1 | Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy eere.energy.gov

[INSERT PICTURE(S) OF PRODUCT(S)]

[INSERT PICTURE(S) OF PRODUCT(S)]

Energy Conservation Standards

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

for Residential Furnace Fans

December 3, 2013

Ronald Majette

Department of Energy

Building Technologies Program

EERE–2010–BT–STD–0011 

FurnFans-2010-STD0011@ee.doe.gov
2

Welcome

• Introductions (around the room)

• Role of the Facilitator

• Ground Rules

– Speak one at a time.

– Say your name for the record – there will be a complete transcript of 

this meeting.

– Be concise – share the ‘air-time’.

– Keep the focus here – cell phones on silent; limit sidebar 

conversations.

– Webinar participants turn phone on mute; “raise your hand” to be 

recognized to speak.

• Housekeeping Items

• Agenda Review

• Opening Remarks
3

Agenda

9:00 – 9:15 am Welcome; Introductions; and Agenda Review

Doug Brookman

9:15 – 9:45 am Purpose of Public Meeting; Opening Statements; Comment Submission 

Instructions; and Regulatory Authority and Rulemaking Overview 

Ronald Majette

9:45 – 10:15 am Market Assessment

Kevin Foley

10:15 – 10:30 am Break

10:30 – 11:15 am Engineering Analysis

Kevin Foley

11:15 – 12:00 pm Markups; Energy Use Characterization; and Lifecycle Cost and Payback Period 

Analysis

Victor Franco

12:00 – 12:45 pm Lunch (on your own)
4

Agenda (cont.)

12:45 – 1:15 pm LCC and Payback Period Analysis (cont.)

Victor Franco

1:15 – 1:45 pm National Impact Analysis, Shipments, and Regulatory Impact Analysis

Alex Lekov

1:45 – 1:55 pm Break

1:55 – 2:30 pm Manufacturer Impact Analysis

Chris Lau

2:30 –3:00 pm Environmental Impacts

Alex Lekov

3:00 – 3:30 pm Results and Proposed Standards

Alex Lekov

3:30 – 4:00 pm Closing Remarks from Interested Parties

Ronald Majette

4:00 pm Adjourn
5

Participating Via the Webcast

• The Department is broadcasting this meeting live over the 

Internet.

• DOE is providing the webcast to accommodate stakeholders 

that are unable to attend the public meeting in person.

• The web broadcast allows stakeholders to listen in, view the 

slides, and participate directly.

• All stakeholders are encouraged to submit written comments 

after the public meeting.
6

Purpose of the Public Meeting

• Present the procedural and analytical approaches to evaluate 

potential energy conservation standards for residential 

furnace fans.

• Invite comment on the energy conservation standards notice 

of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) and technical support 

document (TSD), including DOE’s proposed standard levels.

• Invite participants to provide summary comments or 

statements and raise additional issues for discussion. 
7

Issues for Discussion

The deadline for submitting comments is 12/24/2013.

Issue Box: DOE welcomes comments, data, and information 

concerning its proposed standards for residential furnace fans. 

Issues that correspond to those raised in 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.
8

Opening Remarks

Meeting participants are invited to provide opening remarks or 

statements at this time.
9

Public Meeting Agenda

1 Overview

2 Market Assessment

3 Engineering Analysis

4 Energy Use; Markups Analysis

5 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

6 Shipments, NIA, RIA, and MIA Analysis

7 Environmental Impacts

8 Results and Proposed Standards
10

Regulatory Authority

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) of 1975 (Public 

Law 94-163), as amended by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(EPACT 2005)(Public Law 109-58) and the Energy Independence 

and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007)(Public Law 110-140), 

provides in relevant part:

• “...the Secretary shall consider and prescribe energy conservation 

standards or energy use standards for electricity used for purposes 

of circulating air through duct work.” (42 U.S.C. 6295(f)(4)(D))

• “[A]ny final rule establishing or revising [an energy conservation] 

standard for a covered product adopted after July 1, 2010, shall 

incorporate standby mode and off mode energy use into a single 

amended or new standard, pursuant to [42 U.S.C. 6295(o)], if 

feasible.” (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3))
11

Regulatory History

DOE has no current energy conservation standard or test 

procedure for residential furnace fans.

• Test Procedure

– DOE is developing a test procedure in a parallel rulemaking.

– DOE published a test procedure NOPR on May 15, 2012 (77 FR 28674).

– DOE held the test procedure NOPR public meeting on June 15, 2012.

– DOE published a test procedure SNOPR on April 2, 2013 (78 FR 19606).

– DOE plans to publish a final test procedure by the end of 2013.

• Energy Conservation Standard

– DOE published the Notice of Public Meeting and Availability of the Framework 

Document on June 3, 2010 (75 FR 31323).

– DOE held the energy conservation standards Framework Document public meeting on 

June 18, 2010.

– DOE published the Notice of Public Meeting and Availability of the Preliminary Technical 

Support Document on July 10, 2012 (77 FR 40530).

– DOE held the energy conservation standards Preliminary Analysis public meeting on July 

27, 2012.

• DOE conducted the energy conservation standards NOPR analysis on the basis of the test 

procedure proposed in the test procedure SNOPR. (78 FR 19606 (April 2, 2013))
12

Criteria for Selecting Standard Levels

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) directs DOE to consider seven 

factors when setting energy conservation standards.

EPCA Factor DOE Analysis

1. Economic impact on consumers 

and manufacturers

Life-cycle cost analysis

Manufacturer impact analysis

2. Lifetime operating cost savings Life-cycle cost analysis

3. Total projected energy savings National impact analysis 

4. Impact on utility or performance Screening analysis

Engineering analysis

5. Impact of any lessening of competition Manufacturer impact analysis

6. Need for national energy conservation National impact analysis

7. Other factors the Secretary considers 

relevant

Environmental assessment

Utility impact analysis

Employment impact analysis
13

Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking
14

Public Meeting Agenda

1 Overview

2 Market Assessment

3 Engineering Analysis

4 Energy Use; Markups Analysis

5 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

6 Shipments, NIA, RIA, and MIA Analysis

7 Environmental Impacts

8 Results and Proposed Standards
15

Market Assessment

DOE proposes to define a “furnace fan” as any electrically-powered device used in 

residential heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) products for the 

purpose of circulating air through duct work. DOE uses the term “furnace fan” as 

shorthand for any of these products.

• DOE recognizes that a significant number of products may be encompassed by its 

interpretation of the statutory language and its corresponding definition.

• The boxes outlined in red represent space-conditioning products that include a furnace fan.

Indoor Unit

Outdoor Unit Condensing 

Unit

Coil-Only Unit

Electric Furnace / Modular 

Blower

NWG or Oil 

Furnace 

Hydronic Air 

Handler

Blower-Coil Unit Hydronic Air Handler 

with Coil

Packaged Unit 

(Weatherized 

Furnace)

Typical HVAC System Combinations
16

Market Assessment

The proposed scope of coverage in the current NOPR includes 63% of 

estimated annual sales of space-conditioning products that include furnace 

fans.

Key

Considered in this 

rulemaking.

Not considered in this

rulemaking.
17

Market Assessment

DOE is proposing to establish the following eight product classes that 

represent most of the energy use associated with furnace fans considered in 

the analysis.

Proposed Product Classes

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan (NWG-NC)

Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace Fan (NWG-C)

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan (MH-NWG-NC)

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace Fan (MH-NWG-C)

Manufactured Home Electric Furnace / Modular Blower Fan (MH-EF/MB)

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Oil Furnace Fan (NWO-NC)

Weatherized Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan (WG-NC)

Electric Furnace / Modular Blower Fan (EF/MB)

DOE differentiated between product classes based on internal structure and 

application-specific design differences that impact furnace fan energy 

consumption.
18

Market Assessment

Due to limited data for some product classes, DOE had to extrapolate data 

from similar product classes to generate FER values.

Directly Analyzed Extrapolated

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas 

Furnace Fan (NWG-NC)

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized, NonCondensing Gas Furnace Fan (MH-NWG-NC)

Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace 

Fan (NWG-C)

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized, 

Condensing Gas Furnace Fan (MH-NWG-C)

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Oil 

Furnace Fan (NWO-NC)

Manufactured Home Electric Furnace / 

Modular Blower Fan (MH-EF/MB)

Weatherized Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan 

(WG-NC)

Electric Furnace / Modular Blower Fan (EF/MB)
19

Market Assessment

DOE found two additional product classes with active models listed in the 

AHRI appliance directory: (1) manufactured home weatherized noncondensing gas furnace fans (MH-WG-NC) and (2) manufactured home nonweatherized non-condensing oil furnace fans (MH-NWO-NC). 

• Due to the limited number of basic models for MH-WG-NC and MH-NWONC, DOE did not have data to directly analyze and consider establishing 

standards for these additional product classes.

• DOE proposes to reserve standards for MH-WG-NC and MH-NWO-NC 

until sufficient data become available to consider establishing standards.
20

Public Meeting Agenda

1 Overview

2 Market Assessment

3 Engineering Analysis

4 Energy Use; Markups Analysis

5 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

6 Shipments, NIA, RIA, and MIA Analysis

7 Environmental Impacts

8 Results and Proposed Standards
21

Engineering Analysis

DOE considered six technology options in the Engineering 

Analysis.

Technology Options Brief Description

Improved permanent split capacitor 

(PSC) motors PSC motors with more than 3 airflow-control settings. 

Inverter technology (PSC motors) Motor controls used to extend the airflow range and flexibility of PSC motors.

Constant-torque brushless permanent 

magnet (BPM) fan motors

Constant-torque, brushless permanent magnet motors, that are more efficient and 

have a wider airflow range than PSC motors.

Constant-airflow BPM fan motors Constant-airflow, brushless permanent magnet motors, that add to the efficiency and 

airflow-range benefits of constant-torque BPM motors.

Multi-stage or modulating heating 

controls

Multi-stage furnaces are able to better match typical demand by operating at lower 

heat input rates to heat a residence and, in turn, a lower airflow-control setting for 

extended periods of time compared to single-stage furnaces. 

Backward-inclined impellers Impellers with backward facing inclined blades that can be more efficient than 

conventional forward-curved impellers.
22

Engineering Analysis

In the Engineering Analysis, DOE evaluated technologies that reduce furnace 

fan electrical consumption and characterized the relationship between 

manufacturer cost and energy consumption reduction.

Downstream Analyses

• Life-Cycle Cost and 

Payback Period Analysis

• National Impacts 

Analysis

• Shipments Analysis

• Manufacturer Impact 

Analysis

Output: Cost – Efficiency 

Relationship

Incremental 

Manufacturing Cost

Energy Consumption
23

Engineering Analysis

The proposed rating metric is Fan Energy Rating (FER), which is the 

estimated annual electrical energy consumption normalized by the 

airflow in the maximum airflow-control setting and the estimated 

annual operating hours. 

FER =

 (Operating Hoursx × Power Consumptionx) x=modes

 x=modes Operating Hoursx × (Maximum Airflow)

× 1000

FER =

CH × Emax + HH × Eheat + CCH × Ecirc

(CH + HH + CCH) × Qmax

× 1000
24

Engineering Analysis

Variations to FER exist depending on the maximum heating setting 

and whether the unit has single-stage or multi-stage heating. 

• Single-stage heating, maximum airflow is not a heating setting:

FER =

CH × Emax + HH × Eheat + CCH × Ecirc

(CH + HH + CCH) × Qmax

× 1000

• Single-stage heating, maximum airflow is a heating setting: Eheat = Emax

FER =

CH × Emax + HH × Emax + CCH × Ecirc

(CH + HH + CCH) × Qmax

× 1000

• Multi-stage heating: HH = 830/HCR in numerator

FER =

CH × Emax +

830

HCR × Eheat + CCH × Ecirc

(CH + HH + CCH) × Qmax

× 1000
25

Engineering Analysis

DOE incorporated information from the following sources in the 

Engineering Analysis.

Product literature

Appliance Magazine, AHRI, GAMA

Manufacturer interviews

Product teardowns & manufacturing cost modeling

Product energy testing
26

Engineering Analysis

DOE acquired data from specification sheets, testing, and teardowns to 

assist in developing FER values and cost models.

Specification Sheets

• 163 units

• 6 manufacturers represented

• 800 to 2,000 CFM nominal airflow capacity 

Teardown Units

• 25 units

• 6 manufacturers represented

• 800 to 2,200 CFM nominal airflow capacity 

Technology Variations

• Motor Type: PSC, constant torque BPM, constant airflow BPM

• Airflow Capacity (800-2,200 CFM)

• Heat Exchanger Type (Clamshell, Tubular, Drum)

• Non-condensing / Condensing

• Fan Housing Design (Standard, Proprietary)

• Weatherized / Non-weatherized 

• Single-Stage / Multi-Stage Heating
27

Engineering Analysis

The cost-efficiency curve is developed in four steps.

• Define baseline specifications for each product class;

• Identify design options from the baseline to the maximum 

technologically feasible level (max-tech) as a pathway for improving 

energy efficiency;

• Conduct teardown analysis for representative products spanning the 

range of efficiency levels considered; and

• Generate cost-efficiency curves, which account for full production 

costs.

Develop 

Baseline

Calculate

Costs

Develop Efficiency 

Pathway

Generate CostEfficiency Curves
28

Engineering Analysis

DOE selected baseline models typical of the least-efficient furnace fans used 

in commercially-available residential HVAC models.

Across all product classes, a baseline furnace fan includes:

• A PSC motor with 3 or fewer airflow-control settings.

• A forward-curved impeller.

• A standard, sheet-metal fan housing.

• Single-stage heating.
29

Engineering Analysis

DOE reviewed all available FER values based on data from the preliminary 

analysis and new data, and concluded that FER can best be represented as a 

linear function of airflow capacity.

• First, DOE determined the slope of the linear function by looking at 

multiple series of models of NWG-NC and NWG-C furnaces.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700

FER (W/1000 CFM)

Maximum Airflow Control Setting CFM

Series 1

Series 2

Series 3

Slope = 5.7

FER = slope x capacity + y-intercept
30

Engineering Analysis

Next, DOE performed a market- and capacity-weighted least-squares 

regression analysis, keeping the slope constant, to determine the y-intercept 

of the linear equation. 

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

FER (W/1000 CFM)

CFM

Baseline NWG-NC Furnaces

error

Min ( market weight x capacity weight x (errori)

2

)

n

i=1
31

Engineering Analysis

DOE reviewed information from publicly-available product literature and FER 

values calculated from test data to determine baseline FER ratings.

Key Product 

Class

Baseline FER* 

(W/1000 cfm)

1200 CFM 2000 CFM

NWG-NC FER = 0.057 x QMax + 362 430 476

NWG-C FER = 0.057 x QMax + 395 463 509

WG-NC FER = 0.057 x QMax + 271 339 385

NWO-NC FER = 0.057 x QMax + 336 404 450

EF/MB FER = 0.057 x QMax + 331 399 445

MH-NWG-NC FER = 0.057 x QMax + 271 339 385

MH-NWG-C FER = 0.057 x QMax + 293 361 407

MH-EF/MB FER = 0.057 x QMax + 211 279 325

MH-WG-NC Reserved ----- -----

MH-NWO-NC Reserved ----- -----

*QMax is the airflow, in cfm, at the maximum airflow-control setting measured using the proposed DOE test 

procedure. 
32

Engineering Analysis

Each efficiency level above the baseline is defined by the specific design 

option used to achieve it.

• DOE determined average percentage reductions in FER for each efficiency 

level and applied these reductions to all product classes.

– DOE found that manufacturers use similar components and design paths to 

improve efficiency across all product classes that DOE is examining. 

– DOE does not expect the percentage reduction in FER associated with each 

design option, whether commercially available or prototype, to differ across 

product classes. 

• DOE based the reductions in FER associated with commercialized 

technologies on measurements or publicly-available performance 

information. 

• DOE based the FER reductions associated with prototype technologies on 

research reports that included performance data.
33

Engineering Analysis

DOE assigned percentage reductions in FER to each EL to obtain FER values 

for intermediate ELs. 

Efficiency Level Design Option

Percent Reduction in FER from 

Baseline

1 Improved PSC 10%

2 Inverter-Driven PSC 25%

3 Constant-Torque BPM Motor 42%

4

Constant-Torque BPM Motor and 

Multi-Staging 50%

5

Constant-Airflow BPM Motor and 

Multi-Staging 53%

6

Premium Constant-Airflow BPM 

Motor and Multi-Staging + BackwardInclined Impeller57%*

A premium constant-airflow BPM motor is narrower and operates at higher 

RPM, which is characteristic of the motor paired with the backward-inclined 

prototype.

*DOE estimates that implementing a backward-inclined impeller at EL 6 results in a 10% reduction in FER 

from EL 5. This is equivalent to a 4% percent reduction in FER from baseline. 
34

Engineering Analysis

DOE multiplied the slope and y-intercept of the baseline FER equations by 

the percent reductions in FER at each efficiency level to generate 

intermediate FER equations.

Constant-Torque BPM Motor and Multi-Staging

Key Product 

Class

Constant-Torque BPM Motor and 

Multi-Staging FER* 

(W/1000 cfm)

1200 CFM 2000 CFM

MH-EF/MB FER = 0.029*QMax+105 140 163

MH-NWG-NC FER = 0.029*QMax+134 169 192

WG-NC FER = 0.029*QMax+135 170 193

MH-NWG-C FER = 0.029*QMax+146 181 204

NWEF/ NWMB FER = 0.029*QMax+165 200 223

NWO-NC FER = 0.029*QMax+167 202 225

NWG-NC FER = 0.029*QMax+180 215 238

NWG-C FER = 0.029*QMax+196 231 254

*QMax is the airflow, in cfm, at the maximum airflow-control setting measured using the 

proposed DOE test procedure. 
35

Engineering Analysis

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan

Efficiency 

Level Design Option NWG-NC FER* (W/1000 cfm)

1200 

CFM

2000 

CFM

1 Improved PSC FER = 0.051*QMax+323 384 425

2 Inverter-Driven PSC FER = 0.043*QMax+271 323 357

3

Constant-Torque 

BPM Motor FER = 0.033*QMax+212 252 278

4

Constant-Torque 

BPM Motor and 

Multi-Staging

FER = 0.029*QMax+180 215 238

5

Constant-Airflow 

BPM Motor and 

Multi-Staging

FER = 0.027*QMax+172 204 226

6

Premium ConstantAirflow BPM Motor 

and Multi-Staging + 

Backward-Curved 

Impeller

FER = 0.025*QMax +155 185 205

*QMax is the airflow, in cfm, at the maximum airflow-control setting measured using the 

proposed DOE test procedure. 
36

Engineering Analysis

Manufacturing cost models were developed by DOE as part of the 

efficiency-level approach.

Raw 

Materials

Finished 

Materials

Purchased 

Parts

Physical 

Teardown

Selection of 

Units

Fabrication 

Processes

Bill of Materials

Assembly 

Processes

Manufacturing 

Cost

• Bills of material were generated during 

the product teardown analysis and 

entered into the cost model.

• Cost model generated manufacturing, 

material, labor, and overhead costs.

• Physical teardown analysis conducted 

with representative products.

• Manufacturer interviews conducted to 

further refine the analytical inputs and 

the results generated by the cost 

model.
37

Engineering Analysis

Structure/Classification of Manufacturing Costs

Full Manufacturer Selling 

Price (MSP)

Non-Production Cost **

Selling General & 

Admin. R & D Interest

Full Manufacturing Production Cost (MPC)*

Direct Labor Direct 

Material Overhead

Indirect labor

Indirect material

Maintenance

Depreciation

Taxes

Insurance related 

to assets

Market research

Advertising

POS promotion

Sales person 

compensation & 

travel

Logistics

- Warehousing

- Delivery

- Record keeping

Costs of 

service & 

staff units

General 

corporate 

costs –

comp., etc.

Costs 

associated with 

efforts to find 

new or 

improved 

products or 

production 

processes

Costs of 

borrowing 

funds

* Tax Reform Act of 1986 essentially requires companies to measure cost of goods sold as the full production cost of the goods sold.

** In a company’s income statement, many of these costs are reported as a lump sum, under SG&A. 
38

Engineering Analysis

The costs used in the engineering analysis represent the cost of 

the furnace fan and not the cost of the entire HVAC product. 

• The following components are included in the MPC estimates:

– Fan motor and integrated controls

– Primary control board

– Impeller

– Fan housing

– Components used to direct or guide airflow

– Multi-staging components and controls
39

Engineering Analysis

DOE separated furnace fan product classes into high-volume and low-volume 

product classes to account for factors that impact manufacturers’ production costs 

and purchasing power, such as:

• Some products are produced at volumes significantly larger than others.

• Some manufacturers offer most types of the HVAC products, while others focus on 

niches.

• High-volume manufacturers operating in lower-volume adjacent markets are 

expected to have purchased part price efficiencies consistent with their higher 

overall purchasing volume.

• Low-volume operations were modeled as having lower production volumes and 

fewer shifts per day.

High Volume

• Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces

• Weatherized Gas Furnaces

• Electric Furnaces / Modular Blowers

Low Volume

• Oil Furnaces
40

Engineering Analysis

DOE used a design option approach to estimate the cost of technologies not 

commercially available in furnace fan applications.

Design Option High Volume MPC Low Volume MPC

Inverter Controls for Inverter-Driven PSC $30.00 $42.29

Premium Constant-Airflow BPM Motor $128.19 $175.85

Backward-Inclined Impeller $18.00 $18.32

• DOE estimated these costs based on discussions with manufacturers and on cost estimates for 

inverter drives used in similar residential applications, such as clothes washers. 

• DOE used a 10% markup on the estimated cost for a constant-airflow BPM motor as the 

added cost for a premium constant-airflow BPM motor. 

• DOE used photographs and specifications found in research reports to determine cost model 

inputs to estimate the MPC of the backward-inclined impeller.
41

Engineering Analysis

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

0 100 200 300 400 500

MPC (2012$)

FER (Watts/1000 cfm)

Cost Efficiency Results for NWG-NC at 1200 CFM

Premium Constant-Airflow BPM Motor + Multi-Stage + BI Impeller

Constant-Airflow BPM Motor and Multi-Staging

Constant-Torque BPM Motor and Multi-Staging

Constant-Torque BPM Motor

PSC + Inverter

Improved PSC

Baseline PSC Proposed Standard Level
42

Engineering Analysis

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

MPC (2012$)

FER (Watts/1000 cfm)

Cost Efficiency Results for EF/MB at 1200 CFM

Premium Constant-Airflow BPM Motor + Multi-Stage + BI Impeller

Constant-Airflow BPM Motor and Multi-Staging

Constant-Torque BPM Motor and Multi-Staging

Constant-Torque BPM Motor

PSC + Inverter

Improved PSC

Baseline PSC Proposed Standard Level
43

Engineering Analysis

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

$350

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

MPC (2012$)

FER (Watts/1000 cfm)

Cost Efficiency Results for NWO-NC at 1200 CFM

Premium Constant-Airflow BPM Motor + Multi-Stage + BI Impeller

Constant-Airflow BPM Motor and Multi-Staging

Constant-Torque BPM Motor and Multi-Staging

Constant-Torque BPM Motor

PSC + Inverter

Improved PSC

Baseline PSC

Proposed Standard Level
44

Engineering Analysis

Request for Comment

DOE invites additional FER value data that are generated using 

the DOE residential furnace fans test procedure proposed in 

the April 2, 2013 SNOPR (78 FR 19606), as well as the product 

class, measured airflow capacity in the maximum airflow 

control setting, and technology options of the model for 

which each FER value is calculated.

DOE invites comments and recommendations from interested 

parties on DOE’s methodology for accounting for the 

relationship between FER and airflow capacity, and the 

resulting efficiency levels that are represented by equations 

for FER as a function of airflow capacity.
45

Energy Use and Markups Analysis

1 Overview

2 Market Assessment

3 Engineering Analysis

4 Markups Analysis and Energy Use

5 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

6 Shipments, NIA, RIA, and MIA Analysis

7 Environmental Impacts

8 Results and Proposed Standards
46

Markups Analysis

Markups relate consumer price to the manufacturer selling price, also referred as the “cost 

of goods sold.” 

Baseline and Incremental markups:

• Baseline markups relate direct business costs of products to baseline efficiency.

• Incremental markups relate the incremental change in consumer price to the incremental 

change in cost of goods sold due to potential energy efficiency improvements (e.g., fixed costs 

such as overhead and labor do not scale up).

Distribution Channels through which products move from manufacturers to producers: 

were developed for the following markets: (1) Replacement; (2) New Construction; (3) New 

Construction (Manufactured Home)

Markups were developed for the following market participants: Manufacturer, 

wholesaler, mechanical contractor, general contractor, manufactured home manufacturer, 

and manufactured home dealer.

Sales Taxes and Wholesaler and Contractor markups were developed for each of the 

geographical areas in the analysis.
47

Markups Analysis

Distribution Channels for Residential Furnace Fans Equipment

Replacement

New Construction 

New Construction (Manufactured Homes Only)

Manufacturer Wholesaler Mechanical 

Contractor Consumer

Manufacturer Wholesaler Mechanical 

Contractor

General 

Contractor Consumer

Manufacturer

Manufactured 

Home 

Manufacturer

Manufactured 

Home Dealer Consumer
48

Input Preliminary Analysis NOPR Changes

Distribution Channels See previous slide. Updated MH Contractor to MH Dealer.

Manufacturer Markup

Determined in engineering analysis (Ch. 5), 

based on U.S. Security and Exchange 

Commission (SEC) 10-K reports from publiclyowned residential HVAC companies.

Updated values for every product class based 

on updated data from SEC 10-K reports. 

Wholesaler Markup Based on firm income statements from the 

HARDI 2011 Profit Report.

No change.

Mechanical 

Contractor Markup

Based on ACCA 2005 Financial Analysis report

and Plumbing and HVAC Contractors sector 

from the 2007 Economic Census.

No change.

General Contractor 

Markup

Based on Residential Building Construction 

sector from the 2007 Economic Census.

No change.

Manufactured Home 

Manufacturer Markup

Based on Manufactured Home (Mobile Home)

Manufacturing sector from the 2007 Economic 

Census.

No change.

Manufactured Home 

Dealer

Based on All Other Specialty Trade Contractors 

sector from the 2007 Economic Census.

Determined manufactured home dealer based 

on various sources (see Ch. 6).

Sales Tax Based on 2012 Sales Tax Clearinghouse Data. Updated to 2013 Sales Tax Clearinghouse Data.

Markups Analysis

NOPR Changes to Markups
49

Markups Analysis

Average Markups by Product Class

Product Class Baseline Markup Incremental Markup

Non-weatherized, Non-condensing Gas Furnaces 3.18 2.00

Non-weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnaces 3.11 1.96

Weatherized Gas Furnace 3.08 1.95

Oil Furnace 3.09 1.96

Electric Furnace / Modular Blower 2.84 1.80

Manufactured Home Non-weatherized, Noncondensing Gas Furnaces 2.55 1.84

Manufactured Home Non-weatherized, 

Condensing Gas Furnaces 2.54 1.83

Manufactured Home Electric Furnace /Modular 

Blower 2.32 1.69
50

Markups Analysis

Request for Comment

DOE invites comments and recommendations from interested 

parties on any aspect relating to the Markups Analysis.
51

Energy Use Characterization

Purpose: To develop energy consumption savings estimates for selected product 

efficiency levels. Annual energy consumption is the site energy use associated with 

operating the product.

Methodology: Furnace Fan (FF) annual energy use equals the sum of the energy 

used at each operating mode – heating, cooling, and constant circulation:

• Furnace Fan Power: Power at air flow and pressure operating conditions that meet the 

pressure drop requirements for each household.

– Furnace fan performance depends on efficiency level, product class, and furnace fan 

sizing that meets the heating and cooling needs of the household.

– System curve distribution used depends on product class and availability of central 

air conditioning. 

• Furnace Fan Operating Hours: Determined using RECS 2009 heating and cooling energy 

use data, furnace fan on-time ratios, and adjustment factors.

• Impact on Furnace/AC Energy Use: (1) impact of more-efficient furnace fans on overall 

energy use of household space conditioning equipment and (2) impact of standby energy 

use for more-efficient furnace fans.
52

Input Preliminary Analysis NOPR Changes

Furnace Fan Sizing Based on square footage, outdoor design 

temperature, and shipments by capacity.

Updated with EIA’s RECS 2009 data and new 

heating/cooling requirements methodology

Fan Performance 

Curves 

Based on manufacturer product literature and 

test data.

Updated with new test data, manufacturerprovided data, and product literature. Updated 

method for matching fan performance to FER. 

System Curves

Based on over 1300 field external static 

pressure (ESP) measurements from 27 studies: 

0.73 in w.c. (NWG, NWO, EF/MB w/ AC)

0.52 in w.c. (NWG, NWO,EF/MB w/o AC; WGF)

0.37 in w.c. (MH w/ AC); 0.17 in w.c. (w/o AC)

No change to values. For each household, the 

system curve is set by matching the resulting ESP 

(from a distribution of ESPs) to the cooling airflow 

at 400 CFM/tons. Max. ESP set to 1.2 in w.c.

Heating/Cooling 

Operating Hours

Using EIA’s RECS 2005 and adjusted for 

building shell efficiency, average climate 

conditions, secondary heating equipment, and 

heat contribution from the motor.

Updated to EIA’s RECS 2009 and updated 

adjustment factors with latest data (see Ch. 7 of 

TSD).

Continuous 

Operating Hours

Based on Minnesota /Wisconsin survey data 

and adjusted for rest of the country to match 

the provisions in the furnace fan test 

procedure.

No change. Added sensitivities and reference to 

recent national survey (see Appendix 8-H of TSD).

Impact on Furnace 

and AC Equipment 

Energy Use

Calculated impact of more-efficient furnace 

fans on furnace gas and air conditioner 

electricity use.

No change. 

Energy Use Characterization

NOPR Changes to Energy Use Characterization
53

Energy Use Characterization

Energy Use Determination Methodology

Mfr. 

Product Lit. 

&Test Data

System Curves Field 

Studies

Household

Furnace Fan 

Energy Use

Constant Fan 

Operating Hours

Fan Performance 

Curves

Impact on 

Furnace/AC 

Energy Use Power

Operating Hours

FER 

Efficiency levels

RECS 2009

Data

Heating/Cooling 

Load Adjustments

Constant 

Fan 

Operation 

Field Data

Heating & Cooling 

Fan

Operating Hours

Furnace Fan Sizing
54

Energy Use Characterization

Fan Power Determination

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Watts Airflow (CFM)

External Static Pressure (in w.c.)

PSC (Cooling) - Airflow

PSC (Heating) - Airflow

PSC (Cfan) - Airflow

System Curve

PSC (Cooling) - Watts

PSC (Heating) - Watts

PSC (CFan) - Watts

NOTE: Vertical dashed lines indicate the airflows at different fan 

speed settings, while horizontal dashed lines indicate the power use at 

different fan speed settings.
55

Energy Use Characterization

Fan Performance Curves Derivation

Deriving Adjustment Factors for 

Fan Performance Curves 

to match FER values 

at each efficiency level

Fan Performance Curves 

for all product classes and furnace 

fan sizes

Generate Average

Fan Performance Curves

(Source: mfr literature & test data)

Efficiency Level

NWG- NC NWG-C MH- NWG-NC MH- NWG-CNWO- NC WG EF/MB MH- EF/MB

Baseline 380 393 295 319 333 333 312 243

1 371 384 288 312 326 326 305 238

2 344 356 267 289 301 301 282 220

3 209 216 162 175 183 183 171 133

4 158 163 122 132 138 138 129 101

5 142 147 110 119 124 124 116 90.8
56

Energy Use Characterization

Fan Curve Methodology

Operating Mode Airflow Criteria Reference

Cooling Mode 400 CFM/AC Ton at 0.5 in w.c.* Typical manufacturer conditions.

Heating Mode 

(High or Low)

Fraction of cooling mode airflow 

OR Minimum static pressure set in the 

test procedure at the required CFM 

airflow rate** (whichever is higher). 

Typical default heating airflow settings 

from model data.

Continuous Fan 

Mode Fraction of cooling mode airflow. Typical default continuous fan mode airflow settings from model data.

* 0.3 in w.c. for manufactured home furnaces

** For example, for 60 kBu/h output capacity  60 kBtu/h/(1.08 * 50 deg temp. rise) = 1111 CFM at 0.20 in w.c. 

• Modeled furnace fan airflow performance curves meet the following criteria:

• Furnace fan is sized for each sampled household by taking into account both the heating 

and cooling requirements of the household based on house square footage, heating and 

cooling outdoor design temperature, and historical furnace and AC shipments by capacity.

• Temperature rise of heating is checked to make sure it is met at the external static 

pressure of the sampled household (if not airflow is adjusted).

• Cooling airflow is adjusted so that it lies between 300 to 500 CFM/ton.
57

Energy Use Characterization

Fan Performance (CFM vs. ESP) - Heating Mode (High)

Example: Non-Weatherized (Non-Condensing) Gas Furnace Fan, 3-Ton

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Watts/CFM

External Static Pressure (in w.c.)

EL 0 EL 1 EL 2 EL 3 EL 4 EL 5 EL 6

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Watts

External Static Pressure (in w.c.)

EL 0 EL 1 EL 2 EL 3 EL 4 EL 5 EL 6
58

Energy Use Characterization

Operating Hours

Furnace Fan Heating or Cooling Operating Mode Hours:

– Adjustment Factors (AdjFactor) :

• Adjusting heating/cooling load for building shell efficiency (based on AEO 2012) 

and average climate conditions (based on 10-year NOAA climate data)

• Adjusting RECS 2009 energy use estimates for non-Furnace Fan HVAC energy use

• Adjusting HVAC operating hours for heat produced by the motor (94% useful heat)

Furnace Fan Constant-Circulation Operating Mode Hours: 

– Based on Wisconsin and Minnesota surveys and adjusted for rest of country resulting 

in nationally 11% of households using constant circulation.

– Conducted sensitivity analysis with scenarios assuming 9% and 5% of households use 

constant circulation (see Appendix 8-H).

– Referenced recent national survey (Decision Analyst, American Comfort Survey, Sept. 

2013) showing that nationally 19% of households frequently use constant circulation.

AdjFactor

Output Capacity

Heating or Cooling Load

 Fan On Time Ratio  
59

Energy Use Characterization

Summary of Results

(Non-Weatherized Gas Furnace Fan, Non-Condensing & Condensing)

Efficiency Level

Non- Condensing Furnace Condensing Furnace

Annual 

Electricity 

Use (kWh)

Electricity 

Use Savings 

(kWh)

Additional 

Fuel Use 

(MMBtu)

Annual 

Electricity 

Use (kWh)

Electricity 

Use Savings 

(kWh)

Additional 

Fuel Use 

(MMBtu)

Baseline PSC 1014 --- --- 1100 --- ---

Improved PSC 894 119 0.13 980 120 0.16

Inverter-Driven PSC 746 268 0.14 828 273 0.16

Constant-Torque BPM Motor 572 442 0.45 634 467 0.55

Constant-Torque BPM Motor 

and Multi-Staging 475 539 0.54 541 560 0.64

Constant-Airflow BPM Motor 

and Multi-Staging 471 543 0.52 542 558 0.60

Premium Constant-Airflow 

BPM Motor and Multi-Staging 

+ Backward-Inclined Impeller

420 593 0.58 488 612 0.68
60

Energy Use Characterization

Request for Comment

DOE invites comment and recommendations from interested 

parties on any aspect relating to the Energy Use Characterization.
61

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

1 Overview

2 Market Assessment

3 Engineering Analysis

4 Energy Use; Markups Analysis

5 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

6 Shipments, NIA, RIA, and MIA Analysis

7 Environmental Impacts

8 Results and Proposed Standards
62

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Purpose: Develop the consumer life-cycle cost savings and payback period for 

higher-efficiency products.

Methodology:

• LCC equals total installed cost plus the sum of operating expenses discounted to 

a base year (2019).

• Economic evaluation performed from the consumer perspective.

• Analysis models the uncertainty and variability of inputs using Monte Carlo 

approach and probability distributions using Excel® with Crystal Ball.®
63

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

LCC & Payback Period Analyses Flowchart

Engineering 

Analysis

Markups to 

Determine 

Product Price

Energy Use 

Characterization

Baseline 

Manufacturer Cost

Std-Level 

Manufacturer Cost

Manufacturer 

Markup

Distributer & 

Contractor 

Markups

Sales Tax

Energy 

Consumption

Marginal Energy

Prices

Consumer

Price

Installation

Cost

Total

Installed Cost

Annual

Energy Cost

Repair

Cost

Maintenance

Cost

Annual

Operating Expense

Lifetime

Discount

Rate

Energy Price Trend

Lifetime Operating

Expense

Payback

Period

Life-Cycle

Cost
64

Input Purpose/Definition Methodology

Consumer 

Price

Manufacturing cost multiplied by 

markups and sales tax.

Manufacturing cost: from Engineering Analysis.

Markups and Sales Taxes: from Markups Analysis.

Installation 

Costs

Labor and materials necessary to 

install appliance.

Assumed that a fraction of installations require additional labor at 

startup to check and adjust airflow. 

Maintenance Routine cost to the consumer for 

furnace fan maintenance.

Assumes blower checking as part of regular equipment maintenance, 

and is based on maintenance frequency and labor hours and cost.

Repair Cost of replacing or repairing 

failed components in the fan.

Repair cost is based on failure year, warranty period, labor hours and 

cost, and material cost.

Marginal 

Energy Prices

Develop average marginal 

monthly prices.

Multiply most current average annual energy prices by monthly price 

factors and marginal price factors by geographical area. 

Energy Price 

Trends

Project future energy prices. Multiply marginal energy prices by the projected annual energy price 

trends for the corresponding Census Division.

Discount Rates

Determine the present value of 

lifetime operating expenses.

Derived from estimates of the “finance cost”, which can be interpreted 

as: (1) the financial cost of any debt incurred, or (2) the opportunity cost 

of any equity used.

Lifetime Age when the equipment is 

retired from service.

Assumed furnace fan lifetime equals furnace equipment lifetime. 

Furnace lifetime based on shipments, equipment stock, and survey data.

Base-Case 

Efficiencies

Project market share of products 

at each efficiency level in the 

absence of standards.

Projected efficiency market share for each product class based on

historical market share data and models information.

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

LCC Methodology
65

Input Data Sources

Maintenance • Maintenance Frequency: based on Decision Analysts, 2008 American Home Comfort Study 

• Labor Hours/Cost: based on 2012 RS Means Facility Repair and Maintenance Data.

Repair

• Failure Year: based on fan motor lifetime operating hours from small motors final rule (avg. 30,000); 

capacitor lifetime operating hours based on Electrical Industries Alliance EIA-456 standard (avg. 

60,000); control failure on 12 year average failure from 1992 GTI furnace study and assumed failure 

rate of 7.5% for simple controls, 15% for moderate complex controls, and 30% for complex controls

• Labor Hours/Cost: based on 2012 RS Means Facility Repair and Maintenance Data.

• Material Cost: based on Engineering Analysis and Markups Analysis.

• Warranty Period: based on manufacturer product literature and 2008 American Home Comfort Study.

Energy Prices

• 1990-2011 Form 826 monthly data.

• 1989-2011 Natural Gas Navigator monthly data. 

• 2009 Short Term Energy Outlook 1995-2009 historical data.

• 2011 State Energy Data System (SEDS).

Energy Price 

Trends

• 2018-2035 trends based on EIA’s AEO 2012 by Census Division.

• After 2035 trends based on Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) guidelines.

Discount Rates Federal Reserve Board’s Survey of Consumer Finances 1989-2010.

Lifetime Shipments data, RECS data on furnace ages, and historical AHS data on the total installed furnace stock.

Base-Case 

Efficiencies

• PSC Market Shares: Based on testing results and manufacturer provided data.

• BPM Market Shares: Total market share based on stakeholder data. Disaggregated BPM technology 

based on AHRI’s 2013 furnace model directory and product literature.

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Data Sources for LCC Inputs
66

Input Preliminary Analysis NOPR Changes

Compliance Year 2018 2019

Dollar Year 2011$ 2012$

Building Sample EIA’s RECS 2005 EIA’s RECS 2009

Labor Costs 2011 RS Means 2012 RS Means

Installation Costs Up to one hour of additional labor. Updated methodology; up to two hours of 

additional labor (see Appendix 8-D)

Maintenance/Repair Cost annualized; repair cost of motor 

replacement only

Cost added to year of maintenance/repair; 

added repair cost for controls and capacitor

Energy Prices 2010 EIA data 2011 EIA data

Energy Price Trends EIA’s AEO 2012 Early Release EIA’s AEO 2012 Full Version

Discount Rates Based on 1989-2007 SCF data and historical 

interest rate data up to 2011

Updated with 2010 SCF data and 2012 interest 

rate data

Lifetime Different lifetime distribution product 

classes

Same lifetime distribution for all product classes 

based on stakeholder input and available data

Base-Case Efficiencies • PSC Market Shares: 50% for EL 0 and EL 1 

• BPM Market Shares: 45% of market in 2018

• PSC Market Shares: 40% for EL 0; 60% for EL 1

• BPM Market Shares: 35% of market in 2019

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

NOPR Changes to LCC Inputs
67

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Average Equipment Lifetimes: DOE defines “lifetime” as the age at 

which residential furnace fan equipment is retired from service. DOE 

modeled furnace fan lifetime based on the distribution of furnace 

lifetimes developed for the recent energy conservation standards 

rulemaking for residential furnaces. DOE welcomes further input on 

the average equipment lifetimes for the LCC analysis and NIA.

Base-Case Efficiency Distribution: DOE seeks input on its estimate of 

the base-case efficiency distribution of residential furnace fans in 

2019. 

Request for Comment
68

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

LCC and PBP Analysis Results

Example: Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace Fan

Efficiency 

Level

Life-Cycle Cost 

2012$ Life-Cycle Cost Savings

Median 

Payback 

Period

years

Installed 

Cost

Discounted 

Operating 

Cost

LCC

Average 

Savings 

2012$

% of Consumers that Experience

Net

Cost No Impact Net Benefit

Baseline $339 $2,259 $2,598 --- 0% 100% 0% ---

1 $351 $2,066 $2,417 $49 1% 75% 24% 1.4

2 $398 $1,775 $2,173 $203 21% 41% 38% 4.1

3 $408 $1,506 $1,914 $361 10% 41% 49% 2.7

4 $490 $1,414 $1,904 $371 24% 34% 42% 5.4

5 $658 $1,488 $2,146 $199 45% 29% 27% 11.7

6 $692 $1,415 $2,107 $238 57% 0% 43% 11.0
69

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

LCC Consumer Subgroup Analysis

Purpose: Evaluate impacts on groups or customers who may be disproportionately 

affected by a proposed national energy conservation standard. 

– DOE evaluated LCC and Payback Period impacts on low-income households and 

households occupied by senior citizens (senior-only households). 

Example: Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace Fan, Comparison

Efficiency 

Level

Average LCC Savings

2012$

Median Payback Period

Years

LowIncome Senior All LowIncome Senior All

1 $32 $41 $49 2.2 1.6 1.4 

2 $129 $173 $203 6.6 5.1 4.1 

3 $245 $313 $361 4.0 3.2 2.7 

4 $212 $301 $371 8.5 6.6 5.4 

5 $35 $121 $199 18.3 14.5 11.7 

6 $52 $151 $238 16.4 12.2 11.0 
70

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

Request for Comment

DOE invites comments and recommendations from 

interested parties on any aspect relating to Life-Cycle Cost 

and Payback Period Analysis.
71

Shipments, NIA, RIA, and MIA Analysis

1 Overview

2 Market Assessment

3 Engineering Analysis

4 Energy Use; Markups Analysis

5 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

6 Shipments, NIA, RIA, and MIA Analysis

7 Environmental Impacts

8 Results and Proposed Standards
72

Purpose: Forecast the furnace fans that would be expected to be shipped between 2019 

and 2048, both with and without energy conservation standards.

Methodology:

• Shipment Projections: Estimate the number of furnace fans in each product class 

shipped annually in the absence of new standards (base case) and for the standard 

cases between 2019 and 2048 regionally and by market segment:

‒ Replacements: Product retirement calculation methodology applied to product stock, 

which is generated using historical shipments; accounts for the units demolished and early 

replacements.

‒ New construction: New housing construction projections multiplied by historical market 

shares.

‒ New Owners: Existing homes that acquire a furnace fan for the first time, including 

consumers switching between furnace fan product classes. 

• Efficiency Projections: Projects the percent of shipments in each product class at 

each efficiency level in the base case and for the standard cases.

• Accounted for impact of standards on shipments using price elasticities.

Shipments Analysis
73

Shipments Analysis

New

Installations

Historical Market New 

Construction Saturations

Projected New Housing

Starts

Replacement

Shipments

Historical Annual 

Shipments

Retirement Function 

(based on lifetime data)

Total Shipments New

Owners

Historical 

New Owner 

Shipments

Switching*

Early Replacements

Demolitions**

* Switching to other furnace fan 

product classes (such as noncondensing to condensing) based 

on historical shipments by 

efficiency.

** Based on year-to-year changes to 

projected housing stock.
74

Input Sources

Historical Annual 

Shipments

• AHRI historical shipments, 1972-2012, disaggregated into (1) NWGF and MHGF and (2) OF

• AHRI historical shipments, 2004-2009 data for WGF and estimated for other years based on 

1972-2009 packaged AC unit shipments from DOE’s 2011 CAC standards final rule.

• AHRI 1972-2009 historical shipments by efficiency was used to separate condensing vs. noncondensing NWGF shipments.

• Census MHGF new construction data, MHGF lifetime, American Housing Survey (AHS) 

saturation data used to disaggregate NWGF and MHGF historical shipments.

• For EF, DOE’s 2011 furnace standards final rule historical shipments.

Retirement Function Based on lifetime distribution (see Ch.8).

Historical New 

Construction Market 

Saturations

• Saturations from Characteristics of New Housing data, U.S. Census Bureau.

• U.S. Census historical housing starts data.

• RECS 2009 saturation data.

Projected New 

Construction Starts

EIA’s AEO 2012 projections.

Relative Price 

Elasticities

Based on appliance shipments and household economic data during the period (1980-2002). 

See Appendix 9-A.

Shipments Analysis

Sources for the Shipment Model
75

Input Preliminary Analysis NOPR Changes

Historical Annual 

Shipments

See previous slide for data up to 2010. Updated to 2011 and 2012 AHRI national 

shipments of gas furnaces and oil-fired furnaces

Retirement Function Different function for each product class. Single distribution for all product classes.

Early Replacements None Applied to fraction of shipments during the 

period 1998-2010 for NWGF (see Ch. 9).

Historical New 

Construction Market 

Saturations

See previous slide. Updated with 2011-2012 U.S. Census data.

Projected New 

Construction Starts

EIA’s AEO 2011 projections. EIA’s AEO 2012 projections.

Shipments to New 

Owners

Projected new owner shipments, for both

non-furnace to furnace product and for 

switching between furnace fan product 

classes.

Updated new owner projected fraction of 

shipments and updated fraction switching 

between furnace fan product classes based on 

stakeholder input and updated data.

Forecasting 

Condensing Market 

Shares

North: assumed 100% for NWGF and MHGF

South: increase from 28% in 2018 to 41% in 

2047.

North: increase from 75% in 2019 to 97% in 2048.

South: increase from 32% in 2019 to 46% in 2048.

(Based on updated shipments data.)

Price Elasticities See previous slide. No change.

Shipments Analysis

NOPR Changes to Shipments Model
76

Shipments Analysis

Shipments and Demand Elasticity: To estimate the impact on 

shipments of the price increase for the considered efficiency levels, 

DOE used the relative price elasticity approach that was applied in the 

2011 energy conservation standards rulemaking for residential 

furnaces. DOE welcomes stakeholder input and estimates on the effect 

of amended standards on future furnace fan equipment shipments. 

DOE also welcomes input and data on the demand elasticity estimates 

used in the analysis.

Request for Comment
77

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045

Shipments (millions)

MHEF

MHGFc

MHGFnc

EF

OF

WGF

NWGFc

NWGFnc

Historical Projected

Shipments Analysis

Historical and Projected Shipments for Furnace Fans

MH-EF/MB

MH-NWG-C

MH-NWG-NC

EF/MB

NOW-NC

WG-NC

NWG-C

NWG-NC
78

National Impact Analysis

Purpose: Estimate the national impacts of energy conservation standards for 

furnace fans shipped between 2019 and 2048.

• National Energy Savings (NES): Primary energy savings.

• Net Present Value (NPV): Difference between the present value of annual energy 

expenditures and the present value of annual equipment expenditures.

Methodology

• For each product class in each standards case:

1. Calculate per-unit cost increase and per-unit energy savings due to a standard.

2. Calculate number of units (stock) in use and energy savings each year from 

2019 to 2048.

3. Combine the above to determine NES and NPV.
79

Input Definition/Methodology

National Energy Savings Difference in annual energy savings (UEC multiplied by equipment stock) between base 

case and each standards case and summed over the analysis period.

Unit Energy Consumption (UEC) A function of product efficiency for each product class from LCC analysis results.

Shipments Projected shipments for each product class under the base case and all standards cases.

Equipment Stock Determined yearly stock using annual shipments and lifetimes for each product class.

Rebound Effect Applied to annual UEC and derived using a 2009 Wisconsin field study to estimate the 

rebound effect for standard cases requiring higher-efficiency furnace fans. 

Base-Case Efficiencies

Developed a distribution of efficiencies in the base case for 2019 (see Ch. 8). In each 

standards case, “roll-up” scenario is used to establish the efficiency distribution. Future 

trends are based on historical data and stakeholder input.

Site-to-Power Plant and FullFuel-Cycle (FFC) Energy FactorsConverts site energy into primary (power plant) energy consumption. In addition, FFC 

factors account for the energy used for resource extraction and distribution losses.

National Present Value Difference in installed costs and operating costs between base case and each standards 

case discounted to the present and summed over the analysis period

Total Installed Cost per Unit Derived as a function of product efficiency for each product class based on LCC analysis.

Total Operating Cost per Unit Includes costs for energy, maintenance , and repair derived as a function of product 

efficiency for each product class based on LCC analysis.

Discount Factor Used to determine present value of future monetary values based on discount rate.

National Impact Analysis

National Impact Analysis (NIA) Inputs
80

Input Preliminary Analysis NOPR Changes

Compliance Year 2018 2019

Dollar Year 2011$ 2012$

Discount Factor 3% and 7% in accordance with the Office of 

Management and Budget’s guidance.

No change

LCC Output Results

to NIA

Disaggregated by North and South regions 

and by Replacement and New Construction.

No change in disaggregation. Values updated 

based on changes to LCC analysis (see Ch. 8)

Energy Price Trends EIA’s AEO 2012 Early Release. EIA’s AEO 2012 Full Version.

Rebound Effect

Calculated a separate for the North and 

South regions based on the expected 

increase of constant-circulation fan use for 

all BPM designs (20% in the North and 10% 

in the South).

Calculated separately for each product class and 

efficiency level based on the additional household 

energy use from the expected increase of 

constant-circulation fan use for higher efficiency 

furnace fans. (see Ch. 10)

Base-Case 

Efficiencies

BPM Market Share: increases from 45% in 

2018 to 75% in 2047.

BPM Market Share: increases from 35% in 2019 to 

45% in 2048.

Site-to-Power Plant 

and Full-Fuel-Cycle 

(FFC) Energy Use 

Factors

DOE derived annual average site-to-power 

plant and FFC factors based on National 

Energy Modeling System (NEMS) 

corresponding to EIA’s AEO 2011.

Updated with NEMS data corresponding to EIA’s 

AEO 2012.

National Impact Analysis

NOPR Changes to NIA
81

Efficiency 

Level

Market Share for Non-weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace Fans

2019 

Base Case

2019 Standards Case 2048

1 2 3 4 5 6 Base Case

Baseline 25% 19%

1 34% 59% 28%

2 0% 0% 59% 0%

3 7% 7% 7% 66% 9%

4 6% 6% 6% 6% 72% 8%

5 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 100% 36%

6 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0%

• Products below standard will “roll-up” to 

comply with standards. Products at or above 

the standard will not be affected.

• Overall BPM market share trend (35% in 2019 

to 45% in 2048) is used to adjust the annual 

base-case efficiency for each product class.

Base-Case Efficiencies

National Impact Analysis

0 %

5 %

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

BPM Motor Market Share

Year

Projected Market Share

Historical Data
82

National Impact Analysis

Rebound Effect: DOE seeks comment on the values that DOE 

used to characterize the rebound effect with higherefficiency residential furnace fans.

Request for Comment

Market Penetration of Higher-Efficiency Furnace Fans: DOE 

seeks comment on the long-term market penetration of 

higher-efficiency residential furnace fans.
83

National Impact Analysis

TSL Selection Criteria for each product class:

• TSL 6: Max-Tech efficiency levels

• TSL 5: Yields maximum NPV at 7% discount rate

• TSL 4: Yields maximum NPV at 7% discount rate and for which the percentage of LCC winners is 

higher than the percentage of LCC losers

• TSL 3: One level lower than TSL 4, except in the case of OF

• TSL 2: One level lower than TSL3 for MH-NWG-NC, MH-NWG-C and MH-EF/MB

• TSL 1: Same as EL1

Product Class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan 1 3 3 4 4 6

Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace Fan 1 3 3 4 4 6

Weatherized Gas Furnace Fan 1 3 3 4 4 6

Non-Weatherized Oil Non-Condensing Furnace Fan 1 1 3 1 3 6

Non-Weatherized Electric Furnace/Modular Blower Fan 1 3 3 4 4 6

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, Non-Condensing 

Furnace Fan 1 1 3 1 3 6

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, Condensing Furnace Fan 1 1 3 1 3 6

Manufactured Home Electric Furnace/Modular Blower Fan 1 1 3 4 4 6

Trial Standard Levels (TSLs) TSL4 is Proposed TSL

Note: The numbers in the TSL columns represent the applicable efficiency level described in the Engineering Analysis.
84

Product Class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas 

Furnace Fan 0.25 1.02 1.02 1.86 1.86 2.40

Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace 

Fan 0.28 0.88 0.88 2.00 2.00 2.79

Weatherized Gas Furnace Fan 0.03 0.14 0.14 0.26 0.26 0.34

Non-Weatherized Oil Non-Condensing 

Furnace Fan 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.05

Non-Weatherized Electric Furnace/Modular 

Blower Fan 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.36 0.36 0.45

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, 

Non-Condensing Furnace Fan 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.09

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, 

Condensing Furnace Fan 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02

Manufactured Home Electric 

Furnace/Modular Blower Fan 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.07

Total – All Classes 0.63 2.27 2.34 4.56 4.62 6.22

National Impact Analysis

Primary National Energy Savings (quads)

TSL4 is Proposed TSL
85

Product Class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas 

Furnace Fan 0.26 1.02 1.02 1.87 1.87 2.42

Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace 

Fan 0.28 0.87 0.87 2.00 2.00 2.80

Weatherized Gas Furnace Fan 0.03 0.14 0.14 0.27 0.27 0.34

Non-Weatherized Oil Non-Condensing 

Furnace Fan 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.05

Non-Weatherized Electric Furnace/Modular 

Blower Fan 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.36 0.36 0.45

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, 

Non-Condensing Furnace Fan 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.09

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, 

Condensing Furnace Fan 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02

Manufactured Home Electric 

Furnace/Modular Blower Fan 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.07

Total – All Classes 0.63 2.25 2.33 4.58 4.63 6.25

National Impact Analysis

Full-Fuel-Cycle National Energy Savings (quads)

TSL4 is Proposed TSL
86

Product Class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas 

Furnace Fan 1.46 9.86 9.86 11.09 11.09 8.28

Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace 

Fan 1.49 11.16 11.16 12.23 12.23 9.20

Weatherized Gas Furnace Fan 0.17 1.12 1.12 1.30 1.30 0.49

Non-Weatherized Oil Non-Condensing 

Furnace Fan 0.02 0.02 0.19 0.02 0.19 0.10

Non-Weatherized Electric Furnace/Modular 

Blower Fan 0.15 1.05 1.05 1.29 1.29 0.12

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, 

Non-Condensing Furnace Fan 0.04 0.04 0.25 0.04 0.25 -0.06

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, 

Condensing Furnace Fan 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.05 -0.02

Manufactured Home Electric 

Furnace/Modular Blower Fan 0.03 0.03 0.13 0.17 0.17 -0.17

Total – All Classes 3.37 23.30 23.81 26.16 26.57 17.95

National Impact Analysis

Net Present Value of Consumer Benefit, Discounted at 3% (billion 2012$)

TSL4 is Proposed TSL
87

Product Class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas 

Furnace Fan 0.53 3.52 3.52 3.71 3.71 1.98

Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace 

Fan 0.51 3.78 3.78 3.91 3.91 2.11

Weatherized Gas Furnace Fan 0.06 0.39 0.39 0.41 0.41 -0.01

Non-Weatherized Oil Non-Condensing 

Furnace Fan 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.07 0.01

Non-Weatherized Electric Furnace/Modular 

Blower Fan 0.05 0.33 0.33 0.40 0.40 -0.20

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, 

Non-Condensing Furnace Fan 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.02 0.08 -0.09

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, 

Condensing Furnace Fan 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 -0.02

Manufactured Home Electric 

Furnace/Modular Blower Fan 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.05 0.05 -0.13

Total – All Classes 1.19 8.07 8.23 8.51 8.64 3.65

National Impact Analysis

Net Present Value of Consumer Benefit, Discounted at 7% (billion 2012$)

TSL4 is Proposed TSL
88

Directed by Executive Order 12866.

Methodology: DOE used modified NIA spreadsheet to evaluate non-regulatory 

alternatives to proposed standards:

• Consumer Rebates

• Consumer Tax Credits

• Manufacturer Tax Credits

• Voluntary Energy Efficiency Targets

• Early Replacement

• Bulk Government Purchases

Results: No alternative was found to be as beneficial as the proposed energy 

conservation standards. (See Chapter 17 of the TSD for methodology and results.)

Regulatory Impact Analysis

Evaluation of Policy Alternatives
89

Purpose: 

• Assess the impacts of potential energy conservation standards on 

manufacturers.

• Identify and estimate impacts on manufacturer subgroups that may be more 

severely affected than the industry as a whole.

• Examine the direct employment, product competition, manufacturing 

capacity, and cumulative regulatory impacts on the industry.

Methodology:

• Analyze industry cash flow and industry net present value (INPV) through use 

of the Government Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM).

• Interview manufacturers to refine inputs to the GRIM, develop subgroup 

analyses, and address qualitative issues.

Manufacturer Impact Analysis
90

• Phase 1

– DOE creates an industry profile to characterize the market and identify 

important issues that require further investigation.

• Phase 2

– DOE prepares an industry cash flow model and an interview 

questionnaire to guide subsequent discussions with manufacturers.

• Phase 3

– DOE interviews manufacturers and assesses the impacts of standards 

both quantitatively (using the GRIM) and qualitatively (impacts on 

employment, competition, manufacturing capacity, and regulatory 

burden).

Manufacturer Impact Analysis
91

Industry Cash Flow Model

• Upstream Inputs

– Market and Technology Assessment (MTA) Industry Profile 

– Engineering MPCs

– Shipments

• MIA Inputs

– Markup Scenarios

– Conversion Costs

Manufacturer Impact Analysis
92

Markup Scenarios

– Preservation of Gross Margin Percentage

– Preservation of Operating Profit

Manufacturer Impact Analysis

High-Volume Product Classes

Pres. Of Gross Margin 

Scenario

(TSL 4)

Pres. Of Operating 

Profit Scenario 

(TSL 4)

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas Furnaces 1.30 1.25

Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnaces 1.31 1.26

Weatherized Non-Condensing Gas Furnaces 1.27 1.24

Non-Weatherized Electric Furnace/Modular Blowers 1.19 1.18
93

Industry Conversion Costs at TSL 4 in 2012 $M

Manufacturer Impact Analysis

Product Class Capital Conv Costs Product Conv Costs

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan 0 1.20

Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace Fan 0 1.23

Weatherized Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan 0 0.23

Non-Weatherized Oil Non-Condensing Furnace Fan 0 0.02

Non-Weatherized Electric Furnace/Modular Blower 

Fan 0 0.30

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, NonCondensing Furnace Fan 0 0.02

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Gas, 

Condensing Furnace Fan 0 0.01

Manufactured Home Electric Furnace/Modular 

Blower Fan 0 0.08
94

Manufacturer Impact Analysis

Base Case TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

INPV 

(2012 $M) 252.2

249.2

To

252.9

225.5

To

265.7

223.6

To

265.1

197.8

To

286.0

196.7

To

286.5

82.1

To

310.4

Change in 

INPV

(2012 $M)

- 

(3.0) 

To

0.7

(26.7) 

to 

13.5

(28.6) 

to 

12.9

(54.4) 

to 

33.8

(55.5) 

to 

34.2

(170.1) 

to 

58.2

Change in 

INPV

(%)

-

(1.2) 

To 

0.3

(10.6) 

To 

5.3

(11.3) 

To 

5.1

(21.6) 

To 

13.4

(22.0) 

To 

13.6

(67.5)

To

23.1

Conversion

Costs

(2012 $M)

- 1.1 2.8 2.9 3.1 3.2 164.3

INPV Results*

* Parentheses indicate negative values. 
95

Small Business Impacts

• 14 small manufacturers were identified.

• Small manufacturers could have differential impacts relative to larger competitors due 

to the following:

– Product conversion and certification costs tend to be fixed and do not scale with 

sales volume.

– Small manufacturers have fewer engineering and testing resources.

– Small manufacturers lack purchasing power for critical components.

• Comparison of Product Conversion Costs

Manufacturer Impact Analysis

TSL 4 Large 

Manufacturer

Small

Manufacturer

Product Conversion Cost

as a % of Annual Revenue 1% 5%

Product Conversion Cost

as a % of Annual R&D Expense 41% 267%
96

Small Business Impact Comments

Small Business Impacts: DOE seeks comment on the 

number of small manufacturers; on the potential impacts of 

new energy conservation standard on those small 

manufacturers; and on the severity of those impacts.

Details of the Manufacturer Impact Analysis can be found in chapter 12 of the 

TSD

Request for Comment
97

1 Overview

2 Market Assessment

3 Engineering Analysis

4 Energy Use; Markups Analysis

5 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

6 Shipments, NIA, RIA, and MIA Analysis

7 Environmental Impacts, Indirect Employment

8 Results and Proposed Standards

Public Meeting Agenda
98

Emissions Analysis

Purpose: Report environmental impacts resulting from potential energy conservation standards 

due to changes in power plant emissions, as well as site emissions from the use of gas and oil 

furnaces.

Methodology:

• DOE assessed the environmental impacts using NEMS-BT to derive emissions factors. 

Results:

Energy savings from the proposed standards would be expected to reduce cumulative emissions by:

• 429.78 million metric tons (Mt) of carbon dioxide (CO2), 

• 230,900 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOX), 

• 313,460 tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2), and 

• 1.77 tons of mercury (Hg). 

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

20192024202920342039204420492054205920642069207420792084208920942099

kt

C O2 Emissions Reduction

TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6
99

Monetization of Emission Reductions

Purpose: Estimate the potential monetary benefit of reduced power plant emissions 

resulting from the considered energy conservation standard levels.

Methodology:

• DOE used the most current Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) values developed through 

interagency reviews.

– SCC is intended to be a monetary measure of the incremental damage resulting from 

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, including but not limited to agricultural productivity 

loss, human health effects, property damage from rising sea level, and changes in the 

ecosystem.

• Interagency estimates of the potential global benefits resulting from reduced CO2

emissions in 2015 are $12.9, $40.8, $62.2, and $117.0 per metric ton (2012$).

• For emission reductions that occur in later years, these values grow in real terms 

over time.
100

Monetization of Emission Reductions

Results

TSL

SCC Case* (million 2012$)

5% discount rate, 

average

3% discount rate, 

average

2.5% discount rate, 

average

3% discount rate, 

95th percentile

Power Sector and 

Site Emissions**

1 298 1531 2499 4725

2 1121 5747 9378 17733

3 1161 5951 9711 18363

4 2177 11165 18221 34452

5 2205 11309 18455 34894

6 2944 15103 24652 46603

Upstream 

Emissions

1 10 51 82 156

2 31 160 262 495

3 32 164 268 506

4 70 359 585 1106

5 70 360 588 1111

6 97 497 810 1531

Total Emissions

1 308 1582 2581 4880

2 1152 5907 9639 18228

3 1193 6115 9978 18869

4 2247 11524 18807 35558

5 2275 11669 19043 36005

6 3041 15600 25462 48134

* For each of the four cases, the corresponding SCC value for emissions in 2015 are $12.9, $40.8, 

$62.2, and $117.0 per metric ton (2012$).

** Includes site emissions associated with additional use of natural gas by more-efficient furnace fans.
101

Utility Impact Analysis

Purpose: Assess impacts on energy supply, specifically the changes in electric installed 

capacity and generation, that would result from the adoption of potential energy 

conservation standards. 

Methodology:

• DOE modeled the energy savings impacts from the considered standard levels using 

the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS)-Building Technologies (BT) (a variant 

of the NEMS used by EIA for their AEO report) to generate forecasts that deviate 

from the AEO reference case.

• Outputs of the utility impact analysis include forecasts of electricity generation and 

avoided capacity increases resulting from the considered standard levels.

Results: See Chapter 17 of the TSD.
102

Employment Impact Analysis

Purpose:

• Assess the overall impact on indirect* national employment from the proposed energy 

conservation standard that results from shifting consumer expenditures among goods 

and services and changing equipment and energy costs. 

Methodology:

• DOE used the Impact of Sector Energy Technologies (ImSET) model for the evaluation 

of indirect employment impacts. 

Results: 

• DOE anticipates that net labor market impacts will be small over time due to the small 

magnitude of the short-term effects. (See Chapter 16 of the TSD.)

*Direct national employment impacts are discussed in the Manufacturer Impact Analysis (MIA).
103

1 Overview

2 Market Assessment

3 Engineering Analysis

4 Energy Use; Markups Analysis

5 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

6 Shipments, NIA, RIA, and MIA Analysis

7 Environmental Impacts, Indirect Employment

8 Results and Proposed Standards

Public Meeting Agenda
104

Product Class TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

Consumer Average LCC Savings (2012$)

Non-weatherized, Non-condensing 

Gas Furnace Fan (34% of total 

shipments)

$64 $442 $442 $474 $474 $313

Non-weatherized, Condensing Gas 

Furnace Fan (39% of total shipments) $49 $361 $361 $371 $371 $238

Non-weatherized Electric 

Furnace/Modular Blower Fan (11% of 

total shipments)

$21 $160 $160 $185 $185 $17

Consumer Median PBP (years)

Non-weatherized, Non-condensing 

Gas Furnace Fan 1.3 2.7 2.7 5.4 5.4 11.2

Non-weatherized, Condensing Gas 

Furnace Fan 1.4 2.7 2.7 5.4 5.4 11.0

Non-weatherized Electric 

Furnace/Modular Blower Fan 2.4 3.2 3.2 3.6 3.6 13.4

Results

Consumer Average LCC Savings and Median PBP

TSL4 is Proposed TSL
105

TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan

Net Cost (%) 2 18 18 33 33 58

No Impact (%) 68 25 25 14 14 0

Net Benefit (%) 30 57 57 53 53 42

Non-weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace Fan

Net Cost (%) 1 10 10 24 24 57

No Impact (%) 75 41 41 34 34 0

Net Benefit (%) 24 49 49 42 42 43

Non-weatherized Electric Furnace/Modular Blower Fan

Net Cost (%) 5 20 20 27 27 68

No Impact (%) 73 37 37 25 25 0

Net Benefit (%) 21 42 42 48 48 32

Results

Consumer LCC Impacts by Product Class

TSL4 is Proposed TSL
106

TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

National Energy Savings 

(quads) 0.64 2.25 2.33 4.58 4.63 6.25

NPV of Consumer Benefits (2012$ billion, 30 years of shipments)

3% discount rate 3.37 23.30 23.81 26.16 26.57 17.95

7% discount rate 1.19 8.07 8.23 8.51 8.64 3.65

NPV of Consumer Benefits (2012$ billion, 9 years of shipments)

3% discount rate 1.35 9.36 9.59 10.53 10.72 7.55

7% discount rate 0.63 4.26 4.35 4.50 4.58 2.09

Manufacturer Impacts

Industry NPV (2012$ million) (3.0) to 

0.7

(26.7) to 

13.5

(28.6) to 

12.9

(54.4) to 

33.8

(55.5) to 

34.2

(170.1) to 

58.2

Industry NPV (% change) (1.2) to 

0.3

(10.6) to 

5.3

(11.3) to 

5.1

(21.6) to 

13.4

(22.0) to 

13.6

(67.5) to 

23.1

Results

NES, NPV, MIA, and Employment Impacts

TSL4 is Proposed TSL
107

Results

TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6

Cumulative Emissions Reduction

CO2(million metric tons) 59.0 220.2 227.9 429.8 435.2 582.3

NOX(thousand tons) 31.2 124.4 128.4 230.9 233.6 308.7

SO2(thousand tons) 43.4 155.3 160.4 313.5 316.9 427.4

Hg (tons) 0.2 1.0 1.0 1.8 1.8 2.4

N2O (thousand tons) 0.7 2.7 2.8 5.1 5.2 6.9

CH4(thousand tons) 132.6 371.0 384.6 913.7 922.3 1295.3

Value of Emissions Reduction

CO2(2012$ billion)* 0.308 to 

4.880

1.152 to 

18.228

1.193 to 

18.869

2.247 to 

35.558

2.275 to 

36.005

3.041 to 

48.134

NOX – 3% discount rate (2012$ billion) 0.043 0.155 0.161 0.314 0.318 0.428

NOX – 7% discount rate (2012$ billion) 0.015 0.054 0.056 0.109 0.111 0.149

* Range of the economic value of CO2reductions is based on 2013 draft interagency estimates of the global 

benefit of reduced CO2 emissions.

Total Emission Impacts

TSL4 is Proposed TSL
108

Proposed Standards

Product Class FER* 

(Watts/1000 cfm)

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan (NWG–NC) FER = 0.029 × QMax + 180

Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace Fan (NWG–C) FER = 0.029 × QMax + 196

Weatherized Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan (WG–NC) FER = 0.029 × QMax + 135

Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Oil Furnace Fan (NWO–NC) FER = 0.051 × QMax + 301

Non-Weatherized Electric Furnace/Modular Blower Fan (NWEF/NWMB) FER = 0.029 × QMax + 165

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized, Non-Condensing Gas Furnace 

Fan (MH–NWGNC) FER = 0.051 × QMax + 242

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized, Condensing Gas Furnace Fan 

(MH–NWG–C) FER = 0.051 × QMax + 262

Manufactured Home Electric Furnace/Modular Blower Fan (MH–EF/MB) FER = 0.029 × QMax + 105

Manufactured Home Weatherized Non-Condensing Gas Furnace Fan 

(MH–WG–NC) Reserved

Manufactured Home Non-Weatherized Non-Condensing Oil Furnace Fan 

(MH–NWO–NC) Reserved

*QMax is the airflow, in cfm, at the maximum airflow-control setting measured using the proposed DOE test 

procedure.