1 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov The Parker Ranch installation in Hawaii 

# BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES PROGRAM

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) Public Meeting on Energy Conservation Standards and Test Procedures for Certain Equipment in ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010 Mohammed Khan

Department of Energy Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Mohammed.Khan@ee.doe.gov

February 14, 20122 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# • Introductions

• Role of the Facilitator

• Ground Rules (norms)

– Listen as an ally

– Use short, succinct statements/keep to the point

– Hold sidebar conversations outside the room

– Focus on issues, not personalities

– One person speaks at a time (raise hand to be recognized; state your name for the record)

– Set cell phones to silent/vibrate



# • Housekeeping Items 

# Welcome and Introductions3 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Purpose of the Public Meeting

• Purpose

– To invite comment on proposed energy conservation standard levels;

– To present methodologies and characterize results of the rulemaking analyses;

– To discuss specific issues related to each analysis;

– To seek input from interested parties on methodologies, assumptions, data sources, and results from the analyses; and

– To describe next steps in the standards and test procedure rulemakings.



# • Comments from Participants

– Participants are invited to provide summary comments or statements and raise additional issues for discussion.

– The NOPR was published in the Federal Register on January 17, 2012 (77 FR 2356), and the NOPR comment period closes Monday
, April 2, 2012

.4 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Request For Comment

Issue box numbering corresponds to the list of issues published at the end of the NOPR, available at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/ashrae_Equipments_docs _meeting.html 

### Issue Box: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) welcomes comments, data, and information concerning its NOPR for American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air

- conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) equipment. Issues that correspond to those raised in the DOE’s published material will be numbered in accordance with that material. Whether invited by an issue box or not, comments are welcome on any part of DOE’s analysis.
( Issue #)5 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • In all correspondence, include all of the following:

– Energy Conservation Standards for ASHRAE Equipment

– Docket Number: EERE

- 2011

- BT

- STD

- 0029

– Regulatory Identification Number (RIN ): 1904

- AC47



## • Contact Information

Comment period closes: Monday, April 2, 2012 Postal Mail : Ms. Brenda Edwards U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Program Mailstop EE

- 2J 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20585

- 0121 Courier : Ms. Brenda Edwards U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Program 950 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W., 6 th Floor Washington, DC 20024 Telephone: (202) 586

- 2945 

# DOE Seeks Comments on its Proposal

Email : 

### ASHRAE90.1

- 2011

- STD

- 0029@ee.doe.gov6 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement 4

5

6 Test Procedures 2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis 3 1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

Closing Remarks 87 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# • The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) directs DOE to consider amending the existing Federal energy conservation standard for each type of equipment listed at 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(i), each time ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended with respect to such equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)

- (B))

• For each type of equipment, EPCA directs that if ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is amended, DOE must review and adopt amended standards at the new efficiency level in ASHRAE Standard 90.1, unless clear and convincing evidence supports a determination that adoption of a more stringent efficiency level would:

– Produce significant additional energy savings;

– Be technologically feasible; and

– Be economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)) 

# Introduction and Overview Statutory Authority8 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# • Opening Remarks

– At this time, DOE welcomes opening remarks from interested parties on the NOPR for certain ASHRAE equipment



# • Comments from Participants

– Participants are invited to provide summary comments or statements;

– Participants are invited to raise additional issues for discussion today; and

– Participants are invited to submit comments during the NOPR comment period, which is open through April 2, 2012 

# Introduction and Overview Opening Remarks9 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement 4

5

6 Test Procedures 2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis 3 1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

Closing Remarks 810 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# • To determine scope of coverage for the NOPR, DOE first reviewed all the changes made in ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010.

• DOE identified any increase in the efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010 in comparison to the existing Federal conservation standards, thereby triggering DOE action.

• DOE also identified any changes to the relevant sections of test procedure documents for covered ASHRAE equipment. 

# Determination of Scope11 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### • DOE believes ASHRAE Standard 90.1 does not cover commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment used for industrial, manufacturing, or commercial processes, with the exception of the specific industrial equipment listed in the standard.

• DOE’s standards for commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment are intended to have the same scope as ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and apply only to equipment used for comfort space conditioning, with the exception of those equipment types listed in ASHRAE that are used for commercial or industrial processes.

• To aid regulated entities in determining whether their equipment falls within the scope of DOE’s regulatory requirements, DOE is providing the following guidance:

– Equipment meeting the definition of “commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment” in 10 CFR 431.92 that is used exclusively for manufacturing and/or industrial processes and is not listed as one of the equipment types specifically added to ASHRAE Standard 90.1, are not covered under DOE’s regulatory program.

– Determinations of coverage will be made on a case

- by

- case basis depending on factors such as how the model is advertised, marketed, and/or sold for use in buildings, the extent to which the equipment provides comfort conditioning to occupants, and how the equipment is designed and manufactured. 

# Determination of Scope12 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Determination of Scope

DOE seeks comments on ways manufacturers currently differentiate

commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment used solely for manufacturing and industrial processes from that equipment of the same type that is used in buildings.

(Issue #1)13 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • Previous editions of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 did not cover “equipment and portions of building systems that use energy primarily to provide for industrial, manufacturing, or commercial processes,” such as computer room air conditioners (CRACs).

• ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010 expanded its scope to include equipment used for process loads and created a product class for “air conditioners and condensing units serving computer rooms.”

• Thus, DOE determined in the notice of data availability (NODA) and reiterated in the NOPR that DOE has the authority to cover computer room air conditioners. 

# Determination of Scope Computer Room Air Conditioners14 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Determination of Scope Equipment with Amended ASHRAE Levels

Equipment Class DOE’s Proposed Action

Water

- cooled Air Conditioners Adopting ASHRAE levels* Evaporatively

- cooled Air Conditioners Adopting ASHRAE levels* Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi

- split Water

- source Heat Pumps, <17,000 Btu/h Adopting ASHRAE levels*

Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) Multi

- split Water

- source Heat Pumps, ≥135,000 Btu/h Adopting ASHRAE levels*

Computer Room Air Conditioners Adopting ASHRAE levels Single

- Package Vertical Air Conditioners (SPVACs) and Single

Package Vertical Heat Pumps (SPVHPs) Further analysis in a separate rulemaking

* Due to a de minimis energy savings potential, DOE did not perform a cost/benefit analysis for this equipment class. 

### • The table below shows the equipment types amended in ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010, and DOE’s proposed action regarding these equipment classes.15 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • There were minimal energy savings (or no models on the market) for the following equipment classes:

– Water

- cooled and evaporatively

- cooled air conditioners

– Water

- source VRF heat pumps with a cooling capacity <17,000 Btu/h

– Water

- source VRF heat pumps with a cooling capacity ≥135,000 Btu/h



## • For computer room air conditioners, there was a lack of clear and convincing evidence in the downstream analysis for higher standards due to:

– Uncertainty in seasonal coefficient of performance (SCOP) efficiency data derived using “rule

- of

- thumb” method

– Uncertainty in the price

- efficiency relationship

– Inability for DOE to assess future changes in equipment efficiencies

– Lack of shipment information for the United States



## • For SPVACs and SPVHPs, analysis will be conducted in a separate rulemaking. 

# Rationale for Adoption of ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010 Levels16 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • DOE conducted a potential energy savings analysis for small, large, and very large water

- cooled air conditioners, and for very large evaporatively

cooled air conditioner classes in the May 5, 2011 NODA (76 FR 25622).

• Energy savings were estimated for adoption of the efficiency levels in ASHRAE 90.1

- 2010 and for up to four efficiency levels above ASHRAE 90.1

- 2010 levels.

• U nit e nergy c onsumption was based on spreadsheet models of equipment energy consumption, incorporating annual cooling load profiles from large office building simulations.

• 30

- year National Energy Savings (NES) estimates were calculated for two shipment scenarios for each product class for each higher efficiency level examined. The sum of NES for standards above ASHRAE 90.1

- 2010 levels was minimal. 

# Analysis of Water

- and Evaporatively

Cooled Air Conditioners17 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • DOE conducted a potential energy savings analysis for >135 kBtu/h Variable Refrigerant Flow Water

- Source Heat Pumps with and without heat recovery for the NOPR.

• Unit energy consumption (UEC) estimates established for ASHRAE 90.1

- 2010 efficiency levels and four higher efficiency levels including a max

tech level (14.5 EER, ~4.6 COP). Max

- tech level presumes only ductless indoor units.

• U nit e nergy c onsumption developed from building simulations that modeled water

- source VRF heat pumps used in a 20,000 ft 2 

## office building in 15 U.S. climates.

• Shipment forecast estimated based on historical water

- source heat pump shipments and relative fraction of models in analyzed VRF product classes.

• 30

- year NES estimates calculated for both equipment classes. The sum of NES for standards exceeding ASHRAE 90.1

- 2010 levels were minimal. 

## Analysis of > 135 kBtu/h Variable Refrigerant Flow Water

- Source Heat Pumps18 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement 4

5

6 Test Procedures 2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis 3 1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

Closing Remarks 819 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • EPCA requires DOE to amend any test procedure for ASHRAE products to the latest version generally accepted by the industry, as referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, unless the Secretary determines that clear and convincing evidence exists that the latest version of the industry test procedure does not meet the requirements for test procedures under 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)

- (3). (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)

- (B))

• EPCA also requires DOE to conduct an evaluation of the test procedures for covered equipment at least once every 7 years. (42 U.S.C.6314(a)(1)(A))

• 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) states that test procedures shall be reasonably designed to produce test results which reflect the energy efficiency or energy use of a type of industrial equipment during a representative average use cycle and shall not be unduly burdensome to conduct.

• DOE reviewed the updated test procedures in ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010. 

# Test Procedures Authority20 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • DOE is proposing updating to the following test procedures:

– AHRI 210/240

- 2008 for small (<65,000 Btu/h) commercial packaged air conditioning and heating equipment

– AHRI 340/360

- 2007 for small (≥65,000 Btu/h), large, and very large commercial packaged air conditioning and heating equipment

– UL 727

- 2006 for oil

- fired commercial warm

- air furnaces

– ANSI Z21.47

- 2006 for gas

- fired commercial warm

- air furnaces

– ANSI Z21.10.3

- 2004 for commercial water heaters



## • DOE is proposing to adopt the following new test procedures:

– AHRI 390

- 2003 for SPVACs and SPVHPs

– AHRI 1230

- 2010 with Addendum 1 for VRF multi

- split systems

– ASHRAE 127

- 2007 for computer room air conditioners



## • DOE notes that the AHRI and ASHRAE test procedures contain tolerances allowing the published ratings to be within a certain percentage of the measured ratings (e.g., measured test results shall not be less than 95% of published ratings). DOE does not intend to adopt these provisions in the final rule. 

# Test Procedures Updates21 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Test Procedures

Issues

DOE seeks comment on all relevant aspects of the proposed test procedures for ASHRAE equipment included in this rulemaking as part of the seven year review.
( Issue #2)

DOE seeks comment about the proposed adoption of the new test procedures: AHRI 390

- 2003, AHRI 1230

- 2010, and ASHRAE Standard 127

- 2007, especially on any shortcomings or potential modifications to these test procedures.
(Issue #6

- 8) DOE seeks comment about the proposed adoption of the following updated test procedures: AHRI 210/240

- 2008, AHRI 340/360

- 2007, UL 727

- 2006, ANSI Z21/10.3

- 2004, and ANSI Z21.47

- 2006.
( Issue #3

- 5)22 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • As part of its ongoing testing efforts in support of DOE’s regulatory program, the Department has received ad hoc requests from manufacturers regarding the need for tailored modifications to the testing set

- up or operating conditions for a basic model.

• For DOE’s testing efforts, the Department uses only the conditions specified in the DOE test procedure for a given covered equipment along with any additional guidance that is presented in the installation and/or operating manuals shipped with those units for any DOE

- initiated testing.

• No additional information (e.g., additional specificity for the placement or types of specific testing sensors) will be used for any DOE verification or enforcement testing that are not part of installation and/or operating manuals shipped with the unit.

• DOE wishes to harmonize the way it conducts its testing with the testing done by manufacturers, and does not intend to change the way manufacturers currently test their products for the purposes of determining their certified ratings. 

# Test Procedures
General Guidelines23 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Test Procedures

Issues

DOE seeks comments generally on whether there are additional settings beyond the tolerances and specifications in the test procedure for all types of commercial air conditioning and heating equipment that DOE should consider when testing such equipment. If additional settings are basic

- model specific, DOE is interested in having manufacturers disclose

these instructions as part of their initial certifications for a given basic model and seeks comment on this issue as well.24 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### • Through review of the Air

- Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) certification program, DOE discovered that AHRI testing allows for the use of a compressor “break

- in” period for commercial unitary equipment, which manufacturers may be using when conducting certification testing.

• This “break

- in” period would allow the performance of the compressor to be more representative of the actual field performance.

• DOE is proposing to allow the manufacturers to use the optional break

- in period at their discretion, so that the test procedure may produce results that better reflect the energy efficiency of their units, as required by EPCA.

• DOE is proposing to allow manufacturers the option of a “break

- in” period of up to 16 hours.

• If manufacturers choose to use this optional break

- in period, they will be required to report the length of time (up to 16 hours) they used to break in their equipment and maintain it in the test data underlying their certified ratings. 

# Test Procedures
Break

- in Provision25 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Test Procedures

Issues

DOE seeks comment about the use of an optional compressor “break

in” period as part of the following test procedures: AHRI 210/240, AHRI 340/360, AHRI 390, and AHRI 1230, or the need for a “break

- in” period for computer room air conditioners.
(Issue 3,4,7,8,17)26 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • In reviewing AHRI 1230 for VRF systems, DOE found that there are provisions stating that skilled personnel with knowledge of the control software will be required for inverter driven equipment. Additionally, the procedure states that if the equipment cannot be maintained at steady state conditions by its normal controls, then the manufacturer shall modify or over

- ride such controls so that steady state conditions are achieved.

• DOE would like to learn more about how these systems operate to achieve steady state conditions for testing. Specifically, DOE understands that at least some units require additional control instruction and/or control system override to conduct the test, which requires manufacturer assistance in order to test the unit according to AHRI 1230.

• DOE is interested in options that would eliminate manufacturer involvement in testing, but maintain the operation as specified by the manufacturer. DOE's goal is to not change how the unit is designed to operate, but to allow testing that follows set procedures that eliminates manufacturer intervention. 

# Test Procedures
VRF Systems27 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Test Procedures

Issues

DOE seeks comment about the testing conditions, the basic model operating points, and set

- up for VRF multi

- split air conditioners and heat pumps. Specifically, DOE is interested in how the procedure can be improved such that it can be run independently and manufacturer involvement in the testing is not required.
( Issue #9)28 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement 4

5

6 Test Procedures 2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis 3 1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

Closing Remarks 829 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### NODA NOPR Final Rule Effective Date

Engineering Analysis

Energy Use & End Use Load Characterization

Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis 

# NOPR Rulemaking Stage

Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis Market Assessment30 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Market Assessment

• Purpose

– Characterize the market for applicable ASHRAE equipment types to determine available equipment efficiencies, manufacturers, and shipments



# • Sources

– AHRI Directory of Certified Product Performance

– California Energy Commission (CEC) Appliance Efficiency Database

– Manufacturers’ websites



# • A detailed description of the methodology and results is contained in Chapter 2 of the NOPR TSD.31 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • There is currently no definition for variable refrigerant flow (VRF) air conditioners and heat pumps because DOE’s existing standards do not separate this type of equipment from other classes of commercial air conditioners and heating equipment.

• DOE is proposing the following definitions for this equipment class:

– Variable refrigerant flow multi

- split air conditioner means a unit of commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment that is configured as a split

- system air

- conditioner incorporating a single refrigerant circuit, with one or more outdoor units, at least one variable

speed compressor or an alternate compressor combination for varying the capacity of the system by three or more steps, and multiple indoor fan coil units, each of which is individually metered and individually controlled by an integral control device and common communications network and which can operate independently in response to multiple indoor thermostats. Variable refrigerant flow implies three or more steps of capacity control on common, inter

- connecting piping. 

# Market Assessment VRF Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps Definitions32 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • DOE is also proposing the following definitions for this equipment class:

– Variable refrigerant flow multi

- split heat pump means a unit of commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment that is configured as a split

- system heat pump that uses reverse cycle refrigeration as its primary heating source and which may include secondary supplemental heating by means of electrical resistance, steam, hot water, or gas. The equipment incorporates a single refrigerant circuit, with one or more outdoor units, at least one variable

- speed compressor or an alternate compressor combination for varying the capacity of the system by three or more steps, and multiple indoor fan coil units, each of which is individually metered and individually controlled by a control device and common communications network and which can operate independently in response to multiple indoor thermostats. Variable refrigerant flow implies three or more steps of capacity control on common, inter

- connecting piping.

– Heat recovery (in the context of variable refrigerant flow multi

- split air conditioners or variable refrigerant flow multi

- split heat pumps) means that the air conditioner or heat pump is also capable of providing simultaneous heating and cooling operation, where recovered energy from the indoor units operating in one mode can be transferred to one or more other indoor units operating in the other mode. A variable refrigerant flow multi

- split heat recovery heat pump is a variable refrigerant flow multi

- split heat pump with the addition of heat recovery capability. 

# Market Assessment VRF Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps Definitions33 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • There are also no definitions for computer room air conditioners since DOE previously did not cover this type of equipment.

• DOE is proposing the following definition:

– Computer room air conditioner means a unit of commercial package air

- conditioning and heating equipment that is advertised, marketed, and/or sold specifically for use in computer rooms, data processing rooms, or other precision cooling applications, and is rated for performance using ASHRAE Standard 127. Such equipment may not be marketed or advertised as equipment for any other space conditioning applications, and may not be rated for performance using AHRI Standard 210/240 or AHRI Standard 340/360. 

# Market Assessment Computer Room Air Conditioners Definitions34 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Market Assessment

Issues

DOE seeks comment about the proposed definitions of “variable refrigerant flow multi

- split air conditioner,” “variable refrigerant flow multi

- split heat pump,” and “heat recovery.”
( Issue #10)

DOE seeks comment about the proposed definition of “computer room air conditioner.” Specifically, DOE is interested in whether there are any

physical features or components that could allow DOE to differentiate between computer room air conditioners and commercial package air conditioners used for comfort conditioning.
( Issue #11)35 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# • ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010 divides computer room air conditioners into 30 equipment classes based on:

– Cooling Type (Air

- cooled, Water

- cooled, Glycol

- cooled)

– Sensible Cooling Capacity (<65,000 Btu/h, ≥65,000 and <240,000 Btu/h, ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h)

– Orientation (upflow, downflow)

– Presence of a fluid economizer



# • DOE compiled a database of computer room air conditioners divided into 30 equipment classes, as outlined above.

• DOE found 1364 different models (from 22 equipment lines) from the CEC database and manufacturers’ websites. 

# Market Assessment Computer Room Air Conditioners36 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### NODA NOPR Final Rule Effective Date

Engineering Analysis

Energy Use & End Use Load Characterization

Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis 

# NOPR Rulemaking Stage

Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis Market Assessment37 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

##  Choose equipment classes sizes to be analyzed in the engineering and life

- cycle cost analysis.



##  Define characteristics of baseline models in each representative equipment class.



##  Develop efficiency levels (ELs) that span the range of efficiency from baseline to max

- tech level.



##  Determine prices for computer room air conditioners for the full range of efficiencies.



##  Scale results to equipment classes not directly analyzed.



##  Results of the price

- efficiency curve. 

# Engineering Analysis: Methodology

Choose Representative Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment Classes Not

Analyzed Define Baseline Models

Develop Pricing Data Develop Efficiency Levels

Results38 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • DOE chose the average sensible capacity (rounded to the nearest ton) for each equipment class for computer room air conditioners as the representative capacity for analysis.



## • DOE chose the representative sensible capacity based upon each of the following size categories:



### • <65,000 Btu/h

– DOE chose 36,000 Btu/h (3 tons)



### • ≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h

– DOE chose 132,000 Btu/h (11 tons)



### • ≥240,000 Btu/h and <760,000 Btu/h

– DOE chose 288,000 Btu/h (24 tons)



## • DOE centered the downstream analyses around these representative sensible capacities. 

# Engineering Analysis: Representative Equipment Size

Choose Representative Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment Classes Not

Analyzed Define Baseline Models

Develop Pricing Data Develop Efficiency Levels

Results39 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### • DOE selects the baseline levels as reference points against which DOE measures changes resulting from potential amended energy conservation standards.



### • A baseline piece of equipment refers to a model having features and technologies typically found in the equipment currently offered for sale.



### • Usually, units at the baseline efficiency level just meet the Federal energy conservation standards; however, computer room air conditioners do not currently have a Federal energy conservation standard.



### • Since EPCA requires DOE to adopt either the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 level or a

more

- stringent standard, DOE used the efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010 as the baseline efficiency level.



### • To simplify the engineering analysis, DOE only selected baseline efficiency levels for equipment classes in the downflow orientation. (For upflow models, DOE assumed the results of the cost/benefit analysis would be the same as downflow and did not analyze these products directly in the engineering analysis.) 

# Engineering Analysis: Baseline Models

Choose Representative Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment Classes Not

Analyzed Define Baseline Models

Develop Pricing Data Develop Efficiency Levels

Results40 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • Since DOE does not currently regulate computer room air conditioners, manufacturers are not required to report the ratings of their equipment, and there was no SCOP data available at the time of DOE’s analysis.



## • DOE had to rely on efficiency information found in manufacturer literature and in the CEC appliance efficiency databases.



## • Since SCOP is a new metric in ASHRAE Standard 127

- 2007, all efficiency information DOE found in these sources were in the form of energy efficiency ratio (EER).



## • DOE converted the EER information (when available) into SCOP using the “rule of thumb” formula found in the appendix of ASHRAE Standard 127

- 2007 to approximate the SCOP ratings of equipment on the market. 

# Engineering Analysis: Efficiency Levels

) )( ( 5

. 3 SHR Old 

# EER SCOP = Choose Representative Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment Classes Not

Analyzed Define Baseline Models

Develop Pricing Data Develop Efficiency Levels

Results41 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • For those equipment classes for which DOE had efficiency information, DOE identified the max

- tech efficiency level on the market.



## • DOE chose evenly

- spaced levels between the baseline and max

tech levels for its analysis, which generally corresponded to the levels with the most models on the market



## • For those equipment classes where little or no efficiency information was available, DOE selected levels for analysis based on the differences in efficiency between equipment classes in ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010. 

# Engineering Analysis: Efficiency Levels

Choose Representative Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment Classes Not

Analyzed Define Baseline Models

Develop Pricing Data Develop Efficiency Levels

Results42 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • DOE contacted the 5 known manufacturers of this equipment and was able to obtain efficiency information and pricing information from 3 of those manufacturers.



## • DOE selected models for pricing that were as close to the representative cooling capacity as possible (generally within 15%).



## • DOE received pricing information for 32 models total.



## • DOE used these pricing data together with the SCOP information to produce price

- efficiency curves. 

# Engineering Analysis: Pricing Survey

Choose Representative Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment Classes Not

Analyzed Define Baseline Models

Develop Pricing Data Develop Efficiency Levels

Results43 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • Due to limited efficiency information, DOE only had enough pricing and efficiency data to directly analyze four equipment classes:



### • Air

- cooled with a sensible cooling capacity <65,000 Btu/h



### • Air

- cooled with a sensible cooling capacity ≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h



### • Water

- cooled with a sensible cooling capacity <65,000 Btu/h



### • Water

- cooled with a sensible cooling capacity ≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h



## • For the remaining 11 equipment classes to be analyzed, DOE scaled the price

- efficiency curves from these four classes. 

# Engineering Analysis: Pricing Survey

Choose Representative Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment Classes Not

Analyzed Define Baseline Models

Develop Pricing Data Develop Efficiency Levels

Results44 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Engineering Analysis: Scaling to Other Equipment Classes

Small Air

- cooled Computer Room AC Large Air

- cooled Computer Room AC Very Large Air

cooled Computer Room AC SCOP

– 0.20

Price x 1.44

Small Water

cooled Computer Room AC Large Water

cooled Computer Room AC Very Large Water

cooled Computer Room AC SCOP

– 0.10

Price x 1.90

Small Glycol

cooled Computer Room AC Large Glycol

cooled Computer Room AC Very Large Glycol

cooled Computer Room ACSCOP–0.1SCOP–0.35SCOP–0.30Same PriceSame PriceSame Price

• For equipment classes with a fluid economizer, DOE used the corresponding equipment class

without the fluid economizer and subtracted 0.05 from the SCOP and multiplied the price by 1.0582 

## Translation to Equipment Classes Without a Fluid Economizer Choose Representative Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment Classes Not

Analyzed Define Baseline Models

Develop Pricing Data Develop Efficiency Levels

Results45 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Engineering Analysis: Results

Choose Representative Equipment Size

Scale to Equipment Classes Not

Analyzed Define Baseline Models

Develop Pricing Data Develop Efficiency Levels

Results 

## • The results of the engineering analysis are a set of price

- efficiency tables. The full set of tables for all equipment classes can be found in Chapter 3 of the NOPR TSD.



## • Based on the pricing data that were obtained, DOE observed that the price increases with increased efficiency for small and large air

- cooled equipment and large water

- cooled equipment.*



## • Based on the pricing data, DOE observed that the price decreases with increased efficiency for small water

- cooled equipment.*



## • DOE notes that factors other than the efficiency of equipment (e.g., how competitive the market is, warranty, and other features) impact pricing. DOE believes that the negative correlation for small water

- cooled equipment may have occurred because of the impacts from such factors. These factors may also have influenced the results for the other equipment classes, even though the efficiency trend alone may have shown a positive correlation in those classes.

*Consequently, all equipment classes for which the price

- efficiency relationship was translated from

these classes have the same general trend for the price

- efficiency relationship.46 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Engineering Analysis Issues

DOE seeks comment about the results of the pricing analysis and on any data or information on the price

- efficiency relationship for computer room air conditioners.
( Issue #12)47 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis ; Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement 4

5

6 Test Procedures 2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis 3 1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

Closing Remarks 848 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### NODA NOPR Final Rule Effective Date

Engineering Analysis

Energy Use & End Use Load Characterization

Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis 

# NOPR Rulemaking Stage

Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis Market Assessment49 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • Energy use based on a temperature bin analysis.

• Temperature bin performance maps created for 15 classes of equipment.

– Air

- cooled
, glycol

- cooled , and glycol

- cooled with economizer: use outdoor drybulb (T db 

## ) temperature bins

– Water

- cooled with and without economizers: use outdoor wetbulb ( T w b 

## ) temperature bins

.



## • Annual unit energy consumption (UEC climate 

## ) by efficiency level estimated for 239 climate locations using TMY3 climate data.

• Further aggregated to State

- level UEC state 

## using population

- based weighting factors. 

# Energy Use Characterization Computer Room Air Conditioners50 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • Server load averaged 65% of sensible capacity.

• Efficiency is a function of condensing fluid or ambient air temperature and, thus, varies with temperature bin.

• Load reductions for fluid economizers were included (separate airside economizers not considered in analysis).

• Supply fan power was based on a review of manufacturer data and held constant at all efficiency levels within a product class.

• Condenser p erformances varies
with condensing conditions.

• Part

- load performance curves were also included in the energy analysis. 

# Energy Use Calculation

- CRAC Performance Map Development

COOL

- EIR

- FT_air cooled =

- 0.000006 OAT 2 + 0.004941 OAT + 0.584620 R2 = 0.997371

COOL

- EIR

- FT_glycol = 0.0000228 EFT 2

- 0.0001787 EFT + 0.7700841 R2 = 0.9973387 COOL

- EIR

- FT_water cooled = 0.00001566 EFT 2 + 0.00065099 EFT + 0.79467383 R2 = 0.99992938

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

0 20 40 60 80 100 120EIR (T) / EIR (Nominal)

Entering Condenser Fluid or Air Temperature (F) Air Cooled Unit
Glycol Cooled Unit

Water Cooled Unit
Poly. (Air Cooled Unit)
Poly. (Glycol Cooled Unit)
Poly. (Water Cooled Unit)51 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Energy Use Calculation - CRAC UEC calculations

•

• Power bin 

### = Powercond

, T 

### + Powersupplyfan

Unit Energy Consumption by Climate (UECClimate)



### UECClimate 

### = LBinPowerBin X 

### HoursBin

• Unit Energy Consumption by State (UECState)



### UECstate 

### = LClimate WeightClimate in 

### State X 

### UECClimate

• National UEC reported in LCC spreadsheet output52 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Markups Analysis

Distribution Channels for computer room air conditioner (CRAC) Equipment (Replacement and New Construction)

Manufacturer or Distributor Mechanical Contractor Consumer53 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • DOE developed markups to relate manufacturer selling prices (MSP) to end

- user CRAC prices for one distribution channel for markups analysis. 

# Markups Analysis

Markup Factor Baseline Markup Incremental Markup

Mechanical Contractor 1.474 1.184 Sales tax (National population

- weighted average) 1.073 1.073

Overall Markup 1.581 1.270

• DOE markups vary by State based on 2007 Economic Census (Mechanical Contractors).54 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### NODA NOPR Final Rule Effective Date

Engineering Analysis

Energy Use & End Use Load Characterization

Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis 

# NOPR Rulemaking Stage

Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis Market Assessment55 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# • Economic evaluation from the end

- user perspective.

• Results are expressed as LCC savings (baseline minus the standard level).

• Simple payback period (PBP) is also calculated and reported in this analysis. 

# Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Combine Changes in Costs 

### LCC Results First Cost

(End

- User Price + Installation Cost) 

### Operating Expenses Convert to Present

Value56 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Installation Cost (Showing Air

- Cooled)

Tons kBtu/hr Base Installation Cost

3 36 $ 1,415

5 60 $ 1,977

5.4 64.8 $ 2,079

12.7 152.4 $ 3,636

20 240 $ 4,893

23 276 $ 5,361 

## • DOE calculated installation cost as a function of capacity in tons from RS Means CostWorks data for cooling type, but had no information on installation costs by efficiency level.

• DOE assumed that installation cost would not vary with efficiency level.

y = 690.13x 0.6538 R2 = 0.9623

$0.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $3,000.00 $4,000.00 $5,000.00 $6,000.00 $7,000.00

0 5 10 15 20 2557 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Installation Cost (Cont.)

DOE requests comments on whether computer room air conditioner installation cost increases as a function of increased efficiency. If so, how should the increase in cost be estimated or derived?
( Issue #13)58 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • From 2011 RS Means data, DOE calculated a cost curve showing

one

- time baseline repair costs as a percentage of original equipment cost for different equipment capacities.

• To estimate baseline repair cost for each capacity analyzed, DOE then multiplied the calculated percentage from the cost curve at each capacity times the original equipment cost from the current analysis.

• The one

- time baseline repair cost was then converted to a baseline average annual repair cost.

• For higher

- efficiency levels, DOE scaled the material portion of the baseline repair cost by the relative equipment price at each higher level, then added baseline repair labor expense to get total repair cost. 

# Repair Cost59 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# • DOE based its estimates on 2011 RS Means maintenance data.

• Annualized maintenance costs were estimated at $84/yr for units up to 240 kBtu/hr, $102/yr for larger units

• Maintenance costs include cleaning evaporator coils, lubricating motors, cleaning condenser coils, checking and refilling refrigerant as necessary, and similar activities. Such costs are almost entirely attributable to labor expenses, and were assumed not to vary with efficiency level. 

# Maintenance Cost60 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • Discount rates represent how future monetary expenditures or benefits are “discounted” to the present and indicate how much value a consumer places on a dollar in the future compared to one in the present

.

• Discount rates were sampled for three classes of customers: (1) private companies; (2) State and local government (including education); and (3) Federal government.

• Commercial discount rates: based on capital asset planning model (weighted cost of equity and debt).

• Source of underlying data for private companies was 938 companies in health care, education, and finance and services on the Damodaran Online website.

• For State and local government, a 10

- yr. AA municipal bond rate was used.

• For the Federal government, 1971

- 2010 geometric average of long

- term (>10 yr) U.S. government securities was used. 

# Discount rates61 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • Based on a survey of the available literature (7 sources), DOE concluded that a range of 10

- 25 years with an average of 15 years was appropriate.

• Lifetimes were assumed to follow a Weibull probability distribution: 

# Lifetime of Equipment62 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### • In general, LCC savings were strongly negative above the ASHRAE level (indicating increased life

- cycle costs to the consumer).

• Exceptions

– positive LCC savings seen:



### – For smallest air

- cooled units at Levels 1 and 2 (PBPs >8 years)

– For medium and large air

- cooled units (PBPs were <4 years)

– For smallest water

- cooled and glycol

- cooled units (PBPs were negative)

– For medium and large water

- cooled and glycol

- units (PBPs were either negative or else > 9 years)

• Payback periods were generally longer than equipment lifetimes.

• In cases where paybacks were negative for one of two reasons :



### – There are reduced first costs for higher efficiency levels with some equipment classes.

– Repair and maintenance cost increases outweigh energy costs savings resulting in net increases in operating costs (compared with the baseline ASHRAE standard level). 

# LCC

- PBP Analysis Results63 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement 4

5

6 Test Procedures 2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis 3 1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

Closing Remarks 864 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### NODA NOPR Final Rule Effective Date

Engineering Analysis

Energy Use & End Use Load Characterization

Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis 

# NOPR Rulemaking Stage

Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis Market Assessment65 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • Purpose

‒ To estimate the National Energy Savings (NES) from adoption of standards at the ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010 efficiency levels and also at more

stringent levels.

‒ To estimate the national economic impact on the nation in terms of national Net Present Value ( NPV) from adoption of computer room air conditioner standards higher than the ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010 efficiency levels

.



## • Components

‒ Shipment Analysis;

‒ National Energy Savings Calculations; and

‒ National Net Present Value Calculations. 

# National Impact Analysis66 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov



# • Purpose

‒ To estimate shipments of equipment over time.



# • Methodology

‒ Obtained historical and forecasted shipments (2000

- 2020) for Australia.

‒ Used the ratio of number of business establishments in Australia and US to inflate the Australia shipments to the US.

‒ Estimated future shipments by extrapolating the historical trend.

‒ Disaggregated shipments into product classes first using Australia market shares to allocate shipments to six broad product classes and then using market information of models in the US to further disaggregate into all product classes.

‒ DOE did not distinguish between upflow and downflow units. 

# Shipments Analysis

Year Air

cooled <65 Air

Cooled 65

- 240 Air

cooled >240 Water

cooled <65 Water

cooled 65

- 240 Water

cooled >240 Water

cooled <65 FE Water

cooled 65

- 240

FE Water

cooled >240 FE Glycol
cooled <65 Glycol cooled 65

-

240 Glycol
cooled >240 Glycol
cooled <65 FE Glycol
cooled 65

- 240

FE Glycol
cooled >240
FE

2012 671

- - 74

- - 46

- - 69

- - 69

- - 2013 691 7,499 1,677 76 1,233 470 47 1,036 180 71 1,233 387 71 1,431 345
2014 711 7,722 1,727 79 1,270 484 49 1,067 185 73 1,270 398 73 1,473 356
2015 732 7,951 1,778 81 1,308 498 50 1,098 190 75 1,308 410 75 1,517 366
2016 754 8,186 1,831 83 1,346 513 52 1,131 196 78 1,346 422 78 1,562 377
2017 776 8,427 1,885 86 1,386 528 53 1,164 202 80 1,386 435 80 1,608 388
2018 799 8,674 1,940 88 1,427 543 55 1,198 208 82 1,427 447 82 1,655 399
2019 823 8,933 1,998 91 1,469 559 56 1,234 214 85 1,469 461 85 1,704 411
2020 847 9,192 2,056 94 1,512 576 58 1,270 220 87 1,512 474 87 1,754 423
2021 847 9,198 2,057 94 1,513 576 58 1,271 220 87 1,513 474 87 1,755 424
2022 866 9,401 2,103 96 1,546 589 59 1,299 225 89 1,546 485 89 1,794 433
2023 885 9,604 2,148 98 1,580 602 61 1,327 230 91 1,580 495 91 1,832 442
2024 903 9,807 2,194 100 1,613 614 62 1,355 235 93 1,613 506 93 1,871 452
2025 922 10,009 2,239 102 1,646 627 63 1,383 240 95 1,646 516 95 1,910 461
2026 941 10,212 2,284 104 1,680 640 64 1,411 245 97 1,680 527 97 1,948 470
2027 959 10,415 2,330 106 1,713 652 66 1,439 249 99 1,713 537 99 1,987 480
2028 978 10,618 2,375 108 1,746 665 67 1,467 254 101 1,746 548 101 2,026 489
2029 997 10,821 2,420 110 1,780 678 68 1,495 259 103 1,780 558 103 2,064 498
2030 1,015 11,023 2,466 112 1,813 690 70 1,523 264 104 1,813 569 104 2,103 508
2031 1,034 11,226 2,511 114 1,846 703 71 1,551 269 106 1,846 579 106 2,142 517
2032 1,053 11,429 2,557 116 1,880 716 72 1,579 274 108 1,880 590 108 2,181 526
2033 1,071 11,632 2,602 118 1,913 729 73 1,607 279 110 1,913 600 110 2,219 536
2034 1,090 11,835 2,647 120 1,947 741 75 1,635 283 112 1,947 610 112 2,258 545
2035 1,109 12,038 2,693 122 1,980 754 76 1,663 288 114 1,980 621 114 2,297 554
2036 1,127 12,240 2,738 125 2,013 767 77 1,691 293 116 2,013 631 116 2,335 564
2037 1,146 12,443 2,783 127 2,047 779 79 1,719 298 118 2,047 642 118 2,374 573
2038 1,165 12,646 2,829 129 2,080 792 80 1,747 303 120 2,080 652 120 2,413 582
2039 1,183 12,849 2,874 131 2,113 805 81 1,775 308 122 2,113 663 122 2,451 592
2040 1,202 13,052 2,919 133 2,147 817 82 1,803 313 124 2,147 673 124 2,490 601
2041 1,221 13,254 2,965 135 2,180 830 84 1,831 317 126 2,180 684 126 2,529 610
2042

- 13,457 3,010

- 2,213 843

- 1,859 322

- 2,213 694

- 2,567 620

Cumulative 28,518 315,793 70,636 3,152 51,940 19,780 1,954 43,628 7,563 2,935 51,940 16,288 2,935 60,250 14,542 CRAC Shipments67 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# NES and NPV Methodology

• National Energy Savings (NES) calculated for a period of 30 years from the earliest possible standard compliance date (depends on effective date in ASHRAE and size of product).

– 2012 to 2041 for CRACs <65 kBtu/h

– 2013 to 2042 for larger CRACs



## • National NPV for CRACs calculated from 2012

- 2055 or 2013

- 2056, which

covers life

- cycle installation and operational expenses for all equipment shipments between 2012 and 2041 or 2013 and 2042.

– Assumes a 15 year product lifetime.



## • Both NES and NPV analyses take into account a four

- year to five

- year delay for DOE to set standards more stringent than the efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010.

– Amended energy conservation standards at the ASHRAE efficiency levels would be implemented in 2012 or 2013.

– Amended energy conservation standards at more

- stringent efficiency levels than those in ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010 would be implemented in 2017.68 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# NES and NPV Methodology

– Cont’d

• Used national average customer prices, annual energy use, energy prices, and annual repair and maintenance expenditures from LCC analysis.

– These inputs were based on downflow units but are assumed to represent upflow units as well. The SCOPs for upflow units were adjusted upward by 0.11 (based on ASHRAE) prior to developing efficiency distributions to allow for this approach.



## • Streams of energy use and total costs calculated over analysis time periods with all costs (expenditures) discounted to the present.

• Used a constant price assumption for the default national impact analysis (NIA) forecast, as discussed in the LCC analysis69 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • Analysis used a distribution of shipments mapped to each of the efficiency levels considered ( i.e. , those efficiency levels include a level below

- ASHRAE (baseline), the ASHRAE level, and up to 4 higher efficiency levels) based on mapping the market assessment data for available models to the analyzed efficiency levels.

• Amended energy conservation standards assumed to “roll up” less

- efficient equipment to standard level, but not to affect projected shipments at higher efficiency levels.

• Once an amended standard is in place, new equipment enters the market according to the new efficiency mix. Example Distribution of Efficiencies for Air

- Cooled CRACs <65,000 btu/h
Energy Efficiency Level

2.00 SCOP (Baseline) 2.20 SCOP (ASHRAE) 2.40 SCOP 2.60 SCOP 2.80 SCOP 3.00 SCOP (Max

- Tech)

Base Case 2% 9% 20% 45% 18% 5% 

# NES and NPV Methodology

– Cont’d70 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### DOE seeks comment on whether there would be a rebound effect in computer room air conditioner equipment energy use as a result of improvements in the efficiency of such units.
( Issue #14 )

DOE seeks comment on whether shipments of computer room air conditioners would change with higher standard levels.
( Issue #15 )

DOE seeks comment on the NES

- forecasted base

- case distribution of efficiencies and DOE’s prediction of how amended energy conservation

standards would affect the distribution of efficiencies in the standards

case. ( Issue #16 ) 

# NIA Issues for Comment71 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# NIA Results

• Cumulative NES results showed savings of 0.01 quad for establishing amended energy conservation standards at efficiency levels in ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010.

– Cumulative NES savings ranged from 0.07 to 0.98 quads for establishing amended energy conservation standards at efficiency levels higher than ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010.



## • Cumulative NPV savings ranged from

- $2.25 to +$0.01 billion (2011$) for establishing amended energy conservation standards at efficiency levels higher than ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010 using both 3

- percent and 7

- percent discount rates.72 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

### NODA NOPR Final Rule Effective Date

Engineering Analysis

Energy Use & End Use Load Characterization

Shipments Analysis National Impact Analysis Markups for Equipment Price Determination Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis 

# NOPR Rulemaking Stage

Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis Market Assessment73 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## Purpose of the National Impact Analysis

• Purpose

‒ Assess the overall impacts on domestic energy supplies that would result from the adoption of energy conservation standards.



## • Method

‒ DOE used NEMS

- BT, a variant of the NEMS (National Energy Modeling System) developed and used by DOE/Energy Information Administration (EIA) for their Annual Energy Outlo ok ( AEO ) report, as the basis of the Utility Impact Analysis.

‒ Outputs of the utility impact analysis include forecasts of electricity sales and avoided capacity resulting from a comparison of base and standards

cases.

‒ DOE modeled the energy savings impacts from amended energy conservation standards using NEMS

- BT to generate forecasts that deviate from the AEO reference case. 

# Utility Impact Analysis74 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## Shipment Analysis • Purpose

‒ Estimate national environmental impacts from new energy efficiency standards for products covered under this rule.



### • Methodology

‒ For emissions from power plants, DOE used the environmental impacts predicted from the NEMS

- BT modeling analysis used for the Utility Impacts Analysis. The following emissions are assessed:

• Carbon dioxide (CO2)

‒ NEMS

- BT calculates quantities of CO2 emissions from power plants under standards.

• Sulfur dioxide (SO2)

‒ Clean Air Act amendments of 1990 cap SO2 emissions.

‒ NEMS

- BT does not show any measurable impact from standards.

• Nitrogen oxides (NOx)

‒ Clean Air Interstate Rule (assumed in effect in AEO2011 NEMS) caps NOx emissions in 28 eastern States and DC.

‒ NEMS

- BT calculates quantities of U.S. emissions of NOx from power plants in 22 “non

- capped” States.

‒ For the 28 “capped” States and DC, NEMS

- BT does not show any measurable impact from standards.

• Mercury (Hg)

‒ AEO2011 NEMS does not include EPA’s recent Mercury and Air Toxics Standard.

‒ NEMS

- BT calculates quantities of Hg emissions from power plants under standards. 

# Emissions Impact Analysis75 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## Shipment Analysis

• To value avoided CO2 emissions, DOE uses the most current Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) values developed by interagency process.

‒ SCC is intended to be a monetary measure of the incremental damage resulting from greenhouse gas emissions, including but not limited to agricultural productivity loss, human health effects, property damage from rising sea level, and changes in the ecosystem.



## • The most recent interagency estimates of the potential global benefits resulting from reduced CO2 emissions in 2010 are $5.00, $22.70, $37.20, and $68.80 per metric ton in 2011 dollars.

‒ For emission reductions that occur in later years, these values grow in real terms over time.



## • DOE also estimated the potential monetary benefit of reduced NOx emissions resulting from the considered standard levels. 

# Emissions Impact Analysis
Monetization of Emissions Reductions76 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement 4

5

6 Test Procedures 2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis 3 1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

Closing Remarks 877 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Sampling Plans for all ASHRAE Equipment

Generate Certified Rating Between Minimum and Maximum Values Determine Minimum and Maximum Rating Values
Compare Mean to Energy Conservation Standard Per Regulations Calculate the Product Specific Certification Statistics
Sample Mean (x) Determine which Federal Conservation Standards Apply to the Product
431.77, 431.87, 431.97, 431.110, Test the Minimum Number of Units of a Basic Model Specified in Sections 429.11 and 429.43 Using the Applicable DOE Test Procedure (Maximum Number of Units is at the Discretion of the Manufacturer)78 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# Public Meeting Agenda

Markups Analysis; Energy Use Analysis; Life

- Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Shipments Analysis; National Impact Analysis; Utility Impact and Emissions Impact Analysis

Certification, Compliance & Enforcement 4

5

6 Test Procedures 2

Market Assessment and Engineering Analysis 3 1 Introduction and Overview

Determination of Scope

7

Closing Remarks 879 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

# • Closing Remarks

– At this time, DOE welcomes any additional remarks or questions from interested parties on the NOPR for certain ASHRAE Equipment.



# • DOE specifically invites comment on:

– The proposed test procedure amendments;

– The proposed energy conservation standard levels ( i.e. , the efficiency levels specified by ASHRAE Standard 90.1

- 2010) for the products in this NOPR. 

# Closing Remarks and Comments80 | Building Technologies Program eere.energy.gov 

## • In all correspondence, include all of the following:

– Energy Conservation Standards for ASHRAE Equipment

– Docket Number: EERE

- 2011

- BT

- STD

- 0029

– Regulatory Identification Number (RIN ): 1904

- AC47



## • Contact Information

Comment period closes: Monday, April 2, 2012 Postal Mail : Ms. Brenda Edwards U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Program Mailstop EE

- 2J 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20585

- 0121 Courier : Ms. Brenda Edwards U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Program 950 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W., 6 th Floor Washington, DC 20024 Telephone: (202) 586

- 2945 Email : 

### ASHRAE90.1

- 2011

- STD

- 0029@ee.doe.gov 

# Closing Remarks and Comments