4

- i CHAPTER 4. SCREENING ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 SCREENED

- OUT TECHNOLOGIES

.................................................................... 4-2 4.3 REMAINING TECHNOLOGI ES

........................................................................... 4-2

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.3.1 Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Design Options ................................................... 4-34

- 1 CHAPTER 4. SCREENING ANALYSIS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter discusses the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE ’s) scre ening analysis of the technology options identified for fluorescent lamp ballasts

. As discussed in chapter 3 of the technical support document ( TSD ), DOE consults with industry, technical experts, and other interested parties to develop a list of technology options for consideration. The purpose of the screening analysis is to determine which options to consider further and which to screen out.

Section 325(o)(2) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act ( EPCA ) provides that any new or revised standard must be designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that is determined to be technologically feasible and economically justified . (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)) In view of the EPCA requirements appendix A to subpart C of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) , part 430 (10 CFR part 430), Procedures, Interpretations, and Policies for Consideration of New or Revised Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Products (the Process Rule) sets forth procedures to guide DOE in its consideration and promulgation of new or revised efficiency standards. These procedures elaborate on the statutory criteria provided in 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and, in part, eliminate problematic technologies early in the process of prescribing or amending an energy efficiency standard . In particular, sections 4(b)(4) and 5(b) of the Process Rule provide guidance to DOE for determining which design options are unsuitable for further consideration:

1. Technological feasibility

. DOE will consider technologies incorporated in commercia l products or in working prototypes to be technologically feasible.

2. Practicability to manufacture, install, and service. If mass production and reliable installation and servicing of a technology in commercial products could be achieved on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the time the standard comes into effect, then DOE will consider that technology practicable to manufacture, install, and service.

3. Adverse i mpacts on product utility or product availability. If DOE determines a technolog y would have significant adverse impact on the utility of the product to significant subgroups of consumers, or would result in the unavailability of any covered product type with performance characteristics (including reliability), features, sizes, capaci ties, and volumes that are substantially the same as products generally available in the United States at the time, it will not consider this technology further.

4. Adverse impacts on health or safety

. If DOE determines that a technology will have significant adverse impacts on health or safety, it will not consider this technology further.4

- 2 Section 4.2 discusses the technology options DOE screened out from further consideration. Section 4.3 lists the re maining design options DOE considered in its analyses

.

4.2 SCREENED

- OUT TECHNOL O GIES

This section addresses the tec hnologies that DOE screened out, having considered the following four factors: (1) technological feasibility; (2) practicability to manufacture

, install, and service; (3) adverse impacts on product utility to consumers; and (4) adverse impacts on health or safety.

DOE examined all of the technology options presented in the technology
assessment . Of those options, DOE screened out one : l aminated sheets of amorphous steel . The following discussion details DOE’s consideration of this option in the context of the four screening criteria

.

T he transformer affects the efficiency of magnetic and electronic ballasts

. For electronic ballasts, transformers influence the efficiency of the electromagnetic interference, power factor correction, and output stage of the ballast. For magnetic ballasts, the transformer influences the efficiency of the output stage and current- limiting portion of the ballast. Ballast efficiency can be improved by using higher- quality inductors. One method of decreasing transformer losses is to create the core of the inductor from laminated sheets of amorphous steel, insulated from each other.

DOE screened out this technology because this method i ncreases the size and weight of the ballast

. DOE has learned that the overall market trend is to create increasingly smaller ballast sizes for use in smaller and more highly optimized fixtures. As the trend toward smaller fixtures has exis ted for a number of years, new building designs are already incorporating smaller plenum spaces. Thus, an increase in the size of a ballast could affect its ability to be used in certain existing buildings or in new construction. Accordingly, DOE considers any increase in the existing footprint of a ballast to have adverse impacts on product utility and product availability. Additionally, larger inductors may cause problems installing and servicing ballasts because the existing fixture may not be able to ac commodate the heavier weight. Therefore, DOE screened out laminated sheets of amorphous steel as a design option because it fails to meet the screening criteria of practicality to manufacture, install, and service, and has adverse impacts on product utility.

4.3 REMAINING TECHNOLOGI ES

After screening out l aminated sheets of amorphous steel in accordance with the policies set forth in 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart C, Appendix A, (4)(a)(4) and 5(b), DOE is considering the design options in the following table as viabl e means for improving ballast effic ien cy . Chapter 3 provides a detailed description of these design options, which DOE will consider in the engineer ing analysis (chapter 5).4

- 3 Table 4.3.1 Fluorescent Lamp Ball ast Design Options Technology Option Description

Electronic Ballast Use an e lectronic b allast d esign

.

Improved Components Transformers Use grain

- oriented s ilicon steel or amorphous s teel to reduce core losses.

Use l itz w ire to reduce winding losses.

Diodes Use d io des with lower losses. Capacitors Use c apacitors with a lower effective series resistance.

Transistors Use t ransistors with low drain

- to

- source resistance.

Improved Circuit Design Cathode Cutout Remove filament heating after lamp has st arted.

Integrated Circuits Substitute discrete components with an integrated circuit.

Starting Method Use instant start instead of rapid start as a starting method for lamp operation.