10-i CHAPTER

10. NATION

AL IMPA CT ANALYSI S
TABLE OF CO NTENTS 10.1 INTRODUCTION

.................................................... 10-1 10.1.1 National Impact Analy sis Spreadsheet Flowchart

...................... 10-2 10.2 NATIONAL

ENERGY SAVINGS

....................................... 10-5 10.2.1 National Energy

Savings Overview

................................. 10-5 10.2.2 National

Energ y Sa vings I nputs
................................... 10-6 10.2.2.1 Size Scalin

g of Losses and

Costs

......................... 10-7 10.2.2.2 Mapping Life-Cy cle Cost Design Line Da

ta to Product Classes

. . 10-8 10.2.2.3 Mapping Candidate Standard L evel to Trial Standard Leve l

.... 10-10 10.2.2.4 Root Mean S quare Loa ding

............................ 10-10 10.2.2.5 Load

Growth

........................................ 10-10 10.2.2.6 Affected Stock

....................................... 10-12 10.2.2.7 Unit Energy

Consumption

.............................. 10-12 10.2.2.8 Electricity Site-to-Source Conversion

..................... 10-13 10.3 NET PRESENT VALUE

.............................................. 10-15 10.3.1 Net Present Value Overview

..................................... 10-15 10.3.2 Net Prese

nt Value I nputs
........................................ 10-17 10.3.2.1 First Cost

........................................... 10-17 10.3.2.2 Operati

ng Cost

....................................... 10-19 10.3.2.3 Peak Responsibility Factor

.............................. 10-20 10.3.2.4 Initial Peak L oad

..................................... 10-20 10.3.2.5 Electricity Price F orecast Scalar

......................... 10-21 10.3.2.6 Marginal Elect ricity Costs

.............................. 10-21 10.3.2.7 Discount R

ate
........................................ 10-22 10.4 RESULTS

......................................................... 10-22 10.4.1 National

Energ y Sa vings an d Net Pre sent Valu

e from Tr ial Standard Leve ls

............................................... 10-22 10.4.1.1 Liqui d-Im

mersed Re sults

............................... 10-23 10.4.1.2 Dry-Ty

pe Results

..................................... 10-24 10.4.1.3 Discounte d Cumulative Energ y I mpacts
................... 10-27
LIST OF TABLE S Table 10.2.1 Mapping

of Desig n Line to Product

Class

............................ 10-9 Table 10.2.2 Mapping

of Candid

ate Stand ard L evels to T

rial Stand ard L evels

......... 10-10 Table 10.2.3 Average Site-to-Source Conversion Fa ctors for No-Load L

osses and Load Losse s .................................................. 10-1410-ii

Table 10.3.1 First Cost of Distribution Transformers by Trial Standard Level and Product Class (2004$/kVA)

...................................... 10-19 Table 10.3.2 Peak Resp onsibility Factors by

Product Class ........................ 10-20 Table 10.3.3 Initi al Peak L oading by Pr oduct Clas s .............................. 10-21 Table 10.3.4 Marginal Energ y a nd Deman

d Costs by

Product Class ................. 10-21 Table 10.4.1 Summary

of Cumulat

ive National Ener

gy Savings (2010–20 38) and N et Present Value (2010–2073) Impa ct
................................ 10-22 Table 10.4.2 Cumulative Primary Energ y Savings Dur

ing 2010–2038: Liquid-I mmersed Transformers by

Product Class ................................... 10-23 Table 10.4.3 Net Present Value During 2010–2073: Liquid-Immersed Transforme rs by Product Class ................................................. 10-23 Table 10.4.4 Cumulative Primary Energ y Savings Dur

ing 2010–2038: Dry- Type Transformers by

Product Class ................................... 10-25 Table 10.4.5 Ne t P re se nt Va lu e D ur in g 2 01 0– 20 73 : D ry- Typ e T ra ns fo rm er s b y

Product Class ................................................. 10-26 Table 10.4.6 Discounted Cumulative Energy Impacts, Liquid-Immersed and Dry -Type, Medium-Voltage Transformers

................................... 10-28

LIST OF F IGURES Figure 10.1.1 National Impact Analy sis Flowchart

................................ 10-3 Figure 10.4.1 Liquid-I

mmersed Distribution Transformers: National Energy Savings and Net Prese nt Value I mpacts
....................................... 10-24 Figure 10.4.2 Dry-Ty

pe Distri bution Tra

nsforme rs: Net Energy

Savings and Net Pr

esent Value I mpacts
................................................ 10-2710-1 CHAPTER

10: NATION

AL IMPA CT ANALYSI S
10.1 INTRODUC TION The Energy

Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) state s that any new or amended standar d must be chosen so as to achie ve the ma ximum improve

ment in energy

efficie ncy that is technolo gicall

y f easible and economically

justified . In d

etermini ng whet her economic justification exists, the Department of Energy (DOE) must determine that the benefits of the trial standard level exceed its burdens to the greate st extent practicable. Key factors in this decision are: the total projected amount of energ y savings likely

to result directly from the imposition of the standard, and the savings in operating c osts throughout the estimated average life of the covered product in the ty

pe (or class) compared to any increase in the price of, or in the initial charges for or maintenanc e expenses of, the covered products which are likely to result from the imposition of the standard. To satisfy this EPCA requirement and to more fully understand the na

tional impact of potential efficiency

regulations for distribution transformers, the Department c onducted a national impact analysis. This ana lysis assessed future na

tional energy

savings (NES) from trial transformer standards as well as the national ec onomic impact using the net present value (NPV) metric. The NES is the cumulative incremental energy savings from a transformer eff iciency standard, relative to a base case sce nario of no national standard, over a forec ast period. The Department calculated NES for eac h trial standard level in units of quadrillion British thermal units (quads) for standards that it assumed will be implemented in the y ear 2010. The NPV is the net present value of the incremental ec onomic impact on consumers from a trial st andard l evel. The Depar

tment cal culated

the NPV usi

ng a met hod similar

to the NES, except that it estimated incremental costs and benefits instead of energ y, and discounted the ne

t benefits rather than calculating them as an un-discounted sum. The Department discounted purchases, expenses, and operating costs for tra nsformers using a national average discount factor . It calcu lated the NP V imp act fro m tran sform ers th at are p urchas ed bet ween 20 10 th rough 2038 to calculate the total NPV impact from purchases during the forecast period. The Department developed a Microsoft Excel spreadshe et, the National Impact Spreadsheet, to imp lement the calcula tions desc ribed ab ove. The

spreadsheet ca

lculates capaci ty and oper ating c ost saving s associa ted with e ach of the trial st andard l evels. The NES ana lys is consider s cumulati

ve ener gy savings through the y ear 2038 , while the

NPV consid

ers cap acitya

The Depa rtment

mai nt ain s the s ame t ime peri od f or NPV as it

did in th e ANOPR. 10-2 and operating cost savings throug h the year 2073 a for transformers purchased in the period 2010 to 2038. B y ta

king the annual di ffere

nce between the b ase cas e scena rio and tr ial standa rd level s and summing the discounted annual results, the spreadsheet ca lculates an NPV for each trial standard level relative to the base case. 10.1.1 National Impact Analysis Spreadsheet Flowchart Figure 10.1.1 presents a g raphical flow diagram of the distribution transformer national impact analysis (NES and N PV) model and spreadsheet. I n the diagram, the arrows show the direction of information flow of the calculation. The information beg ins with inputs (shown as paralle logram s). As inf

ormation f

lows from

these inp uts, it may

be integ rated in to interme diate results ( shown as r

ectangles) or th

rough in tegra ting sums or diffe rences (shown a s circle s) into major outputs (shown as boxes with curved bottom edges). Note that the shipments model portion of the flow diagram (shaded) is discussed in Chapter 9.10-3

Figure 10.1.1 National Impact Analysis Flowchart 

# / • • 

# .. . , ."



# _ .

.. "



# - .l 

# •

. w 

# -



# ...... .... . '" uo , .. .. .... ..,.

.. ... . .... 1*0 "**~** 

# . " 

# .. .. .. 

# - j -"'j 

# _.-

" 

# .

•

• 

# I-

... . M ..



# .

. . "10-4

The calculation starts with the shipments model (described in Chapter 9), which integrates the inputs of 2001 shipments estimates from the Department’s contra ctor, 1 the U.S. Bure au of Economic A

naly sis (B EA) t

rans former quantit

y i ndex, 2 electricity mar

ket shares from DOE’s Energy

Information Administration (EI A), 3, 4 and equipment price estimates from the lifecycle c ost (LCC) analysis, to produce a backcast and a forec ast of total shipments. The Department used the total shipments and a retirement function to produce an accounting of inservice transformers (stocks), enabling DOE to estimate the stock that is affected by trial standards and transformer retirements. Total transf ormer capacity

shipments minus transformer capaci ty r etireme nts in new c apacity

shipments,which ar

e those tr ansformers made

to supply ne w e le ct ri ca l c ap ac it y, i .e . g ro wt h i n t ra ns fo rm er ca pa ci ty. After the shipments calculation, the NES and NPV calculations begin. Key inputs from the LCC analysis are the average ra ted losses for both no-load and load losses, and the cost of transformers, in

cluding installat ion. The D epartme

nt adjusts t

he losses and the e quipment c osts for tran sformer

size and pr

oduct class, to convert the d ata from repre sentative

design l ines to average product class infor mation. Additional inputs on average and peak losses—including root mea n square (RMS) load

ing, pe ak loadin

g, and p eak res

ponsibility

factor —allow DO E to convert rated lo sses into a

ctual loss es. At this

point, the

informat ion flow f or the NE S and NPV calcula tion splits in

to two path s. On one path, the NES calculation sums the watt-hours of energ y consumed by

the affected stock, and take s the diff erence betwee n the base case an d standar ds scena rio to ca lculate site ene rgy savings . Margi

nal heat rates fr om the Nat

ional Ene rgy Modeling

Syst em (NEMS) 5 then convert the site energy savings to energy

savings at the source (i.e., at the power plant). The marginal heat rates from NEMS include the tra nsmission and distribution losses. (The Department perf

ormed a s ensitivity

analy sis to ana lyze an improvement in the heat r ate as a result of the efficiency

improvement in the standards scenario; the impact was not significant.) The sum of annual energy savings for the forecast period throug h 2038 then provides the final NES resul

t. On the other path, the NPV ca lculation brings i n margi nal pric e inputs f

rom the LCC analysis for both ene

rgy costs and capacity

costs and for both load losses and no-load losses. The marginal prices, when combined with the actua l peak and average losses, provide the estimate of the oper ating c ost. Mean

while, the adjusted equipmen

t installe d cost time s the annu al shipmen

ts provides the estimate of the total annual equipment costs. The Department ca lculated three differences to calculate the net impact of the trial standard. The first difference was between the trial standards scenario equipment costs and the base case equipment costs, to obtain the net equipmen t cost incr ease fr om a trial standar d. The se cond diff

erence was between the b ase cas e scenario operating cost and the trial standa rds scenario operating cost, to obtain the net opera ting cost savi ngs from a trial standard . The thir d differ ence was betwee

n the net o

peratin g cost savings and the net equipment cost increase, to get the net expense/savings for each y ear. The Department then discounted the net expenses/savings to 2004 and summed them over the y ears 2010–2073 for transformers purchased during or before 2038, to provide the NPV impact of a trial standard.10-5

The Depa rtment pr ovided a d

etailed t echnica l description of the

shipments m

odel in Chapter 9 of this TSD; similar descriptions of the other two models are provided below—the NES model in section 10.2, and the NPV model in section 10.3. Each technical description begins with a summary

of the model. It then provides a desc riptive overview of how the Department performs each model’s ca lculations, and follows with a summary of the inputs. The final subsections of each technical description descr ibe each of the major input and computation steps in detail and with equations, when appropriate. After the tec hnical model descriptions, the Department pres ents the r esults of t he national impact

analy sis calcu lations.
10.2 NATIONAL E NERGY SAVINGS The Dep artme nt dev elope d the N ES mo del to estim ate th e tota l nati onal e nergy savi ngs usin g the res ults from t he shi pment s mod el, co mbin ed wit h info rmati on fro m the LC C on en ergy savings. The savings shown in the NES reflect de creased energy losses resulting from the installat ion of new , more ef

ficient t ransfor mer units nationwide , in compa rison to a base ca se with no national standards. Positive values of NES correspond to net energy savings, i.e., a decrease in energy

consumption with standards in comparison to the energy consumption in the base case scenario. 10.2.1 National Energy Savings Overview The Department calculated the cumulative incre mental energy

savings from a trial transformer ef

ficienc y st andard,relative

to a base case sc enario o f no stand ard, ove r the for ecast period. I t calcula ted NES for each t

rial stan dard level, in units

of quads, for stan

dards tha t it assumed will be implemented in the yea r 2010. The NES calculation started with estimates of transformer shipments and stocks (in-servic e transf

ormers) , which a

re outputs of the sh

ipments model (Cha

pter 9). The Depa

rtment the

n obtaine d estimate s of tran sformer losses fr om the L CC analysis (Chapter 8) , and calculated the total energy use by the stock of tra

nsformers for each year, f or both a base case and a standards c ase. Over time, in the standards case, more-e fficient transformers gradually

replace less-efficient ones. Thus, the ene rgy per unit capacity

used by the stock of transformers gradually decreases in the standards case r elative to the base case. The Department converted energ y used by the transformers into the amount of energy consumed at the source of electricity

generation (the source ene rgy ) with a site-to-source conversion factor. The site-to-source factor acc ounts for transmission, distribution, and generation losses. For each year a nalyzed, the differ

ence in source energy

use between the base case and the sta ndards scenario is the annual energy savings. The Department summed the annual ener gy sa vings from 2010 through 2038 to calculate the total NES for the forec ast period. In calculating the

NES, the Department did not assume anytrends in transformer nameplate ef ficienc y be sides the

increme ntal eff iciency improveme

nt indica ted by the L CC calculation. The Department examined proprietary shipments data provided by the industry and found that the data lacked conclusive trends in effic iency improvement. The refore, the Department felt that future efficiency trends were genera

lly indeterminate and c

hose to use a10-6

fixed baseline efficiency . The Department also assumed that the efficiency of transformers does not degrade over time. This means the annual e nergy savings can be described in terms of an affected stock (see Equation 10.1), as de scribed in section 9.3.10 in the shipments chapter: Eq. 10.1 where: AES(y) = the annual energy savings in ye ar y , UEC Base = the site unit energy consumption for the base case, UEC Std = the site unit energy consumption for the standards case, and Aff_Stock(y) = stock of transformers of all vintages that are operational in yea

r y . Then, given the a

nnual ene rgy savings , the NES c an be ca lculated as a simple

sum: Eq. 10.2
where: Std_year = the y ear sta ndards c ome into e ffect, SiteToSource(y) = the site-to-source conversion factor in y ear y , and AEC = the annual energy consumption. Once the shipments model provides the estimate for the affected stock, the key to the NES ca lcula tion is in calcul ating UEC Base and UEC

Std , using the input from the LCC analy sis and including the site-to-source conversion factor. In the next section, the inputs necessary for the NES calculation are summarized and then presented individually

. 10.2.2 National Ene rgy Savings Inputs The NES model inputs fall into three broad categories: (1) those that help convert the data from the LCC into data for the produc t classes and transformer size distributions used in the NES; (2) those that help calculate the unit energy consumption; and (3) the site-to-source conve rsion factor , whic h enab les th e calcu lati on of s ource e nergy consu mpti on fro m sit e energy use. The specific list of NES m

odel input s is as foll ows: 1. Size Scalin

g of Losses and

Costs 2. Mapping of LCC Desig n Line Data to Product Classes 3. Mapping

of Candid

ate Stand ard L evels to T

rial Stand ard L evels10-7

4. Root Mean Square Loading 5. Load Growth 6. Affected Stock 7. Effective Date of Standard 8. Unit Energy

Consumption 9. Electricity Site-to-Source Conversion
10.2.2.1 Size Scaling of Losses a nd Costs The Depa rtment use d a scali

ng rela tionship, or equati on, to proj ect the e conomic r esults from one transformer de sign line

to similar t

ransfor mers of d iffere nt sizes. Th

is relati onship is a key eleme

nt in adjusting losses and costs from a representative transfor mer in the LCC to a distribution of transformer sizes represented in the NES calculation. To be consistent ac ross trial standard levels, the Department used the same scaling for the National Electrical Manufacture rs Association (NEMA)’s TP1 standard level as it did for the other levels. NEMA’ s scaling was appare ntly based on a diffe rent set o f repre sentative

units than

was used by t he Depa rtment. A s a result, f or trans formers

other tha n the representa

tive units, which we

re key ed to NEMA

TP1 efficiencies, there is a slight differ ence in efficiency

level between NEMA’s TP 1 and the Department's TP 1, as use d to calc ulate na tional impa

cts. As described in the engineering analysis, the Depa

rtment applied the 0.75 power scaling rule (the “0.75 scaling rule”) f or projecting losses and costs from one design line to tra nsformers of other sizes. In the NES analy sis, shipments are calculated in terms of installed capacity . The losses associated with a stock of transformers, and the costs associa ted with a capacity

shipped, are est imated by multiply ing the r elevant capaci ty ti mes the a verag e losses, or costs p er unit capaci ty. Befor e apply ing the 0 .75 scali

ng rule , the Dep artment c alculate d the losse s and costs per unit of installed capacity within a given engineering design line. Then it calculated an adjus tment factor usin g the 0. 75 sca ling ru le to a ccoun t for t he fact that t he repr esent ative design line unit used in the engineering analy sis is not exactly the “average” transformer size for the set of transformers that the design line repre sents. This adjustment factor is given by the following equation: Eq. 10.3
where:10-8

AdjFactor = adjustmen t factor that gives the shi

pments-weighte d losses or costs per transformer when multiplied by the design line losses or costs, Ship i = shipments in the i -th size category , Cap i = the rated capacity for the transformers in the i -th size category , and Cap DL = the rated capacity of representative unit of the design line. The Department also used the shipment-weighted a verage size of transformers repres ented by

a partic ular des ign line

to calcu late the a verag e loss per

capaci ty ( AvgLossPerCap DL ), as described in the following equation: Eq. 10.4 where: LossPerCap DL = the loss, or cost per unit capacity , for the design line unit from the

LCC analysis, and Cap avg = the shipment-weighted averag e size of transformers represented by

a particular design line. Once the losses and costs from the L CC represent the correct size distribution, they need a further adjustment so that they represent the appropriate product classes, as described in the next section. 10.2.2.2 Mapping Life-Cycle Cost Design Line Data to Product Classes The NES and NPV calculations use the LCC ca lculations as the source of most input data. The Department performed the L CC calculations by desig

n line, whereas any

eventual standard would be promulgated by product class. As a first step, therefore, the NES ca lculation aggr egate s the L CC design

line data into produ

ct classe s. This des ign-line-to-pr oduct-c lass aggr egation was the

process by w hich the D epartme

nt took the

results f rom an ec onomic analy sis of engineering desig

n lines and combined them to provide estimates of economic impact by product c lass. To represent the variety

of designs in some product classes, the Department ana lyzed up to three different design lines per produc t class. Specifically, pr

oduct class 1 (single-phase, medium-voltage, liquid-immersed transformers) is repre sented by three design lines and product class 2 (three-phase, medium-voltage, liquid-immerse d transformers) is represented by two design lines. The Department did not specifically examine single-phase, dry -type desig

n lines. For si ngle-p hase p roduc t clas ses 5 a nd 9, t he Depa rtmen t used the ap propr iate t hree-p hase d esign lines divid

ed by three. T able 10.2 .1 prese nts the map

ping of d esign li ne (DL ) to produ ct class (PC).10-9

Table 10.2.1 Mapping of De sign Line to Product Cl ass Prod uct Class BIL* kV ** Capa city

kVA *** M apping
PC 1, Li qui d- Im mer se d, MV, † Single-Phase Any 10-833 DL 1 + DL 2 + DL 3 PC 2, Liquid-Imm ersed, M V, T hree-Pha se Any 15-2500 DL 4 + DL 5 PC 5, Dry-T ype, M V, Single-P hase 20-45 15-833 (DL 9 ÷ 3) + (DL 10 ÷ 3) PC 6, Dry-T ype, M V, T hree-Pha se 20-45 15-2500 DL 9 + DL 10 PC 7, Dry-T ype, M V, Single-P hase 46-95 15-833 (DL 11 ÷ 3) + (DL 12 ÷ 3) PC 8, Dry-T ype, M V, T hree-Pha se 46-95 15-2500 DL 11 + DL 12 PC 9, Dry-T ype, M V, Single-P hase $ 96 75-833 DL 13 ÷ 3 PC 10, D ry-Type, M V, T hree-Pha se $ 96 225-2500 DL 13 * BIL = Basic i mpulse i nsulat ion level ** kV = kilovolt *** kVA = kilovolt-ampere † MV = medium-voltage To aggreg ate losses from more than one design line, the Depa rtment took a shipments-capacity-weighted average of the per-kVA transformer cha racteristics from the economic analy sis of the design lines and applied the average per-capacity values to the estimated capacity

shipped for each product class. The Depa rtment’s contractor 1 provided the capacity shipped for each design line (and ea ch product class), the LCC analy sis provided the economic results f or each design l ine, and D OE used the 0.75 ru le to estimate the r

e-scal ed cost and loss estimates for each size category represented by

each design line. Equation 10.5 provides the aver age los s per unit

capaci ty o f product class (

AvgLossPerCap PC ), as derived from the average loss per unit capac ity for a desig n line: Eq. 10.5
where: AvgLossPerCap DL = the average loss per unit capa city for the de sign line, and MS DL = the capacity market share of the design line. Equation 10.5 sums those design lines that constitute a product class. The AvgLossPerCap PC

represents the average

loss per unit capacity of

the transformer load. For no-load losses, no more adjustment is needed; for load losses, howeve r, the losses at rated lo ad need

to be converted to

losses at a

ctual loa ding. The RMS loadin

g is a ke y f actor in estimatin g load lo sses at a

ctual loa ding. The next section describes the RMS loading

input.10-10

10.2.2.3 Mapping Candidate Standard Level to Trial Standard Level The Department conducted the LCC analysis for six alternate eff iciency leve ls, i.e., candidate standard levels (CSLs) , for each representative unit in the 13 desig n lines. The Department selected the CSL e fficiency levels for each design line by applying a

set of common economic criteria to intermediate L CC analyses as discussed in Chapter 8, resulting in unique sets of CSL efficiencies for each design line. I

t mapped these LCC analy sis results to trial standard levels (TSLs) for the 10 product classes. All CSLs directly map to their corresponding TSLs, with the exception of design lines 1 and 4. Constraints on material selec tion combinations wi th in pr od uc t c la ss es re su lt ed in il lo gi ca l c om bi na ti on s o f m at er ia ls fo r D L 4. Ad di ti on al ly, because the representative units in design lines 1 a nd 2 are quite close in size, overlaps occurred in the scaled analy sis which cause inconsistent results. The Department resolved both issues with rela tively minor remapping

of CSL to TSL f or desig n line 1 an

d design line 4, as shown in Table 10.2.2.
Table 10.2.2 Mapping of Candidate Stand ard Level s to Trial St andard Levels

DL1 DL2 DL3 DL4 DL5 DL9 DL10 DL11 DL12 DL13 TSL1 CSL1 CSL1 CSL1 CSL1 CSL1 CSL1 CSL1 CSL1 CSL1 CSL1 TSL2 CSL1 CSL2 CSL2 CSL2 CSL2 CSL2 CSL2 CSL2 CSL2 CSL2 TSL3 CSL1 CSL3 CSL3 CSL3 CSL3 CSL3 CSL3 CSL3 CSL3 CSL3 TSL4 CSL2 CSL4 CSL4 CSL3 CSL4 CSL4 CSL4 CSL4 CSL4 CSL4 TSL5 CSL3 CSL5 CSL5 CSL5 CSL5 CSL5 CSL5 CSL5 CSL5 CSL5 TSL6 CSL6 CSL6 CSL6 CSL6 CSL6 CSL6 CSL6 CSL6 CSL6 CSL6
10.2.2.4 Root Mean Square Loading Energy losses in transformers follow the RMS load, not the arithmetic average load. The Department calculated the RMS loading as the root mean squa re of the transformer load, divided by the transfor

mer rated capacity, times the power factor. (As explained in Chapter 6, while the Department’s met

hod for a nalysis can de

rive re sults for vary

ing powe r factors, for the analy

sis presented here the Department set the powe r factor to the value of one.) The De partment used the aver age na tional RMS lo ading f

or each design l ine as ca

lculated in the L CC analy

sis. These values range between 30.5 pe rcent and 59.1 percent for the diffe rent design lines. 10.2.2.5 Load Growth The fractional load growth is the frac tion by which the load has incr eased since a transformer was installed. Loa d growth occurs when new equipment, new appliances, or additional activities increase the energy loads on the circuits served by distribution transformers.10-11

Load growth has the impact of increasing the load losses relative to the losses that the Department estimated to have occurred during the first year

of installation. The Depa rtment ca lculated the fra ctional lo ad growth from a n estimate d load g

rowth ra te that it used as an input to the LCC analysis. There is a maximum load growth, LGRMax, which is set by the Depar

tment at 50 percent for liquid-immersed transformers. The 50 pe rcent value represents the approximate amount of growth in load that can oc cur without overloading the transformer be

yon d a reas onable po int. When overloadi ng does occur, t he trans former i s assumed to be relocated and installed in a new location with the same initial peak loa ding as when originally

installed. 6 See I

nstitute of

Electric al and Ele ctronic s Engine ers, I nc. (I EEE) Std C57.91-1995 7 for details on permissible overloading of mineral-oil immersed transf ormers. Since IEEE does not report data on permissible overloading of dry -type units, the Depa

rtment used the same values for both liquid-immersed and dry -type transf

ormers. The age of the transformer at w

hich the l oad switc

hes to initi al peak l oad is gi ven by Equation 1 0.6: Eq. 10.6
where: age

Max = the maximum a ge of tr ansformer afte

r which ti me the loa

d switche s to initial peak load (yea

rs), and LGR = the annual load growth rate (%). Thus, the equation for the load growth as a func tion of the age of the transformer is as follows: Eq. 10.7 for age < age

Max , and Eq. 10.8 for age >= age Max where: LGrwth (age) = the fractional load growth, and age = the age of the transformer ( years)

. The Department then used the load growth to adjust the RMS loading e stimate for the affected stock . The mathematica l equation for this a

djustment i s as follow s:10-12 Eq. 10.9

where LAdj ust(y) is the load adjustment factor in ye ar y . All other variabl es have b een def

ined in previous equations. The Department used a load adjustment factor to ca lculate an adjusted RMS loading that incorporates load growth into the unit energ y consumption, as describe d in section 10.2.2.7. 10.2.2.6 Affected Stock The affected stock is an output of the shipments model (Chapter 9) and a key input for the NES and NPV calculations. The affected stock re presents that portion of the transformer stock that is potentially impacted by a trial standard. It there fore consists of those transformers in the stock that are purchased in or after the y ear the trial standard has taken effe ct, as described by the following equation: Eq. 10.10 where: Aff_ Stock (y) = stock of a ffecte d transf

ormers o f all vinta

ges tha t are ope rationa l in year y , Ship (y) = shipment of new transformers in y ear y, Std_year = year the standard becomes effective, and Stock (age) = age in y ears of the stock of transformers.
10.2.2.7 Unit Energy Consumption One of the final q

uantities the Depa rtment ca lculated for the N ES estimate

was the u

nit energy consumption for affected stock. The unit energ y consumption times the capac ity shipped and the site-to-source conversion factor e quals the annual energy consumption from which DOE derived total nati onal ene

rgy savings

. Annual unit energy

consumption ( UEC(y) ) for af fected stock is th e annu al ener gy consumption per unit capacity for transformers shipped after the ef fective date of a standard. The Department calculated the losses per transfor mer as the sum of no-load losses plus the load loss es. It cal culat ed the load l osses as the rated l oad lo ss ti mes th e squa re of R MS lo ading, adjusted for load growth. Average energy consumed per unit capacity for affected stock varies from y ear to y ear due to load g rowth ef fects.a For m ore info rmatio n on N EM S, refer to the D epa rtmen t’s EIA doc ume ntation. A useful summary is Nati onal Ener gy Modeling

Sys te m: An Overview 2003

. 5 DOE/EIA approve s us e of t he name NEM S to des cri be onl y an off ici al v ersi on of the model withou t an y modi fi cati on to c ode or da ta. Becau se t he a nal ys is ent ail s s ome minor code mod ifi cations and the mod el is ru n u nde r p ol ic y s ce na ri os th at ar e v ar iati ons on DOE/ EIA as su mpt io ns , t he na me NE MS- BT refers to the model as used here (BT is DOE’s Building Techno logies Program, under whose aegis thi s work was performed). 10-13 The annu al unit energy

consumpti on for distribution t ransfor mers for affected stock

is given by Equation 10.11: Eq. 10.11 where: E

NL = rated no-load losses per kVA capacity , E LL = ra te d l oa d l os se s p er kV A c ap ac it y, RMS = root mean square, and Ladjust(y) = loading adjustment factor for y ear y . Once the unit energy

consumption for affected stock was defined, only one more input was necessary

to complete the NES calculation: the site-to-source conversion fac tor. 10.2.2.8 Electricity Site-to-Source Conversion The site-to-sourc e conve

rsion fa ctor for electri city

is the fac tor by which site

energ y ( in kWh) is multiplied to obtain primary (source) ene rgy (in Btu). Since the NES estimates the chang e in ener

gy use of the

resourc e (e.g ., the power plant ), this conversion

factor is neces sary

to accoun t for l osses in gene ratio n, tra nsmi ssio n, and dist ribut ion. After c alcul ating e nergy consumption at the site of its use (i.e., the installed transformer), the Department multiplied it by the conversion factor to obtain primary energy consumption, expressed in quads (quadrillion Btus). This conversion permitted comparison across (source) fuels by taking into account the heat content of different fuels and the ef ficiency of

different energy

conversion processes. The annual values are the U.S. average conversion factors for electric ity gene ration for both peak and base load reduction. The Department used marg inal heat rates corresponding to base load for noload losses (or core losses) and marginal he at rates corresponding to peak load f or load losses (or coil losses). It used these differ ent rates because load losses are hig her during transformer peak loads while no-load losses occur at all times. The Department obtained these conversion factors using a variant of the NEMS, called NEMS-BT. a Table 10.2.3 presents the average annual conversion factors the Department used.10-14

Table 10.2.3 Average Site-to-Source Conversion Fac tors for No-Load Losses and Load Losses Year For No-Load Losses For Load Losses 2010 2.699 2.931 2011 2.699 2.931 2012 2.699 2.931 2013 2.568 2.809 2014 2.390 2.578 2015 2.390 2.458 2016 2.390 2.345 2017 2.390 2.283 2018 2.390 2.222 2019–38 2.390 2.180 The Department used a time-series projection of c onversion factors, changing f rom year to year, wh

ich it cal culated

as follow s: 1. Start with an integrated projection of electricity supply and demand (e .g., the Annual Energy Outlook

( AEO20 05) reference case) 4 and extract the source energy consumption. 2. Estimate projected energy savings due to possible standards for each y ear (e.g., using the NES spreadsheet model). 3. Fe ed th es e e ne rg y sa vi ng s b ac k t o t he NE MS -B T m od el as a n ew sc en ar io , s pe ci fi ca ll y a devia tion from t he refe rence ca se, to obtai n the c orresp ondi ng sour ce energy consumption. 4. Obtain the difference in source ene rgy consumption between this trial standard level scenario and the referenc e case. 5. Divide the source energy savings, in Btu, adjusted for load-specific tra nsmission and distribution losses, by the site energ y savings, in kWh, to provide the time serie s of conversion factors in Btu per kWh. The conversion factors chang e over time and account for the displacement of generating sources. The NES spreadsheet model includes the conver sion factors for each y

ear of the projection. The Department and stakeholders ca n examine the effects of alternative assumptions by r evising this column

of number

s.10-15

The conversion of site energy savings to source energy savings and the summation of energy savings over the forecast period c omplete the NES calculations—the results section of this chapter (section 10.4) presents the output from the NES model. The next section (section 10.3) describes the technical details of the NPV calc ulation.
10.3 NET PRESENT VALUE The Department estimated the national financial impact on consumers from the imposition o f new energy -effic iency

standar ds using a national NPV acc ounting c omponent i n the national impact spreadsheet. The Depar tment comb ined outpu

t of the sh ipments mod

el with energy savings and financial data from the LCC to calculate an annual stream of costs and benefits resulting from trial distribution transformer energ y-eff iciency standa

rds. It discounted this time series to the year 2004 a nd summed the result, yielding the national NPV. 10.3.1 Net Present Value Overview The NPV is the present value of the incremental ec onomic impact of a trial standard level. Like the NES, the NPV calcula tion started with transformer shipments and transformer stocks, estimates of which are outputs from the shipments model. The Department then obtained estimate s of tran sformer

first costs, losses, and ave rage margina

l electr icity costs from the L CC analysis. I

t calculated the amount spent on transformer purchase s and installation, and then calcula ted the c orresponding op erating costs by apply ing the margina

l prices t o the ene rgy (both energy and electricity

system capac ity) used by the stock of transformers for each y ear, for both a base case and a standards case . Over time in the standards case, more-expensive, but moreefficient transformers gra dually replac e less-efficient transformers. Thus, the oper ating cost per unit capacity used by

the stock of transformers gradually decreases in the standards case r elative to the base case, while the equipment costs increase. The Department discounted purchases, expenses, and oper ating costs for transformers using a simple national average discount fa ctor. The discount factor converts a future e xpense or benefit to a present value. The differe nce in present value of all expenses and benefits betwee n the base case and standards scena rio is the national NPV impact. The Department calculated the NPV impact from transformers that were purchased between the effective date of the standard and 2038, inclusive, to calculate the total NPV impact from purchases during the forecast period. Mathematically, NPV is the value in the present time of a time series of costs and savings, described by

the equation: Eq. 10.12 where: PVS = the present value of electricity savings, and10-16

PVC = the present value of equipment costs including installation. PVS and PVC are det ermined accord ing to the following

expressio

ns: Eq. 10.13
where: OC

Base/Cap(y) = operati ng cost p er unit c apacity

of trans former f

or the ba se case in ye ar y , Aff_Stock(y) = stock of transformers of all vintages that are operational in yea

r y , y = the year (from effective date of the trial standa rd to the year

when units purchased in 2038 retire), and Discount Factor(y) = discount factor for the y ear y, defined in Eq. 10.14. Eq. 10.14
where: reference year = year 2004, a nd discount r

ate = the rate of discount as described in section 10.3.2.7.
Eq. 10.15
where: FC

Std /Cap (y) = first cost of the transformer per unit of capac ity for a trial standar d level S td

in year y. First cost is defined in Eq. 10.16 and described in section 10.3.2.1. Std_year = the year standards come into effect, and Ship (y) = shipments of transformers in ye ar yfor the standards case. The Department calculated NPV using its projections of na tional expenditures for distribution transformers, including purchase price (e quipment and installation price) and operating costs (electricity and maintenance costs). I t calculated costs and savings as the di ffe ren ce b etw een a tr ial st and ard s ca se a nd a bas e ca se s cen ari o wi th out nat io nal st and ard s. It discounte d future

costs and savings to the pre sent. The Department calculated a discount fac tor from the discount rate and the number of years be tween the ye ar to which the sum is being discounted (2004) and the y ear in which the10-17

costs and savings occur. The NPV is the sum over time (2010–2073) of the discounted net financial savings. The following sections describe the inputs specific to the NPV ca lculation. 10.3.2 Net Present Value Inputs The NPV mo del inputs

include c ost inputs, inputs impor tant for d etailing electri city capacity costs, and several of the inputs used by the NES calculation. This section provides details on those inputs that have not yet bee n described as part of the NES and shipments models. The spec ific list of

inputs for

the NPV is as follows: 1. First Cost 2. Operati

ng Cost 3. Peak Responsibility Factor 4. Initial Peak L oad 5. Electricity Price F orecast Scalar 6. Marginal Elect

ricity Costs 7. Discount R

ate
10.3.2.1 First C ost The first cost includes all of the initial costs that are incurred with the installation of a tr an sf or me r. Th e D ep ar tm en t e xp re ss es fi rs t c os t i n t er ms of co st pe r u ni t c ap ac it y. S pe ci fi ca ll y, it defines the first cost of acquiring a transfor mer with the following equation: FC/Cap = (P + Install)/Cap Eq. 10.16 where: FC = the first cost, Cap = the rated capacity of the transformer, P = the price of the transformer including shipping and taxes, and Install = the installation cost of the transformer. In the NPV calculation, these va lues are obtained from the L CC calculation as the averages for specif

ic design lines. The Department applied an adjustment fa ctor to convert the first cost of a representative design to an e stimated average first cost for a distribution of sizes10-18

within a particular product class. The adjustment incorporates the 0.75 sc aling rule and the design-line-to-product-class mapping. This a djustment factor is explained in detail in sections 10.2.2.1 and 10.2.2.2. The costs are expressed in units of 2004$ per kVA of rate d transformer ca pa ci ty. Table 10.3.1 shows the resulting mean first costs per kVA for distribution transformers by TSL a nd produc

t class.10-19

Table 10.3.1 First C ost of Distribution Tr ansforme rs by Trial S tandard Level and

Product Class (2004$/kVA) Pro duct C lass Ba se TSL 1* (TP 1) TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6
PC 1, Liquid-Imm ersed, M V, Single-P hase 61.85 62.46 62.67 62.85 63.79 69.43 106.66 PC 2, Liquid-Imm ersed, M V, T hree-Pha se 20.48 21.04 22.12 24.37 24.99 35.82 37.87 PC 5, Dry-T ype, M V, Single-P hase 27.58 28.24 28.82 30.15 33.70 44.65 44.64 PC 6, Dry-T ype, M V, T hree-Pha se 22.36 23.18 23.72 24.79 26.79 35.37 35.36 PC 7, Dry-T ype, M V, Single-P hase 32.61 33.36 33.97 35.31 38.12 47.16 47.17 PC 8, Dry-T ype, M V, T hree-Pha se 23.43 23.80 24.05 24.65 26.41 36.30 36.31 PC 9, Dry-T ype, M V, Single-P hase 28.90 29.10 29.50 30.37 34.92 47.60 47.61 PC 10, D ry-Type, M V, T hree-Pha se 22.46 22.62 22.92 23.60 27.14 36.99 36.99 *TSL = Trial Sta ndard Level 10.3.2.2 Operating

Cost Transformer operating cost is the annua l cost of transformer losses. Operating costs ar e a complex, yet essential, part of c alculating the national economic impact of a trial distribution transformer sta

ndard. T he Depa rtment use d 11 distinct inputs to c alculate operati ng costs . This large number of

inputs was

necessa ry because transformers ha

ve both no -load an

d load loss es, and because electricity

has both energy

and capacity

costs. The combination of distinct losses and distinct capa

city and ene rgy costs cr eates the neces sity

for four price a nd two loss coefficients. Potential load growth requires a loa d growth adjustment factor. Peak loading, pe ak load coincidence, and average loading require three additional fa ctors to characterize load losses. Finally , the Dep artment u sed an el ectrici ty price forecast

scalar to chara cterize f uture tre nds in electricity pr

ices consistent with the AEO2005 forecast. The Department assumed zero maintenance cost in ca lculating the transformer operating costs. It calculated annua l operating costs using the following formula to ca pture the diversity of potentia l factors that ca

n affec t these c osts: OC/C ap = EPFS(y) × (E NL × (NLLMCC + 87 60 × NLLME C) + E LL × (LAdj ust(y)) 2 × (PRF × PL 2 × LLMCC + 8760 × RMS 2 × LLMEC))/Cap Eq. 10.17 where: OC = the operating cost, Cap = the rated capacity of the transformer, EPFS(y) = the electricity pr ice forecast scalar for y

ear y , E NL = the no-load losses at rated load, NLLMCC = the no-load loss marginal cost of capacity ,10-20

NLLMEC = the no-lo ad loss ma rginal energ y c ost, E LL = the load losses at rated load, LAdjust(y) = the load growth adjustment factor in y ear y , PRF = the peak responsibility fa ctor, PL = the initial peak load, LLMCC = the load loss marginal cost of capacity , RMS = the root mean square loading of the transfor mer, and LLMEC = the load l oss marginal ene rgy cost. The Department expressed the operating c osts in units of 2004$ per kVA of rated capaci ty. As in the N

ES calcu lation (se e sections 10.2.2. 1 and 10.2 .2.2), the Department also applied an adjustment factor to incorporate the 0.75 scaling rule to E

NL and E

LL , to convert from design l ine data

to product class estimates. The following four sections explain the inputs of the operating cost equa tion that are not explained in the NES section. 10.3.2.3 Peak Responsibility Factor The transformer peak responsibility factor (PRF) is the fraction of the transforme r peak that is coincident with the system peak, c alculated by ta king the square of the ratio of the tra nsf orm er l oad at t he t im e of

th e cu st om er p eak lo ad t o t he t ran sfo rme r pe ak l oad . In combinat ion with the

initial pe ak loadin

g, the PRF

is neces sary

for estimating the capac ity c ost impacts of transformer load losses. The Department used the a verage PRF from the hourly and monthly load analy

sis for the liquid-immersed and dry-type transf ormers, respectively , as reported in the LCC analy sis. Table 10.3.2 presents the PRFs used in the analysis for the 10 product c lasses. Table 10.3.2 Peak Re sponsibility F actors by Product Class PC 1 PC 2 PC 5 PC 6 PC 7 PC 8 PC 9 PC 10 PRF 0.35 0.61 0.52 0.53 0.53 0.54 0.54 0.54 10.3.2.4 Initial P eak Load The initial peak loading is the annual per-unit peak load on the tra nsformer during the first year of operation. This factor, in combination with the PRF, is necessary for calculating capaci ty c ost impacts from tra

nsforme r load los ses. The

initial pe ak load is

estimate d as a percen tage of the rate d peak loa

d of the tr ansformer. The

IEEE ’s Draft Guide for Distribution Transformer Loss Evaluation 6 defines a similar but different measure of pea k transformer loading called an “Equivalent Annual Peak L oad” that accounts for change s in peak load over the life of the transformer. Rather than use the equiva lent annual peak load method, the Department characterized a range

of possible initial peak loads by defining a distribution of initial peak loads.10-21

Chapter 6 , section

6.3.4, pr ovides fu rther de scription

of DOE’s

method. Ta

ble 10.3. 3 presen

ts the initia l peak loa dings use d in the analy sis for the 10 product classes

. Table 10.3.3 Initial P eak Loading by Product Class PC 1 PC 2 PC 5 PC 6 PC 7 PC 8 PC 9 PC 10 Initi al Peak Loading 0.87 0.86 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 10.3.2.5 Electricity Price F orecast Scalar The elec tricity price f orecast scalar

converts curre

nt electr icity costs into f

orecasted costs for the period 2004–2073. The electricity price forecast scalar is the ra tio of the unit cost of electricity in re al dollars in a given y ear to the real cost of electricity in the year 2004. T

he Department used AEO2005 4 forecasts to obtain the electricity price forecast scalar. F or the period be yon d 2025, the

Department used t

he BEA r eal dolla r price trend fr om 2015 to 20 25 to extrapolate the electricity price scalar. 10.3.2.6 Marginal Electricity Costs The characterization of four distinct margina l electricity costs is nec essary to ca lculate the operating costs of transformers and the f inancial impact of transformer efficienc y standards. The four ty pes of ma rginal costs ar e: no-loa d loss marg

inal cap acity

cost ( NLLMCC

), load lo ss marginal capa

city cost ( LLMCC ), no-loa d loss marg

inal ene rgy cost ( NLLMEC ), and loa d loss marginal ener

gy cost ( LLMEC ). In an electricity

system, ther

e are both energ

y c osts and c apacity costs. Depending on the load shape of a par ticular load, the average va lue of capacity

costs and energy costs are different. Since no-load losses and load losses have distinct load shapes, and since different customers have differ ent load shapes, costs vary both by loss ty

pe and by the product class of the transformer. The Depa rtment therefore used distinct marginal ener gy a nd capacity costs for no-load losses and load losses for each transfor mer product class. No transformer size scaling is necessary for the marginal costs, although DOE ne eded to apply the design-line-to-product-class mapping de scribed in section 10.2.2.2 to convert the design line output from the LCC to product class information for the NPV ca lculation. The Department calculated capacity

costs in units of 2004$/kW/year, and ener gy c osts in units of 2004$/kWh. Table 10 .3.4 summa

rizes the f our marg inal costs for the 1 0 product classes

. Table 10.3.4 Marginal E nergy and D emand Co sts by Product Clas s M argina l Energ y Co st by P rodu ct Class ($ /kWh)

PC 1 PC 2 PC 5 PC 6 PC 7 PC 8 PC 9 PC 10 NLL 0.027 0.026 0.051 0.051 0.051 0.051 0.050 0.050 LL 0.037 0.034 0.054 0.053 0.054 0.053 0.053 0.053 M argina l Dema nd C ost by P rodu ct Class ($/kW/ye ar )

PC 1 PC 2 PC 5 PC 6 PC 7 PC 8 PC 9 PC 1010-22

NLL 103.05 106.42 92.19 93.50 92.06 93.32 93.99 93.99 LL 55.72 56.80 70.62 72.44 70.66 72.47 74.10 74.10 10.3.2.7 Discount Rate The disco unt rate expresse s the time value of money and is the

final inpu

t to the NPV calculation. The Department used real discount ra tes of 3.0 and 7.0 percent, as established by the U.S. Offi ce of Ma

nageme nt and Bu dget (O MB) gu

idelines on regu

latory analy sis. 8 The discount rates the Department used i

n the L CC are distinct from those it us ed in the N PV calcu lations, in that the NPV discount rates represent the societal rate of return on capital, whereas LCC discount rates reflect the owner cost of ca pital and the financial environment of electric utilities and commerc ial and industrial e ntities.
10.4 RESULTS 10.4.1 National Ene rgy Savings and Net P resent V alue from Trial Standa rd Levels The NES and NP V re sul ts fro m t he N ES Sp rea dsh eet Mod el f or T SL 1 th rou gh T SL 6 are shown in Table 10.4.1. It should be r eiterated that, currently, the NES Spreadsheet Model us es di sc re te po in t- va lu es ra th er th an a d is tr ib ut io n o f v al ue s f or al l i np ut s. Sa vi ng s f

or th e d rytype units are sig

nificantly differ

ent from the estimates in the advance notice of proposed rulemak ing (ANOPR) anal

ysi s. 9 The difference in savings originates predominantly fr om the exclusion o f dry

-ty pe, low- voltage

transformers fr

om the notic e of prop osed rule making ( NOPR) stage of this analysis, since these types of tra nsformers were regulate d by the Energ y Policy Act of 2005, enacted on August 8, 2005. Table 10.4.1 Summary of Cumulative National Energy Savings (2010–2038) and Net

Present Value (2010–2073) Impact
Distr ibut ion Transformers An alysis Discount Rate % Trial Standard Level

TSL 1 (TP 1) TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

Liquid- Immersed NES quads 1.70 2.28 2.99 3.38 6.51 9.38 NPV bil lion 2004$ 3 7.02 8.78 9.20 9.83 9.94 -10. 31

7 2.02 2.31 2.01 1.92 -1. 14 -14. 10

Dry- Type NES

quads 0.07 0.11 0.16 0.25 0.39 0.39 NPV bil lion 2004$ 3 0.44 0.68 0.95 1.29 1.05 1.05

7 0.13 0.21 0.28 0.34 0.03 0.0310-23

10.4.1.1 Liquid-Imm ersed Re sults Tables 10.4.2 and 10.4.3 present the NES and NPV results for liquid-immersed tr an sf or me rs by p ro du ct cl as s. Fi gu re 10 .4 .1 il lu st ra te s t he typ ic al pa tt er n o f p ri ma ry e ne rg y savings and costs resulting from standards for liquid-immerse d transformers over time. The figure shows the nature of net saving s for all six TSLs relative to the base case. Table 10.4.2 Cumulative Primary Energy Savings During 2010–2038: Liquid-Imme rsed

Transform ers by P roduct Cl ass

Pro duct C lass Cum ulative P rimary Ener gy Sa vings quads TSL 1 (TP 1) TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6 1. Liquid-Imm ersed, M V, Single-P hase 0.81 0.86 0.90 1.06 1.77 4.49 2. Liquid-Imm ersed, M V, T hree-Pha se 0.90 1.42 2.10 2.32 4.74 4.88 Total 1.70 2.28 2.99 3.38 6.51 9.38

Table 10.4.3 Net Present Value During 2 010–2073: Liquid-Imm ersed Tr ansforme rs by

Product Class

Pro duct C lass Net Prese nt Value $bil lion Discount

Rate: 3% Discount Rate: 7% TSL 1 (TP 1) TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6 TSL 1 (TP 1) TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6 1. Liqui dIm mer se d, MV, Single-Phase 2.95 3.03 3.13 3.31 2.14 -16. 91 0.87 0.86 0.85 0.75 -0. 59 -12. 76
2. Liqui dIm mer se d, MV, Thre e-Phase 4.07 5.76 6.08 6.52 7.80 6.60 1.16 1.46 1.16 1.18 -0. 55 -1. 34
Total 7.02 8.78 9.20 9.83 9.94 -10. 31 2.02 2.31 2.01 1.92 -1. 14 -14. 1010-24

Figure 10.4.1 Liquid-Immersed Distribution Transformers: National Energy

Savings and Net Present Value Impacts

10.4.1.2 Dry-Type Results Tables 10.4.4 and 10.4.5 present NES and NPV results for dry -type transf

ormers by product class. Figure 10.4.2 shows the ty pical pattern of national savings and costs resulting from standards for dry

-type transf

ormers over time. Again, the figur e shows the nature of net savings for all six TSLs relative to the base case.10-25

Table 10.4.4 Cumulat

ive Pr imary E nergy Savings During 20 10–2038: Dry-Type Transform ers by P roduct Cl ass

Pro duct C lass Cum ulative P rimary Ener gy Sa vings quads TSL 1 (TP 1) TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6
5. Dry-Type, M V, Single-Phase, 20-45 kV B IL 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 6. Dry-Type, M V, Three-Phase, 20-45 kV B IL 0.016 0.024 0.035 0.047 0.065 0.065 7. Dry-Type, M V, Single-Phase, 46-95 kV B IL 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 8. Dry-Type, M V, Three-Phase, 46-95 kV B IL 0.053 0.082 0.117 0.179 0.298 0.298 9. Dry-T ype, M V, S ingle-P hase, > 96 kV B IL 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10. Dry-T ype, M V, T hree-P hase, > 96 kV B IL 0.001 0.005 0.009 0.018 0.026 0.026

Total 0.07 0.11 0.16 0.25 0.39 0.3910-26

Table 10.4.5 Net Present Value During 2010–2073: Dry-Type Transforme rs by Product

Class

Pro duct C lass Net Prese nt Value $bil lion Discount

Rate: 3% Discount Rate: 7% TSL 1 (TP 1) TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6 TSL 1 (TP 1) TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6 5. Dry -Ty

pe, MV, Singl e-Phase, 20-45 kV BIL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

6. Dry -Ty

pe, MV, Three-Phase, 20-45 kV BIL 0.10 0.14 0.19 0.24 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.02

7. Dry -Ty

pe, MV, Singl e-Phase, 46-95 kV BIL 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

8. Dry -Ty

pe, MV, Three-Phase, 46-95 kV BIL 0.33 0.51 0.69 0.96 0.80 0.80 0.10 0.16 0.20 0.26 0.03 0.03

9. Dry -Ty

pe, MV, Singl e-Phase, > 96 kV B IL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

10. Dry -Ty

pe, MV, Three-Phase, > 96 kV B IL 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.02 -0. 01 -0. 01

Total 0.44 0.68 0.95 1.29 1.05 1.05 0.13 0.21 0.28 0.34 0.03 0.0310-27

Figure 10.4.2 Dry-Type Distribut

ion Transfor mers: Net Ener gy Savings and Net Present Value Impacts
The national impact spreadsheet is available as an Excel file on the D OE website: http://www .eere. energ

y.gov/buildin

gs/appl iance_standards/commer cial/dist ribution_ transformers. html. Instructions for using the spreadshe et are in Appendix 10A of this TSD. 10.4.1.3 Discounted Cumulative Energy Impacts In the ANOPR, the

Department state d that, for its NOPR a nalysis, it woul d calcul ate discounted values for future national energ y savings. The

Department used the same discount rates tha t it used in c alculati

ng the N PV (seve n perce nt and thr ee perc ent rea

l) to calc ulate discounted cumulative NES. As described in section 10.3.2.7, it used the seven-perc ent and three- percen t real dis count ra

tes in ac cordanc e with the OMB gu idelines on regu

latory analy sis. 8 Table 10.4.6 shows the discounted national energy savings for both liquid-immersed and dry -type, medium-vo ltage t

ransfor mers. The seven-percent and three- percent real discount rate values ar e meant to capture the10-28

present value of costs and benefits associated with projec ts facing an average degree of risk. Other dis count ra

tes may be more a

pplicabl e to disco

unt costs a

nd benef its associ ated with projects facing different risks and unc ertainties. Risk adjustment theory suggests that lower discount rates may be

called for to calculate the present value of future energy

consumption or saving. Table 10.4.6 Discounted Cumulative Energy Impacts, Liquid-Immerse d and Dry-Type,

Medium-Voltage Transformers Liquid-Immersed Dry-Type, Medium-Voltage Cumulative 2010-2038 3% discount Cumulative

2010-2038 7% discount Cumulative

2010-2038 3% discount Cumulative

2010-2038 7% discount TS L1 quads 0.86 0.38 0.04 0.02 TS L2 quads 1.15 0.51 0.06 0.03 TS L3 quads 1.50 0.67 0.08 0.04 TS L4 quads 1.70 0.76 0.12 0.06 TS L5 quads 3.27 1.45 0.20 0.09 TS L6 quads 4.71 2.10 0.20 0.0910-29 REFEREN CES
1. HVOLT Consultants I nc., P. Hopkinson, and J. Puri. Distribution Transformer Market Shipment Estimates for 2001. Februa ry 17, 2003. 3 704 High

Ridge Roa

d, Charlotte, NC, 28270, tel: (704) 846-3290, e-mail: P.Hopkinson@hotmail.com. Prepared for Naviga nt Consulting, Inc., Washington DC. 2. U.S. Department of Commerce - Bureau of Economic Analysis. Industry Economic Accounts Information Guide. Annual Industry Accounts. Gross Domestic Product (GDP ) by Industry. 2005. (Last accesse d May 11, 2005.) This materia l is available in Docket #86. Contact Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of Energ y, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 I ndependence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC, 20585-0121, telephone (202) 586-2945 for more information. <F or download page, see http:/ /www.be a.gov/

bea/dn2/ iedguid e.htm#g po . For 1 977-1997data, g o to http://bea .gov/be a/pn/GDPbyI nd_SHI P_SIC. xls . For 199 8-2003 da ta, go to http://bea.gov/bea/pn/GDPbyI nd_SHIP_NAI CS.xls .>> 3. U.S. Department of Energy -Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy Review 2003, Chapter 8: Electricity, Table 8.9 Electricity End Use, 1949-2003. 2004. (La st accessed May

9, 2005.) This material is available in Docket #86. Contact Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of Energy , Building Technologies Progra m, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 Independence Ave nue, SW, Washington, DC, 20585-0121, telephone (202) 586-2945 for more

informat ion. <http ://www.e ia.doe.gov/emeu/ aer/txt/stb 0809.xls> 4. U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration. Annual Energy Outlook 2005: With Projections Through 2025. January, 2005. Washington, DC. Report No. DOE/EI A-0383(2005). <

http://www .eia.doe .gov/oia f/aeo/in dex.html> 5. U.S. Department of Energy -Energy Information Administration. National Energy Modeling System: An Overview 2003. 2003. Report No. DOE/EIA-0581(2003)

. <http://ww

w.eia.d oe.gov /oiaf/ae o/overvi ew/index.h tml> 6. Institute of Electrical and Elec tronics Engineers I

nc. Draft Guide for Distribution Transformer Loss Evaluation. October, 2001. 345 East 47th Street, New York, NY. Report No. IEEE PC57.12.33/D8. 7. Institute of Electrical and Elec tronics Engineers I

nc. Guide For

Loading Min eral OilImmerse d Transform ers. 1995. 345 E ast 47th Str eet, Ne w York, N

Y. Report No. IEEE Std C57.91-1995. Transformer Committee of the IEEE Power Engineering Society

. 8. U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Circular A-4: Regulatory Analysis. 2003. (La st accessed March 25, 2005.) This material is available in Docket #86. Contact Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of Energy , Building Technologies Progra m, Mailstop10-30

EE-2J, 1000 Independence Ave nue, SW, Washington, DC, 20585-0121, telephone (202) 586-2945 for more information. <http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a004/a-4.pdf>
9. U.S. Department of Energy -Office of Building Technolog ies. Technica l Support Docume nt: Energ y Conserv

ation Progr

am for Comm ercial an d Industri al Equipme

nt: Electrical Distribution Transformers - ANOPR Version. 20 04 . U .S . D ep ar tm en t o f E ne rg y. Washington, DC. Report No. LBNL-53985. <http://www.eere.energy .gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/dist_trans_tsd_0 61404.html>