APPENDIX 17

- A. REGULATORY IMPACT AN ALYSIS: SUPPORTING

MATERIALS

TABLE OF CO NTENTS

17

- A.1 INTRODUCTION

................................ ................................ ............................... 17

- A

- 1

17

- A.2 MARKET SHARE ANNUAL INCREASES BY POLICY

................................ 17

- A

- 2

17

- A.3 NIA

- RIA INTEGRATED MODEL

................................ ................................ ..... 17

- A

- 8

17

- A.4 CONSUMER REBATE POLI CY MARKET PENETRATIO N CURVES

........ 17

- A

- 8

17

- A.4.1 Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 17

- A

- 8

17

- A.4.2 Adjustment of XENERGY Penetration Curves

................................ ................. 17

- A

- 10

17

- A.4.3 Interpolation of Penetration Curves

................................ ................................ ... 17

- A

- 11

17

- A.5 CONSUMER REBATE PROG RAMS

................................ .............................. 17

- A

- 12

17

- A.6 FEDERAL AND STATE TA X CREDITS

................................ ........................ 17

- A

- 16

17

- A.6.1 Federal Tax Credits for Consumers

................................ ................................ ... 17

- A

- 16

17

- A.6.2 Federal Tax Credits for Manufacturers

................................ .............................. 17

- A

- 17

17

- A.6.3 State Tax Credits

................................ ................................ ................................ 17

- A

- 18

LIST OF TABLES

Table 17

- A.2.1 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners (< 7,000 Btu/h)

....... 17

- A

- 2

Table 17

- A.2.2 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners (7,000

– 15,000

Btu/h)

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 17

- A

- 3

Table 17

- A.2.3 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal A ir Conditioners (> 15,000 Btu/h)

..... 17

- A

- 3

Table 17

- A.2.4 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measur es for Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps (< 7,000 Btu/h)

.............. 17

- A

- 4

Table 17

- A.2.5 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alter native Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps (7,000

– 15,000 Btu/h)

... 17

- A

- 5

Table 17

- A.2.6 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps (> 15,000 Btu/h)

............ 17

- A

- 6

Table 17

- A.5.1 Represe ntative Capacities and Energy Efficiencies Used to Calculate

the Rebate Amounts for each Rebate Program

................................ ...... 17

- A

- 12

Table 17

- A.5.2 Rep resentative Rebate Amounts (2013$)

................................ .............. 17

- A

- 13

Table 17

- A.5.3 Rebates for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Packaged

Terminal He at Pumps

................................ ................................ ............ 17

- A

- 14

LIST OF FIGURE S

Figure 17

- A.4.1 S

- Curves Showing Effects of External and Internal Sources on

Adoption of New Technologies

................................ ............................. 17

- A

- 10

17

- A

- iAPPENDIX 17

- A. REGULATORY IMPACT AN ALYSIS: SUPPORTING M ATERIALS

17

- A.1 INTRODUCTION

This appendix contains sections discussing the following topics:

• Projections of annual market share increases for the alternative policies;

• NIA

- RIA Integrated Model;

• XENERGY penetration curves used to analyze consumer rebates, including:

o Background material,

o DOE’s adjustment of these curves for this analysis, and

o The m ethod DOE used for interpolating the curves;

• Detailed tables of rebates offered for the considered products; and

• Backgroun d material on Federal and state tax credits for appliances

.

17

- A

- 117

- A.2 MARKET SHARE ANNUAL INCREASES BY POLICY

Table 17

- A.2.1 through Table 17

- A.2 .6 show the annual increases in market shares of

packaged terminal air conditioners (PTACs) and packaged terminal heal pumps (PTHPs)

meeting the target efficiency levels for the proposed TSL (T SL 2 )

. DOE used these market share

increases as inputs to the NIA

- RIA spreadsheet model.

Table 17

- A.2.1 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners ( < 7,000 Btu/ h )

Year Consumer

Rebates Consumer

Tax Credits Manufacturer

Tax Credits Voluntary

Energy

Efficiency

Targets Bulk

Government

Purchases

2018 40.0% 24.0% 12.0% 1.1% 0.7%

2019 38.2% 22.9% 11.5% 0.0% 0.8%

2020 32.0% 19.2% 9.6% 0.0% 0.9%

2021 26.1% 15.6% 7.8% 0.0% 1.0%

2022 19.9% 11.9% 6.0% 0.0% 1.1%

2023 14.0% 8.4% 4.2% 0.0% 1.2%

2024 7.8% 4.7% 2.4% 0.0% 1.3%

2025 1.9% 1.2% 0.6% 0.0% 1.5%

2026 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6%

2027 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.7%

2028 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8%

2029 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2030 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2031 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2032 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2033 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2034 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2035 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2036 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2037 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2038 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2039 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2040 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2041 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2042 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2043 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2044 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2045 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2046 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2047 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

17

- A

- 2Table 17

- A.2.2 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners ( 7,000

– 15,000 Btu/h )

Year Consumer

Rebates Consumer

Tax Credits Manufacturer

Tax Credits Voluntary

Energy

Efficiency

Targets Bulk

Government

Purchases

2018 57.7% 34.6% 17.3% 4.3% 0.5%

2019 57.2% 34.3% 17.1% 1.1% 0.7%

2020 57.0% 34.2% 17.1% 0.0% 0.8%

2021 53.2% 31.9% 16.0% 0.0% 0.9%

2022 48.9% 29.4% 14.7% 0.0% 1.1%

2023 44.4% 26.7% 13.3% 0.0% 1.2%

2024 39.9% 24.0% 12.0% 0.0% 1.3%

2025 35.7% 21.4% 10.7% 0.0% 1.5%

2026 30.6% 18.3% 9.2% 0.0% 1.5%

2027 25.7% 15.4% 7.7% 0.0% 1.5%

2028 20.5% 12.3% 6.2% 0.0% 1.5%

2029 15.6% 9.4% 4.7% 0.0% 1.5%

2030 10.5% 6.3% 3.2% 0.0% 1.6%

2031 4.0% 2.4% 1.2% 0.0% 1.7%

2032 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2033 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2034 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2035 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2036 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2037 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2038 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2039 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2040 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2041 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2042 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2043 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2044 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2045 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2046 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2047 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Table 17

- A.2.3 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners ( > 15,000 Btu/h )

Year Consumer

Rebates Consumer

Tax Credits Manufacturer

Tax Credits Voluntary

Energy

Efficiency

Targets Bulk

Government

Purchases

2018 56.1% 33.7% 16.8% 0.1% 0.4%

2019 56.1% 33.7% 16.8% 0.2% 0.6%

17

- A

- 32020 56.1% 33.7% 16.8% 0.3% 0.7%

2021 56.1% 33.7% 16.8% 0.4% 0.9%

2022 56.1% 33.7% 16.8% 0.5% 1.0%

2023 56.1% 33.7% 16.8% 0.7% 1.2%

2024 56.1% 33.7% 16.8% 0.8% 1.3%

2025 56.1% 33.7% 16.8% 1.0% 1.5%

2026 66.6% 39.9% 20.0% 0.0% 1.5%

2027 63.3% 38.0% 19.0% 0.0% 1.5%

2028 59.9% 35.9% 18.0% 0.0% 1.5%

2029 57.8% 34.7% 17.3% 0.0% 1.5%

2030 57.2% 34.3% 17.2% 0.0% 1.5%

2031 54.0% 32.4% 16.2% 0.0% 1.5%

2032 46.5% 27.9% 13.9% 0.0% 1.5%

2033 38.7% 23.2% 11.6% 0.0% 1.5%

2034 30.9% 18.5% 9.3% 0.0% 1.5%

2035 23.4% 14.0% 7.0% 0.0% 1.5%

2036 15.6% 9.3% 4.7% 0.0% 1.5%

2037 8.1% 4.8% 2.4% 0.0% 1.7%

2038 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.3%

2039 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2040 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2041 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2042 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2043 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2044 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2045 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2046 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2047 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Table 17

- A.2.4 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps ( < 7,000 Btu/ h)

Year Consumer

Rebates Consumer

Tax Credits Manufacturer

Tax Credits Voluntary

Energy

Efficiency

Targets Bulk

Government

Purchases

2018 59.0% 35.4% 17.7% 2.1% 0.1%

2019 57.6% 34.5% 17.3% 0.0% 0.1%

2020 56.2% 33.7% 16.9% 0.0% 0.1%

2021 54.7% 32.8% 16.4% 0.0% 0.1%

2022 53.3% 32.0% 16.0% 0.0% 0.1%

2023 52.2% 31.3% 15.7% 0.0% 0.2%

2024 51.3% 30.8% 15.4% 0.0% 0.2%

2025 50.6% 30.3% 15.2% 0.0% 0.2%

2026 49.9% 30.0% 15.0% 0.0% 0.2%

17

- A

- 42027 49.4% 29.6% 14.8% 0.0% 0.2%

2028 49.1% 29.4% 14.7% 0.0% 0.2%

2029 48.9% 29.3% 14.7% 0.0% 0.2%

2030 47.4% 28.5% 14.2% 0.0% 0.2%

2031 41.2% 24.7% 12.4% 0.0% 0.2%

2032 35.2% 21.1% 10.6% 0.0% 0.2%

2033 29.0% 17.4% 8.7% 0.0% 0.2%

2034 22.9% 13.7% 6.9% 0.0% 0.2%

2035 16.9% 10.1% 5.1% 0.0% 0.2%

2036 10.7% 6.4% 3.2% 0.0% 0.2%

2037 4.7% 2.8% 1.4% 0.0% 0.2%

2038 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2039 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2040 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2041 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2042 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2043 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2044 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2045 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2046 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2047 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Table 17

- A.2.5 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps ( 7,000

– 15,000 Btu/h )

Year Consumer

Rebates Consumer

Tax Credits Manufacturer

Tax Credits Voluntary

Energy

Efficiency

Targets Bulk

Government

Purchases

2018 49.9% 30.0% 15.0% 10.3% 0.1%

2019 47.8% 28.7% 14.4% 8.9% 0.1%

2020 46.3% 27.8% 13.9% 7.5% 0.1%

2021 45.0% 27.0% 13.5% 5.8% 0.1%

2022 43.8% 26.3% 13.1% 4.3% 0.1%

2023 39.6% 23.8% 11.9% 2.4% 0.2%

2024 35.4% 21.3% 10.6% 0.4% 0.2%

2025 31.5% 18.9% 9.5% 0.0% 0.2%

2026 27.4% 16.4% 8.2% 0.0% 0.2%

2027 23.4% 14.1% 7.0% 0.0% 0.2%

2028 19.3% 11.6% 5.8% 0.0% 0.2%

2029 15.4% 9.2% 4.6% 0.0% 0.2%

2030 11.2% 6.7% 3.4% 0.0% 0.2%

2031 4.7% 2.8% 1.4% 0.0% 0.2%

2032 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2033 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

17

- A

- 52034 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2035 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2036 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2037 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2038 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2039 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2040 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2041 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2042 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2043 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2044 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2045 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2046 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2047 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Table 17

- A.2.6 Annual Increases in Market Shares Attributable to Alternative Policy

Measures for Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps ( > 15,000 Btu/h )

Year Consumer

Rebates Consumer

Tax Credits Manufacturer

Tax Credits Voluntary

Energy

Efficiency

Targets Bulk

Government

Purchases

2018 51.6% 31.0% 15.5% 7.9% 0.1%

2019 49.8% 29.9% 14.9% 4.9% 0.1%

2020 48.5% 29.1% 14.6% 1.9% 0.1%

2021 47.8% 28.7% 14.3% 0.0% 0.1%

2022 47.6% 28.6% 14.3% 0.0% 0.2%

2023 43.8% 26.3% 13.2% 0.0% 0.2%

2024 38.6% 23.2% 11.6% 0.0% 0.2%

2025 33.6% 20.2% 10.1% 0.0% 0.2%

2026 28.4% 17.1% 8.5% 0.0% 0.2%

2027 23.2% 13.9% 7.0% 0.0% 0.2%

2028 18.2% 10.9% 5.5% 0.0% 0.2%

2029 13.0% 7.8% 3.9% 0.0% 0.2%

2030 8.1% 4.8% 2.4% 0.0% 0.2%

2031 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.3%

2032 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2033 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2034 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2035 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2036 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2037 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2038 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2039 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2040 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

17

- A

- 62041 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2042 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2043 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2044 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2045 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2046 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2047 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

17

- A

- 717

- A.3 NIA

- RIA INTEGRATED MODEL

For this analysis, DOE used its integrated NIA

- RIA a model appro ach that built on the

NIA model discussed in Chapter 10 and documented in Appendix 10

- A .The resulting integrated

NIA

- RIA model featured both the NIA analysis inputs and results and the RIA inpu ts and had

the capability to generate results for each of the RIA polic ies. A separate module produced

results summaries for the tables and figures in the RIA document. For the RIA methodology

documentation in C hapter 17, t he module created summaries of parameters calculated by the

model for the consumer rebates policy, generated its penetration curves (discussed in S ection 17

-

A.4.3 below)

, and reported market s hare impacts for the rebate and tax cred it policies by

equipment class. For the RIA results reported in C hapter 17 , the module produced graphs of the

market sh are increases resulting from each of the policies analy zed and created summary tables

for the national energy savings (NES) and net present value (NPV) results

. This module also

generated tables of market share increases for each policy reported in S ection 17

- A.2 of this

Appendix

.

17

- A.4 CONSUMER REBATE POLI CY MARKET PENETRATIO N CURVES

This section first discusses the theoretical basis for the market penetration curves that

DOE used to analyze the Consumer Rebates policy. Next it discusses the adjustments it made to

the maximum penetration rates. It then refers to the method it used to develop interpolated

penetration curves for each specific equipment class and efficiency level in the analysis. The

resulti ng curve s for the PTAC and PTHP equipment class es are in C hapter 17

.

17

- A.4.1 Introduction

XENERGY, Inc. b , developed a re

- parameterized, mixed

- source information diffusion

model to estimate market impacts induced by financial incentives for purchasing energy efficient

appliance s. 1 The basic premise of the mixed

- source model is that information diffusion drives

the adoption of technology.

Extensive economic literature describes the diffusion of new products as technologies

evolve. Some research focuses primarily on developing analytical models of diffusion patterns

applicable to individual consumers or to technologies from competing firms

. 2

, 3

, 4 One study

records researchers’ attempts to investigate the factors that drive diffusion processes

. 5 Because a

new product generally has its own distinct characteristics, few studies have been able to

conclu sively develop a universally applicable model. Some key findings, however, generally are

accepted in academia and industry.

a NIA = national impact analysis; RIA = regulatory impact analysis

b XENERGY is now owned by KEMA, Inc. ( www.kema.com )

17

- A

- 8One accepted finding is that, regardless of their economic benefits and technological

merits, new technologies are unlikely to be adopted by all potential users. For many products, a

ceiling must be placed on the adoption rate. A second conclusion is that not all adopters purchase

new products at the same time: some act quickly after a new product is introduced; others wait

for the product to mature. Third, diffusion processes can be characterized approximately by

asymmetric S

- curves that depict three stages of diffusion: starting, accelerating, and decreasing

(as the adoption ceiling is approached).

A so

- called epidemic model of d iffusion is used widely in marketing and social studies.

The epidemic model assumes that (1) all consumers place identical value on the benefits of a

new product, and (2) the cost of a new product is constant or declines monotonically over time.

What induc es a consumer to purchase a new product is information about the availability and

benefits of the product. In other words, information diffusion drives consumers’ adoption of a

new product

. 3 The model incorporates information diffusion from both internal sources (spread

by word of mouth from early adopters to prospective adopters) and external sources (the

“announcement effect” produced by government agencies, institutions, or commercial

adv ertising). The model incorporates both internal and external sources by combining a logistic

function with an exponential function. 4

, 5

The relative degree of influence from the internal and external sources determines the

general shape of the diffusion curve for a specific product. 4

, 5 If adoption of a product is

influ enced primarily by external sources of information (the announcement effect), for instance,

a high rate of diffusion occurs at the beginning of the process. In this scenario, external sources

provide immediate information exposure to a significant number o f prospective adopters. In

contrast, internal sources (such as a network of prospective adopters) are relatively small in size

and reach, producing a more gradual exposure to prospective adopters. Graphically speaking,

information diffusion dominated by ex ternal sources is represented by a concave curve (the

exponential curve in Figure 17

- A.4.1 ). If adoption of a new product is influenced most strongly

by internal so urces of information, the number of adopters increases gradually, forming a convex

curve (the logistic curve in Figure 17

- A.4.1 ).

17

- A

- 9Figure 17

- A.4.1 S

- Curves Showing Effects of Ext ernal and Internal

Sources on Adoption of New Technologies

17

- A.4.2 Adjustment of XENERGY Penetration Curves

In consultation with the primary authors of the 2002 XENERGY study who later

conducted similar California studies, DOE made some adjustments to XENERGY’s o riginal

implementation (penetration) curves. 6 The experiences with utility programs since the

XENERGY study indicate that incentive programs have difficulty achieving penetration rates as

high as 80 percent. Consumer response is limited by barriers crea ted by consumer utility issues

and other non

- economic factors. DOE therefore adjusted the maximum penetration parameters

for some of the curves from 80 percent to the following levels:

Moderate Barriers: 70%

High Barriers: 60%

Extremely High Barri ers: 50%

The low barriers and no barriers curves (the latter used only when a product has a very

high base

- case

- market share) remained, respectively, with 80 percent and 100 percent as their

maximum penetration rates. For the interpolated penetration curves (discussed below), DOE set

the no barri ers and extremely high barriers curves as the upper and lower bounds, respectively,

17

- A

- 10for any benefit/cost ratio points higher or lower than the curves. It set another constraint such

that the policy case market share cannot be great than 100 percent, as mig ht occur for products

with high base case market shares of the target

- level technology.

17

- A.4.3 Interpolation of Penetration Curves

As discussed above, the XENERGY penetration (implementation) curves followed a

functional form to estimate the market implementation rate caused by energy efficiency

measures such as consumer rebates. c The XENERGY report presents five reference market

implementation curves that vary according to the level of market barriers to technology

penetration. 1 Such curves have been used by DOE in the Regulatory Impact Analyses for

rulemakings for appliance energy efficiency standards to estimate market share increases in

response to rebate p rograms. d They provide a framework for evaluating technology penetration,

yet require matching the studied market to the curve that best represents it. This approximate

matching can introduce some inaccuracy to the analysis.

Blum et al (2011, Appendix A) 7 presents an alternative approach to such evaluation: a method

to estimate market implementation rates more accurately by performing interpolations of the

reference curves. The referred report describes the mar ket implementation rate function and the

reference curves, the method to calibrate the function to a given market, and the limitations of

the method.

c The RIA chapter refers to these curves as penetration curves . This section, in references to the original source, uses

the term implementation curve

. d DOE has also used this method to estimate market share increase s resulting from consumer tax credit an d

manufacturer tax credit programs, since the effects of tax credits on market s can be considered proportional to the

rebate impacts

.

17

- A

- 1117

- A.5 CONSUMER REBATE PROGRAMS

DOE performed a search for rebate programs that offered incentive s for PTACs and

PTHPs. Some organizations nationwide, comprising elect ric utilities and regional agencies, offer

rebat e programs for this equipment

. Table 17

- A.5.3 provide s the organizations’ names, states,

rebate amounts

, and program websites. If there is more than one e ntry for an organization, it

offers different rebates in different states

. When an organization offers rebates through several

utilities, it is represented only once in each table.

Rebates are offered either on per unit or per ton basis. Most of the rebate programs offer a

fixed amount rebate. However, s ome of them include an incremen tal rebate amount proportional

to the equipment cooling capacity and energy efficiency. DOE calculated a representative rebate

amount for each equipment class and TSL . The representative amount accounts for the

equipment class cooling capacity and the efficiency level corresponding to each TSL

. Table 17

-

A.5.1 shows the cooling capacit ies (in tons) and efficiencies (in EER) that DOE used to calculate

specific reba te amounts for each equipment class and TSL.

Table 17

- A.5.1 Representative Cooling Capacities and Energy Efficiencies Used to

Calculate the Rebate Amounts for each Rebate Program

Equipment Class Energy Efficiency (EER) per

Trial Standard Levels Representative

Cooling

Capacity

(tons) 1 2 3 4 5

< 7,000 Btu/h 12.2 12.6 13.1 13.6 13.8 7

7,000

– 15,000 Btu/h 11.5 12.0 12.4 12.9 13.1 12

> 15,000 Btu/h 9.7 10.0 10.4 10.8 11.0 15

< 7,000 Btu/h 12.2 12.6 13.1 13.6 13.8 7

7,000

– 15,000 Btu/h 11.5 12.0 12.4 12.9 13.1 12

> 15,000 Btu/h 9.7 10.0 10.4 10.8 11.0 15

After calculating a rebate amount for each program, DOE calculated the representative

rebate amount for each equipment class and TSL taking the simple average of the rebate amounts

DOE calculated for each rebate program. Table 17

- A.5.2 shows the representative rebate

amounts DOE used for each equipment class and TSL in its analysis of the benefits from

consumer rebat es

.

17

- A

- 12Table 17

- A.5.2 R epresentative R ebate Amounts (2013$)

Equipment Class Trial Standard Levels

1 2 3 4 5

< 7,000 Btu/h 34.82 37.13 39.43 41.74 42.89

7,000

– 15,000 Btu/h 43.95 47.70 51.45 55.20 57.08

> 15,000 Btu/h 48.74 52.67 56.60 60.52 62.49

< 7,000 Btu/h 32.91 33.14 33.37 33.60 33.71

7,000

– 15,000 Btu/h 40.95 41.32 41.70 42.07 42.26

> 15,000 Btu/h 45.71 46.10 46.49 46.88 47.08

17

- A

- 13Table 17

- A.5.3 Rebates for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps

Organization State Rebate Website

PTAC PTHP

SRP AZ $20/ton $20/ton http://www.savewithsrpbiz.com/rebates.aspx

Imperial Irrigation District CA $50/ton $50/ton http://www.iid.com/index.aspx?page=293

Modesto Irrigation District CA $75/unit $75/unit http://www.mid.org/rebates/commercial/default.html

Pacific Power CA $25/ton $50/ton https://www.pacificpower.net/bus/se/california/sc/hc.html

City of Roseville California CA $125/unit $125/unit http://www.roseville.ca.us/electric/business/rebates/hvac.asp

Southern California Edison CA $100/unit $100/unit https://www.sce.com/wps/portal/home/business/savings

incentives/express

- solutions/how

- to

- apply/!ut/p/b1

Silicon Valey Power CA $100/ton $100/t on https://siliconvalleypower.com/index.aspx?page=1931

SMUD CA $100/unit $100/unit https://www.smud.org/en/business/save

- energy/rebates

incentives

- financing/incentives

- for

- heating

- and

cooling/express

- incentives

- air

- conditioning.htm

City of Fort Collins CO $50/ton * $50/ton * http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/improve

efficiency/rebates

- incentives/electric

- efficiency/cooling

rebates

JEA FL $50/ton $50/ton https://www.jea.com/Manage_My_Account/Ways_to_Save/

Rebate_Programs/InvestSmart/Heating,_Cooling_a nd_Air_

Handling_Rebates.aspx

TECO FL $37.50/ton $37.50/ton http://www.tampaelectric.com/business/saveenergy/cooling/

Cedar Falls Utilities IA $50/unit $50/unit http://www.cfu.net/save

- energy/business

- rebates.aspx

Illinois Municipal Electric Agency IL $50/ton $50/ton http://www.imea.org/EEProjects.aspx

Duke Energy IN $20/ton $20/ton http://www.duke

- energy.com/indiana

- business/energy

management/cooling

- incentive.asp

Kentucky Utilities Company KY $10/ton $10/ton http://lge

- ku.com/saving

- energy

- money/commercial

- rebates

Louisville Gas & Electric KY $10/ton $10/ton http://lge

- ku.com/saving

- energy

- money/commercial

- rebates

Baltimore Gas & Electric Company MD $30/unit $30/unit http://www.bgesmartenergy.com/business/energy

- solutions

business/application

- forms

Baltimore Gas & Electric Company MD $40/unit $40/unit http://www.bgesmartenergy.com/business/energy

- solutions

business/application

- forms

Baltimore Gas & Electric Company M D $50/unit $50/unit http://www.bgesmartenergy.com/business/energy

- solutions

business/application

- forms

17

- A

- 14Organization State Rebate Website

CONNEXUS ENERGY MN $10/ton ** $10/ton ** https://www.connexusenergy.com/business/rebates/cooling

and

- heat

- pumps/

CONNEXUS ENERGY MN $10/ton † $10/ton † https://www.connexusenergy.com/business/rebates/cooling

and

- heat

- pumps/

Dakota Electric Association MN $10/ton ** $10/ton ** https://www.dakotaelectric.com/business/programs/rebates_

grants_and_loans/heating_cooling_ventilation_rebates

Dakota Electric Assoc iation MN $10/ton † $10/ton † https://www.dakotaelectric.com/business/programs/rebates_

grants_and_loans/heating_cooling_ventilation_rebates

East Central Energy MN $10/ton ** $10/ton ** http://www.eastcentralenergy.com/rebatesbusiness.aspx

East Central Energy MN $10/ton † $10/ton † http://www.eastcentralenergy.com/rebatesbusiness.aspx

Elk River Municipal Utilities MN $10/ton ** $10/ton ** http://www.elkriverutilities.com/pages/rebate

- forms

Elk River Municipal Utilities MN $10/ton † $10/ton † http://www.elkriverutilities.com/pages/rebate

- forms

Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative MN $10/ton ** $10/ton ** http://www.mvec.net/business/efficiency

- rebates/

Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative MN $10/ton † $10/ton † http://www.mvec.net/business/effi ciency

- rebates/

Moorhead Public Service Utility MN $35/room †

† $30/room †† http://www.brightenergysolutions.org/municipalities/?categ

ory=business&state=mn&municipality=28&program=4

El Paso Electric Company NM $30/ton $30/ton http://www.epesaver.com/index.php/component/content/arti

cle/105

- commercial

- cooling

PNM NM $20/ton $20/ton http://www.pnmenergyefficiency.com/Projects/Default.aspx

?tabid=908

conEdison NY $50/ton $50/ton https://www.conedci.com/HVAC.aspx#electric

Dayton P ower & Light OH $50/unit $50/unit http://www.dpandl.com/save

- money/business

government/rapid

- rebates/hvac

- rebates/#pack

AEP Ohio OH $30/ton $30/ton https://www.aepohio.com/save/programs/PrescriptiveProgra

m.aspx

FirstEnergy (MetEdison, Penelec, Penn

Power) PA $150/unit $150/unit http://www.energysavepa

- business.com/index.php

AEP Appalachian Power WV $30/ton $30/ton http://aeprebates.com/commercial

- program/

* incremental rebate ($5/ton per 0.1 EER above base)

** incremental rebate ($1.75/ton per 0.1 EER above base)

† incremental rebate ($3.50/ton per 0.1 EER above base)

†† DOE assumed a per unit rebate amount

17

- A

- 1517

- A.6 FEDERAL AND STATE TA X CREDITS

This section summarizes the Federal and State tax credits available to consumers who

purchase energy efficient appliances. This section also describes tax credits available to

manufacturers who produce certain energy efficient appliances.

17

- A.6.1 Federal Tax Credits for Consumers

EPACT 2005 included Federal tax credits for consumers who installed efficient air

conditioners or heat pumps; gas, oil and propane furnaces and boilers ; furnace fans; and/or gas,

oil, or electric heat pump water heaters in new or existing homes. 8

, 9 These tax credits were in

effect in 2006 and 2007, expired in 2008, and were reinstated for 2009

– 2010 by the American

Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). 10 There was a $1,50 0 cap on the credit per home,

including the amount received for insulation, windows, and air and duct sealing. Congress

extended this provision for 2011, with some modifications to eligibility requirements, and

reductions in the cap to $500 per home

. The A merican Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 extended,

with some modifications, residential tax credits for air conditioners, heat pumps, furnaces, and

water heaters placed in service between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2013. 8

, 11

The tax c redit for furnace fans was $50 in 20 1 1, after which it expired.

The importance of the Fed eral tax credits has been emphasized in research in the

residential heating industry on the impacts of the relatively large credits that were available for

HVAC (hea ting, ventilating, and air conditioning) equipment

. I n a survey of HVAC distributors

conducted by Vermont Energy Inve stment Corporation, respondents indicated that the ample

credit had had a notable impact on sal es of higher

- efficiency heating and cooling equipment

. Some distributors combined the Federal tax credits with manufacturer re bates and ut ility

program rebates for a greater consumer incentive. However, when the amount of the Federal tax

credit was reduced , smaller utility rebate incentives had not ind uced the same levels of

equipment sales increases

. T h e decrease in incentive size from a $1,500 cap in 2009

- 20 10 to a

$500 cap in 2011 , during a period when the economy continued to be sluggish, resulted in a

decline in total sales of residential HVAC products

. Distributors stated that an incentive needed

to cover 25 to 75 percent of the incremental cost of the efficient equipment to influence

consumer choice. The industry publication “ 2011 HVAC Review and Outlook ” noted a decline

in sales of air condit ioning units with >14 SEER in 2011 and a return in sales of units with >16

SEER to 2009 levels (after an increase in 2010). The l arge majority of distributor observed no

impacts from the utility p rograms with their lower rebate amounts available in 2011. D istributors

also commented on the advantages of the Federal tax credit being nationwide in contrast to

utility rebate programs that target regional markets. 12

, 13

In an effort to evaluate the potential impact of a Federal appliance tax credit program

, DOE reviewed Internal Revenue Service (IRS) data on the numbers of taxpayers who claimed

the tax credits during tax years 2006 and 2007. It estimated the percentage of taxpayers who filed

Form 5695, Residential Energy Credits

. 14 It also estimated the percentage of taxpayers with

entries under Form 5695’s section 3, Residential energy property costs , line 3b, qualified natural

gas, propane, or oil furnace or hot water boiler . DOE reasoned that the percentage of taxpayers

17

- A

- 16with an en try on Line 3b could serve as a rough indication of the potential of taxpayer

participation in a Federal tax credit program for furnaces during the initial program years. DOE

found that of all residential taxpayers filing tax returns, 0.8 percent in 2006 a nd 0.6 percent in

2007, claimed a credit for a furnace or boiler. DOE further found that the percentages of those

filing Form 5695 for any qualifying energy property expenditure (which also included

installation of efficient windows, doors and roofs) were 3.1 and 3.2 percent in 2006 and 2007

respectively.

DOE also reviewed data from an earlier Federal energy conservation tax credit program

in place in the 1980s. While this tax credit was available from 1979 through 1985, DOE located

data for only the fi rst three years of the program

. 15

, 16

, 17 For those three years

- 1979, 1980, and

1981

- the percentages of taxpayers filing Form 5695 were 6.4 percent, 5.2 percent, and 4.9

percent. Given that the data from this earlier tax credit program were not disaggregated by type

of energy property, this data series served only to indicate a possible trend of greater

participation in the initial program year, followed by slightly smaller participation in subsequent

years. However, DOE did not find detailed analysis of this program to indicate the possible

reasons for such a trend. Also, this trend varies fro m the more stable trend shown in the EPAct

2005 energy tax credit program data for its first two program years.

As discussed in C hapter 17, DOE analyzed the percentage of participation in consumer

tax credit programs using its estimates of consumer participation in rebate programs that was

based on benefit/cost data specific to each equipment class. Hence it was difficult to compare

these detailed estimates to the more general data analysis described above from the existing

Federal tax credit progra m, or to use the IRS data analysis in its consumer tax credit analysis.

17

- A.6.2 Federal Tax Credits for Manufacturers

EPACT 2005 provided Federal Energy Efficient Appliance Credits to manufacturers that

produced high

- efficiency refrigerators, clothes washers, and dishwashers in 2006 and 2007. 18

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 19 amended the credits and extended them

through 2010. The credits were extended again to 2011 with modifications in the eligibility

requirements. Manufacturer t ax credits were extended again, by the American Taxp ayer Relief

Act of 2012 , for clothes washers, refrigerators, and dishwashers manufactured between January

1, 2012 and December 31, 2013. 20

Manufacturers who produce these appliances receive the credits for increasing their

p roduction of qualifying appliances. These credits had sev eral efficiency tiers in 2011. F or 2012

- 2013, credits for the higher tiers remain but were eliminated for the lowest (least efficient) tiers

for cloth es washers and dishwashers

. 11 The credit amounts applied to each unit manufactured.

The credit to manufacturers of qualifying clothes washers, refrigerators and dishwashers wa s capped at $75 million for the period of 2008

- 2010. However, the most efficient refrigera tor

(30%) and clothes washer (2.2 MEF/4.5 wcf) models was not subject to the ca p. The credit to

manufacturers wa s capped at $25 million for 2011, with t he most efficient refrigerators (35%)

and clothe s washers (2.8 MEF/3.5 WCF) exempted from this cap. 21

17

- A

- 1717

- A.6.3 State Tax Credits

The States of Oregon and Montana have offered consumer tax credits for efficient

appliances for several years, and the States of Kentucky, Michigan and Indiana began offering

such credits in 2009. The Oregon Department of Energy (OD OE) has disaggregated data on

taxpayer participation in credits for eligible products. ( See the discussion in C hapter 17

, S ection

1 7 .3.3, on tax credit data for clothes washers.) Montana’s Department of Revenue does not

disaggregate participation data by a ppliance, although DOE reviewed Montana's overall

participation trends and found them congruent with its analysis of Oregon's clothes washer tax

credits.

Oregon’s Residential Energy Tax Credit (RE TC) was created in 1977. T he Oregon

legislature expanded t he RETC program in 1997 to include residential refrigerators, clothes

washers, and dishwashers, which significantly increased participation in the program . The

program subsequently added credits for high

- efficiency heat pump systems, air conditioners, and

water heaters (2001); furnaces and boilers (2002); and duct/air sealing, fuel cells, heat recovery,

and renewable energy equipment. Beginning in 2012 a Tax Credit Extension Bill (HB3672)

eliminated refrigerators, clothes washers, dishwashers, air condition ers, and boilers from the

RETC program, leaving credits for water heaters, furnaces, heat pumps, tankless water heaters

, and heat pump water heaters. 22

, 23 Those technologies recognized by the Oregon Department of

Energy as “premium efficiency” are eligible for tax credit of $0.60 per kWh saved in the first

year (up to $1,500). 22

, 24

Montana has had an Energy Conservation Tax Credit for residential measures since

1998. 25 The tax credit covers various residential energy and water efficient products, including

split system central air conditioning; package system cent ral air conditioning; split system air

source heat pumps; package system heat pumps; natural gas, propane, or oil furnaces; hot water

boilers; advanced main air circulating fans; heat recovery ventilators; gas, oil, or propane water

heaters; electric heat pump water heaters; low

- flow showerheads and faucets ; light fixtures ; and

controls. In 2002 the amount of the credit was increased from 5 percent of product costs (up to

$150) to 25 percent (up to $500) per taxpayer. The credit can be used for products ins talled in

new construction or remodeling projects. The tax credit covers only that part of the cost and

materials that exceed established standards of construction.

17

- A

- 18REFERENCES

1. Rufo, M. and F. Coito, California's Secret Energy Surpl us: The Potential for Energy

Efficiency, 2002. XENERGY Inc. (Last accessed March, 2013.)

< http://www.ef.org/documents/Secret_Surplus.pdf >

2. Hall, B. H. and B. Khan, Adoption of New Technolo gy

. Working Paper No. E03

- 330

, 2003

3. Lekvall. P and C. Wahlbin, "A Study of Some Assumptions Underlying Innovation

Diffusion Functions"

. Swedish Journal of Economics , 1973

4. Geroski, P. A., Models of Technology Diffusion

. Research Policy , 2000. 29: pp. 603

- 625

5. Van den Bulte, C., "Want to Know How Diffusion Speed Varies Across Countries and

Products? Try a Bass Model"

. Product Development & Management Association , 2002.

XXVI(4)

6. Rufo, M., Telephone Conversation with Barbara Atkins on of LBNL, personal

communication. Itron, Inc

. January 2008 and March 2009.

7. Blum, H., Atkinson B., and Lekov, A., A Framework for Comparative Assessments of

Energy Efficiency Policy Measures, May, 2011.

8. Tax Incentives Assistance Project, Consume r Tax Incentives: Home Heating & Cooling

Equipment., 2011. (Last accessed March, 2013.)

< www.energytaxincentives.org/consumers/heating

- cooling.php >

9. Energy Policy Act of 2005 , in 119 STAT. 594 Public Law 109

- 58. Section 1333, 26 USC

25C note, . 2005. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS

- 109hr6pcs/pdf/BILLS

109hr6pcs.pdf

10. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, 2009. Government Printing Office.

(Last accessed March, 2013.) < http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi

bin/getdoc.cgi?db name=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1enr.pdf >

11. Tax Incentives Assistance Project, The Tax Incentives Assistance Project (TIAP), 2013.

(Last accessed March, 2013.) < http://energytaxincentives.org/ >

12. Foster , R., J. Grevatt, N. Lange, and T. Gee, Efficiency Programs and Distributors:

Opportunities to Fully Leverage the Supply Chain for Greater Impact, August 12

- 17,

2012. American Council for an Energy

- Efficient Economy. Asilomar, CA.

< http://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2012/data/papers/0193

- 000198.pdf >

17

- A

- 1913. Tusa, C. S., D. Pierson, P. Mammola, and J. P. Vora, JPM/HARDI 2011 HVAC Survey,

2011. < http://www.hardinet.org/mid

- season

- hvac

- distributor

- survey >

14. Internal Revenue Service, SOI Tax Stats

- Individual Income Tax Returns, Estimated

Data Line Counts, (Last accessed March, 2013.) < http://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI

- Tax

Stats

- Individual

- Income

- Tax

- Returns,

- Estimated

- Data

- Line

- Counts >

15. Internal Revenue Service, 1979 Annual Report, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, (Last

accessed March, 2013.) < http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs

- soi/79dbfullar.pdf >

16. Internal Revenue Service, 1980 Annual Report, Commissioner of Internal Reve nue., (Last

accessed March, 2013.) < http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs

- soi/80dbfullar.pdf >

17. Internal Revenue Service, 1981 Annual Report: Commissioner of Internal Revenue and

the Chief Counsel for the Internal Revenue Service, (Last accessed March, 2013.)

< http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs

- soi/81dbfullar.pdf >

18. U .S. Department of the Treasury

– Internal Revenue Service, Form 8909: Energy Efficient

Appliance Credit, (Last accessed March, 2013.) < www.irs.gov/pub/irs

- pdf/f8909.pdf >

19. Emergency Economic Stabi lization Act of 2008, (Last accessed September, 2011.)

< http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW

- 110publ343/pdf/PLAW

- 110publ343.pdf >

20. Database of State Incentives for Renew ables and Efficiency (DSIRE), Energy

- Efficient

Appliance Manufacturing Tax Credit, 2013. (Last accessed March, 2013.)

< http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US42F&re=1&ee=1

&utm_source=FEB2013+DSIRE+NNL&utm_campaign=February2013&utm_medium=e

mail >

21. Tax Incentives Assistance Project, Manufacturers Incentives, (Las t accessed March,

2013.) < http://energytaxincentives.org/builders/appliances.php >

22. Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (DSIRE), Oregon

Incentives/Policies for Renewable Energy, Residential Energy Tax Credit, 2013. (Last

accessed March, 2013.)

< http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentiv e.cfm?Incentive_Code=OR17F&re=1&ee=1

>

23. Oregon Department of Energy, HB 3672 (2011)Tax Credit Extension Bill, 2013.

< http://www.oregon.gov/energy/CONS/docs/HB3672summary.pdf >

2 4. Oregon Department of Energy, ODOE: Energy Conservation, Heat Pumps and Air

Conditioning Systems, 2013.

< http://www.oregon.gov/energy/CONS/docs/HB3672summary.pdf >

17

- A

- 2025. Montana Depa rtment of Revenue, Energy Related Tax Relief: Energy Conservation

Installation Credit, (Last accessed March, 2013.)

< http://revenue.mt.gov/f orindividuals/ind_tax_incentives/energy_related_tax_relief.mcpx

#energy >

17

- A

- 21