CLOTHES WASHER . CARD -16

......................................................

.....................................................

.........................................................

..........................................................

...............................................

........................................................

Price of Clothes Washer $450

Energy and Water Savings $10

Wash Capacity Standard

Top or Front Load Top

Wash/Rinse Temperature Cold, Warm

Load Size Non-Adjustable

J-67

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
J.14 INSTRUCTIONS

J.14.1 Clothes Washers

Assume that you are purchasing a new clothes washer. You have in front of you a series

of cards that contain different combinations of clothes washer prices, expected annual energy and

water savings, and different washer features such as capacity, wash and rinse water temperatures,

and load size adjustments. We're going to ask you to sort these cards according to your preference

for the features described on each. These features are defined below and are also shown in the

laminated exhibits you have in front of you. Please read these instructions and look at the exhibits

carefully to make sure you understand the definitions before you begin sorting through the cards.

Price. The price refers to the cost of a new clothes washer.

Top or Front Load. Top or front load refers to the placement of the door on the machine.

"Top" means the door is on the top of the machine and "Front" means the door is on the front side.

Please refer to Figure 1 to see different examples of top loading and front loading clothes washers.

Energy and Water Savings. The savings shown on the card reflects an average expected

bill savings (both water and energy) for an entire year using the clothes washer.

Wash/Rinse Temperature. This feature refers to the water temperature options available

on the machine for the wash and rinse cycles. The two categories are "Cold, Warm, Hot" and "Cold,

Warm".

Wash Capacity. Wash capacity refers to the amount of clothes that can be washed in one

wash load. The categories are "Standard" and "Extra Large". The "Extra Large" capacity is 20

percent larger than the standard tub.

Load Size. Load size refers to a feature that allows you to adjust the amount water during

the wash cycle to match a small, medium, or large wash load. "Adjustable" means that the water

level can be adjusted to match the load size, while "Non-adjustable" indicates a washer that uses the

same amount of water regardless of the size of the load.

Once you've looked through the cards, sort them into three piles in the rough order of your

preference for them. To help you, we have provided marker cards labeled:

J-68

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Product/Service Product/Service I would be Product/Service I would be

I would be NEITHER MORE nor LESS LIKELY I

MORE LIKELY LESS LIKELY to choose

to choose to choose

After you have sorted the cards into three piles, pick up the cards in your "More Likely"

pile. Sort them according to your preference for them so that the one you most prefer is on the top

and the one you least prefer is on the bottom.

Repeat this sorting procedure for the cards in your "Neither More Nor Less Likely" pile.

Then, sort the cards in your "Less Likely" pile. If you feel inclined to move a card to a different

stack during the sorting procedure, please feel free to do so.

Please review your three piles to ensure that the cards are sorted from most preferred to

least preferred. We would now like you to record the clothes washer you prefer most, second most,

and so on down to the clothes washer you prefer least.

Note that there is a number located on the upper right hand corner of each card. On your

response sheet, write down the number of the cards under the column labeled "Card Number"

beginning with the top card on your "More Likely" pile. When you reach the bottom of the first pile,

proceed to the "Neither More Nor Less Likely" pile and then to the "Less Likely" pile. When you

are done, the number of your least preferred card should be written on the last line of the "Card

Number" column and every line should have only one card number entered.

97

Card Number

97

99

98

J-69

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
J.15 CONJOINT ANALYSIS COEFFICIENT ESTIMATES

Coefficient Estimates

All Respondents

Equipment Choice Model Likelihood of Purchase

Coefficient Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Price -0.0036 0.000 1% 26%

Savings 0.010 0.001 1% 14%

Capacity 0.248 0.024 1% 7%

Door Placement 0.383 0.024 1% 11%

Water Temp. 0.614 0.024 1% 18%

Load Size 0.852 0.024 1% 25%

_____________

100%

Coefficient Standard Significance Relative

Error Level Importance

Intercept -0.949 0.224 1% 0%

Price -0.0066 0.000 1% 22%

Savings 0.029 0.002 1% 19%

Capacity 0.452 0.072 1% 6%

Door Placement 0.698 0.075 1% 9%

Water Temp. 1.438 0.071 1% 19%

Load Size 1.809 0.071 1% 24%

______________

100%

Low Income. Less than $25k _________________________ ________

Fri,iinmn* (hn Mnrll Likelihood of Purchase

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Price -0.0040 0.000 1% 30%

Savings 0.010 0.001 1% 16%

Capacity 0.255 0.049 1% 8%

Door Placement 0.330 0.049 1% 10%

Water Temp. 0.518 0.049 1% 16%

Load Size 0.648 0.049 1% 20%

100%

roefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

ntercept -0.230 0.387 55% 0%

Price -0.0066 0.001 1% 24%

Savings 0.025 0.003 1% 19%

Capacity 0.369 0.132 1% 5%

Door Placement 0.624 0.134 1% 9%

WaterTemp. 1.262 0.130 1% 19%

Load Size 1.600 0.129 1% 24%

______________

100%

Elderly, 65 and older = ___________ _________________________________ -

Fn.iinmnt rhnir MnrleI Likelihood of Purchase

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Price -0.0025 0.000 1% 22%

Savings 0.006 0.001 1% 11%

Capacity 0.124 0.061 4% 5%

Door Placement 0.352 0.061 1% 13%

Water Temp. 0.524 0.062 1% 19%

Load Size 0.817 0.063 1% 30%

100%

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Intercept -1.963 0.542 1% 0%

Price -0.0044 0.001 1% 16%

Savings 0.022 0.004 1% 17%

Capacity 0.447 0.177 1% 7%

Door Placement 0.794 0.183 1% 12%

WaterTemp. 1.392 0.176 1% 21%

Load Size 1.873 0.179 1% 28%

______________

100%

Young, 18-24 ________________________________

Fntiinmpnt (hnue Model Likelihood of Purchase

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Price -0.0052 0.000 1% 31%

Savings 0.016 0.002 1% 19%

Capacity 0.375 0.069 1% 9%

Door Placement 0.460 0.070 1% 11%

Water Temp. 0.547 0.071 1% 13%

Load Size 0.657 0.069 1% 16%

100%

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Intercept 0.628 0.537 24% 0%

Price -0.0081 0.001 1% 28%

Savings 0.027 0.004 1% 19%

Capacity 0.634 0.186 1% 9%

DoorPlacement 0.818 0.188 1% 11%

WaterTemp. 0.867 0.181 1% 12%

Load Size 1.508 0.180 1% 21%

_____________

100%

J_70

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Recent Purchasers

Fi,uioment Choice Model Likelihood of Purchase

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Price -0.0024 0.000 1% 22%

Savings 0.005 0.001 1% 9%

Capacity 0.173 0059 1% 6%

Door Placement 0.300 0.059 1% 11%

Water Temp. 0.520 0.059 1% 19%

Load Size 0.861 0.060 1% 32%

_____________

100%

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Intercept -1.596 0.573 1% 0%

Price -0.0056 0.001 1% 20%

Savings 0.022 0.004 1% 16%

Capacity 0.562 0.180 1% 8%

Door Placement 0.605 0.187 1% 8%

WaterTemp. 1.468 0.176 1% 21%

Load Size 1.976 0.183 1% 28%

_______________ 100%

Have Tried Horizontal Axis ___________ __________________________________

n.iinmnt (Thniie Mridel Likelihood of Purchase

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Price -0.0035 0.000 1% 26%

Savings 0.009 0.001 1% 13%

Capacity 0.260 0.032 1% 8%

Door Placement 0.303 0.033 1% 9%

Water Temp. 0.624 0.033 1% 19%

Load Size 0867 0.033 1% 26%

100%

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Intercept -0.766 0.309 1% 0%

Price -0.0069 0.001 1% 23%

Savings 0.030 0.002 1% 20%

Capacity 0.455 0.099 1% 6%

Door Placement 0.484 0.102 1% 6%

Waterlemp. 1.483 0.095 1% 20%

Load Size 1.841 0.097 1% 25%

______________

100%

Would Consfr1er Purchasing H-Axis Machine _________________________________ -

Eciuinment Choice Model Likelihood of Purchase

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Price -0.0037 0.000 1% 26%

Savings 0011 0.001 1% 15%

Capacity 0.266 0.028 1% 8%

Door Placement 0.264 0.028 1% 8%

Water Temp. 0.653 0.029 1% 19%

Load Size 0.834 0.029 1% 24%

_____________

100%

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Intercept -0.953 0.252 1% 0%

Price -0.0063 0.001 1% 22%

Savings 0.031 0.002 1% 21%

Capacity 0.482 0.083 1% 7%

Door Placement 0.499 0.085 1% 7%

WaterTemp. 1.520 0.082 1% 21%

Load Size 1.671 0.081 1% 23%

______________

100%

Would Not Consider Purchasing H-Axis Machine = ___________ __________________________________

EciuiDment Choice Model Likelihood of Purchase

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance ______________

Price -00035 0.000 1% 25%

Savings 0.006 0.001 1% 9%

Capacity 0.194 0.046 1% 5%

Door Placement 0.709 0.047 1% 20%

Water Temp. 0.533 0.046 1% 15%

Load Size 0.927 0.047 1% 26%

_____________

100%

'oefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

ntercept -1.296 0.513 1% 0%

Price -0.0072 0.001 1% 22%

Savings 0.022 0.004 1% 14%

Capacity 0.392 0.149 1% 5%

Door Placement 1.347 0.163 1% 16%

WaterTemp. 1.245 0.144 1% 15%

Load Size 2.273 0.156 1% 28%

______________

100%

J-7 1

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Madison, WI

Eauioment Choice Model Likelihood of Purchase

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Price -0.0048 0.000 1% 25%

Savings 0.0157 0.001 1% 16%

Capacity 0.4834 0.052 1% 10%

Door Placement 0.5579 0.052 1% 12%

Water Temp. 0.7683 0.052 1% 16%

Load Size 1.0077 0.052 1% 21%

100%

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Intercept 0.358 0.49 46% 0%

Price -0.0098 0.00 1% 27%

Savings 0.036 0.00 1% 20%

Capacity 0.662 0.15 1% 7%

Door Placement 0.747 0.16 1% 8%

WaterTemp. 1.427 0.15 1% 16%

Load Size 1.934 0.15 1% 21%

______________ 100%

Washington DC ___________ _________________________________

EauiDment CI'oice Model Likelihood of Purchase

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Price -0.0032 0.000 1% 26%

Savings 0.0099 0.001 1% 16%

Capacity 0.1912 0.052 1% 6%

Door Placement 0.1779 0.052 1% 6%

Water Temp. 0.6164 0.052 1% 20%

Load Size 0.7559 0.052 1% 25%

100%

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Intercept -1.359 0.408 1% 0%

Price -0.0045 0.001 1% 18%

Savings 0.024 0.003 1% 19%

Capacity 0.521 0.140 1% 8%

DoorPlacement 0.394 0.141 1% 6%

WaterTemp. 1.284 0.137 1% 20%

Load Size 1.767 0.138 1% 28%

______________ 100%

Dallas, TX

Eauioment C'I'oice Model Likelihood of Purchase

'oefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Price -0.0034 0.000 1% 27%

Savings 0.005 0.001 1% 8%

Capacity 0.156 0.048 1% 5%

Door Placement 0.523 0.048 1% 17%

WaterTemp. 0.523 0.048 1% 17%

Load Size 0.836 0.049 1% 27%

100%

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Intercept -2.039 0.510 1% 0%

Price -0.0054 0.001 1% 19%

Savings 0.022 0.004 1% 15%

Capacity 0.325 0.151 3% 4%

Door Placement 1.105 0.164 1% 15%

Water Temp. 1.472 0.152 1% 20%

Load Size 1.977 0.158 1% 27%

_____________ 100%

San Francisco Bay Area = ___________ _________________________________

Eauioment C'I'oice Model Likelihood of Purchase

coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance _____________

Price -0.0036 0.000 1% 25%

Savings 0.011 0.001 1% 15%

Capacity 0.235 0.046 1% 7%

Door Placement 0.339 0.047 1% 10%

Water Temp. 0.638 0.047 1% 18%

Load Size 0.916 0.048 1% 26%

100%

Coefficient

Standard

Error

Significance

Level

Relative

Importance

Intercept -0.985 0.45 3% 0%

Price -0.0070 0.00 1% 22%

Savings 0.034 0.00 1% 21%

Capacity 0.312 0.15 3% 4%

Door Placement 0.684 0.15 1% 9%

Water Temp. 1.747 0.15 1% 22%

Load Size 1.749 0.14 1% 22%

______________ 100%

J-72

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
J.16 ELASTICITY CALCULATIONS

J-73

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Low Income Households

Variable D eseription

Price Dollar value of retail price of machine

Savings Dollar value of annual water and energy bill navings

Capacity Binary variable: zero for standard capacity machine, ove for extra large capacity.

Door Placement Binary variable: zero for front loader, one for top loader

Water Temp Binary variable: zero for cold/warm, one for cold/warm/hot washing temperature options

Load Sze Binary variable: zero it there isno load ze adjustment option, one if there is

Directions

To calculate a price elasticity use the 'Likelihood of Purchase Model" to the left. Fill in the Initial Price and probability, and new price and probability cells in the "Price Elasticity of

Demand" table to generate results for the spscific price change

Smilarly, when calculating Savings elasticity, be sure the initial and new market conditions differ only in their navings estimates.

Low Income Households

Note: Includesthose in namplewith

household annual incomes of $25,000

or lena, Upper Bound = 0.93 Lower Bound = 0.54

Ukelihood of Purchase Model

Pl'oduct of

Coefficient and

Current Market Current Market

Variable Coefficient Conditions Value

Intercept -0.230267252 3 -0.690801756

Pl'ice -0.006588926 400 -2.6355704

Savings 0.025374155 50 1.268707725

Capacity 0.368678285 0 0

Door Placement 0623771343 1 0.623771343

WaterTernp 1.262196472 1 1.262196472

Load Sze 1.599534028 1 1.599534028

Sam 1.427837412

Likelihood of Purchase

suarce: &irvey 019, 7 percent at low incomes

reondentscIaim that would go to laaodromat

rather than repair or parchana new machine at

$400. This assumes that rewondents that chose to

repair at $150 would choow to parchase a new

machine if repairing were not an option

Price Badicity of Demand

Initial Price 400

Initial Probability 0.93

New Price 650

New Probability 0.72

Price fiaeficily _______

Savings 6aicity of Demand

Initial Savings 0

Initial Probability II 0.931

New Savings II 501

New Probability 0.98

.SavingsBasticity ir

/warce: survey 019, proportion of people low

income respondentsthat would do Iaandry

elsewhere or shop for a anad machine rather than

repair at $150 or purchase anew machine at

$650. This aenmesthat all those that choose to

repair would start going to the Iaandromat if

repairing were nolan option.

Price Baeficity of Demand

Initial Price

Initial Probability 0.54

New Price 650

New Probability

Price Baef icily

Savings Basticity of Demand

Initial Savings

Initial Probability

New Savings [II°

New Probability 0.81

Savingsaeficify .

J-74

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Low Income Households

Variable 0 escription

Rice Dollar value of retail price of machine

Savings Dollar value of annual water and energy bill mivings

Capacity Binary variable: zero for eandard capacity machine, one for eutra large capacity.

Door Ptacement Binary variable: zero fur front loader, one tor top loader.

Water Temp Binary variable: zero for cold/warm', one for 'cold/warm/hot' wabling temperature Options

Load Bze Binary variable: zero if there is no load rize sdju6ment option, one if there is

Directions

To calculate a price elasticity use the "Likelihood of Purchaue Modef' to the left. Fill in the Initial Price and probability, and new price and probability cells in the "Price Elasticity of

Demand" table to generate results for the specific price change

i$milarly, when calculating Savings elaaticity, be mire the initial and new market conditions differ only in their mivings ed/mates.

Low Income Households

Note: lncludesthoue in mimplewith

household annual incomes of $25,000

Upper Bound = 0.93 Lower Bound = 0.54

Likelihood of Purchase Model

Product of

Coefficient and

Current Market Current Market

Variable Coefficient Conditions Value

Intercept -0.230267252 3 -0.680801756

Pl'ice -0.006588929 400 -2.6355704

Savings 0.025374155 50 1.268707725

Capacity 0.3686 78255 0 0

Door Placement 0.623771343 1 0.623771343

WaterTemp 1.262186472 1 1.262186472

Load Sze 1.589534028 1 1.599534028

Sam 1.427837412

likelihood of Purchase

Ssurce: Sirvey Cia, 7 percent of low iscnmes

respondestsclaim that wnuld guts laundromat

rather than repair or purchase nem machine at

$400. This aemmes that respondents that chose to

repair at $150 would choose to purchase a new

machine if repairing were notes option

Price Baaticity of Demand

Initial FI'ice 400

Initial Probability

New Rice

0.93

650

New Probability 0.72

Price Bad/unity

Savings Dad/icity of Demand

Initial Savings [ 0

Initial Probability I 0.931

New Savings I 501

New Probability 0.98

Savings Basticity

&airce: Survey ale, proportion ot people low

income respondents that wosld do laundry

elsewhere or shop for a used machine rather than

repair at $150 or purchase a sew machine at

$650. This aseimes that all those that choose to

repair would eart going to the laundromat if

repairing were not an option.

Price Dad/icity of Demand

Initial Price 400

Initial Probability 0.54

New Price 650

New Probability Ii8

Price Bad/icity -y

Savings Bad/icity of Demand

Initial Savings

Initial Probability

New Savings 50

New Probability 0.81

Savings Bad/icity T:

J-75

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
REFERENCES

1. Currim, I. S., Using SegmentationApproachesforBetterPrediction and Understanding

from Consumer Mode Choice Models. Journal of MarketingResearch, 1981. l8:p. 301-

309

2. Green, P. E. andA. M Krieger, Segmenting Markets with ConjointAnalysis. Journal of

Marketing, 1991. 55: p. 20-30

3. Green, P. E. and K. Helsen, Cross- Validation Assessment ofAlternatives to IndividualLevel Conjoint Analysis: A Case Study. Journal of Marketing Research, 1989. 24: p.

346-3 50

4. Allison, P. D. and N. A. Christakis, Logit Models for Sets ofRanked Items. Sociological

Methology, 1994. 24: p. 199-228

5. Louviere, J. J. and D. A. Hensher, Using Discrete Choice Models with Experimental

Design Data to Forecast Consumer Demand for a Unique Cultural Event. Journal of

Consumer Research, 1983. 10. p. 348-361

6. Babbie, E., The Practice of Social Research. Fifth ed. 1989, Wadsworth Publishing

Company: Belmont, CA.

J-76

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
APPENDIX K. LIFE-CYCLE-COST RESULTS FOR CONSUMER SUBGROUPS

..............

..............

.............

.............

.............

.............

.............

.............

..................................

..................................

.............

.............

.............

.............

..................................

.................................

............

............

............

............

............

............

.................

.................

................

................

................

................

................

................

......................................

......................................

................

................

................

................

......................................

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure K. 1 MEF of 0.860 (5% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-2

Figure K.2 MEF of 0.860 (5% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-2

Figure K.3 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-3

Figure K.4 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-3

Figure K.5 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-4

Figure K.6 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-4

Figure K.7 MEF of 1.021(20% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-5

Figure K.8 MEF of 1.02 1 (20% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-S

Figure K.9 MEF = 1.04 in 2004, Low Income K-6

Figure K.10 MEF = 1.04 in 2004, Low Income K-6

Figure K. 11 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-7

Figure K. 12 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-7

Figure K. 13 MEF of 1.257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-8

Figure K.14 MEF of 1.257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-8

Figure K.15 MEF = 1.26 in 2007, Low Income K-9

Figure K.16 MEF of 1.26 in 2007, Low Income K-9

Figure K.17 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-b

Figure K. 18 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-b

Figure K.19 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-li

Figure K.20 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-li

Figure K.21 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-12

Figure K.22 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income K-12

Figure K.23 MEF of 0.860 (5% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-13

Figure K.24 MEF of 0.860 (5% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-13

Figure K.25 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-14

Figure K.26 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-i4

Figure K.27 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-iS

Figure K.28 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-iS

Figure K.29 MEF of 1.021(20% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K- 16

Figure K.30 MEF of 1.021 (20% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-16

Figure K.3i MEF = 1.04 in 2004, Senior K-i7

Figure K.32 MEF = 1.04 in 2004, Senior K-17

Figure K.33 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-18

Figure K.34 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-18

Figure K.35 MEF of 1.257(35% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-19

Figure K.36 MEF of 1.257(35% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior K-i9

Figure K.37 MEF = 1.26 in 2007, Senior K-20

K-i

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Figure K.38 MEF = 1.26 in 2007, Senior K-20

Figure K.39 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior ................ K-2 1

Figure K.40 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior ................ K-21

Figure K.41 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior ................ K-22

Figure K.42 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior ................ K-22

Figure K.43 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior ................ K-23

Figure K.44 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior ................ K-23

K-u

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
APPENDIX K. LIFE-CYCLE-COST RESULTS FOR CONSUMER SUBGROUPS

This appendix contains the complete set of life-cycle-cost (LCC) results for the low income

and senior subgroups. For details on the methodology used to calculate the LCC and payback period

refer to Chapter 8. For each efficiency level, frequency and cumulative charts are provided showing

the distribution of expected LCC differences from the baseline design.

K-i

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

.024

018

.012-

I-

.000 Ii

($55)

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 194 Outliers

- - 239

-179.2

-'1

-I

-. 119.5

=

-. 59.75

0

Figure K.1 MEF of 0.860 (5% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

10,000 Trials

1.000

.750

.500

. 250 -

-r

($55)

Forecast: LCC Difference

Cumulative Chart

0

-'1

-I

=

=

Figure K.2 MEF of 0.860 (5% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

194 Outliers

- 10000

K-2

($41) ($28) ($14) $0

$

($41) ($28) ($14) $0

$

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 93 Outliers

.033

025 __________________________________

i1 JIllilil______________

- 332

249

IIl .017 ___________________________________________________ ___________________ 166 .

11 FJH [I .

I

I

I- iiII L

=

_

.008 _______ _____________________________ _____________________________ ______

1i

____ 83

= ($46j..

000 .'.....,.I..IlIIllf'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIRhIIU . O I 0

________________ __________________________________________ _________

($150) ($106) ($63) ($19) $25

Certainty is 99.06% from -Infinity to $0 $

-

Figure K.3 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 93 Outliers

1.0001

_________________________________ _________ .750

-'1-I

.500 __________________________ ______

10000

.

o

& .250

Mean f$46 .0001 11111 0

($150) ($106) ($63) ($19) $25

Certainty is 99.06% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.4 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

K-3

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

.033

.025

.017

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart

000

231 Outliers

- - 330

($225) ($150) ($75) $0 $75

Certainty is 95.74% from -Infinity to $0 $

247.5

1

rD

165 •

=

82.5

0

Figure K.5 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 231 Outliers

1.000 - 10000

.750 _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________ 1 I I

H

.. .soo 411Li riIriJit 2

IIIlIIiIlI I E 250 _______________________

.,lI I i1Ill 0_

.000 t.IIIIIfltIIIIIItIIIIIuhltIIIlII _____________________ 0

I

($225) ($150) ($75) $0 $75

Certainty is 95.74% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.6 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

K-4

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

.036-

.027

.018

.=

C

I-

.000

($300)

I

($188) ($75) $38 $150

Certainty is 84.90% from -Infinity to $0 $

267

11

-'

-178 •

rD

=

89

0

Figure K.7 MEF of 1.02 1 (20% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 121 Outliers

1.000

I1,111,,.

.750 ______________________________________________________

.lI

1il!L L

10000

-I

.5001

=

C =

.250-

Mean $69) .000 .....111.....11UffllflItfflIOIIHIIIDfiI _____ i'M•tuHI.fl!I1III - 0-

($300) ($188) ($75) $38 $150

Certainty is 84.90% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.8 MEF of 1.021 (20% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart

__________________________________________________ ..1diiiii

_________________________________ 'LI

uILtItslulIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIItlIII111 1i H 'Il II

______________________________

$ff:' Mean ($69) - -.________ ________

121 Outliers

- 356

K-5

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

.028

.021

.014

.

IForecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart

.000

= ($11

141 Outliers

- 282

($450) ($300) ($150) $0 $150

Certainty is 89.48% from-Infinity to $0 $

211.5

-I,

-'

141

=

70.5

n

Figure K.9 MEF = 1.04 in 2004, Low Income

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 141 Outliers

10000

1.0001

_______________________ II -

.750

-I

.500 .==

rD

=

.250

Mean ($118

.000 ......i....,iiiIIllllIIIIIIIIlIIIIIIIIItwiuinnuwii 0

I --

($450) ($300) ($150) $0 $150

Certainty is 89.48% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.10 MEF = 1.04 in 2004, Low Income

K-6

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 189 Outliers

.024

8

244

183

'1

-'

.012 122 -

=

rD

IllIllil I i

=

.006 _______________

l

__________________

k ______________ ______________ 61

l IIII IIlIIIIIIIIIIIIII M = ($243) II i 000 _______________ _________________ ini i.i _______________________________ __________________________ I UHiiriiiriuir.uiu 0

I

___________________

($900) ($625) ($350) ($75) $200

Certainty is 87.83% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.11 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 189 Outliers

1 .0001 llHllHHHtj 1 0000

.750 -

-I

.500 .ilII .=

. ____________________________________________ iiilii1ft =

.250

__________________________________________________________

V V Iii iv .a ri ($243)

.000 _______________ ........1•IIIInhiilll!IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII _____________________________________ ImI _______________ 0

($900) ($625) ($350) ($75) $200

Certainty is 87.83% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.12 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

K-7

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 87 Outliers

.034

.026 _____________________________________________ i.II.IIIIIIIIL _________________

I- 343

___________ 257.2

-'

.017 - - 171.5

=

.009 85.75

i i thIIIItIIIIIIIII = ,i i iit .000 t I,mutt,Iut...- ..______ - ____

I 4I

______

- 0

($1,500) ($938) ($375) $188 $750

Certainty is 80.70% from -Infinity to $0 $

.......

Figure K.13 MEF of 1.257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 87 Outliers

1.000

.750 _________________________________________________________

iilflHllO

10000

.5001 . -

=

=

.250 _____________________________ .

_________ I( ...!JUUULLL]LLI1TT1I1I1II1I!.fl .000 suw"uL1IdIIIIiI 0

4,

($1,500) ($938) ($375) $188 $750

Certainty is 80.70% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.14 MEF of 1.257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

K-8

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 105 Outliers

.032 - 321

.024 _____________________________________________

II.I III lIb ___________________________ 240.7

= JJ It

. .016 _______ _________

____________ _______ _______________

I ________________ ________ 160.5 .

=

. I I -

.008 ...r!.dIII. L I .......

.

80.25

000 1•.ui1ilhIIIttIdII1IIIIIIII ______________

•

______

,.

____________

($1,500) ($938) ($375) $188 $750

Certainty is 81.45% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.15 MEF = 1.26 in 2007, Low Income

Figure K.16 MEF of 1.26 in 2007, Low Income

K-9

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 74 Outliers

.032

.024 _________________ _________________________________________________ [IllIllIllIld __________________________________ _____________________ ' -

- 323

242.2

_______________________ I _________________

___________________ ________________ 8:7:1

000 - ..I,..HIb IIIlklIIIIIIhIIIII. '1 i.

Mean=($flJMhith,

• I I 0

($1,500) ($938) ($375) $188 $750

Certainty is 79.89% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.17 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

•Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials CumulativeChart 74 Outliers

1.000

-

10000

I ______________________________________________________________ F ___________ HUhIIIHilH

____________________________

::

($1,500) ($938) ($375) $188 $750

Certainty is 79.89% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.18 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

K- 10

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

.030

.022

.015

Ii:i_ .007

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart

000-

152 Outliers

- 295

($1,250) ($750) ($250) $250 $750

Certainty is 70.63% from -Infinity to $0 $

221.2

1

-I

147.5 .=

=

=

73.75

(1

Figure K.19 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Cumulative Chart 152 Outliers

1.000

.750 ______________________________________________________ __________ diJIflIII1ilflililBI

- 10000

IIi.L.

1 .500 L4I4jfflfflI .

J1 0

($1,250) ($750) ($250) $250 $750

Certainty is 70.63% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.20 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

K-il

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 168 Outliers

.027

020 I•i ,. ___________

- 272

_________ 204

. .014 : .:)...: dJ .

. 2

[

136

. I .

Ii ii III 11111 II IIIlJIIIII

.007 'j . .

68

.000 ihutiIllflhIIIIIIIII 1IJllllIll . -. 0

($1,250) ($750) ($250) $250 $750

Certainty is 70.63% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.21 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 168 Outliers

1.000 10000

.750

______________________________________________________ ___________

.500

0

.250

omwni Mean =

.000 ..w..u,,piiIlfllIllIfflhII1III!I nr.1..ii.i Jill, 0

($1,250) ($750) ($250) $250 $750

_________

iij

___________________

Certainty is 70.63% from -Infinity to $0 $ __________ Figure K.22 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

K-i 2

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

.031

.023

.015 -

I- .008

L. .000

($40)

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 156 Outliers

- 305

-228.7

1

- -152.5 .

Figure K.23 MEF of 0.860 (5% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

10,000 Trials

1.000

.750 -

.500 -

I-

.000 -r

($40)

Forecast: LCC Difference

Cumulative Chart

0

11

-'

=

Figure K.24 MEF of 0.860 (5% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

156 Outliers

- 10000

K- 13

($30) ($20) ($10) $0

$

($30) ($20) ($10) $0

$

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 243 Outliers

.033

___________________________________________________ III I I

- 330

::: __________

'

.. 'j __________ ____________________•.. ________

C

.008

11111 '!j II 82.5

=

.000 . ....h1l1II IlIIIlIIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIII[i[ .Lj J 0

($90) ($63) ($35) ($8) $20

Certainty is 98.57% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.25 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 243 Outliers

1.000 10000

____________________________________________________ .750 iiiiiøIIII 10111111 1 P

.500- ____________________________________________________________________________________ .1111111 f11l11

I - C =

.250

=

000 • .....LttflhIuUIflhItLLLIgphIIIIJIIIIOI11111I1JIMedn- $32)

0

($90) ($63) ($35) ($8) $20

Certainty is 98.57% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.26 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

K- 14

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 162 Outliers

- 432

032 324

-

022 216 -

rD

C

_____________________

III 108

=

000 .III.IL.IIIIItl1uIIIIIIIIIIIllhIIII -

($175) ($113) ($50) $13 $75

Certainty is 94.45% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.27 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Cumulative Chart 162 Outliers

1 .000 - 10000

.750

L[

-I

•500 .=

=

rD

C

________ .250 ___________________

I11l

=

itiiLIillhIIIIIIIIIIIH1 1$49 .000 Ltti ir 0

($175) ($113) ($50) $13 $75

Certainty is 94.45% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.28 MEF of 0.96 1 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

K- 15

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 73 Outliers

.046-f - 456

.034 .ii1ij. 342

11111111 '

=

ii' 1 •iuuiiiiiii :

. .023 AIIUIIIIIIII - 228 .

=

1 llIH1i

.011

.

..-__________________ 114

000 •" is.t I.ittUIIIIItIItIIIIIIIIII1l L 7i 0 4

($250) ($150) ($50) $50 $150

Certainty is 78.84% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.29 MEF of 1.021 (20% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 73 Outliers

1.000 iouUlilhhIIIIIIIIilRHil 10000

.750

-'

.

.500 _____________________________

IIIIIIIJIIJIIOft

=

250 _______

=

.000 $41iIIIu..iiii liii,

0

($250) ($150) ($50) $50 $150

Certainty is 78.84% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.30 MEF of 1.021 (20% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

K- 16

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

.032-r

.024

.016

IForecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart

.000

164 Outliers

- - 322

($300) ($188) ($75) $38 $150

Certainty is 83.69% from -Infinity to $0 $

241.5

11

-'

161 -

=

rD

80.5

Figure K.31 MEF = 1.04 in 2004, Senior

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 164 Outliers

1.000 I H HHH 10000

.750- -

-

.500 .=

=

. -

=

.250

.i..uiuiIIiilllIIllhIIIIIIIIIIIII ffløI HIUUUULU.III!IE .000 -0

($300) ($188) ($75) $38 $150

Certainty is 83.69% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.32 MEF = 1.04 in 2004, Senior

K-i 7

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 184 Outliers

.026 - 255

__________________________________________________________ i iiII iIiiIIIii.i ___________________________

.% jIIlII III I 1111111111 _______________________

. .013 1111111111 127.5 .

iii =

::: IlhIIIIILIIIIhIIfIllIllhIflhIfHllhllh jJj137_^J

!

($600) ($400) ($200) $0 $200

Certainty is 80.40% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.33 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 184 Outliers

1.000 - 10000

.750 ___________________ ____4 W* :W WU

_________________________________________________________________________________ [[

IIl"

- ILtIIIIIIIItttLtflhttIIIUh1I1IHIIIII- I I -

0

I

($600) ($400) ($200) $0 $200

Certainty is 80.40% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.34 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

K- 18

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 69 Outliers

.039

J I

- 392

029 I IIIIl IID ____________________________ . 294

1

-I

. .020 iF1I1ft 196 .

.=

IIIII

=

010 _________________

___________

[ ______________l

________

__________________ -

'

_____________ 98 i

L

l IIIIhIIIIIII Mean=($32)] -

000 ''• II.I!lIl I .Dll... - 0

($1,000) ($563) ($125) $313 $750

Certainty is 70.64% from -Infinity to $0 $

......... ................................

Figure K.35 MEF of 1.257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Cumulative Chart 69 Outliers

1 .000 I IIHIIII - 10000

.750 _________________ ______________________________________________ .,.

i1 . :'

1111 II II

.

.. .500 _______________ ________________________________ 1 L 'U

______________________________ •

250 ________________________________________________ 1Ii!r Lftfl[ L1. I 1

L 'Earl -1(Il.J. I

,

' ' h 000 1

($1,000) ($563) ($125) $313 $750

Certainty is 70.64% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.36 MEF of 1.257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

K-i 9

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart

.038

.028

.019

C

0

.000

90 Outliers

1

...tui,lIbdIIIIIII I H _ii:

375

281.2

1

-I

187.5

=

93.75

0

($1,000) ($563) ($125) $313 $750

Certainty is 71.74% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.37 MEF = 1.26 in 2007, Senior

10,000 Trials

1.000

.750

.500

.C

C

.000

($1,000)

Forecast: LCC Difference

Cumulative Chart 90 Outliers

10000

Liii ].o

$750

-'1

-'

=

=

Figure K.38 MEF = 1.26 in 2007, Senior

K-20

($563) ($125) $313

Certainty is 71.74% from -Infinity to $0 $

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 76 Outliers

037

.028__ _______________ ________

371

__ 278.2

t1

-IrD

.019 185.5

.

.009

=

92.75

Mean = ($1 305lIl l I llIIIIIllhIIII1 d, .000 ......iiii. i i riii..r -

0

($1,000) ($563) ($125) $313 $750

Certainty is 70.09% from -Infinity to $0 $

...

Figure K.39 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

Forecast: LCC Difference

10,000 Trials Cumulative Chart 76 Outliers

1.000 - 10000

.750

.500 1 .iiiIIIIllI 0, I ¶ H J .L

_____________________________________ ___________________________________ 0

($1,000) ($563) ($125) $313 $750

Certainty is 70.09% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.40 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

K-2 1

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 67 Outliers

.033

_____________ .025 ___________________________ III _____________________

- 333

____________ 249.7

. 017 166.5 -

=

.008 1

..:. ....:... .•. 83.25

II h Jjjjj 1

1 .ian

= 1 1iiii11iiiiliitI ($6 ' 000 l•• 11

($1,000) ($563) ($125) $313 $750

___________

Certainty is 56.62% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.41 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Cumulative Chart 67 Outliers

1.000 - 10000

750 ___________________________________________________________________ 11iiii1III1111I1HhIOHIUH

.liII r1]Ir1I)utIIIIJIIJII I 11 F

UIiluh.,.

.

- 500 11111 III I IIIIII''1IiiiI'I =

_________________

_. •• _________________________________________

I I - .

=

- III I fIIIII -

0

_______________________ __________________________________________ uhf 1 =

::: -

i..nnhIlllIIIIIIIhIIIII MLt flII 0

($1,000) ($563) ($125) $313 $750

Certainty is 56.62% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.42 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

K-22

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: LCC Difference

Frequency Chart 67 Outliers

.033

.024

326

244.5

I

II

= 1 L

. .016 163 'H i

-

=

.

.008 1 .. ... .....________________________ 81.5

iL

.

.__ .000 0

($1,000) ($563) ($125) $313 $750

Certainty is 55.00% from -Infinity to $0 $

Figure K.43 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

Figure K.44 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior

K-23

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
APPENDIX L. PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS FOR CONSUMER SUBGROUPS

.............

......

..............

...........

..................................

..............

..............

...................................

..............

..............

.............

....................

..................

..................

..................

.......................................

.................

.................

.......................................

.................

.................

.................

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Figure L.1 MEF of 0.860 (5% Reduction in Energy Usage), Low Income L-2

Figure L.2 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Consumption), Low Income L-2

Figure L.3 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income L-3

Figure L.4 MEF of 1.021(20% Reduction in Energy Usage), Low Income L-3

Figure L.5 MEF of 1.04 in 2004, Low Income L-4

Figure L.6 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income L4

Figure L.7 MEF of 1.257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income L-5

Figure L.8 MEF = 1.26 in 2007, Low Income L-5

Figure L.9 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income L-6

Figure L.10 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income L-6

Figure L. 11 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income L-7

Figure L.12 MEF of 0.86 (5% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior L-8

Figure L.13 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior L-8

Figure L.14 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior L-9

Figure L. 15 MEF of 1.021(20% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior L-9

Figure L.16 MEF = 1.04 in 2004, Senior L-10

Figure L.17 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior L-10

Figure L. 18 MEF of 1.257 (35% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior L- 11

Figure L.19 MEF = 1.26 in 2007. Senior L-11

Figure L.20 MEF of 1.362 (40% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior L-12

Figure L.21 MEF of 1.485 (45% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior L-12

Figure L.22 MEF of 1.634 (50% Reduction in Energy Use), Senior L-13

L-.i

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
APPENDIX L. PAYBACK PERIOD RESULTS FOR CONSUMER SUBGROUPS

This appendix contains the complete set of simple payback period results for the subgroups

of low income and senior households. For details on the methodology used to calculate the payback

period refer to Chapter 8. For each efficiency level, frequency charts are provided showing the

distribution of expected payback periods.

L- 1

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
Forecast: Payback (yrs)

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 258 Outliers

.412 - -4117

.309 -

.C .206-

=

.

.103---

LMean=0.1 -

0

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

Figure L.1 MEF of 0.860 (5% Reduction in Energy Usage), Low Income

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 295 Outliers

.452 - - 4516

.339 - ______ _______________________________________________

- :i

=

. .226- -- -

o =

=

I- _____ ______________________________________

-. -l I___ Ii. IMean=0.7 -

000 - iiillliii.,gi ._.-_.--.. - -0

0.0 1.3 2.5 3.8 5.0

Figure L.2 MEF of 0.908 (10% Reduction in Energy Consumption), Low Income

L-2

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 275 Outliers

.309

.232 - _____________________________________

- 3092

________

=

. .155 - _____________________________________________ -

=

=

& .077--- - 773

.ooo IIi1 1L1L 0

0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0

Figure L.3 MEF of 0.961 (15% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

10,000 Trials

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 265 Outliers

.290

.218

2904

=

. .145 -

=

rD

o =

.073 726

.000 ----, 1

0

0.0 6.3 12.5 18.8 25.0

Figure L.4 MEF of 1.02 1 (20% Reduction in Energy Usage), Low Income

Mean=4.4

- IIIllihIH ..

L-3

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88
10,000 Trials

.033

.024

.016 -

.

& .008

.000

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

Frequency Chart 219 Outliers

- 326

244.5

- -'1

_1163 -

=

-if81.5

17.5

Figure L.5 MEF of 1.04 in 2004, Low Income

Forecast: Payback (yrs)

10,000 Trials Frequency Chart 190 Outliers

.029 286

021

ii 1111 II 214 5

%

______________________________________________________________________

.

. 014 F

H

________________________________________________________________ _______________________

::: ' i :

0.0 4.4 8.8 13.1 17.5

Figure L.6 MEF of 1.089 (25% Reduction in Energy Use), Low Income

L-4

0.0 4.4 8.8 13.1

EE-RM-PET-100 COMMENT 88