CHAPTER 3. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

3.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 3­1

3.2 EQUIPMENT CLASSES ANALYZED.......................................................................... 3­2

3.2.1 Representative Output Capacities........................................................................ 3­2

3.3 METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW .................................................................................... 3­4

3.3.1 Approach.............................................................................................................. 3­4

3.3.2 Selection of Baseline Efficiency Levels.............................................................. 3­5

3.3.3 Identification of Efficiency Levels for Analysis.................................................. 3­5

3.3.4 Data Collection .................................................................................................... 3­8

3.3.5 Aggregating Contractor Cost Data....................................................................... 3­8

3.3.6 Oil­Fired Commercial Packaged Boilers............................................................. 3­9

3.4 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS SUMMARY OF RESULTS............................................ 3­9

3­i

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Equipment Classes Analyzed in the Engineering Analysis and the Efficiency Levels in

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007................................................................................... 3­4

Table 3.2 Baseline Efficiency Levels for Commercial Packaged Boilers................................... 3­5

Table 3.3 Small Gas­Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels............ 3­6

Table 3.4 Small Gas­Fired Steam, All Except Natural Draft Commercial Packaged Boiler

Efficiency Levels....................................................................................................... 3­6

Table 3.5 Small Gas­Fired Steam Natural Draft Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels

.................................................................................................................................... 3­6

Table 3.6 Small Oil­Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels............. 3­6

Table 3.7 Small Oil­Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels.................... 3­7

Table 3.8 Large Gas­Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels............ 3­7

Table 3.9 Large Gas­Fired Steam, All Except Natural Draft Commercial Packaged Boiler

Efficiency Levels....................................................................................................... 3­7

Table 3.10 Large Gas­Fired Steam Natural Draft Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels

.................................................................................................................................... 3­7

Table 3.11 Large Oil­Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels........... 3­8

Table 3.12 Large Oil­Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels.................. 3­8

Table 3.13 Incremental Contractor Cost for Small Gas Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

with an 800 kBTU/h Output Capacity ..................................................................... 3­10

Table 3.14 Incremental Contractor Cost for Small Gas Steam All Except Natural Draft

Commercial Packaged Boilers with an 800 kBTU/h Output Capacity.................... 3­10

Table 3.15 Incremental Contractor Cost for Small Gas Steam Natural Draft Commercial

Packaged Boilers with an 800 kBTU/h Output Capacity ........................................ 3­10

Table 3.16 Incremental Contractor Cost for Small Oil Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

with an 800 kBTU/h Output Capacity ..................................................................... 3­10

Table 3.17 Incremental Contractor Cost for Small Oil Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers with

an 800 kBTU/h Output Capacity ............................................................................. 3­11

Table 3.18 Incremental Contractor Cost for Large Gas Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

with a 3,000 kBTU/h Output Capacity .................................................................... 3­11

3­ii

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
Table 3.19 Incremental Contractor Cost for Large Gas Steam All Except Natural Draft

Commercial Packaged Boilers with a 3,000 kBTU/h Output Capacity................... 3­11

Table 3.20 Incremental Contractor Cost for Large Gas Steam Natural Draft Commercial

Packaged Boilers with a 3,000 kBTU/h Output Capacity ....................................... 3­11

Table 3.21 Incremental Contractor Cost for Large Oil Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boilers

with a 3,000 kBTU/h Output Capacity .................................................................... 3­12

Table 3.22 Incremental Contractor Cost for Large Oil Steam Commercial Packaged Boilers with

a 3,000 kBTU/h Output Capacity ............................................................................ 3­12

3­iii

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
CHAPTER 3. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS

3.1 INTRODUCTION

The engineering analysis establishes the relationship between the cost and the

energy efficiency of commercial packaged boilers. This cost­efficiency relationship

serves as the basis for cost­benefit calculations for individual customers and the Nation.

To establish the industry cost­efficiency relationship, the U.S. Department of

Energy (DOE) used equipment performance information from manufacturer catalogs in

conjunction with discussions with commercial boiler distributors and mechanical

contractors. DOE subsequently developed commercial packaged boiler costs primarily

from data provided by mechanical contractors and equipment distributors, which

categorized contractor costs by thermal and combustion efficiency, output capacity, input

fuel, type of heating output (i.e. hot water or steam), and the type of boiler draft system

(atmospheric or other). DOE used this data, along with the rated performance data for

each boiler (identified by reviewing data found in the January 2008 edition of the

Institute of Boiler and Radiator Manufacturers’ (I=B=R) Ratings for Boilers, Baseboard

Radiation, Finned Tube (Commercial Radiation), and Indirect­Fired Water Heaters (2008

I=B=R Directory)1 and manufacturer equipment literature) to develop discrete industry

cost­efficiency points. In a subsequent life­cycle cost analysis (chapter 4), DOE used the

cost­efficiency data points to determine customer prices for commercial boiler equipment

by applying distribution channel markups.

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA) establishes energy

conservation standards for commercial packaged boilers under 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(4)(C)

and (D). These energy conservation standards are measured and expressed in terms of

combustion efficiencya (EC). However, the efficiency levels for commercial packaged

boilers specified by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and AirConditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE) and the Illuminating Engineering Society of

North America (IESNA) Standard 90.1­2007, “Energy Standard for Buildings Except

Low­Rise Residential Buildings” (ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007) are expressed in terms

of thermal efficiencyb (ET) for eight equipment classes and EC for the remaining two

equipment classes. In conducting the engineering analysis, DOE estimated the

incremental cost to increase ET for eight equipment classes and the incremental cost to

increase EC of the remaining two equipment classes above baseline performance levels,

consistent with the metric specified by the ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 efficiency

levels.

In this chapter, DOE discusses the equipment classes it analyzed, the

identification of representative equipment, the identification of baseline equipment and

efficiency levels above the baseline, and the process for collecting data and developing

a Combustion efficiency is defined for commercial packaged boilers at part 431.82 of the Code of Federal

Regulations as 100 percent minus the percent of flue loss. (Percent flue loss is based on input fuel energy.)

b Thermal efficiency, as used in ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 for commercial packaged boilers, accounts

for jacket losses as well as flue losses, so it can be considered combustion efficiency minus jacket losses.

3­1

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
industry cost­efficiency results. The engineering analysis produces a set of costefficiency results that represent the average incremental contractor cost of increasing

energy efficiency levels above the baseline levels for commercial packaged boilers.

3.2 EQUIPMENT CLASSES ANALYZED

EPCA establishes two equipment classes that categorize commercial packaged

boilers by the type of fuel the boiler burns (i.e., gas and oil). (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(4)(C)­

(D); 10 CFR 431.87) As presented in the market assessment (chapter 2), DOE proposes

to further subdivide the equipment classes by input capacity (“small” or “large”)c, type of

heating output (hot water or steam), and draft type (natural draft or other). These

subdivisions were suggested by ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007. DOE analyzed the

following ten equipment classes for commercial packaged boilers in the engineering

analysis:

1. Small gas­fired hot water boilers;

2. Small gas­fired steam, all except natural draft;

3. Small gas­fired steam, natural draft boilers;

4. Small oil­fired hot water boilers;

5. Small oil­fired steam boilers;

6. Large gas­fired hot water boilers;

7. Large gas­fired steam all except natural draft boilers;

8. Large gas­fired steam natural draft boilers;

9. Large oil­fired hot water boilers; and

10. Large oil­fired steam boilers.

3.2.1 Representative Output Capacities

Because of the large variations in equipment cost that result from differences in

heating output capacity, DOE analyzed a range of gross output capacities for each

equipment class. Using representative output capacities (which usually correspond to the

equipment with the highest number of shipments) allows DOE to analyze specific

equipment in detail that can provide information representative of the entire equipment

class. Using representative output capacities also allows DOE to establish baseline units

that are used throughout the rulemaking analyses. The baseline units are discussed further

in section 3.3.2 of this analysis.

For small commercial packaged boiler equipment classes, DOE identified three

gross output capacitiesd at which to collect cost data. The output capacities for small

commercial packaged boilers for which DOE collected data are 400, 800 and 1,500

c Small commercial packaged boilers refer to equipment with a fuel input of at least 300, but not more than

2,500 thousand British thermal units per hour (kBTU/h). Large commercial packaged boilers, as defined in

the market assessment, refer to equipment with a fuel input greater than 2,500 kBTU/h.

d The January 2008 I=B=R Directory defines “gross output” as the total quantity of BTU’s which the boiler

will deliver in the form of heated water output or steam output per hour, and at the same time meet all the

test requirements set forth in the standard.

3­2

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
kBTU/h, which fall within the ≥ 300 and ≤ 2,500 kBTU/h output capacity range that

DOE defined as “small” commercial packaged boilers. DOE identified these three

capacities based on information published in the 2000 Screening Analysis for EPACTCovered Commercial Heating, Ventilating, and Air­Conditioning (HVAC) and WaterHeating Equipment report (the 2000 Screening Analysis).2 Although commercial

packaged boiler costs vary greatly based on the output capacity of the boiler, DOE

research suggests that once the contractor costs are normalized on a gross output capacity

basis, the cost per kBTU/h of capacity is similar regardless of the total gross output

capacity.

DOE subsequently simplified its analysis and developed a cost­efficiency

relationship for only one output capacity (800 kBTU/h) that it deemed representative of

all units in the small commercial packaged boiler category. DOE chose 800 kBTU/h

because it is the median of the three small commercial boiler representative output

capacities. DOE normalized all of the data collected at each representative output

capacity on a cost per kBTU/h of capacity basis and then further aggregated the data for

small commercial packaged boilers to create a single cost efficiency curve for each small

commercial packaged boiler equipment class at a representative output capacity of 800

kBTU/h. See section 3.3.5 for additional information about the process DOE used to

normalize and aggregate the data.

For “large” commercial packaged boilers, DOE collected data for a single output

capacity, 3000 kBTU/h, for the entire range of products with a gross output above 2,500

kBTU/h. DOE chose to use 3000 kBTU/h as a representative capacity because

conversations with industry experts have led DOE to conclude that for applications

requiring heating capabilities above this capacity, contractors will generally choose to

install multiple lower capacity boilers (instead of a single boiler with a higher output

capacity) to allow for modulation of the output capacity and increase the seasonal

efficiency of the boiler system. DOE collected contractor cost data for commercial boiler

models at the 3,000 kBTU/h output capacity, and then developed a cost­efficiency

relationship for each large commercial packaged boiler equipment class.

Table 3.1 shows the equipment classes and the output capacities for which DOE

collected data for the engineering analysis.

3­3

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
Table 3.1 Equipment Classes Analyzed in the Engineering Analysis and the

Efficiency Levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007

ASHRAE

Standard 90.1­

2007 Equipment

Class

Gross Output

Capacities for

Which DOE

Collected Data

kBTU/h

Existing

Federal

Energy

Conservation

Standard Level

ASHRAE

Standard 90.1­

2007 Efficiency

Level

(Effective 2010)

ASHRAE

Standard 90.1­

2007 Efficiency

Level

(Effective 2020)

Small Gas Hot

Water

400, 800, 1,500 80% EC 80% ET 80% ET

Small Gas Steam

All Except Natural

Draft

400, 800, 1,500 80% EC 79% ET 79% ET

Small Gas Steam

Natural Draft

400, 800, 1,500 80% EC 77% ET 79% ET

Small Oil Hot Water 400, 800, 1,500 83% EC 82% ET 82% ET

Small Oil Steam 400, 800, 1,500 83% EC 81% ET 81% ET

Large Gas Hot

Water

3,000 80% EC 82% EC 82% EC

Large Gas Steam

All Except Natural

Draft

3,000 80% EC 79% ET 79% ET

Large Gas Steam

Natural Draft

3,000 80% EC 77% ET 79% ET

Large Oil Hot Water 3,000 83% EC 84% EC 84% EC

Large Oil Steam 3,000 83% EC 81% ET 81% ET

3.3 METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW

This section describes the analytical methodology DOE used in the engineering

analysis. The results of the engineering analysis are a set of cost­efficiency points.

3.3.1 Approach

DOE used an efficiency­level approach to evaluate the contractor cost of

commercial packaged boilers at the baseline efficiency level, as well as efficiency levels

above the baseline. DOE chose the efficiency level approach because of the wide variety

of boiler designs available of the market. The efficiency level approach allowed DOE to

examine the relative costs of achieving increases in energy efficiency levels without

regard to the particular designs manufacturers would implement to achieve such

efficiency increases. The efficiency levels that DOE considered in the engineering

analysis for each equipment class were representative of commercial packaged boiler

equipment available on the market when the engineering analysis was developed. DOE

relied primarily on pricing data collected through discussions with mechanical

3­4

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
contractors or equipment distributors of commercial boiler equipment to develop its costefficiency relationship for commercial packaged boilers.

3.3.2 Selection of Baseline Efficiency Levels

DOE selected baseline efficiency levels as reference points for each equipment

class, against which it measured changes resulting from potential amended energy

conservation standards. DOE defined the baseline efficiency levels in the engineering

analysis and the LCC and PBP analyses (see chapter 4 of this TSD) as reference points to

compare the technology, energy savings, and cost of equipment with higher energy

efficiency levels. Typically, units at the baseline efficiency level just meet Federal energy

conservation standards and provide basic consumer utility. However, EPCA does not

allow DOE to consider efficiency levels lower than those specified in ASHRAE Standard

90.1­2007 for commercial packaged boilers. Therefore, the baseline efficiency levels

DOE identified for this analysis were the efficiency levels specified for each commercial

packaged boiler equipment class in ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007. Table 3.2 lists the

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 efficiency levels for each commercial packaged boiler

equipment class.

Table 3.2 Baseline Efficiency Levels for Commercial Packaged Boilers

Equipment Class ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007

Efficiency Level*

Small Gas­Fired Hot Water 80% ET

Small Gas­Fired Steam All Except Natural Draft 79% ET

Small Gas­Fired Steam Natural Draft 77% ET

Small Oil­Fired Hot Water 82% ET

Small Oil­Fired Steam 81% ET

Large Gas­Fired Hot Water 82% EC

Large Gas­Fired Steam, All Except Natural Draft 79% ET

Large Gas­Fired Steam Natural Draft 77% ET

Large Oil­Fired Hot Water 84% EC

Large Oil­Fired Steam 81% ET

* EC means combustion efficiency and ET means thermal efficiency.

3.3.3 Identification of Efficiency Levels for Analysis

In the engineering analysis, DOE identified efficiency levels for each equipment

class based on an extensive review of current manufacturer product literature and the

January 2008 I=B=R Directory. DOE used this information to identify the efficiency

levels most commonly offered on the market by a number of different manufacturers.

DOE proposes several efficiency levels, which attempt to encompass the entire efficiency

range of commercial packaged boilers that are currently commercially available. DOE

notes that while all of the efficiency levels identified are not offered in the full range of

capacities, each efficiency level is offered at multiple capacities within the entire capacity

range.

3­5

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
As noted above, DOE used an efficiency level approach, which allows DOE to

estimate the costs and benefits associated with a particular efficiency level rather than a

particular design. DOE selected three to four efficiency levels to analyze for each

equipment class and gathered cost data at the representative capacity for each efficiency

level. Table 3.3 through Table 3.12 show the efficiency levels analyzed for each

equipment class.

Table 3.3 Small Gas­Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency

Levels

Efficiency Level Thermal Efficiency (ET) Levels (%)

Baseline Efficiency 80

Efficiency Level 1 82

Efficiency Level 2 84

Efficiency Level 3 86

Efficiency Level 4 (Condensing) 92

Table 3.4 Small Gas­Fired Steam, All Except Natural Draft Commercial Packaged

Boiler Efficiency Levels

Efficiency Level Thermal Efficiency (ET) Levels (%)

Baseline Efficiency 79

Efficiency Level 1 80

Efficiency Level 2 81

Efficiency Level 3 82

Efficiency Level 4 83

Table 3.5 Small Gas­Fired Steam Natural Draft Commercial Packaged Boiler

Efficiency Levels

Efficiency Level Thermal Efficiency (ET) Levels (%)

Baseline Efficiency 77

Efficiency Level 1 78

Efficiency Level 2 79

Efficiency Level 3 80

Table 3.6 Small Oil­Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels

Efficiency Level Thermal Efficiency (ET) Levels (%)

Baseline Efficiency 82

Efficiency Level 1 84

Efficiency Level 2 86

Efficiency Level 3 88

3­6

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
Table 3.7 Small Oil­Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels

Efficiency Level Thermal Efficiency (ET) Levels (%)

Baseline Efficiency 81

Efficiency Level 1 82

Efficiency Level 2 83

Efficiency Level 3 85

Table 3.8 Large Gas­Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency

Levels

Efficiency Level Combustion Efficiency (EC) Levels (%)

Baseline Efficiency 82

Efficiency Level 1 83

Efficiency Level 2 84

Efficiency Level 3 85

Efficiency Level 4 (Condensing) 95

Table 3.9 Large Gas­Fired Steam, All Except Natural Draft Commercial Packaged

Boiler Efficiency Levels

Efficiency Level Thermal Efficiency (ET) Levels (%)

Baseline Efficiency 79

Efficiency Level 1 80

Efficiency Level 2 81

Efficiency Level 3 82

Efficiency Level 4 83

Table 3.10 Large Gas­Fired Steam Natural Draft Commercial Packaged Boiler

Efficiency Levels

Efficiency Level Thermal Efficiency (ET) Levels (%)

Baseline Efficiency 77

Efficiency Level 1 78

Efficiency Level 2 79

Efficiency Level 3 80

Efficiency Level 4 81

3­7

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
Table 3.11 Large Oil­Fired Hot Water Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency

Levels

Efficiency Level Combustion Efficiency (EC) Levels (%)

Baseline Efficiency 84

Efficiency Level 1 86

Efficiency Level 2 87

Efficiency Level 3 88

Table 3.12 Large Oil­Fired Steam Commercial Packaged Boiler Efficiency Levels

Efficiency Level Thermal Efficiency (ET) Levels (%)

Baseline Efficiency 81

Efficiency Level 1 82

Efficiency Level 2 83

Efficiency Level 3 84

Efficiency Level 4 86

3.3.4 Data Collection

DOE identified commercial packaged boiler models for each equipment class at

each of the representative output capacities and across a range of efficiencies. The models

DOE identified utilize a range of designs and materials (e.g. cast iron, copper, aluminum,

etc.) in their respective heat exchangers. Through discussions with mechanical

contractors, DOE was able to obtain the contractor cost for commercial packaged boiler

models at various efficiency levels, including the baseline, for a range of commercial

boiler types and configurations.

3.3.5 Aggregating Contractor Cost Data

To develop the relationship of incremental contractor cost versus efficiency, DOE

aggregated the absolute cost data collected for each equipment class. DOE aggregated the

data in order to eliminate possibility of revealing sensitive information about individual

manufacturers’ equipment. DOE also aggregated the data in order to normalize the data

across manufacturers that utilize different design options, heat exchanger configurations,

and manufacturing techniques.

Before aggregating the data for the small equipment classes (i.e. equipment

classes with a fuel input capacity between 300 and 2,500 kBTU/h), DOE normalized the

contractor costs by output capacity. This allowed DOE to further supplement the costefficiency relationship for equipment at the 800 kBTU/h representative capacity. DOE

then aggregated the data for each equipment class using a simple average across all

manufacturers for which DOE obtained cost data. DOE fit a curve to the data and an

exponential curve had the best overall fit for the data.

The analysis is based on baseline ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2007 units having zero

cost, while the marginal costs of building units with higher efficiency levels are published

3­8

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
below. The normalized exponential cost curves from the aggregated data establish a

general cost­efficiency relationship for each equipment class and represent the average

incremental cost of increasing efficiency above the ASHRAE Standard 90.1–2007 levels.

3.3.6 Oil­Fired Commercial Packaged Boilers

DOE did not explicitly analyze oil­fired boilers. As previously done in the 2000

Screening Analysis, DOE estimated that non­condensing oil­fired commercial packaged

boilers are, on average, 3 percent more efficient than gas­fired boilers of identical

construction. Because the construction of oil­ and gas­fired boilers is basically the same,

with the exception of some differences in controls and the burner, DOE estimated the

incremental cost of increasing the efficiency of both types of boilers would be the same

for non­condensing models. Since neither the controls nor the oil burner are likely to

change across efficiency levels, DOE estimates that the marginal cost of oil boilers as a

function of efficiency will be similar to that of gas­fired boilers. Thus, once the costefficiency curves were normalized, the cost of the oil­fired controls and burners were

subtracted.

DOE estimated the incremental cost­efficiency curves for oil­fired equipment by

shifting the cost­efficiency curves for each gas­fired equipment class by 3 percent (e.g.,

DOE shifted the small gas­fired hot water curve 3 percent higher in efficiency to obtain

the small oil­fired hot water curve). Although DOE did not explicitly analyze oil­fired

boilers, DOE did collect a limited amount of contractor cost information for oil­fired

boilers. The costs DOE collected for oil­fired boilers were generally consistent with the

costs for oil­fired boilers determined using the method described above.

For oil­fired steam equipment, where gas­fired equipment is divided into natural

draft and all except natural draft curves, DOE used the all except natural draft curves to

develop the cost­efficiency curves for oil­fired steam boilers. DOE found that most of the

oil­fired steam boiler models in DOE’s database use a draft system other than natural

draft.

3.4 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS SUMMARY OF RESULTS

The result of the engineering analysis is a set of cost­efficiency data points.

Creating the cost­efficiency points involved three steps: (1) plotting the contractor cost

versus efficiency, (2) aggregating the cost data by capacity and manufacturer, and (3)

using a regression analysis to fit a curve that best defines the aggregated data. Table 3.13

through Table 3.22 show the cost­efficiency results in the form of efficiency (thermal or

combustion, whichever is applicable to the given equipment class) versus incremental

contractor cost. In the rulemaking process, the results from the engineering analysis are

used in the life­cycle cost (LCC) analysis to determine customer prices for commercial

packaged boiler equipment.

3­9

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
Table 3.13 Incremental Contractor Cost for Small Gas Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boilers with an 800 kBTU/h Output Capacity

Efficiency Level Incremental Contractor Cost ($)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 Level (80% ET) 0

Efficiency Level 1 (82% ET) 1,044

Efficiency Level 2 (84% ET) 3,305

Efficiency Level 3 (86% ET) 6,985

Efficiency Level 4 (92% ET) 12,329

Table 3.14 Incremental Contractor Cost for Small Gas Steam All Except Natural

Draft Commercial Packaged Boilers with an 800 kBTU/h Output Capacity

Efficiency Level Incremental Contractor Cost ($)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 Level (79% ET) 0

Efficiency Level 1 (80% ET) 873

Efficiency Level 2 (81% ET) 2,695

Efficiency Level 3 (82% ET) 5,548

Efficiency Level 4 (83% ET) 7,627

Table 3.15 Incremental Contractor Cost for Small Gas Steam Natural Draft

Commercial Packaged Boilers with an 800 kBTU/h Output Capacity

Efficiency Level Incremental Contractor Cost ($)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 Level (77% ET) 0

Efficiency Level 1 (78% ET) 529

Efficiency Level 2 (79% ET) 1,628

Efficiency Level 3 (80% ET) 3,339

Table 3.16 Incremental Contractor Cost for Small Oil Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boilers with an 800 kBTU/h Output Capacity

Efficiency Level Incremental Contractor Cost ($)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 Level (82% ET) 0

Efficiency Level 1 (84% ET) 1,189

Efficiency Level 2 (86% ET) 3,706

Efficiency Level 3 (88% ET) 7,707

3­10

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
Table 3.17 Incremental Contractor Cost for Small Oil Steam Commercial Packaged

Boilers with an 800 kBTU/h Output Capacity

Efficiency Level Incremental Contractor Cost ($)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 Level (81% ET) 0

Efficiency Level 1 (82% ET) 803

Efficiency Level 2 (83% ET) 2,480

Efficiency Level 3 (85% ET) 6,137

Table 3.18 Incremental Contractor Cost for Large Gas Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boilers with a 3,000 kBTU/h Output Capacity

Efficiency Level Incremental Contractor Cost ($)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 Level (82% EC) 0

Efficiency Level 1 (83% EC) 1,797

Efficiency Level 2 (84% EC) 5,614

Efficiency Level 3 (85% EC) 11,699

Efficiency Level 4 (95% EC) 36,345

Table 3.19 Incremental Contractor Cost for Large Gas Steam All Except Natural

Draft Commercial Packaged Boilers with a 3,000 kBTU/h Output Capacity

Efficiency Level Incremental Contractor Cost ($)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 Level (79% ET) 0

Efficiency Level 1 (80% ET) 1,656

Efficiency Level 2 (81% ET) 3,402

Efficiency Level 3 (82% ET) 5,243

Efficiency Level 4 (83% ET) 7,184

Table 3.20 Incremental Contractor Cost for Large Gas Steam Natural Draft

Commercial Packaged Boilers with a 3,000 kBTU/h Output Capacity

Efficiency Level Incremental Contractor Cost ($)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 Level (77% ET) 0

Efficiency Level 1 (78% ET) 1,071

Efficiency Level 2 (79% ET) 3,240

Efficiency Level 3 (80% ET) 6,536

Efficiency Level 4 (81% ET) 10,987

3­11

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
Table 3.21 Incremental Contractor Cost for Large Oil Hot Water Commercial

Packaged Boilers with a 3,000 kBTU/h Output Capacity

Efficiency Level Incremental Contractor Cost ($)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 Level (84% EC) 0

Efficiency Level 1 (86% EC) 4,459

Efficiency Level 2 (87% EC) 10,131

Efficiency Level 3 (88% EC) 16,060

Table 3.22 Incremental Contractor Cost for Large Oil Steam Commercial Packaged

Boilers with a 3,000 kBTU/h Output Capacity

Efficiency Level Incremental Contractor Cost ($)

ASHRAE Standard 90.1­2007 Level (81% ET) 0

Efficiency Level 1 (82% ET) 1,570

Efficiency Level 2 (83% ET) 4,796

Efficiency Level 3 (84% ET) 9,768

Efficiency Level 4 (86% ET) 18,522

In Table 3.13 through Table 3.22, DOE only presents the incremental costs of

increasing the efficiency of a commercial packaged boiler to avoid the possibility of

revealing sensitive information about individual manufacturers’ equipment. Different

manufacturers might have substantially different absolute costs for their products at the

same efficiency level due to heat exchanger design, materials, and manufacturer­specific

manufacturing practices.

The cost­efficiency results shown above do not represent any single manufacturer,

and they do not describe any variance among manufacturers. The results simply

represent, on average, the industry’s cost to increase equipment efficiency. It should be

noted that in this analysis, several types of boiler construction are aggregated into single

equipment classes, and the cost­efficiency results represent only an average boiler and

not any individual boiler with any specific design characteristics. For example, small gas

hot water boilers are commonly manufactured as copper tube boilers or as cast iron

sectional boilers. The difference in the two materials and the construction of these boilers

results in a wide range of prices and efficiencies for this boiler equipment class.

DOE attempted to estimate the average cost­efficiency relationship across the

range of boiler types included in each equipment class. The results indicate that the costefficiency relationships for each of the ten equipment classes are nonlinear and the best

cost­efficiency curve fit was an exponential one. Thus, as efficiency increases,

manufacturing becomes more difficult and more costly for manufacturers.

3­12

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22
REFERENCES

1 Institute of Boilers and Radiation Manufacturers (I=B=R). 2008. I=B=R Ratings for

Boilers, Baseboard Radiation and Finned Tube (Commercial) Radiation. Berkeley

Heights, New Jersey.

<www.gamanet.org/gama/inforesources.nsf/vAttachmentLaunch/E9E5FC7199EBB1B

E85256FA100838435/$FILE/01­08_CBR.pdf>

2 U.S. Department of Energy­Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Energy

Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Screening Analysis for EPACTCovered Commercial HVAC and Water­Heating Equipment Screening Analysis. April

2000.

3­13

EERE-2008-BT-STD-0013 COMMENT 22