

Level 1

(ENERGY

STAR

Tier 1) Level 2

Level 3

(ENERGY

STAR

Tier 2) Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7

Level 8

(Max

Tech)

Alabama 3733 1964 1620 1488 1400 1238 1170 1161 1145

Alaska 3607 1857 1513 1393 1317 1155 1097 1090 1076

Arizona 3762 1987 1643 1509 1419 1257 1185 1176 1159

Arkansas 3722 1954 1610 1480 1393 1231 1163 1154 1139

California 3710 1943 1599 1468 1382 1219 1154 1145 1130

Colorado 3661 1899 1555 1429 1348 1186 1124 1116 1102

Connecticut 3672 1909 1565 1439 1357 1194 1132 1124 1109

Delaware 3687 1923 1578 1451 1367 1205 1141 1133 1118

Dist. of Columbia 3685 1920 1576 1449 1365 1203 1139 1131 1116

Florida 3783 2010 1665 1531 1438 1276 1202 1193 1177

Georgia 3726 1957 1613 1482 1394 1232 1165 1156 1141

Hawaii 3801 2025 1681 1546 1451 1289 1214 1204 1187

Idaho 3656 1894 1550 1425 1344 1182 1121 1113 1099

Illinois 3668 1907 1563 1437 1355 1193 1131 1122 1108

Indiana 3678 1916 1572 1445 1362 1200 1137 1128 1114

Iowa 3662 1904 1560 1435 1354 1191 1129 1121 1107

Kansas 3692 1928 1584 1456 1372 1210 1145 1137 1122

Kentucky 3689 1925 1581 1453 1369 1207 1143 1134 1120

Louisiana 3752 1981 1637 1504 1414 1252 1182 1173 1157

Maine 3646 1888 1544 1420 1340 1178 1117 1110 1096

Maryland 3689 1924 1580 1452 1368 1206 1142 1134 1119

Massachusetts 3665 1903 1559 1433 1351 1189 1127 1119 1105

Michigan 3657 1897 1553 1428 1347 1185 1124 1116 1102

Minnesota 3647 1892 1548 1425 1345 1183 1122 1114 1100

Mississippi 3735 1965 1621 1489 1401 1239 1170 1161 1146

Missouri 3694 1930 1586 1458 1373 1211 1146 1138 1123

Montana 3643 1885 1541 1417 1338 1176 1115 1108 1094

Nebraska 3673 1913 1568 1443 1360 1198 1135 1127 1112

Nevada 3710 1941 1597 1467 1382 1220 1153 1144 1129

New Hampshire 3651 1892 1548 1424 1344 1182 1120 1113 1099

New Jersey 3684 1919 1575 1448 1364 1202 1139 1130 1116

New Mexico 3687 1922 1577 1449 1365 1203 1139 1131 1116

New York 3677 1914 1569 1442 1360 1198 1135 1126 1112

North Carolina 3709 1942 1598 1468 1382 1220 1154 1146 1131

North Dakota 3639 1886 1541 1420 1340 1178 1117 1109 1095

Ohio 3668 1907 1563 1437 1355 1193 1130 1122 1108

Oklahoma 3714 1947 1603 1473 1387 1225 1158 1150 1135

Oregon 3671 1907 1563 1435 1353 1191 1129 1121 1107

Pennsylvania 3674 1912 1568 1441 1358 1196 1133 1125 1111

Rhode Island 3667 1905 1561 1435 1353 1191 1129 1121 1106

South Carolina 3723 1954 1610 1479 1392 1230 1163 1154 1139

South Dakota 3653 1896 1552 1428 1348 1186 1124 1116 1102

Tennessee 3715 1948 1604 1474 1387 1225 1158 1150 1135

Texas 3749 1978 1634 1502 1412 1250 1180 1171 1155

7­8

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22
  

  

  

  

    

  

  

                             

                          

    

                         

         

Energy Use (All Locations, kWh)      

Size 

   

   

       

   

                   

   

  

  

  

                           

                                   

                              

                           

                          

                               

                            

                             

   

Utah 3672 1908 1563 1436 1355 1193 1130 1122 1107

Vermont 3648 1891 1547 1424 1343 1181 1120 1112 1098

Virginia 3695 1930 1586 1457 1373 1211 1146 1137 1123

Washington 3662 1899 1555 1428 1347 1184 1123 1115 1101

West Virginia 3682 1918 1574 1447 1363 1201 1138 1130 1115

Wisconsin 3650 1893 1549 1425 1345 1183 1122 1114 1100

Wyoming 3640 1882 1538 1414 1335 1173 1113 1105 1091

National 3699 1934 1589 1461 1376 1214 1149 1140 1125

Annual energy consumption for each size of Class A machines are shown in Table 7.3.4

for all equipment sizes. National average energy consumption figures are identical to State

energy consumption figures.

Table 7.4.4	 Annual Energy Consumption for Class A Machine, All Sizes and All

Locations, by Efficiency Levels, kWh

Level 1 Level 3

Level 0 (ENERGY (ENERGY Level 8

(Market STAR STAR (Max

Baseline) Tier 1) Level 2 Tier 2) Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Tech)

Large 3173 2452 2229 2045 1882 1790 1773 1654 1586

Medium 3005 2321 2102 1933 1775 1692 1675 1576 1510

Small 2796 2117 1902 1737 1585 1518 1502 1417 1356

This energy use characterization presumes that there are no controls which limit display lighting

or compressor operation in a BVM to certain hours of the day or would be affected by occupancy

patterns in the building. It is known, however, tha using occupancy sensors and other controllers

might reduce the vending machine’s energy requirements during long periods of non­use, such as

overnights and weekends. This occupancy controller option is often used when de­lamping a

vending machine is not advisable (i.e., when a vending machine does not have a captive audience

or when de­lamping results in reduced vending sales revenues). The controllers can either be

added on or enabled in certain beverage vending machines, depending on the location and the

site owner.

7­9

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22
                 

                     

                         

   

                        

                    

                    

          

            

2

REFERENCES

1.	 American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air­Conditioning Engineers, Inc.

ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 32.1­2004, Methods of Testing for Rating Vending Machines for

Bottled, Canned, and Other Sealed Beverages, 2004, 1791 Tullie Circle N.E., Atlanta, GA

30329, U.S.A.

Based on personal conversation with Bob McGarrah, USA Technologies, May 2007

3.	 TMY2S National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 1995. Typical Meteorological Years

Derived from the 1961­1990 National Solar Radiation Database. Golden, Colorado.

4.	 The U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census,

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/GCTTable?_bm=y&­geo_id=01000US&­

_box_head_nbr=GCT­PH1&­context=gct&­ds_name=DEC_2000_SF1_U&­

tree_id=4001&­format=US­9. (Accessed on March 25, 2007.)

7­10

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 22