# US Department ofEnergy 

# Workshop on Water Heaters Water Heater Analysis Results July 23, 1999 ^f

# Engineering Analysis Results (Electric)
Electric WaterHeater (50 gal): HFC-245fa-Blown Foam # Selected Design Option Combinations EF Total Installed Cost Baseline (existing) 0.8600 345.66 0 Baseline (245fa) 0.8601 349.01 1 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps 0.8780 355.26 2 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps + InsulatedTank Bottom 0.8822 361.39 3 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps + InsulatedTank Bottom + 2" 0.8967 388.77 Insulation 4 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps + Insulated Tank Bottom + 2.5" 0.9077 408.07 Insulation 5 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps + 2.5" Insulation + Plastic Tank 0.9099 444.50 6 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps + 3" Insulation + Plastic Tank 0.9180 510.83 

### Electric WaterHeater (50 gal): Water-Blown Foam # Selected Design Option Combinations EF Total Installed Cost Baseline (existing) 0.8600 345.66 0 Baseline (Water-Blown) 0.8601 361.02 1 Baseline (Water-Blown) + Heat Traps 0.8780 367.27 2 Baseline (Water-Blown) + Heat Traps + Insulated Tank Bottom 0.8816 373.40 3 Baseline (Water-Blown) + Heat Traps + Insulated Tank Bottom + 0.8895 394.82 2.5" Insulation 4 Baseline (Water-Blown) + Heat Traps + Insulated Tank Bottom + 0.8981 459.23 3" Insulation 5 Baseline (Water-Blown) + Heat Traps + 3" Insulation + Plastic 0.9012 495.66 Tank_ 2

# Engineering Analysis Results (Gas)

Gas-Fired WaterHeater (40 gal): HFC-245fa-Blown Foam # Selected Design Option Combinations EF Total Installed Cost Baseline (existing) 0.544 330.15 0 Baseline (245fa) 0.543 376.35 1 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps 0.552 380.57 2 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps + 78% RE 0.565 395.54 3 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps + 78% RE + 2"Insulation 0.592 416.76 4 Baseline (245fa) + HeatTraps + 78% RE + 2.5" Insulation 0.599 431.47 5 Baseline (245fa) + HeatTraps + 80% RE + 2.5" Insulation 0.615 468.25 6 Baseline (245fa) + HeatTraps + 80% RE + 2.5" Insulation + Side-Arm + Electronic 0.700 636.89 Ignition 7 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps + 80% RE + 2.5" Insulation + Side-Arm + Electronic 0.709 654.60 Ignition + PlasticTank 8 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps + 80% RE +3"Insulation + SideArm + Electronic 0.715 716.40 Ignition + PlasticTank

3

# Engineering Analysis Results (Gas)
Gas-FiredWaterHeater (40gal): Water-Blown Foam # Selected Design Option Combinations EF Total

### InstalledCost Baseline (existing) 0.544 330.15 0 Baseline (Water-Blown) 0.544 380.30 1 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps 0.552 

### 384.53 2 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps+ 78% RE 0.565 399.50 3 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps + 78% RE+2"Insulation 0.583 414.49 4 Baseline (Water-Blown) + Heat Traps + 78% RE+2.5" Insulation 0.591 430.58 5 Baseline (Water-Blown) + Heat Traps + 80% RE+2.5" Insulation 0.607 467.36 6 Baseline (Water-Blown) + Heat Traps + 80% RE+2.5" Insulation + Side-Arm + 0.691 635.99 Electronic Ignition 7 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps + 80% RE +2.5" Insulation + Side-Arm + 0.700 653.71 Electronic Ignition + PlasticTank 8 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps + 80% RE + 3"Insulation +Side-Arm + 0.706 714.61 Electronic Ignition + PlasticTank

4

# Engineering Analysis 

# Results (Oil)

Oil-FiredWaterHeater (32 gal): HFC-245fa-Blown Foam # Selected Design Option Combinations EF Total Installed Cost 

### Baseline (existing) 0.529 936.60 0 Baseline (245fa) 0.529 939.86 1 Baseline (245fa) + HeatTraps 0.539 954.81 2 Baseline (245fa) + HeatTraps+ 2" Insulation 0.555 1,007.11 3 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps+ 2.5" Insulation 0.558 1,023.23 4 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps+ 3" Insulation 0.561 1,048.03 5 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps+ 3" Insulation + 78% RE 0.582 1,167.39 6 Baseline (245fa) + Heat Traps+ 3" Insulation + 78% RE + 0.586 1,223.39 Interrupted Ignition 7 Baseline (245fa) + HeatTraps + 3" Insulation + 78% RE + 0.616 1,434.34 Interrupted Ignition + 82% RE Increased HX Area

5

# Engineering Analysis 

# Results (Oil)
Oil-FiredWaterHeater(32 gal): Water-Blown Foam # Selected Design Option Combinations EF Total Installed Cost 

### Baseline (existing) 0.529 936.60 0 Baseline (Water-Blown) 0.529 970.53 1 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps 0.539 985.48 2 Baseline (Water-Blown) + Heat Traps+ 2"Insulation 0.547 1,000.98 3 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps + 2.5" Insulation 0.552 1,015.49 4 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps + 3" Insulation 0.556 1,038.39 5 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps + 3" Insulation + 78% 0.577 1,157.75 RE 6 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps + 3" Insulation + 78% 0.581 1,213.75 RE + Interrupted Ignition 7 Baseline (Water-Blown) + HeatTraps + 3" Insulation + 78% 0.610 1,424.79 RE + Interrupted Ignition + 82% RE Increased HX Area

6

# WaterHeater Standards Summar Design OptionStandardLevels: ELECTRIC Standard LCC% Level Savings Benefitting 1 Heat Traps + Insulated Tank Bottom 1 $53.00 97 2 Heat Traps, Insulated Tank Bottom + 2.5" 2 $13.00 56 Insulation Heat Traps, Insulated Tank Bottom, 3" Insulation 3 ($69.00) 27 3,4 + Plastic Tank 4 ($69.00) 27 GAS Standard LCC% Level Savings Benefitting 1 Heat Traps 1 $18.00 97 2 Heat Traps, 78% RE+ 2" Insulation 2 $30.00 78 3 Heat Traps, 80% RE+ 2.5" Insulation 3 ($17.00) 73 4 Heat Traps, 80% RE, 3" Insulation, Side-arm 4 ($245.00) 17 Heater, Plastic Tank + Electronic Ignition_ OIL Standard LCC% Level Savings Benefitting 1 Heat Traps 1 $16.00 80 2 Heat Traps + 2.5" Insulation 2 ($32.00) 15 3 Heat Traps, 78% RE + 3" Insulation 3 ($153.00) 1 4 Heat Traps + 3" Insulation, Interrupted Ignition, 4 ($392.00) .4 Improved Heat Exchanger '7 '---------

# National Energy Savings andNPV

Standard Energy Savings NPV Level (Quads) ($billion)

2 

### AEO low 

## growth 3.28 .046 

## AEOreference 3.27 0.84 AEO highgrowth 3.27 1.18

4 AEO low growth 9.58 -21.30 4 

## AEOlow growth 9.58 -21.30 AEOreference 9.55 -21.02 AEO high growth 9.53 -20.50

8

# National Water Heater Energy Consumption

."
. ........... . ... t----- ':i 

### 4.5 4.0 3.5 C 

### 3.0 2.5__~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~- Base Case o2.5

- ------- Std Level1 3a>~~~~ --~~~~~A; ~~--- ~Std Level2 '2.0 - - Std Level3

- Std Level4 

### 1.5 1.0 

### 0.5 0.0

-- 

### 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 9

# v 

# Projected Shipments

TrialStandardLevel One TrialStandardLevel Two 8 -. 8 l 7

- 7 6

- 6

- 65 Gas- 5 Gas -- ' :=_-4

- ,: 2E % .a Elece E . .--- oo Ao~ ^ ^ o f Elec 3 bh 3 3 2 2 1~~~1 ~ LPG 1 L LPG yPOQQOOOO

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oo Oil 0O o1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 TrialStandardLevel Three Trial StandardLevel Four 8 8 7- 7 6 6 E _ e - E Gas

- - 6,^5' 6 m

51 Gas , ~ ----- I Gas.-.

3 A 3.1

'* a I 2

- _ 2 - 1 LPG 1 LPG LPG

.ooo2ooOoooooooo O. ;gcogo 0 0 0 0 0 Oil OiOl 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Energy Price: AEO 1999 Reference Case 10

# Cumulative Emission Reductions, 2003-2030
Standard Carbon NOx (kt) SO2 

# (kt) Level (Mt) 1 17 46 41 2 50 150 201 3 80 240 401 4 1302 3802 501 'Only household emissions reductions 2

## Results uncertain due tofuel switching

11

# MIA Analysis: Industry Cash Flow
TheDepartmentused the Government Regulatory ImpactModel (GRIM) to conduct the IndustryCashFlow Analysis. * GRIM is atool thathelps identify the financial impacts ofenergy efficiency and otherregulations onmanufacturers. * Based on conventional analysis ofdiscounted cashflows * Creates full computations ofcash flow forthree regulatory scenarios: base case (as is), standards case (energy efficiency regulations only), andcumulative case (allregulations facing industry) * Computes industry values (NPV) for all scenarios

e 

## Offers numerical and graphical comparisons

12

# MIA Analysis: Industry Cash Flow TheDepartment has developed acash flow using industryaverage values formanufacturing costs, shipments, and financial information. * Manufacturer costs were estimated from the GAMA data submittal and independent consultants. * Financial information (e.g., taxrate, working capital, depreciation) is obtained from manufacturers' 10-K statements, otherpublicly available industry statistics (e.g., RobertMorris Associates), and manufacturer interviews. * Shipments are obtained from the "National Energy Savings Spreadsheet" developed by LBNL.

13

# MIA Analysis
Based on manufacturers' comments, below are the results expected for each trial standard level (Business Scenario 3 from MIA):
Standard Base Case Cumulative Change in Level INPV INPV INPV (millions) (millions) 

### 1 $ 295 $ 267 -9.5% 2 $ 295 $ 254 -14.0% 3 $ 295 $ 232 -21.5% 4 $ 295 $ 203 -31.2% Standard Base Case Standard Change in Level INPV INPV INPV (millions) (millions)_ 

### 1 $ 295 $ 293 -0.7% 2 $ 295 $ 280 -5.1% 3 $ 295 $ 259 -12.3% 

### 4 $ 295 $ 229 -22.5% 14

# MIA Analysis Theresults showrequired average costs to offsettheinvestments associated with each trialstandardlevel. $400.00 $350.00 $300.00 $300.00 wj*0~ ~~Price 

## Curves$250 § $200.00 $20.00
= ____ _---x---'^Z^Z^^y ^ .- * $200.00 Q00 E $100.00 --- --- X--__ L L E *- X X -$150.00 , , $0.00
- $100.00 $50.00 t = I ($200.00) | ($200Investments$0.00 

### .o ($300.00) ($50.00) ($400.00) ($100.00) 

### 1 2 3 4 Trial Standard Level |_ Standards I ICumulative -+StandardsPrice X Current Price- -- Cumulative Price

# MIA Analysis: Industry Cash Flow The cumulative short-term cash flows, cumulative and standards scenarios (Business Scenario 3): Cumulative Case: StandardsCase: 100

- 0 10

50 - 50

0 0

1998 1 1 1998IL Q9 2001 2002208 004 2005 -50so
v-100 -100 - -150- -150
-200 - -200 ~~~I---^-^ ---- + Base Case-- TS 1 I TS2
-- Base Case -m- TS 1 TS 2 -TS 3 -S T-S- TS3
- -- TS4 16

# Impacts on Manufacturing Capacity

Standard Impacts on Capacity Level1 Nomajor impacts expected. 2 Nomajor impacts expected. 3 Existingproduct wouldbe obsolete andnew facilities would havetobe constructed. Some 

# manufacturers may electtoleave theindustry. 4 Existingproduct wouldbe obsolete andnew facilities would havetobe constructed. Some manufacturers areexpected toleave theindustry.

17