Updated Buildings Sector 

Appliance and Equipment Costs 

and Efficiency

August 2013

Independent Statistics & Analysis

www.eia.gov

U.S. Department of Energy

Washington, DC 20585
U.S. Energy Information Administration | Buildings Appliance and Equipment Costs and Efficiency i

This report was prepared by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the statistical and 

analytical agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. By law, EIA’s data, analyses, and forecasts are 

independent of approval by any other officer or employee of the United States Government. The views 

in this report therefore should not be construed as representing those of the U.S. Department of Energy 

or other Federal agencies.
June 2013

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Buildings Appliance and Equipment Costs and Efficiency 1

Updated Buildings Sector Appliance and Equipment Costs and 

Efficiency

Energy used in the residential and commercial sectors provides a wide range of services: heating, 

cooling, lighting, refrigeration, cooking, and numerous other end uses. 

EIA conducts surveys of the building sectors, the Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) and 

Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), which provide information on the 

equipment stock and energy consumption within existing buildings. However, these surveys do not 

directly gather other information that is important to forecasting future energy consumption, such as 

equipment cost information or nameplate efficiency ratings. 

The Residential Demand Module (RDM) and Commercial Demand Module (CDM) of the National Energy 

Modeling System (NEMS) contain equipment cost and performance “menus” that represent competing 

options for most of the largest end uses. Multiple classes and types are represented in the equipment 

menus so that the projected equipment stock can change over time in response to fuel prices and other 

factors that affect equipment choice, such as appliance standards. These equipment menus interact 

with other NEMS modules to determine market shares, equipment efficiency levels, cost estimates, and 

equipment interactions1

, and are used to translate service demand to energy demand.

The contract reports in Appendices A-D provide the information basis upon which these menus can be 

built with a consistent perspective on cost and efficiency characterizations across equipment and fuel

types. Previous editions of the Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) used similar contract reports. 

Appendices A and B constitute one set of reports that characterizes most major residential equipment 

and commercial heating, cooling, and water heating equipment. Appendix A was used in developing

Reference case projections, while Appendix B was used in developing advanced technology cases.2

 

These assumptions were developed and implemented during the AEO2012 cycle. 

Appendices C and D constitute another set of reports that characterizes residential and commercial 

lighting, as well as commercial ventilation and refrigeration equipment. Appendix C was used in 

developing the Reference case, while Appendix D was used in developing advanced technology cases. 

These assumptions were developed and implemented during the AEO2013 cycle.

When referencing the contract reports in Appendices A-D they should be cited as reports by Navigant 

Consulting, Inc. and SAIC prepared for the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

 1 Examples of equipment interactions are solar water heaters that supplement traditional water heaters, clothes washers that 

reduce the need for clothes drying, or water heaters that provide dishwashers and clothes washers with heated water.

2 In addition to the Reference case, the demand sectors also project scenarios to explore different assumptions for the cost and 

performance of future technologies. For the more optimistic cases, some equipment achieves lower life-cycle costs through 

improved efficiency or lower upfront costs, or both. The contracted reports provide a base case and an advanced case for 

modeling the AEO Reference case along with the more optimistic cases.
June 2013

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Buildings Appliance and Equipment Costs and Efficiency 2

APPENDIX A
FINAL

EIA - Technology Forecast Updates –

Residential and Commercial Building 

Technologies – Reference Case

Presented to:

U.S. Energy Information Administration

Prepared by

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1801 K Street, NW, Suite 500

Washington, D.C. 20006

With

SAIC

8301 Greensboro Drive

McLean, VA 22102

September 22, 2011
Final

DISCLAIMER

This presentation was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States 

Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their 

employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, 

express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or 

usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use 

would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, 

process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily 

constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government 

or any agency, contractor or subcontractor thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed 

herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency 

thereof. 

September 2011

1
Final

Objective 3

Methodology 4

Definitions 5

Market Transformation 6

Historical Shipment Data 7

Residential Gas-Fired Water Heaters 8

Residential Oil Water Heaters 11

Residential Electric Resistance Water Heaters 13

Residential Heat Pump Water Heaters 16

Residential Instantaneous Water Heaters 18

Residential Solar Water Heaters 20

Residential Gas-Fired Furnaces 22

Residential Oil-Fired Furnaces 25

Residential Hydronic Heating Systems (Boilers) 28

Residential Room Air Conditioners 30

Residential Central Air Conditioners 33

Residential Air Source Heat Pumps 35

Residential Ground Source Heat Pumps 37

Residential Gas Heat Pumps 39

Residential Refrigerator / Freezer 42

Residential Natural Gas Cooktops 46

Residential Clothes Washers 49

Residential Clothes Dryers 52

Residential Dishwashers 55

Commercial Gas-Fired Furnaces 58

Commercial Oil-Fired Furnaces 60

Commercial Electric Boilers 62

Commercial Gas-Fired Boilers 64

Commercial Oil-Fired Boilers 66

Commercial Gas Fired Chillers 68

Commercial Centrifugal Chillers 70

Commercial Reciprocating Chillers 72

Commercial Screw Chillers 74

Commercial Scroll Chillers 76

Commercial Rooftop Air Conditioners 78

Commercial Gas-Fired Engine-Driven Rooftop Air 

Conditioners 80

Commercial Rooftop Heat Pumps 83

Commercial Ground Source Heat Pumps 85

Commercial Electric Resistance Heaters 87

Commercial Gas-Fired Water Heaters 89

Commercial Electric Resistance Water Heaters 92

Commercial Oil-Fired Water Heaters 95

Commercial Gas-Fired Instantaneous

Water Heaters 97

Commercial Electric Booster Water Heaters 99

Commercial Gas Booster Water Heaters 100

Data Sources A-1

References B-1

Page Page

Table of Contents
Final

3

The objective of this study is to develop baseline and projected 

performance/cost characteristics for residential and commercial 

end-use equipment.

• 2005 and 2007 baselines, as well as today’s (2010)

— Review of literature, standards, installed base, contractor, and manufacturer 

information.

— Provide a relative comparison and characterization of the cost/efficiency of a 

generic product.

• Forecast of technology improvements that are projected to be available through 2035

— Review of trends in standards, product enhancements, and Research and 

Development (R&D).

— Projected impact of product improvements and enhancement to technology.

Objective

The performance/cost characterization of end-use equipment developed in 

this study will assist EIA in projecting national primary energy 

consumption.
Final

4

Input from industry, including government, R&D organizations, and 

manufacturers, was used to project product enhancements concerning 

equipment performance and cost attributes.

• Technology forecasting involves many uncertainties.

• Technology developments impact performance and cost forecasts.

• Varied sources ensure a balanced view of technology progress and the probable timing 

of commercial availability.

• All cost forecasts are shown in real, 2010 dollars.

Methodology
Final

5

The following tables represent the current and projected efficiencies for residential and 

commercial building equipment ranging from the installed base in 2005 and 2007, to 

the highest efficiency equipment that is expected to be commercially available by 2035, 

assuming incremental adoption. Below are definitions for the terms used in 

characterizing the status of each technology.

• 2005/2007 Installed Base: the currently installed and “in use” equipment for that year. 

Represents the installed stock of equipment, does not represent sales.

• 2010 Current Standard: the minimum efficiency required by current standards, or 

typical where no standard exists.

• Typical: the average, or “typical” product being sold in the particular timeframe.

• ENERGY STAR: the minimum efficiency required to meet the ENERGY STAR criteria, 

where applicable.

• Mid-Level: middle tier high-efficiency product available in the particular timeframe.

• High: the product with the highest efficiency available in the particular timeframe.

Definitions
Final

6

Market Transformation

The market for the reviewed products has changed since the analysis 

performed in 2007 and is reflected in the efficiency and cost 

characteristics.

• Over the past three years, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established 

ENERGY STAR specifications for a number of new products, including residential 

water heaters.

• Typical air conditioners have improved efficiencies as a result of increased Federal 

standards or otherwise. In 2007, the typical Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER) for a 

residential room air conditioner was 10.0, today it is 10.8; the typical EER for a 

commercial rooftop air conditioner was 10.1, today it is 11.2.

• Overall, there has been an increased market acceptance of energy efficient products 

driven by initiatives such as LEED and other green building programs.
Final

7

Historical Shipment Data

Due to the severe recession and dramatic contraction in the housing market, over the 

past few years there has been a trend of decreased appliance shipments, except in 

commercial appliances where a specific trend is not evident. In 2010, shipments have 

increased across all appliance types.

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment 

Statistics Monthly: January 2011

Throughout the presentation, shipment trends 

for specific products are depicted. Overall, the 

recession and contraction of the housing 

market has significantly affected each 

product.

Commercial Appliances

130,000

135,000

140,000

145,000

150,000

155,000

160,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Major Appliances

55,000,000

60,000,000

65,000,000

70,000,000

75,000,000

80,000,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Comfort Conditioning

14,000,000

16,000,000

18,000,000

20,000,000

22,000,000

24,000,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

8

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas-Fired Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 40 40 40 40 50 40 50 40 50 40 50

Energy Factor 0.6 0.59 0.62 0.67 0.85 0.62 0.85 0.62 0.85 0.62 0.85

Average Life (yrs) 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 470-

510

470-

510

480-

510

780-

810

1500-

3000

450-

500

1380-

2880

450-

500

1250-

2750

450-

500

1200-

2700

Total Installed Cost ($) 920-

960

920-

960

930-

960

1230-

1260

1950-

3450

900-

950

1830-

3330

900-

950

1700-

3200

900-

950

1650-

3150

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) - - 13 17 17 13 17 13 17 13 17
Final

• The current Federal standard, which came into effect in January 2004 mandates an EF of 

0.59 for a 40-gallon water heater. The equation for the Federal standard is: 

EF=0.67-(0.0019*Gal), which is used to expand the analysis to a greater range of 

storage capacities.

• An updated Federal standard will go into effect on April 16, 2015. The equation for the 

Federal standard is:

EF=0.675-(0.0015*Gal) for a volume ≤ 55 gallons and

EF=0.8012-(0.00078*Gal) for a volume > 55 gallons

• Per discussions with National Labs, there is a potential trend towards a capacity of 50 

gallons after 2020.

• Gas-fired water heater capacities typically fall between 30 and 75 gallons.

• As part of the heating products Federal standards rulemaking, a high efficiency model 

was examined, EF=0.77 at 40 gallons, which represents a condensing unit with two 

inches of insulation and a power vent.

• The cost of installation is approximately $450, which is higher than electric water 

heaters for a number of reasons, which includes an extra 1.5 hours of labor for 2 

plumbers that is required for gas units. 

9

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas-Fired Water Heaters
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in residential gas-fired water heater shipments. 

10

Shipment Data » Residential Gas-Fired Water Heaters

Water Heaters, Gas

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011

3,500,000

3,700,000

3,900,000

4,100,000

4,300,000

4,500,000

4,700,000

4,900,000

5,100,000

5,300,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

11

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Oil Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical MidLevel High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

Energy Factor 0.5 0.53 0.54 0.62 0.68 0.62 0.68 0.62 0.68 0.62 0.68

Average Life (yrs) 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1200-

1300

1300-

1400

1350-

1450

1450-

1550

1600-

1700

1440-

1540

1600-

1700

1420-

1520

1600-

1700

1420-

1520

1600-

1700

Total Installed Cost ($) 1800-

1900

1900-

2000

1950-

2050

2050-

2150

2200-

2300

2040-

2140

2200-

2300

2020-

2120

2200-

2300

2020-

2120

2200-

2300

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)* - - 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157
Final

• The current Federal standard, which came into effect in January 2004 mandates an EF of 

0.53 for a 30-gallon water heater. The equation for the Federal standard is:

EF=0.59-(0.0019*Gal), which is used to expand the analysis to a greater range

of storage capacities.

• An updated Federal standard will go into effect on April 16, 2015. The equation for the 

Federal standard is:

EF=0.68-(0.0019*Gal)

• Oil-fired water heaters often have small tanks with larger input ratings, relative to 

natural gas and electric residential water heaters.

• No condensing oil-fired, storage residential water heaters currently exist on the U.S. 

market, hence the range of efficiencies tops out at near-condensing efficiency levels.

• The max-tech model on the market is achieved using a proprietary “turbo flue” design. 

12

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Oil Water Heaters
Final

13

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Electric Resistance Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

Energy Factor 0.9 0.9 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.95 0.96 0.95 0.96

Average Life (yrs) 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 250-300 250-300 275-325 350-375 350-375 400-450 350-375 400-450 350-375 400-450

Total Installed Cost ($) 550-600 550-600 575-625 650-675 650-675 700-750 650-675 700-750 650-675 700-750

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)* - - 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible
Final

• The current Federal minimum efficiency standard, which went into effect in January 

2004, requires an EF of 0.90 for a 50-gallon electric resistance water heater. The equation 

for the Federal standard is:

EF=0.97-(0.00132*volume), which is used to expand the analysis to a greater range

of storage capacities.

• An updated Federal standard will go into effect on April 16, 2015. The equation for the 

Federal standard is:

EF=0.96-(0.0003*Gal) for a volume ≤ 55 gallons and

EF=2.057-(0.00113*Gal) for a volume > 55 gallons

• Electric resistance water heater capacities usually range between 30 and 119 gallons.

14

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Electric Resistance Water Heaters
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in residential electric resistance water heater shipments. 

15

Shipment Data » Residential Electric Resistance Water Heaters

Water Heaters, Electric

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011

3,600,000

3,800,000

4,000,000

4,200,000

4,400,000

4,600,000

4,800,000

5,000,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

16

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Heat Pump Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

ENERGY

STAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

Energy Factor 2 2 2.35 2 2.35 2 2.35 2 2.35

Average Life (yrs) 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1400-

1700

1400-

1700

1500-

2000

1300-

1600

1500-

2000

1300-

1600

1500-

2000

1250-

1550

1500-

2000

Total Installed Cost ($) 1500-

2200

1500-

2200

1600-

2500

1400-

2100

1600-

2500

1400-

2100

1600-

2500

1350-

2050

1600-

2500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
Final

• There is not a unique Federal standard for heat pump water heaters (HPWH). Because integrated 

HPWHs are in the same product class as electric resistance water heaters under DOE’s classifications, 

the Federal standard that applies to electric resistance water heaters applies here as well.

• Since 1990, significant R&D efforts have gone into developing HPWHs. Improvements have advanced 

efficiency and reliability; however, the high first cost still precludes high-volume market penetration.

• Although there is an installed base listed for 2005, the market penetration of HPWHs was quite low at 

that time.

• Three major domestic storage water heater manufacturers (Rheem , AO Smith, and GE) have an 

integrated HPWH model on the market; however, new and established competitors offer integrated or 

retrofit units (for existing electric or indirect storage water heaters). 

• Stiebel Eltron has an 80 gallon, 2.5 energy factor high efficiency HPWH. This unit was not included in 

the analysis presented on the previous slide because it has a significantly larger capacity than the units 

included, making for a difficult comparison.

• Sales are estimated to be limited and driven in part by rebates and tax credits at the utility, local, state, 

and Federal level. Hence, it is not surprising that all HPWH products on the market meet ENERGY 

STAR minimums and that no HPWH products are being offered below the ENERGY STAR efficiency 

level. 

• While resistive heating elements are virtually 100% efficient at transferring heat to the water inside a 

water heater, there is a jump in efficiency when heat pump technology is adopted since the COP of heat 

pump systems is usually between 2 and 3, at least on a seasonal basis.

• Due to the typically slow rate at which heat pumps raise the water temperature in a storage water 

heater, it is not unusual for heat pump systems to use resistive heat for some proportion of the water 

heating process to meet consumer expectations. All HPWH systems examined by DOE allow the 

consumer to adjust the HPWH behavior. 17

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Heat Pump Water Heaters
Final

18

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Instantaneous Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (BTU/h) 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 185

Energy Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.98 0.82 0.98 0.82 0.98 0.82 0.98

Average Life (yrs) 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1050-

1150

1050-

1150

1050-

1150

1050-

1150

2150-

2250

1050-

1150

2150-

2250

1050-

1150

2150-

2250

1050-

1150

2150-

2250

Total Installed Cost ($) 1550-

1650

1550-

1650

1550-

1650

1550-

1650

2650-

2750

1550-

1650

2650-

2750

1550-

1650

2650-

2750

1550-

1650

2650-

2750

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85
Final

• Most instantaneous hot water heaters sold in 2010 are gas-fired and have an efficiency 

of 0.80 EF or above, which is also the qualifying criteria for ENERGY STAR

• Navien manufactures the highest efficiency gas-fired model currently available on the 

market, which has an EF of 0.98. This is achieved through the use of electronic ignition, 

powered direct venting, and through condensing the flue gases.

• All of the major water heater manufacturers now offer an instantaneous model, all of 

which are imported and private-labeled.

• The maintenance cost includes cleaning the water inlet filter and the heat exchanger of 

mineral deposits and replacing the water valve approximately once every five years for 

all energy efficiency levels of instantaneous water heaters.

• When replacing a storage water heater with an instantaneous water heater, there are 

significant additional costs to upsize the gas supply line to 3/4 inch from the typical 1⁄2 

inch and change the venting.

19

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Instantaneous Water Heaters
Final

20

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Solar Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard

Typical / ENERGY

STAR2 Typical2

Typical2Typical2

Typical Capacity (sq. ft.) 42-63 NA 42-63 42-63 42-63 42-63

Overall Efficiency (Solar 

Fraction) 0.5 NA 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Solar Energy Factor 2.5 NA 2.5 3 3.5 3.5

Average Life (yrs) 20 NA 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment Cost1($) 3300-

5200 NA

3300-

5200

3000-

4700

2600-

4100

2600-

4100

Total Installed Cost1($) 7600-

10000 NA 7600-10,000

7300-

9500

6900-

8900

6900-

8900

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 25 NA 25 25 25 25

1 Costs are for an indirect (active closed loop) system, including tank and backup heater. Smaller capacity/cost systems are 

typical for southern & western states (>2/3 of the current market). Higher capacity/cost systems are required in colder/cloudier 

regions.

2 ENERGY STAR requires OG-300 rating from SRCC. Most installations use SRCC rated collectors; a high efficiency option is not 

applicable.
Final

• ENERGY STAR requires an OG-300 rating from the Solar Rating and Certification Corporation 

(SRCC). Most installations use SRCC rated collectors, so there is no high efficiency category.

• Solar water heaters (SWHs) can be either active or passive. An active system uses an electric pump 

to circulate the heat transfer fluid; a passive system has no pump. Most solar water heaters in the 

United States are the active type.

• Solar water heaters are also characterized as open loop (also called "direct") or closed loop (also 

called "indirect"). An open-loop system circulates household (potable) water through the collector. 

A closed-loop system uses a heat transfer fluid (water or diluted antifreeze, for example) to collect 

heat and a heat exchanger to transfer the heat to household water.

• Solar fraction represents the fraction of total annual water heating energy met by the solar water 

heater. A backup water heating system is required with SWHs, and it is typically most economical 

to size the system to provide about 50% of water heating energy (solar fraction = 0.5).

• Solar Energy Factor (SEF) is defined by the SRCC as the useful energy delivered by the system 

divided by the total electrical and/or fossil fuel required for backup heating, pumping, and controls 

(the free solar energy input is neglected).

• Over 2/3 of the current SWH market is in the southern or western US (including Hawaii). The 

collector area of 42 ft2 would be typical for these areas. Colder areas of the US would require a larger 

collector (63 ft2).

• Installed costs are higher for colder areas where larger collectors are required. Costs also vary 

widely depending on collector quality, type of system, and site-specific characteristics.

21

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Solar Water Heaters
Final

22

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas-Fired Furnaces

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75

AFUE (%) 78 78 80 90 98 90 98 90 98 90 98

Electric Consumption (kWh/yr) 780 780 430 371 340 371 340 371 340 371 340

Average Life (yrs) 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 700-

800

700-

800

700-

800

1200-

2200

2200-

3200

1200-

2200

1700-

1800

1200-

2200

1700-

1800

1200-

2200

1700-

1800

Total Installed Cost ($) 2000-

3000

2000-

3000

2000-

3000

2500-

3000

3500-

4000

2500-

3000

3000-

3500

2500-

3000

3000-

3500

2500-

3000

3000-

3500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
Final

• The current standard for residential gas-fired furnaces is 78% AFUE; however, virtually all furnaces 

on the market have an AFUE of 80% or better.

• The minimum criteria for an ENERGY STAR qualified gas-fired furnace is 90% AFUE.

• York and Lennox manufacture the highest efficiency models currently available on the market, 

which have an efficiency of 98%.

• Condensing furnaces use an additional heat exchanger to extract additional energy from the flue 

gases; some models also have variable speed blowers, which decrease electrical energy consumption, 

and inducer fan systems, which usually have modulating gas valves to allow the furnace to 

modulate in very small increments, providing an AFUE boost of a few percent.

• Non-condensing AFUE levels for natural gas top out at around 81%; above this level, the potential 

for exhaust gas condensation increases. This condensate is corrosive and will breach the appliance or 

vent over time and hence allow flue gases into the structure.

• High-efficiency condensing furnaces typically have aluminized steel heat exchangers and low NOx

emissions, flexible installation, direct vent, and sealed combustion systems. The furnace does not use 

room air for combustion, but instead draws the combustion air directly from outdoors. 

• Depending on the location of the home, piping materials in use, and other considerations, 

condensing furnaces may need an acid neutralizer and/or lift pump for the condensate.

• Furnaces may contain PSC or electronically commutated motors (ECM) fan motors, though the type 

of motor has no impact on the AFUE measurement. It only impacts SEER/EER of the associated air 

conditioner.

23

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas-Fired Furnaces
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in gas-fired furnace shipments. 

24

Shipment Data » Residential Gas-Fired Furnaces

Furnaces, Warm Air, Gas

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011

2,000,000

2,200,000

2,400,000

2,600,000

2,800,000

3,000,000

3,200,000

3,400,000

3,600,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

25

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Oil-Fired Furnaces

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105

AFUE (%) 80 78 80 85 98 82 98 82 98 82 98

Electric Consumption (kWh/yr) 1001 1001 1001 944 900 950 900 950 900 950 900

Average Life (yrs) 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 2000-

2200

2000-

2200

2000-

2200

2200-

2800

3200-

3800

1900-

2100

3200-

3800

1800-

2000

3200-

3800

1775-

1975

3200-

3800

Total Installed Cost ($) 3000-

3500

3000-

3500

3000-

3500

3500-

4000

4500-

5000

2900-

3100

4500-

5000

2800-

3000

4500-

5000

2775-

2975

4500-

5000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120
Final

• The current NAECA Standard for oil-fired, forced air furnaces is 78% AFUE.

• The ENERGY STAR criteria for oil-fired furnaces is 85% AFUE.

• Since the latent heat content of oil is lower than that for either propane or natural gas, 

oil-fired appliances can typically operate at a higher AFUE rating than comparable gasfired appliances before condensation issues arise.

• There are condensing residential oil-fired furnaces on the market that operate at about 

95% AFUE. They have a tiny market share (<1%), due to market acceptance issues. 

• Condensate from condensing oil furnaces is typically even more corrosive than that of 

gas-fired systems due to the higher sulfur content in fuel oil. Hence, condensing oil 

furnaces also likely require the use of an acid neutralizer.

• Oil-fired furnaces, like gas-fired furnaces, achieve condensing conditions through the 

use of a secondary heat exchanger. Typically, these heat exchangers use a high-grade 

stainless steel (Al29-4C) as the primary heat exchange surface.

• Sooting is an issue for all oil-fired appliances, but secondary heat exchangers, with their 

narrow passages, are even more prone to be plugged by soot. Because of this, oil 

furnaces require frequent cleaning and maintenance.

26

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Oil-Fired Furnaces
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there was initially a 

decrease with a recent slight increase in oil-fired furnace shipments. 

27

Shipment Data » Residential Oil-Fired Furnaces

Furnaces, Warm Air, Oil

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

110,000

120,000

130,000

140,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

28

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Hydronic Heating Systems (Boilers)

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105

AFUE (%) 78 80 82 85 98 82 98 82 98 82 98

Average Life (yrs) 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1000-

1100

1000-

1800

1200-

2000

2100-

2500

2500-

3500

1200-

2000

2500-

3500

1200-

2000

2500-

3500

1200-

2000

2500-

3500

Total Installed Cost ($) 2800-

2900

2800-

3800

3000-

4000

4000-

4500

4500-

5500

3000-

4000

4500-

5500

3000-

4000

4500-

5500

3000-

4000

4500-

5500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130
Final

• The NAECA standard for hot-water residential gas boilers is 80% AFUE, while the 

ENERGY STAR standard for boilers is 85% AFUE. The highest available efficiency is 

98% AFUE. 

• Hydronic systems represent about 6% of all U.S. residential heating systems.

• The bulk of U.S. boiler sales is for non-condensing boilers, primarily manufactured in 

North America. These are typically high-mass systems whose heat exchangers are 

made of iron or steel and which have simple on/off burners.

• Due to incentives and market pressure, the U.S. boiler industry has been shifting 

towards also providing condensing boilers. Most of these boilers are private-labeled 

products sourced from Europe, where the hydronic market is much bigger and 

condensing appliances are much more common and/or required by law.

• Typically, condensing boilers are low-mass in construction with modulating burners, 

variable-speed inducer fan systems, sealed powered direct-vent combustion, multiple 

sensor technologies, and electronic ignition and control.

• Most value-added components for condensing boilers are sourced abroad, even when 

the condensing boiler is assembled in North America (i.e. heat exchanger, gas valve, 

burner, blower systems, sensors, and/or controls).

29

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Hydronic Heating Systems (Boilers)
Final

30

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Room Air Conditioners

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5

EER 8.7 9.8 9.8 10.8 11.5 11.0 11.5 11 13 11.2 13

Average Life (yrs) 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 190-

265

230-

300

230-

300

250-

320

400-

470

250-

320

400-

470

250-

320

480-

550

250-

320

480-

550

Total Installed Cost ($) 190-

265

230-

300

230-

300

250-

320

400-

470

250-

320

400-

470

250-

320

480-

550

250-

320

480-

550

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)* - - - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible
Final

• The residential room air conditioners analyzed in this study are window room air 

conditioners.

• The ENERGY STAR criteria requires an EER of 10.8, which also represents the most 

common efficiency on the market.

• According to the AHAM Directory of Certified Products, the most efficient product on 

the market has an EER of 11.5. Based on the DOE Building Technologies Program (BTP) 

R&D, it is anticipated that units may reach an EER of 13.0 by 2030.

• A wider range of costs reflects a variation in the marketplace

• It is assumed that the homeowners will install their own room air conditioner.

• Efficiency improvements are attained by:

— Higher efficiency compressor and fan motors, and

— An increased heat transfer area in the evaporator and condenser through the use of 

larger heat exchangers, finer fin spacing, micro-channel heat exchangers, and 

similar design options. 

• According to the ACEEE – AHAM Consensus Agreement, the Federal standards will 

be updated in 2014 from 9.8 to 11.0

31

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Room Air Conditioners
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in room air conditioner shipments. 

32

Shipment Data » Residential Room Air Conditioners

Air-Conditioners, Room

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

9,000,000

10,000,000

11,000,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

33

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Central Air Conditioners

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36

SEER 10.2 13 13.7 14.5 24 14 24 14.5 24 15 24

Average Life (yrs) 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1000-

1500

2000-

2500

2050-

3750

2500-

4200

6500-

13500

2500-

4200

6500-

13500

2500-

4200

6500-

13500

2750-

4250

6500-

13500

Total Installed Cost ($) 2500-

2700

2500-

3500

2550-

4750

3000-

5200

7000-

14500

3000-

5200

7000-

14500

3000-

5200

7000-

14500

3250-

5250

7000-

14500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120
Final

• The current NAECA minimum SEER is 13.0.

• The ENERGY STAR criteria is 14.5 SEER and 12 EER for split systems, which is close to 

the efficiency of the typical product on the market.

• Energy efficiency is driven by several factors:

— Heat exchanger (surface area, number of tube rows, tube & fin vs. micro-channel)

— Compressor choices (i.e., type of compressor and single-stage vs. two-stage vs. 

variable-speed operation)

— Fan motor choices (PSC vs. ECM fan motors on inside and outside)

— Control choices (i.e., piston, TXV, or EEV expansion devices)

As an example, above 16 SEER, units typically have very large heat exchangers, an ECM 

evaporator fan motor and a two-stage scroll compressor. 

• Variable-speed compressor technology typically leads to a significant SEER boost, but 

does not affect the EER. Manufacturers have used the SEER boost to develop high-SEER 

condensing units with smaller enclosures. 

• Efficiency levels beyond 21 SEER are made possible through combining existing large 

heat exchangers with variable-speed compressors, ECM fan motors, and EEVs.

34

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Central Air Conditioners
Final

35

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Air Source Heat Pumps

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36

HSPF (Heating) 6.8 8 8 8.2 10.7 8.1 10.8 8.3 10.9 8.5 11

SEER (Cooling) 10 14 14 14.5 22 14.2 23 15 24 15.3 25

Average Life (yrs) 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 3500-

4000

4000-

4500

4000-

4500

5500-

6000

7000-

7500

4700-

5200

7100-

7600

6000-

6500

7200-

7700

6200-

6700

7300-

7800

Total Installed Cost ($) 4500-

5500

4400-

5500

4400-

5500

5900-

7000

7400-

8500

5100-

6200

7500-

8600

6400-

7500

7800-

8700

6600-

7700

7700-

8800

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120
Final

• The NAECA minimum HSPF is 7.7 and the minimum SEER is 13.

• The ENERGY STAR criteria states a minimum HSPF of 8.2 and a minimum SEER of 

14.5.

• Heat pumps are generally sized to meet the cooling load of the house. When the heating 

load exceeds heat pump heating capacity, resistance heat is supplemented; however, 

when the heating capacity exceeds the heating load, the heat pump starts and stops 

more frequently, causing wear and tear on the components and an overall loss of 

efficiency. Multi-stage and/or variable-speed compressors can help, as does 

sophisticated refrigerant management.

• High efficiency cooling does not necessarily lead to high efficiency heating. The range of 

SEER/HSPF combinations is very broad.

36

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Air Source Heat Pumps
Final

37

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Ground Source Heat Pumps

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36

COP (Heating) 3 3.1 3.1 3.5 4.3 3.1 5 3.1 5 3.1 5

EER (Cooling) 12 13.4 13.4 16.1 23 13.4 30 13.4 30 13.4 30

Average Life (yrs) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 4000-

6000

4000-

6000

4000-

6000

5000-

7000

7000-

9000

4000-

6000

7000-

9000

4000-

6000

7000-

9000

4000-

6000

7000-

9000

Total Installed Cost ($) 9000-

11000

9000-

11000

9000-

11000

10000-

12000

12000-

14000

9000-

11000

12000-

14000

9000-

11000

12000-

14000

9000-

11000

12000-

14000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70
Final

• There are currently 19 ground source heat pump manufacturers in the US.

• Heating COP does not correlate with cooling EER (coefficient of determination, R2 = 

0.62). The highest efficiency GSHP is the Envision by WaterFurnace International, Inc. 

(30 EER & 5.0 COP).

• The ENERGY STAR® criteria for water-to-air ground source heat pumps are:

• The most common ground source heat pump is a closed-loop system in which water or 

an anti-freeze solution is circulated through plastic pipes buried underground. Open 

loop systems that employ ground water or surface water (e.g., open well, pond, lake) 

are used in some parts of the country, but water supply and water quality issues impose 

limitations on such applications.

• Installation cost is for a closed loop system and includes necessary accessories. The 

ground loop heat exchanger represents a majority of the installation cost.

• Electronically commutated motors (ECMs) improve performance on high end models.

38

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Ground Source Heat Pumps

Type

Tier 1 (12/1/2009) Tier 2 (1/1/2011) Tier 3 (1/1/2012)

Heating 

COP

Cooling 

EER

Heating 

COP

Cooling 

EER

Heating 

COP

Cooling 

EER

Closed Loop 3.3 14.1 3.5 16.1 3.6 17.1

Open Loop 3.6 16.2 3.8 18.2 4.1 21.1

Direct Expansion 3.5 15 3.6 16 3.6 16
Final

39

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas Heat Pumps

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard1 Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 60 60 60 60 60 60

Heating (GCOP) 1.3 NA 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3

Cooling (GCOP) 0.6 NA 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7

Annual Electric Use (kWh/yr) 2000 2000 2000 1500 1500 1500

Average Life (yrs) 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 6500-7500 6500-7500 6500-7500 6500-7500 6500-7500 6500-7500

Total Installed Cost ($) 8500-9500 8500-9500 8500-9500 8500-9500 8500-9500 8500-9500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 150 150 150 150 150 150

1NAECA does not cover residential gas heat pumps, but the CEC Title 24, Part 6 Section 112 does indicate minimum 

cooling efficiency for gas heat pumps.
Final

• Residential Gas Heat Pumps are not currently covered by NAECA. CEC Title 24, Part 6 

Section 112 does indicate cooling efficiency requirements for gas heat pumps, and two 

residential size units are listed there; Robur and Yazaki. Both units are 5-ton cooling 

capacity, a size typically associated with larger homes. The Yazaki unit offers cooling 

only and appears to be available only in Europe at the moment. Since only one product 

is available, no mid-level or high efficiency categories are included.

• The data represents air-source absorption heat pumps. Gas engine-driven vapor 

compression heat pumps are available in other parts of the world; York formerly offered 

the Triathlon gas engine-driven heat pump in the US. It is possible to couple either 

technology to the ground (ground source) rather than the atmosphere (air source).

• The absorption heat pump is a gas-fired, ammonia-water absorption cycle, combined 

with a high-efficiency low-pressure boiler integrated into one outdoor unit.

• The cooling efficiency of a gas-fired air source absorption heat pump is considerably 

lower than for an electric air source heat pump. Heating efficiency of an air source heat 

pump (electric or gas-fired absorption) decreases as outdoor temperature decreases; 

however the gas-fired absorption heat pump recovers waste heat from the combustion 

process to improve heating efficiency.

• Gas-fired cooling equipment currently comprises less than 1% of the residential air 

conditioning/heat pump market.

40

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas Heat Pumps
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in both air source and ground source heat pump shipments. 

41

Shipment Data » Residential Heat Pumps

Heat Pumps

1,200,000

1,300,000

1,400,000

1,500,000

1,600,000

1,700,000

1,800,000

1,900,000

2,000,000

2,100,000

2,200,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

42

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Refrigerator / Freezer

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Capacity (cu. ft.)* 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6

Energy Consumption (kWh/yr) 840 453 475 408 285 475 285 475 285 475 285

Average Life (yrs) 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 200-

400

400-

500

400-

500

425-

525

800-

1200

400-

500

800-

1200

400-

500

800-

1200

400-

500

800-

1200

Total Installed Cost ($) 200-

500

400-

600

400-

600

425-

625

800-

1300

400-

600

800-

1300

400-

600

800-

1300

400-

600

800-

1300

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)** 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

* Capacity is the nominal volume (not adjusted volume)

**Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible
Final

• The current NAECA standard for a typical top-mount refrigerator/freezers is 453 kWh/yr while the typical topmount refrigerator/freezer currently consumes approximately 475 kWh/yr. The best available top-mount 

refrigerator/freezer uses 285 kWh/yr.

• According to NAECA standards, for a refrigerator/freezer to qualify as ENERGY STAR, it must be at least 20% more 

energy efficient than the minimum Federal government standard. This equates to an annual energy use of 

approximately 408 kWh/yr.

• EISA 2007 requires that DOE publish a final rule no later than December 31, 2010 to determine whether to amend the 

standards in effect for products manufactured on or after January 1, 2014.

• A wider range of costs reflects a variation in the marketplace

• Improvement opportunities include:

— Higher efficiency and/or variable-speed compressor systems

— Larger heat exchangers

— Permanent-magnet fan systems (vs. SPM and PSC fan motors)

— Demand defrost systems

— Vacuum-insulated panels

— Thicker insulation (though at a loss of consumer utility)

— Better gasketing

— Refrigerants (Isobutane vs. R134a)

• All manufacturers are using at least some of these technologies in an attempt to reach ENERGY STAR qualification.

• According to the ACEEE – AHAM Consensus Agreement, the Joint Stakeholders agree to jointly petition DOE to 

initiate a rulemaking by January 1, 2012 to be completed by December 31, 2012 to revise the test procedure for 

refrigerators/freezers to incorporate measured ice maker energy use. Additionally, the Federal standards will be 

revised in 2014. For top-mount units without ice makers, the standard is represented by 7.35 AV+ 207.0 and for units 

with ice makers, the standard is represented by 7.65 AV+ 267.0, where AV is the adjusted volume.1

43

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Refrigerator / Freezer

1Adjusted Volume (AV) for refrigerators is calculated as follows: AV = (Fresh Volume) + 1.63 x (Freezer Volume). When the new rulemaking is published, 

the formula for AV will become: AV = (Fresh Volume) + 1.76 x (Freezer Volume).
Final

• This analysis focuses on top-mount refrigerator-freezers because they have the largest 

market share of all refrigerator-freezer product classes at 50.6%*. The market share for 

bottom- and side-mount refrigerator-freezers are as follows:

— Bottom-mount: 12.5%*

— Side-mount: 26.9%*

• When looking at all product classes, the energy consumption ranges from 

approximately 790 kWh/yr** to 230 kWh/yr, with the typical energy consumption at the 

current standard level.

• There are also significant differences in average equipment cost across the product 

classes:

— Top-mount: $400-$1500

— Bottom-mount: $800-$2800

— Side-mount: $1000-$1800

44

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Refrigerator / Freezer

* 2008 data from Technical Support Document

** A product operating at this level is less efficient than the current Federal standard

Sources: CEC, AHAM, Technical Support Document
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in standard residential refrigerator / freezer shipments. 

45

Shipment Data » Residential Refrigerator / Freezer

Refrigerators, Standard

8,000,000

8,500,000

9,000,000

9,500,000

10,000,000

10,500,000

11,000,000

11,500,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

46

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Natural Gas Cooktops

DATA

2005 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12

Cooking Efficiency (%) 38 39.9 42 39.9 42 39.9 42 39.9 42

Average Life (yrs) 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 225-300 250-350 375-450 250-350 375-450 250-350 375-450 250-350 375-450

Total Installed Cost ($) 275-350 300-400 425-500 300-400 425-500 300-400 425-500 300-400 425-500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)* - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible
Final

• Efficiency levels vary little for cooktops on the market.

• The typical model on the market has a cooking efficiency of 39.9% and the highest 

efficiency model on the market has a cooking efficiency of 42%.

47

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Natural Gas Cooktops
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in residential natural gas cooktop shipments. 

48

Shipment Data » Residential Natural Gas Cooktops

Cooktops, Gas

Data is unavailable for dates prior to 2007.

2,200,000

2,300,000

2,400,000

2,500,000

2,600,000

2,700,000

2,800,000

2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Exluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

49

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Clothes Washers

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (ft3) 3 3.2 3 2.7 3.5 2.7 3.5 2.7 3.5 2.7 3.5

Modified Energy Factor (ft3/kWh/cycle) 2 1.26 2 2 3.88 2.2 3.88 2.2 3.88 2.2 3.88

Average Life (yrs) 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15

Water Consumption (gal/cycle) 14 30 11 20 13 11 13 11 13 11 13

Hot Water Energy (kWh/cycle) 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

Machine Energy (kWh/cycle) 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Dryer Energy (kWh/cycle) 0.7 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 550-

700

360-

440

550-

700

550-

700

800-

900

550-

700

850-

950

550-

700

850-

950

550-

700

850-

950

Total Installed Cost ($) 650-

800

460-

540

650-

800

650-

800

900-

1000

650-

800

950-

1050

650-

800

950-

1050

650-

800

950-

1050

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)* - - - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible
Final

• This analysis examined front-loading residential clothes washers. It should be noted 

that there are high efficiency top-loading residential clothes washers on the market as 

well, though front-loaders are inherently more efficient than top-loaders.

• The current standard for standard-size front-loading and top-loading clothes washers is 

a modified energy factor (MEF) of 1.26. The ENERGY STAR criteria is 2 MEF; however, 

the most common front-loading models on the market exceed the ENERGY STAR 

criteria and have a MEF of 2.2.

• Only clothes washers with capacities of greater than 1.6 ft3 are eligible to earn ENERGY 

STAR.

• Energy efficiency improvement opportunities include:

— Higher efficiency motors and higher spin speeds

— Better load sensing (soiling and size and type of load)

— Better controls / greater number of wash programs

• The annual maintenance cost for residential clothes washers is negligible.

• According to the ACEEE – AHAM Consensus Agreement, the Federal standards frontloading residential clothes washers will be updated in 2015 (and will remain current 

through the 2018 standard updates) to a MEF of 2.2 and a water factor (WF) of 4.5

50

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Clothes Washers
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in automatic residential clothes washer shipments. 

51

Shipment Data » Residential Clothes Washers

Washers, Automatic

7,000,000

7,500,000

8,000,000

8,500,000

9,000,000

9,500,000

10,000,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

52

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Clothes Dryers

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical MidLevel High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (ft3) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

EF (lb/kWh)

electric:

3.01

gas:

2.67

electric:

3.01

gas:

2.67

electric:

3.1

gas:

2.75

gas:

2.85

electric:

3.16

gas:

3.02

electric:

3.17

gas:

2.81

electric:

4.51

gas: 3.02

electric:

3.17

gas:

2.81

electric:

4.51

gas:

3.02

electric:

3.17

gas:

2.81

electric:

4.51

gas:

3.02

Average Life (yrs) 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19

Retail Equipment Cost ($)

electric:

400-500

gas:

450-550 

electric:

400-500

gas:

450-550 

electric:

450-550

gas:

550-600

gas:

650-750

electric:

550-650

gas:

850-950

electric:

450-550

gas:

550-600

electric:

650-750

gas:

850-950

electric:

450-550

gas:

550-600

electric:

650-750

gas:

850-950

electric:

450-550

gas:

550-600

electric:

650-750

gas:

850-950

Total Installed Cost ($)

electric:

500-600

gas:

600-700

electric:

500-600

gas:

600-700

electric:

675-775

gas:

700-800

gas:

800-900

electric:

700-800

gas:

950-1050

electric:

675-775

gas:

700-800

electric:

900-1000

gas:

950-1050

electric:

675-775

gas:

700-800

electric:

900-1000

gas:

950-1050

electric:

675-775

gas:

700-800

electric:

900-1000

gas:

950-1050

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)* - - - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible
Final

• The test procedure for residential clothes dryers was recently amended to include a new efficiency metric, 

combined energy factor (CEF), which adds a measure of standby/off-mode power. Although EF and CEF 

are both expressed in lbs/kWh of energy use, they can not be compared side-by-side since they are 

calculated differently. 

• There are both gas and electric models of clothes dryers on the market:

— For gas clothes dryers, the standard efficiency is 2.67 lb/kWh (CEF = 3.14 lb/kWh)

— For electric clothes dryers, the standard efficiency is 3.01 lb/kWh (CEF = 3.55 lb/kWh)

• Improvement opportunities include:

— Multi-step or modulating heat

— Higher efficiency drum motors

— Inlet air pre-heat

— Heat pump (for electric clothes dryers): heat pump residential clothes dryers are currently available in 

Europe and are anticipated to make it to the US market by 2020.

— Better control systems for cycle termination (not reflected per the current test procedure, however)

• No ENERGY STAR incentives currently exist to motivate manufacturers to adapt to existing energy 

efficiency opportunities. This is an especially important factor for heat pumps due to the high initial cost 

and the potential reliability issues. 

• The high electric clothes dryer EF value of 4.51 represents a product with heat pump technology, which is 

planned to enter the market around 2020.

• According to the ACEEE – AHAM Consensus Agreement, the Federal standards will be revised in 2015.

— For gas clothes dryers, the standard efficiency will be 2.81 lb/kWh (CEF = 3.30 lb/kWh)

— For electric clothes dryers, the standard efficiency will be 3.17 lb/kWh (CEF = 3.73 lb/kWh)

53

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Clothes Dryers
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in residential clothes dryer shipments.

54

Shipment Data » Residential Clothes Dryers

Dryers, Electric Dryers, Gas

5,000,000

5,200,000

5,400,000

5,600,000

5,800,000

6,000,000

6,200,000

6,400,000

6,600,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

1,200,000

1,300,000

1,400,000

1,500,000

1,600,000

1,700,000

1,800,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics Monthly: January 2011
Final

55

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Dishwashers

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Annual Use (kWh/yr) 720 355 355 324 190 307 190 307 190 307 190

Efficiency (cycle/kWh) 0.30 0.61 0.61 0.66 1.13 0.70 1.13 0.70 1.13 0.70 1.13

Annual Hot Water Energy Use (kWh/yr) 286 261 261 185 100 180 100 180 100 180 100

Average Life (yrs) 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 200-

300

200-

300

200-

300

300-

1200 900 200-300 900 200-300 900 200-300 900

Total Installed Cost ($) 300-

400

300-

400

300-

400

400-

1300 1200 300-400 1200 300-400 1200 300-400 1200

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) - - - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible
Final

• The current standard was established by the EISA 2007 amendments to EPCA and stipulates a 

maximum of 355 kWh/yr of energy use and 6.5 gal/cycle of water use for standard sized 

dishwashers, which typically handle eight place settings plus six serving pieces.

• The current ENERGY STAR qualifying criteria require a maximum of 324 kWh/yr of energy use and 

5.8 gal/cycle of water use for standard sized dishwashers.

• We are assuming that a typical residential dishwasher completes 215 cycles/year

• The most efficient dishwasher has an annual energy use of 190 kWh/yr, but at a high retail price and 

very small market share. Typical high efficiency units have an EF closer to the current standard.

• Dishwasher annual energy use is based on the U.S. DOE test procedure. This procedure is based on 

total energy use - including motor, dryer, booster heater (if present), and for hot water required from 

the water heater. The previous U.S. DOE test procedure was based on a usage estimate of 322 cycles 

per year, but as of September 2003 a new test procedure of 215 cycles per year was implemented.

• Efficiency improvement opportunities include:

— Better soil sensing in the water, the filter, and the controls to make use of that 

— Water distribution (small pipes, fine filter, small sump, alternating water use)

— Inline water heater (to minimize sump volume)

— High-efficiency, variable-speed pump motor

— Vent assembly to help drying of dishes

• According to the ACEEE – AHAM Consensus Agreement, the Federal standards will be revised in 

2013. The updated standard stipulates a maximum of 307 kwh/year and 5.0 gal/cycle of water use.

56

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Dishwashers
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in residential dishwasher shipments.

57

Shipment Data » Residential Dishwashers

Dishwashers, Built-In

5,000,000

5,500,000

6,000,000

6,500,000

7,000,000

7,500,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

58

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Furnaces

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

Combustion Efficiency (%)** 76 77 80 80 82 80 90 80 91 80 93

Average Life (yrs) 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1800-

2000

2000-

2400

2700-

2900

2700-

2900

2900-

3200

2700-

2900

3360-

3660

2700-

2900

3830-

4130

2700-

2900

4060-

4360

Total Installed Cost ($) 2800-

3000

3000-

3500

3050-

3275

3050-

3275

3275-

3625

3050-

3275

3735-

4035

3050-

3275

4205-

4505

3050-

3275

4435-

4735

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

*Capacity is input

** Gas furnaces less than 225,000 Btu/hr are rated by AFUE. Furnaces larger than 225,000 Btu/hr must been an 80% combustion efficiency.
Final

• EPACT standard for a gas-fired furnace is 80% combustion efficiency at maximum rated 

capacity.

• According to the U.S. DOE, combustion efficiency is a measure of how effectively the 

heat content of a fuel is transferred into usable heat.

• Commercial furnace efficiency ranges are as wide as those for residential and the 

technology options are similar (though usually scaled up).

• Besides scale, commercial units can differ in terms of the control system (i.e. integration 

with a Building Management System, twinning, or other staging strategies) and they 

may also use a heat recovery system to pre-heat inlet air.

• The maintenance cost is based on two cleanings per year.

59

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Furnaces
Final

60

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Furnaces

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

Thermal Efficiency (%) 81 81 81 82 82 82 82

Average Life (yrs) 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 3000-3600 3000-3600 3000-3600 3600-3700 3600-3700 3600-3700 3600-3700

Total Installed Cost ($) 3575-4125 3575-4125 3575-4125 4125-4225 4125-4225 4125-4225 4125-4225

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

* Capacity is input
Final

• Commercial oil-fired furnaces with a capacity of 225,000 BTU/h or more must meet a 

thermal efficiency standard of 81% as stipulated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. The 

ASHRAE standard also mandates that furnaces that are not within the conditioned 

space must not have jacket losses that exceed 0.75% of the input rating.

• According to the U.S. DOE, thermal efficiency is interpreted as what is commonly 

known as “combustion efficiency” in other contexts, i.e., 100 percent minus percent flue 

loss

• The maintenance cost is based on two cleanings per year.

61

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Furnaces
Final

62

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Boilers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kW)* 165 165 165 165 165 165

Efficiency (%) 98 98 98 98 98 98

Average Life (yrs) 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 6000-7000 6000-7000 6000-7000 6000-7000 6000-7000 6000-7000

Total Installed Cost ($) 7500-9000 7500-9000 7500-9000 7500-9000 7500-9000 7500-9000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 100-150 100-150 100-150 100-150 100-150 100-150

* Capacity is output
Final

• There are currently no Federal standards associated with electric boilers.

• The costs shown are for one 165kW unit, which would equate to a steady load of 

approximately 550,000 Btu/hr.

• Service life is determined mainly by water quality. Water conditioning (e.g., filters, 

softeners, de-alkizers, chemical feeders) may be necessary for a given application. 

• Annual maintenance in a typical application would include draining the unit for 

removal of any accumulated scale or sludge buildup.

• Minor end-use inefficiencies for electric boilers result from heat loss through the boiler 

(jacket losses).

63

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Boilers
Final

64

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Boilers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical MidRange High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

Combustion Efficiency (%) 76 77 80 80 90 98 80 98 82 98 82 98

Average Life (yrs) 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 5000-

6000

7000-

9000

9000-

11000

9000-

11000

13500-

16500

22500-

27500

13500-

16500

22500-

27500

13500-

16500

22500-

27500

13500-

16500

22500-

27500

Total Installed Cost ($) 12000-

13000

14000-

16000

16000-

18000

16000-

18000

20500-

23500

29500-

34500

20500-

23500

29500-

34500

20500-

23500

29500-

34500

20500-

23500

29500-

34500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450

* Capacity is output
Final

• The current requirement for gas-fired boilers is a minimum combustion efficiency of 

80% at the maximum rated capacity.

• Similar technologies to the those used in the residential market can be leveraged in the 

commercial arena. The higher efficiency units typically include electronic ignition, 

power burners, and improved heat exchangers. They may even condense and/or preheat incoming air.

• Since the last ASHRAE standard was published, ASHRAE has changed the metric for 

stating the efficiency of most classes of commercial boilers, excluding large oil hot water 

and large gas hot water boilers. Federal standards express efficiency in terms of 

combustion efficiency while efficiency levels in ASHRAE 90.1-2007 are expressed in 

terms of thermal efficiency. The thermal efficiency descriptor, as used in Standard 90.1-

2007, accounts for jacket losses as well as flue losses, while combustion efficiency only 

accounts for flue losses.

• Small, gas-fired, hot water, commercial packaged boilers (input capacity between 

300,000 and 2,500,000 Btu/hr) are the largest commercial packaged boiler equipment 

class in the market.

65

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Boilers
Final

66

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Boilers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200

Thermal Efficiency (%) 79 80 83 83.5 98 83.5 98 83.5 98 83.5 98

Average Life (yrs) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 11000-

12000

11000-

12000

12300-

13400

12300-

13400

24000-

26000

12300-

13400

24000-

26000

12300-

13400

24000-

26000

12300-

13400

24000-

26000

Total Installed Cost ($) 15000-

16000

15000-

16000

16600-

17700

16600-

17700

30000-

35000

16600-

17700

30000-

35000

16600-

17700

30000-

35000

16600-

17700

30000-

35000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

* Capacity is output
Final

• Commercial oil-fired boilers must meet a thermal efficiency standard of 83%.

• The higher efficiency units typically include improved heat exchangers, and multi-step 

or variable-output power burners.

• Since the last ASHRAE standard was published, ASHRAE has changed the metric for 

stating the efficiency of commercial boilers. Federal standards expresses efficiency in 

terms of combustion efficiency while efficiency levels in ASHRAE 90.1-2007 are 

expressed in terms of thermal efficiency. The thermal efficiency descriptor, as used in 

Standard 90.1-2007, accounts for jacket losses as well as flue losses, while combustion 

efficiency only accounts for flue losses.

67

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Boilers
Final

68

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Chillers1

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base:

Absorption

Installed

Base:

Engine -

Driven

Installed

Base:

Absorption

Installed

Base:

Engine -

Driven

AbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDriven

Typical Capacity 

(tons)* 150-1500 400 150-1500 400 150-1500 400 150-1500 400 150-1500 400 150-1500 400

COP 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.1 1.8 1.2 1.8 1.3 1.8 1.3 1.8

Average Life (yrs) 23 25 23 25 23 25 23 25 23 25 23 25

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton)

600-

750

700-

800

600-

750

700-

800

600-

750

700-

800

600-

750

700-

800

600-

750

700-

800

600-

750

700-

800

Total Installed 

Cost ($/ton)

750-

900

850-

950

750-

900

850-

950

750-

900

850-

950

750-

900

850-

950

750-

900

850-

950

750-

900

850-

950

Annual 

Maintenance Cost 

($/ton)

15-30 35-45 15-30 35-45 15-30 35-45 15-30 35-45 15-30 35-45 15-30 35-45

1This analysis assumes a water-cooled chiller; both gas-fired chiller types (absorption and engine-driven) are shown.

* Capacity is output
Final

• Gas-fired chillers are available as either air-cooled (~25-50 tons) or water-cooled (150+ 

tons). This analysis includes only water-cooled chillers. Two direct-fired gas chiller 

technologies are in the market; absorption and engine-driven.

• Direct gas firing provides high enough temperatures to operate double effect absorption 

chillers, which operate at a 50-60% higher COP than single effect absorption chillers. 

Triple effect absorption chillers are expected to boost cooling COP another 50% beyond 

that of a double effect chiller. Prototype direct-fired triple effect absorption chillers 

have been tested by York and Trane, but are not commercially available. Some 

absorption chillers can be operated in reverse to provide heating; these are referred to as 

chiller/heaters.

• Gas-fired engine-driven chillers pair conventional vapor compression technologies 

(typically screw or centrifugal compressors) with natural gas powered reciprocating 

engines. Gas-fired engine-driven chillers exhibit higher peak cooling COP than 

absorbers, and engine modulation results in even better part load performance. Future 

efficiency improvements for engine driven chillers are not anticipated. Engine driven 

chillers allow the opportunity to recover waste heat on site for useful purposes. 

69

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Chillers
Final

70

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Centrifugal Chillers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical2 Mid3 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(tons)* 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350

Efficiency [fullload/IPLV] (kW/ton1

)

0.70 / 

0.67

0.70 / 

0.67

0.58 / 

0.55

0.56 / 

0.45

0.48 / 

0.39

0.56 / 

0.45

0.46 / 

0.36

0.56 / 

0.45

0.46 / 

0.36

0.56 / 

0.45

0.46 / 

0.36

COP [full-load/IPLV] 1 5.0 / 

5.2

5.0 / 

5.2

6.1 / 

6.4

6.3 / 

7.8

7.3 / 

9.0

6.3 / 

7.8

7.6 / 

9.7

6.3 / 

7.8

7.6 / 

9.7

6.3 / 

7.8

7.6 / 

9.7

Average Life (yrs) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton)

250-

350

250-

350

250-

350

300-

400

400-

500

300-

400

400-

500

300-

400

400-

500

300-

400

400-

500

Total Installed Cost 

($/ton)

300-

450

300-

450

300-

450

350-

500

450-

600

350-

500

450-

600

350-

500

450-

600

350-

500

450-

600

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($/ton) 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30

1COP and kW/ton efficiencies listed are for full load rated conditions as well as integrated part load value (IPLV), which is more indicative of 

annual performance.

22010 typical efficiency based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007.

32010 mid efficiency based on FEMP recommendations.

* Capacity is output
Final

• For most chiller applications the seasonal performance (represented by the integrated 

part-load value; IPLV) is more indicative of performance than the full-load performance 

at rated conditions. The IPLV does not necessarily correlate well to the full-load 

efficiency, so both efficiency parameters are listed in the comparison table.

• The ASHRAE 90.1-2007 minimum efficiency requirements for centrifugal chillers 

greater than 300 tons capacity are the same as for 90.1-2004 (COP=6.10 full-load; 

COP=6.40 IPLV). 

• The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) recommends a full -load efficiency 

of 0.56 or less kW/ton for base-loaded chillers or an integrated part-load value efficiency 

of 0.45 kW/ton for chillers with seasonally variable loads.

• The highest efficiency centrifugal chillers incorporate some of the following:

— Variable speed compressors

— greater heat exchanger surface areas; enhanced tube configurations (counterflow)

— Optimized fluid flow velocities

— High efficiency electric motors

— Improved turbomachinery design, resulting in higher compressor efficiency

— Better piping and valving, including electronic expansion valves

— Evaporative condenser for the heat rejection equipment

• Installed costs vary widely depending on equipment needed for installation (e .g. crane) 

and size of system. This is a mature market with centrifugal chillers representing 75% of 

commercial chiller sales larger than 200 tons.

71

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Centrifugal Chillers
Final

72

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reciprocating Chillers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical2 Mid3 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(tons)*

100-

200

100-

200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200

Efficiency [fullload/IPLV] (kW/ton1

)

1.26 / 

1.15

1.26 / 

1.15

1.26 / 

1.15

1.23 / 

0.90

1.00 / 

0.80

1.23 / 

0.90

1.00 / 

0.80

1.23 / 

0.90

1.00 / 

0.80

1.23 / 

0.90

1.00 / 

0.80

COP [full-load/IPLV] 1 2.80 / 

3.05

2.80 / 

3.05

2.80 / 

3.05

2.86 / 

3.91

3.52 / 

4.40

2.86 / 

3.91

3.52 / 

4.40

2.86 / 

3.91

3.52 / 

4.40

2.86 / 

3.91

3.52 / 

4.40

Average Life (yrs) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton)

400-

500

400-

500 400-500 450-550 500-600 450-550 500-600 450-550 500-600 450-550 500-600

Total Installed Cost 

($/ton)

475-

600

475-

600 475-600 525-650 575-700 525-650 575-700 525-650 575-700 525-650 575-700

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($/ton) 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40

1COP and kW/ton efficiencies listed are for full load rated conditions as well as integrated part load value (IPLV), which is more indicative of annual 

performance.

22010 typical efficiency based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007.

32010 mid efficiency based on FEMP recommendations.

* Capacity is output
Final

• For most chiller applications the seasonal performance (represented by the integrated 

part-load value; IPLV) is more indicative of performance than the full-load performance 

at rated conditions. The IPLV does not necessarily correlate well to the full-load 

efficiency, so both efficiency parameters are listed in the comparison table.

• Reciprocating chillers are most cost effective for small loads. Reciprocating chiller 

market share continues to be supplanted by screw chiller market share.

• Reciprocating chillers can be used in either air-cooled or water cooled applications. 

Reciprocating chillers shown in the data are air-cooled. Air-cooled chillers are less 

efficient than the water-cooled models. Listed efficiencies include matched condensers 

and their associated energy use (as required for compliance with ASHRAE 90.1-2010).

• The ASHRAE 90.1-2007 minimum efficiency requirements for air-cooled reciprocating 

chillers are the same as for 90.1-2004 (COP=2.80 full-load; COP=3.05 IPLV). 

• The most recent Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) recommendations for 

reciprocating chillers (published 11/03) include a full -load efficiency of 1.23 or less 

kW/ton for base-loaded chillers or an integrated part-load value efficiency of 0.90 

kW/ton for chillers with seasonally variable loads.

• The highest efficiency reciprocating chillers incorporate some of the following:

— Multiple compressors for staged capacity control

— Improved heat-exchangers

73

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reciprocating Chillers
Final

74

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Screw Chillers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical2 Mid3 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(tons) 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300

Efficiency [fullload/IPLV] 

(kW/ton1)

1.26 / 

1.15

1.26 / 

1.15

1.26 / 

1.15

1.22 / 

0.94

0.94 / 

0.79

1.22 / 

0.94

0.94 / 

0.79

1.22 / 

0.94

0.94 / 

0.79

1.22 / 

0.94

0.94 / 

0.79

COP [fullload/IPLV] 12.80 / 

3.05

2.80 / 

3.05

2.80 / 

3.05

2.88 / 

3.74

3.02 / 

4.45

2.88 / 

3.74

3.02 / 

4.45

2.88 / 

3.74

3.02 / 

4.45

2.88 / 

3.74

3.02 / 

4.45

Average Life (yrs) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton) 300-400 300-400 300-400 350-450 400-500 350-450 400-500 350-450 400-500 350-450 400-500

Total Installed 

Cost ($/ton) 375-500 375-500 375-500 400-525 450-575 400-525 450-575 400-525 450-575 400-525 450-575

Annual 

Maintenance Cost 

($/ton)

10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50

1COP and kW/ton efficiencies listed are for full load rated conditions as well as integrated part load value (IPLV), which is more indicative of annual 

performance.

22010 typical efficiency based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007.

32010 mid efficiency based on FEMP recommendations.

* Capacity is output
Final

• For most chiller applications the seasonal performance (represented by the integrated 

part-load value; IPLV) is more indicative of performance than the full-load performance 

at rated conditions. The IPLV does not necessarily correlate well to the full-load 

efficiency, so both efficiency parameters are listed in the comparison table.

• Screw chillers are available from ~50-1100 tons but are most cost effective for small 

(<300 tons) loads. Screw chillers dominate the current market for small to mid-size 

chillers.

• Screw chillers can be used in either air-cooled or water cooled applications. Screw 

chillers shown in the data are air-cooled. Air-cooled chillers are less efficient than the 

water-cooled models. Listed efficiencies include matched condensers and their 

associated energy use (as required for compliance with ASHRAE 90.1-2010).

• The ASHRAE 90.1-2007 minimum efficiency requirements for air-cooled screw chillers 

are the same as for 90.1-2004 (COP=2.80 full-load; COP=3.05 IPLV). 

• The most recent Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) recommendations for 

150+ ton screw chillers (published 12/10) include a full -load efficiency of 1.22 or less 

kW/ton for base-loaded chillers or an integrated part-load value efficiency of 0.94 

kW/ton for chillers with seasonally variable loads. 

• The highest efficiency screw chillers incorporate some of the following:

— Variable speed compressors and/or multiple compressors

— Improved heat-exchangers

75

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Screw Chillers
Final

76

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Scroll Chillers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (tons) 20-140 20-140 20-140 20-140 20-140 20-140

Efficiency [full-load/IPLV] (kW/ton1)

1.26 / 

1.15

1.26 / 

1.15 1.19/0.80 1.19/0.80 1.19/0.80 1.19/0.80

COP [full-load/IPLV] 1 2.80 / 

3.05

2.80 / 

3.05 2.96/4.40 2.96/4.40 2.96/4.40 2.96/4.40

Average Life (yrs) 20 20 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment Cost ($/ton) 300-400 300-400 350-450 350-450 350-450 350-450

Total Installed Cost ($/ton) 400-500 400-500 450-550 450-550 450-550 450-550

Annual Maintenance Cost ($/ton) 35-50 35-50 35-50 35-50 35-50 35-50

1COP and kW/ton efficiencies listed are for full load rated conditions as well as integrated part load value (IPLV), which is 

more indicative of annual performance.

* Capacity is output
Final

• For most chiller applications the seasonal performance (represented by the integrated 

part-load value; IPLV) is more indicative of performance than the full-load performance 

at rated conditions. The IPLV does not necessarily correlate well to the full-load 

efficiency, so both efficiency parameters are listed in the comparison table.

• Scroll chillers can be used in either air-cooled or water cooled applications. Scroll 

chillers shown in the data are air-cooled, which is most common. Air-cooled chillers are 

less efficient than the water-cooled models. Listed efficiencies include matched 

condensers and their associated energy use (as required for compliance with ASHRAE 

90.1-2010).

• The most recent Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) recommendations for 

<150 ton scroll chillers (published 12/10) include a full -load efficiency of 1.19 or less 

kW/ton for base-loaded chillers or an integrated part-load value efficiency of 0.80 

kW/ton for chillers with seasonally variable loads. 

• The highest efficiency screw chillers incorporate some of the following:

— Multiple compressors for staged capacity control

— Improved heat-exchangers

77

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Scroll Chillers
Final

78

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Rooftop Air Conditioners

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical MidRange High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90

Efficiency (EER) 9.2 10.1 11.2 11.2 12 13.9 11.5 13.9 11.5 13.9 11.5 13.9

Average Life (yrs) 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 3300-

4500

4000-

5100

5500-

6500

5500-

6500

7000-

8000

20000-

21000

5500-

6500

20000-

21000

5500-

6500

20000-

21000

5500-

6500

20000-

21000

Total Installed Cost ($) 5000-

6200

5700-

7000

7500-

8500

7500-

8500

9000-

10000

22000-

24000

7500-

8500

22000-

24000

7500-

8500

22000-

24000

7500-

8500

22000-

24000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

* Capacity is input
Final

• Effective January 1, 2010, the minimum efficiency standards for commercial rooftop air 

conditioners are as follows:

• Above, two EERs are listed. The first refers to systems with electric resistance heat or no 

heating, and the second refers to systems with all other heating system types that are 

integrated into the unitary equipment.

• This analysis examined 90,000 BTU/h (7.5 ton), cooling only units.

• The high efficiency unit includes a variable capacity digital scroll compressor, which 

saves energy during off-design hours, approximately 17% annual energy savings over a 

typical unit.

79

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Rooftop Air Conditioners

Air-Cooled Products Efficiency Standards

≥ 65 - < 135 kBtu/h 11.2/11.0 EER

≥ 135 - < 240 kBtu/h 11.0/10.8 EER
Final

80

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Engine-Driven Rooftop Air 

Conditioners

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (tons) 25 25 11 11 11 11

Heating COP NA NA 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4

Cooling COP 0.7 0.7 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1

Average Life (yrs) 30 30 30 30 30 30

Retail Equipment Cost 

($/ton) 775-835 775-835 3200-3300 2000-2100 1000-1100 1000-1100

Total Installed Cost ($/ton) 1200-1300 1200-1300 3700-3800 2500-2600 1500-1600 1500-1600

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 55 55 55 55 55 55

* Capacity is output
Final

• The only gas-fired engine-driven rooftop unit currently available in the US market is by 

Nextaire (an Aisin Seiki product line). It is an 11 ton heat pump with dual scroll 

compressors, variable refrigerant flow, and a variable speed supply fan. Engine coolant 

heat recovery improves the heating mode COP. This heat pump was introduced in 

2010.

• There are currently no Federal requirements on gas-fired engine-driven rooftop air 

conditioners or heat pumps.

• Annual sales of the engine-driven rooftop heat pump are currently estimated at less 

than 5,000 units per year. Nextaire expects the cost of their 11-ton unit to drop to 

approximately $12,000 within the next 15 years as a result of increasing sales volume 

which will allow more production automation and reduced manufacturing cost.

81

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Engine-Driven Rooftop Air 

Conditioners
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in unitary (rooftop) air conditioner shipments. 

82

Shipment Data » Commercial Rooftop Air Conditioners

Air-Conditioners, Unitary

This data includes both residential and commercial units. It should be noted that the vast 

majority of rooftop air conditioners are residential, not commercial. 

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

4,500,000

5,000,000

5,500,000

6,000,000

6,500,000

7,000,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

83

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Rooftop Heat Pumps

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90

Efficiency (EER) 9.3 9.8 11.0/

10.8** 11.0 12.0 11 12 11 12 11 12

COP (Heating) 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4

Average Life (yrs) 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 3500-

4500

4000-

5000

5000-

6000

5000-

6000

5500-

6500

5000-

6000

5500-

6500

5000-

6000

5500-

6500

5000-

6000

5500-

6500

Total Installed Cost ($) 5000-

6500

6000-

7100

6500-

7300

6500-

7300

7900-

9500

6500-

7300

7900-

9500

6500-

7300

7900-

9500

6500-

7300

7900-

9500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

* Capacity is output

** The first EER refers to systems with electric resistance heat or no heating, and the second refers to systems with all other heating system types 

that are integrated into the unitary equipment.
Final

• Effective January 1, 2010, the minimum efficiency standards for commercial rooftop 

heat pumps are as follows:

• Above, two EERs are listed. The first refers to systems with electric resistance heat or no 

heating, and the second refers to systems with all other heating system types that are 

integrated into the unitary equipment.

84

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Rooftop Heat Pumps

Air-Cooled Products Efficiency Standards

≥ 65 - < 135 kBtu/h 11.0./10.8 EER

3.3 COP @470F

≥ 135 - < 240 kBtu/h 10.6/10.4 EER

3.2 COP @470F
Final

85

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Ground Source Heat Pumps

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100

COP (Heating) 3.4 3.5 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9

EER (Cooling) 13.8 14 14 27.8 14 27.8 14 27.8 14 27.8

Average Life (yrs) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 7000-

8000

7000-

8000

7000-

8000

10000-

12000

7000-

8000

10000-

12000

7000-

8000

10000-

12000

7000-

8000

10000-

12000

Total Installed Cost ($) 14000-

15000

14000-

15000

14000-

15000

17000-

20000

14000-

15000

17000-

20000

14000-

15000

17000-

20000

14000-

15000

17000-

20000

Annual Maintenance Cost (¢/sqft) 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15

* Capacity is output
Final

• There is no Federal standard for commercial ground source heat pumps.

• Commercial design applications vary in size, style, and configuration.

• The most common ground source heat pump is a closed-loop system in which water or 

an anti-freeze solution is circulated through plastic pipes buried underground. Openloop systems employ groundwater, or surface water such as a pond or lake, but water 

supply and water quality issues impose limitations on such applications.

• Input and output ratios (i.e., efficiencies) of a given machine change with different 

entering water temperatures, air flow rates, water flow rates, and relative humidity.

• Useful life is based on the expected life of the compressor. Replacement cost would be 

less than installed cost, since the ground loop is already in place and would have a 

useful life much longer than the compressor. A closed-loop system can last up to 50 

years.

• There is an expectation that large, central facilities are used in commercial buildings. 

This is not always the case. Distributed, small units with zonal ducting and controls are 

almost always more efficient and less expensive.

86

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Ground Source Heat Pumps
Final

87

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Resistance Heaters

DATA

2010 2020 2030 2035

Small Large Small Large Small Large Small Large

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 17 170 17 170 17 170 17 170

Efficiency (%) 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98

Average Life (yrs) 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 500-

700

3400-

3800

500-

700

3400-

3800

500-

700

3400-

3800

500-

700

3400-

3800

Total Installed Cost ($) 600-

800

3500-

3900

600-

800

3500-

3900

600-

800

3500-

3900

600-

800

3500-

3900

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) ** - - - - - - - -

* Capacity is output

** Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible
Final

• This analysis examined electric unit heaters

• Electric unit heaters range in capacity from 14 to 170 kBtu/hr, with 17 and 170 kBtu/hr 

being the most typical units on the market

• Electric resistance heaters are considered 100% efficient because there is no heat loss 

through ducts or combustion. For this analysis, the efficiency is 98% to account for IR 

losses and fan inefficiency.

• Installation time and costs are estimated to be minimal

88

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Resistance Heaters
Final

89

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Typical Input Capacity (kBTU/h) 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200

Thermal Efficiency (%) 77 78 80 80 96 80 96 80 96 80 96

Average Life (yrs) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 2800-

4200

3000-

4500

3500-

4500

3500-

4500

5000-

6500

3500-

4500

5000-

6500

3500-

4500

5000-

6500

3500-

4500

5000-

6500

Total Installed Cost ($) 3200-

4700

3500-

5000

4000-

5000

4000-

5000

5500-

7000

4000-

5000

5500-

7000

4000-

5000

5500-

7000

4000-

5000

5500-

7000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200
Final

• Commercial gas-fired water heaters with a capacity of 75,000 BTU/h or more must meet 

a thermal efficiency standard of 80% as stipulated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. 

• Baseline units are constructed quite similarly to residential units, though typically at 

higher storage and/or input capacities. 

• High-efficiency, integrated commercial storage water heaters feature condensing heat 

exchangers , consisting of either stainless or enameled tubing and an inducer fan system 

or power burner. Other designs incorporate an external heating module with a storage 

tank assembly. Either design approach can yield a condensing appliance. 

• Maintenance for water heaters consists of sediment and scale removal once or twice per 

year. Estimated cost for a gas water heater would be $100 per year for one cleaning 

performed by a plumber.

90

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Water Heaters
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in commercial gas-fired water heater shipments. 

91

Shipment Data » Commercial Gas-Fired Water Heaters

Commercial Water Heaters, Gas

70,000

75,000

80,000

85,000

90,000

95,000

100,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

92

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Resistance Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (gal) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

Typical Capacity (kW) 45 45 45 45 45 45 45

Thermal Efficiency (%) 98 98 98 98 98 98 98

Average Life (yrs) 14 14 14 14 14 14 14

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 3400-5300 3400-5300 3400-5300 3400-5300 3400-5300 3400-5300 3400-5300

Total Installed Cost ($) 4000-6000 4000-6000 4000-6000 4000-6000 4000-6000 4000-6000 4000-6000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
Final

• The EPACT standard will remain in effect for electric water heaters.

93

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Resistance Water Heaters
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in commercial electric resistance water heater shipments. 

94

Shipment Data » Commercial Electric Resistance Water Heaters

Commercial Water Heaters, Electric

40,000

45,000

50,000

55,000

60,000

65,000

70,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

95

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical MidRange High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70

Typical Input Capacity (kBTU/h) 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

Thermal Efficiency (%) 78 79 78 80 82 85 80 85 80 85 80 85

Average Life (yrs) 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 4100 4150 4100 4200 4300 4400 4200 4400 4200 4400 4200 4400

Total Installed Cost ($) 4600 4650 4600 4700 4800 4900 4700 4900 4700 4900 4700 4900

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200
Final

• Commercial oil-fired water heaters with a capacity of 105,000 BTU/h or more must meet 

a thermal efficiency standard of 78% as stipulated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007.

• Condensing commercial water heaters do not exist, the highest attainable efficiency 

with oil-fired storage water heaters is thus about 86% TE.

• Maintenance for commercial oil-fired water heaters consists of sediment and scale 

removal once or twice per year.

96

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Water Heaters
Final

97

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Instantaneous Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBtu/hr) 180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

Thermal Efficiency (%) 76 77 80 84 85 84 85 84 90 84 90

Average Life (yrs) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 500-

750

600-

850

800-

1000

1250-

1300

1350-

1450

1250-

1300

1350-

1450

1250-

1300

1350-

1450

1250-

1300

1350-

1450

Total Installed Cost ($) 650-

900

750-

1000

900-

1250

1500-

1800

1600-

2000

1500-

1800

1600-

2000

1500-

1800

1600-

2000

1500-

1800

1600-

2000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) - - - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible
Final

• Commercial gas-fired instantaneous water heaters with a capacity of 200,000 BTU/h or 

more must meet a thermal efficiency standard of 80% as stipulated in ASHRAE 

Standard 90.1-2007.

• Commercial instantaneous systems use similar technologies for improving energy 

efficiency as residential systems; however, unlike condensing residential systems, 

condensing commercial systems typically do not use multiple heat exchangers.

• Depending on the manufacturer, input ratings for condensing systems usually top out 

at 800,000 BTU/h, requiring the use of multiple units for staging purposes; however, 

there are reliability, comfort, and efficiency benefits to staging multiple units.

• When replacing a storage water heater with an instantaneous water heater, there may 

be significant additional costs to upsize the gas supply line and change the venting.

98

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Instantaneous Water Heaters
Final

99

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Booster Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kBtu/hr) 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200

Thermal Efficiency (%) 98 98 98 98 98 98

Average Life (yrs) 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1200-1500 1200-1500 1200-1500 1200-1500 1200-1500 1200-1500

Total Installed Cost ($) 1400-1700 1400-1700 1400-1700 1400-1700 1400-1700 1400-1700

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) * - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible
Final

100

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas Booster Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current 

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(kBtu/hr)

100-

200

100-

200 100-200 100-200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200 100-200 100-200

100-

200 100-200

Thermal 

Efficiency (%) 79 79 80 80 90 82 92 85 95 85 95

Average Life (yrs) 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($)

5000-

6000

5000-

6000

5000-

6000

5000-

6000

10000-

11000

5000-

6000

10000-

11000

5000-

6000

10000-

11000

5000-

6000

10000-

11000

Total Installed 

Cost ($)

5300-

6300

5300-

6300

5300-

6300

5300-

6300

10300-

11300

5300-

6300

10300-

11300

5300-

6300

10300-

11300

5300-

6300

10300-

11300

Annual 

Maintenance 

Cost ($)

150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150
Final

• Booster water heaters are installed, often at the point of use, in series with the main 

service water heating system to boost service water temperatures. The main service 

water heating system may provide 110-140 F water, and the booster water heater may 

increase that temperature to 180-195 F. Typical commercial applications for booster 

water heaters include commercial dishwashers, laundromats, hospitals, and car washes.

• There is currently no energy efficiency standard for electric booster water heaters. Gas 

booster water heater minimum efficiency is dictated by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007 

under the “gas instantaneous water heaters” category.

• Booster water heaters typically have short lifetimes because of high usage and extreme 

temperatures.

• Typical sales are small due to the limited number of applications.

101

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Booster Water Heaters
Final

102

Appendix A

Data Sources

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1801 K Street, NW, Suite 500

Washington, D.C. 20006

(202) 973-2400

www.navigantconsulting.com
Final

A-1

Data Sources » Residential Gas-Fired Water Heaters

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY

STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) AHRI /

Distributors EERE AHRI /Distributors

NCI

Energy Factor AHRI EERE AHRI ENERGY

STAR AHRI

Average Life (yrs) EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors EERE Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors /

RS Means 2010 EERE

Distributors /

RS Means

2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Oil Water Heaters

A-2

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical Mid-Level High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) AHRI /

Distributors EERE AHRI EERE

NCI

Energy Factor AHRI EERE AHRI

Average Life (yrs) Ka-BOOM! 

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors /

RS Means 2007 EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Electric Resistance Water Heaters

A-3

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) AHRI /

Distributors EERE

NCI

Energy Factor AHRI EERE DEER, 2008 AHRI

Average Life (yrs) EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors /

RS Means 2010 EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Heat Pump Water Heaters

A-4

SOURCES

2005 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) AHRI EERE

NCI

Energy Factor AHRI ENERGY STAR AHRI

Average Life (yrs) ACEEE, 2007 EERE

Retail Equipment Cost w/o Tank($) RS Means 2010 /

ACEEE, 2007 EERE / Distributors

Total Installed Cost w/o Tank ($) RS Means 2010 /

ACEEE, 2007 EERE / Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Instantaneous Water Heaters

A-5

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (BTU/h) EERE

NCI

Energy Factor Distributors EERE AHRI ENERGY STAR Distributors

Average Life (yrs) ENERGY STAR EERE

Retail Equipment Cost w/o Tank ($) Distributors /

RS Means 2010 EERE

Total Installed Cost w/o Tank ($) DEER, 2008 EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Solar Water Heaters

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (sq. ft.) SRCC

SAIC

Overall Efficiency (Solar 

Fraction) 0.3-0.5 (RETScreen); 0.58-0.83 (SRCC); 0.5-0.75 (EERE)

Solar Energy Factor ENERGY STAR range=0.53-47, median=2, average=2.83

Average Life (yrs) 20 year system life (EERE); Collector warranties are 10 years (ENERGY STAR/SRCC)

Retail Equipment Cost1($) RS Means

Total Installed Cost1($) RS Means

1Costs are for an indirect (active closed loop) system, including tank and backup heater. Smaller capacity/cost systems are typical for southern 

& western states (>2/3 of the current market). Higher capacity/cost systems are required in colder/cloudier regions.

2ENERGY STAR requires OG-300 rating from SRCC. Most installations use SRCC rated collectors; a high efficiency option is not applicable.

A-6
Final

Data Sources » Residential Gas-Fired Furnaces

A-7

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) AHRI Distributors AHRI

NCI

AFUE (%) AHRI EERE ENERGY STAR AHRI

Electric Consumption (kWh/yr) AHRI EERE AHRI

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Oil-Fired Furnaces

A-8

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) AHRI Distributors AHRI

NCI

AFUE (%) AHRI EERE AHRI ENERGY STAR AHRI

Electric Consumption (kWh) AHRI EERE

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE Distributors EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Hydronic Heating Systems (Boilers)

A-9

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) EERE

NCI

AFUE (%) AHRI EERE ENERGY STAR EERE

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Room Air Conditioners

A-10

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Distributors AHAM

NCI

EER Distributors Federal Standard AHAM ENERGY STAR AHAM

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 Ka-BOOM!

Ka-BOOM! /

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Residential Central Air Conditioners

A-11

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Distributors EERE

NCI

SEER Distributors Federal Standard EERE ENERGY STAR EERE

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors EERE /

Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Air Source Heat Pumps

A-12

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Distributors / 

Product Literature AHRI

NCI

HSPF (Heating) AHRI Federal Standard AHRI ENERGY STAR AHRI /

CEC

SEER (Cooling) AHRI Federal Standard AHRI ENERGY STAR AHRI /

CEC

Average Life (yrs) EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($)

Distributors /

RS Means 2010 /

NCI

EERE

Total Installed Cost ($)

Distributors /

RS Means 2010 /

NCI

EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Residential Ground Source Heat Pumps

A-13

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Mid-Range High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) AHRI/SAIC

NCI

COP (Heating) SAIC ASHRAE 90.1-2007, ENERGY STAR

EER (Cooling) SAIC ASHRAE 90.1-2007, ENERGY STAR

Average Life (yrs) System life 25 years, ground loop life 50 years (EERE)

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors / CEC

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors / CEC

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Residential Gas Heat Pumps

A-14

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Manufacturer/SAIC

SAIC

Heating (GCOP) Manufacturer/SAIC Manufacturer/SAIC Manufacturer/SAIC

Cooling (GCOP) Manufacturer/SAIC CEC/T24 Manufacturer/SAIC

Annual Electric Use (kWh/yr) Manufacturer/SAIC

Average Life (yrs) SAIC

Retail Equipment Cost ($) SAIC

Total Installed Cost ($) SAIC

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Residential Refrigerator / Freezer

A-15

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Energy Consumption (kWh/yr) Distributors ENERGY STAR CEC ENERGY STAR CEC

NCI

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 Ka-BOOM!

Ka-BOOM! /

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE /

Distributors EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors /

RS Means 2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Natural Gas Cooktops

A-16

SOURCES

2005 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Distributors /

Product Literature EERE

NCI

Cooking Efficiency (%) Distributors /

Product Literature EERE

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI / EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Clothes Washers

A-17

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (ft3) Distributors CEC ENERGY STAR CEC

NCI

Modified Energy Factor (ft3/kWh/cycle) Distributors Standards CEC ENERGY STAR CEC

Average Life (yrs)

Appliance Magazine,

2005 /

EERE

Ka-BOOM! /

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Water Consumption (gal/cycle) EERE /

Distributors CEC

Hot Water Energy (kWh/cycle) EERE /

Distributors

Machine Energy (kWh/cycle) EERE /

Distributors

Dryer Energy (kWh/cycle) EERE /

Distributors

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE /

Distributors DEER, 2008

EERE /

Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) RS Means 2010 DEER, 2008 RS Means 2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Residential Clothes Dryers

A-18

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Mid-Level High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (ft3) NCI CEC CEC /

Distributors

NCI

EF (lb/kWh) NCI EERE

Machine Energy (kWh/cycle) NCI EERE

Average Life (yrs) NCI Ka-BOOM! /

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) NCI EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Dishwashers

A-19

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Annual Use (kWh/yr) Product Literature EERE Distributors ENERGY STAR CEC

NCI

Efficiency (cycle/kWh) NCI EERE CEC

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 Ka-BOOM! /

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE Distributors EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) EERE DEER, 2008 DEER, 2008 EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Furnaces

A-20

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Arthur D. Little, 1997 AHRI

NCI

AFUE ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004

ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004 /

CEC

AHRI

Average Life (yrs)

2003 ASHRAE

Handbook –

HVAC Applications

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($)

RS Means 2010/

NCI /

Distributors

RS Means 2010

Total Installed Cost ($)

RS Means 2010/

NCI /

Distributors

RS Means 2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

RS Means 2010/

NCI /

Distributors
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Oil-Fired Furnaces

A-21

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)

NCI /

Distributors /

AHRI

AHRI

NCI

Thermal Efficiency (%) ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004 AHRI AHRI /CEC AHRI

Average Life (yrs) 2003 ASHRAE Handbook –

HVAC Applications Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) RS Means 2010

Total Installed Cost ($) RS Means 2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI / Distributors
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Electric Boilers

A-22

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kW) BSRIA

SAIC

Efficiency (%) SAIC

Average Life (yrs) ASHRAE 2007 HVAC Applications

Retail Equipment Cost ($) RS Means/SAIC

Total Installed Cost ($) RS Means/SAIC

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) RS Means/SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Boilers

A-23

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Mid-Range High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)

Arthur D. Little /

Building Services Research and

Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998

NCI EERE

NCI

Combustion Efficiency (%) ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004 CEC AHRI

Average Life (yrs)

Building Services Research and

Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998 /

Appliance Magazine, 2005

EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) CEC /

RS Means 2010 DEER, 2008 EERE /Appliance Magazine, 2010

Total Installed Cost ($) CEC /

RS Means 2010 NCI EERE /Appliance Magazine, 2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI EERE /

Appliance Magazine, 2010
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Oil-Fired Boilers

A-24

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)

Building Services Research

and Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998

NCI EERE

NCI

Combustion Efficiency (%) ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004 AHRI

Average Life (yrs)

Building Services Research

and Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998 /

NCI

EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($)

Distributors /

RS Means 2010 /

NCI

EERE

Total Installed Cost ($)

Distributors /

RS Means 2010 /

NCI

EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI EERE
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Chillers

A-25

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed 

Base: 

Absorption

Installed 

Base: 

EngineDriven

Installed 

Base: 

Absorption

Installed 

Base: 

EngineDriven

AbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDriven

Typical 

Capacity (tons) BSRIA/Distributors

Efficiency 

(kW/ton)

Product Literature/SAIC

COP

Average Life 

(yrs) 2007 ASHRAE Applications Handbook/Distributors

Retail 

Equipment 

Cost ($/ton)

Distributors/RS Means/SAIC Total Installed 

Cost ($/ton)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Cost ($/ton)
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Centrifugal Chillers

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Mid High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(tons) US Census SAIC

Efficiency 

(kW/ton)

DEER/FEMP/Product Literature SAIC

COP

Average Life (yrs) 2007 ASHRAE Applications Handbook

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton)

RS Means/Distributors/SAIC

Total Installed 

Cost ($/ton)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Cost ($/ton)

SAIC

A-26
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Reciprocating Chillers

A-27

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Mid High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical 

Capacity (tons) BSRIA / DEER SAIC

Efficiency 

(kW/ton)

DEER/FEMP/Product Literature SAIC

COP

Average Life 

(yrs) Manufacturers

Retail 

Equipment 

Cost ($/ton) RS Means/Distributors/SAIC

Total Installed 

Cost ($/ton)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Cost ($/ton)

SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Screw Chillers

A-28

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Mid High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(tons) SAIC

Efficiency 

(kW/ton)

DEER/FEMP/Product Literature SAIC

COP

Average Life (yrs) Manufacturers

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton) RS Means/Distributors/SAIC

Total Installed Cost 

($/ton)

Annual 

Maintenance Cost 

($/ton)

SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Scroll Chillers

A-29

SOURCE

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (tons) SAIC/Manufacturers

Efficiency [full-load/IPLV] (kW/ton1)

Product Literature SAIC

COP [full-load/IPLV]

Average Life (yrs) Manufacturers

Retail Equipment Cost ($/ton)

RS Means/SAIC

Total Installed Cost ($/ton)

Annual Maintenance Cost ($/ton) SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Rooftop Air Conditioners

A-30

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Mid-Range High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) AHRI / NCI

NCI

Efficiency (EER) ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004

Distributors /

NCI EERE AHRI

Average Life (yrs) 2003 ASHRAE Handbook –

HVAC Applications Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) NCI /

LBNL, 2003

Distributors /

NCI /

DEER, 2008

EERE Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI /

LBNL, 2003

Distributors /

NCI /

DEER, 2008

EERE Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Engine-Driven Rooftop Air Conditioners

A-31

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (tons) Distributors

Heating COP NA Product 

Literature

Distributors/SAIC

Cooling COP Product Literature

Average Life (yrs)

Distributors/SAIC

Retail Equipment Cost 

($/ton)

Total Installed Cost ($/ton)

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Rooftop Heat Pumps

A-32

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) AHRI

NCI

Efficiency (EER) ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004 EERE

COP (Heating) NCI / EERE EERE

Average Life (yrs) 2003 ASHRAE Handbook - HVAC Applications

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors / RS Means 2010 / NCI / DEER

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors / RS Means 2010 / NCI / DEER

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) Distributors / RS Means 2010 / NCI / DEER
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Ground Source Heat Pumps

A-33

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) GHPC

NCI

COP (Heating) IGSPHA / GHPC

EER (Cooling) GHPC

Average Life (yrs) GHPC

Retail Equipment Cost ($) NCI / Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI / Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost (¢/sqft) GHPC
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Electric Resistance Heaters

A-34

DATA

2010 2020 2030 2035

Small Large Small Large Small Large Small Large

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Distributors

NCI

Efficiency (%) NCI

Average Life (yrs)

Technology Cost and 

Performance File for 

Commercial Model for 

AEO2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Water Heaters

A-35

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) Arthur D. Little / Distributors / AHRI AHRI

NCI

Typical Input Capacity (BTU/h) Arthur D. Little /

AHRI CEC AHRI

Thermal Efficiency (%)

EERE /

ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004

AHRI

Average Life (yrs)

Building Services Research

and Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998 /

Appliance Magazine, 2005

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors /

CEC / NCI Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors / CEC / NCI

Annual Maintenance Cost (¢/sqft) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Electric Resistance Water Heaters

A-36

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (gal) NCI / Product Literature AHRI

NCI

Typical Capacity (kW) Product Literature

Thermal Efficiency (%) Product Literature ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004 AHRI

Average Life (yrs)

Appliance Magazine, 2005 /

Building Services Research and

Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998

Appliance Magazine, 2005

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors / NCI Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors / NCI NCI

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Oil-Fired Water Heaters

A-37

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Mid-Range High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) NCI AHRI / NCI

NCI

Typical Input Capacity (kBTU/h) NCI AHRI / NCI AHRI / CEC

Thermal Efficiency (%) NCI ASHRAE Standard

90.1-1999

ANSI / ASHRAE /

IESNA Standard

90.1-2007

AHRI / CEC

Average Life (yrs) NCI Appliance Magazine, 2005

Retail Equipment Cost ($) NCI Distributors / NCI

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI Distributors / NCI NCI

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI Distributors / NCI NCI
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Instantaneous Water Heaters

A-38

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal)

Building Services Research and

Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998 /

AHRI

AHRI

Building Services Research and

Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998 /

AHRI

NCI

Thermal Efficiency (%) AHRI

ANSI / ASHRAE /

IESNA Standard

90.1-2007

Average Life (yrs) EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) CEC / NCI / Distributors Distributors / NCI

Total Installed Cost ($) CEC / NCI / Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) CEC / NCI / Distributors
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Electric Booster Water Heaters

A-39

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (gal) SAIC/Distributors

SAIC

Thermal Efficiency (%) Product Literature

Average Life (yrs)

Retail Equipment Cost ($)

Total Installed Cost ($) SAIC/Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas Booster Water Heaters

A-40

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current 

Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity 

(gal) Distributors/SAIC

SAIC

Thermal 

Efficiency (%) Product Literature

Average Life (yrs) Product Literature/SAIC

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($)

Distributors/SAIC Total Installed 

Cost ($)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Final

143

Appendix B

References

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1801 K Street, NW, Suite 500

Washington, D.C. 20006

(202) 973-2400

www.navigantconsulting.com
Final

144

• ACEEE. (2007). Top Rated Energy-Efficient Appliances. American Council for an EnergyEfficient Economy.

• AHAM - ACEEE. (2010). Agreement on Minimum Federal Efficiency Standards, Smart Appliances, 

Federal Incentives and Related Matters for Specified Appliances.

• AHAM. (n.d.). AHAM Directory of Certified Products. Retrieved September 2010, from 

http://www.ahamdir.com/dirsvc/aham.nsf/fraRAC?OpenFrameset&pgm=Room%20Air%20C

onditioners

• AHRI. (n.d.). Certification Directory. Retrieved September 2010, from Directory of Certified 

Product Performance: http://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx

• Appliance Magazine. (2010). Appliance Market Research Report - U.S. Appliance Industry: Market 

Share, Life Expectancy & Replacement Market, and Saturation Levels. Appliance Magazine.

• Appliance Magazine. (2005). Portrait of the U.S. Appliance Industry. Appliance Magazine.

• Arthur D. Little. (1997). Massachusetts Market Transformation Scoping Study; Final Report.

Massachusetts Gas DSM / Market Transformation Collaborative.

References

B-1
Final

145

• ASHRAE. (2003). 2003 ASHRAE Handbook - HVAC Applications. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (2007). ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (1999). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (2004). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004. ASHRAE, Inc.

• Building Services Research and Information Association & Ducker Research Company. (1997, 

1998). U.S. Market for Central Plant Air Conditioning; Market for Ducted Warm Air Central 

Heating; U.S. Market for Hydronic Heating and Burners; U.S. Water Heating Market; U.S. Unitary 

and Close Control Air Conditioning.

• California Energy Commission. (n.d.). Retrieved September 2010, from Appliance Efficiency 

Database: http://www.appliances.energy.ca.gov/AdvancedSearch.aspx

• DEER. (2008, June). Database for Energy Efficiency Resources. Retrieved September 2010, from 

California Energy Commission: www.energy.ca.gov/deer

• Distributors. (n.d.). NCI discussions with distributors and online research (i.e. Grainger, 

Home Depot, Lowes, Sears, and others).

References

B-2
Final

146

• EERE. (2006). Buildings Energy Data Book.

• EERE. (2000). Clothes Washers Technical Support Document, Final Rule Technical Support 

Document: Energy Efficiency Standards for Consumer Products: Clothes Washers.

• EERE. (2009). Commercial Heating, Air Conditioning and Water Heating Equipment (i.e. ASHRAE 

Equipment).

• EERE. (2006). DOE Appliance Standards Framework, Rulemaking Framework for Residential Water 

Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment and Pool Heaters.

• EERE. (2005). Draft Technical Analysis for Refrigerators, Analysis of Amended Energy Conservation 

Standards for Residential Refrigerators-Freezers.

• EERE. (2010). Energy Conservation Program for Appliance Standards: Residential Central Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps.

• EERE. (2001). Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Central Air Conditioners and 

Heat Pumps Energy Conservation Standards; Final Rule.

References

B-3
Final

147

• EERE. (2007). Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Energy Conservation 

Standards for Residential Furnaces and Boilers; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2009). Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Certain Consumer 

Products and for Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2010). Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Water 

Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment, and Pool Heaters; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2009). Final Rule Technical Support Document: Residential Dishwashers, Dehumidifiers, 

Cooking Products, and Commercial Clothes Washers.

• EERE. (2004). Joint Stakeholders Comments on Standards for Commercial Package Air Conditioners 

and Heat Pumps.

• EERE. Preliminary Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Consumer 

Products: Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers.

• EERE. (2010). Residential Clothes Dryers and Room Air Conditioners Preliminary Technical Support 

Document.

References

B-4
Final

148

• EERE. (2006). Technical Analysis for Residential Furnaces and Boilers, Energy Conservation 

Program for Residential Furnaces and Boilers; Proposed Rule.

• EERE. (2006). Technical Analysis for Rulemaking Framework for Dishwashers/Cooktops/Ovens, 

Rulemaking Framework for Commercial Clothes Washers and Residential Dishwashers, 

Dehumidifiers, and Cooking Products.

• EERE. (2005). Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and 

Industrial Equipment: Commercial Unitary Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps.

• ENERGY STAR. (n.d.). Retrieved September 2010, from ENERGY STAR Products: 

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=products.pr_find_es_products

• Federal Standard. (n.d.). National energy conservation standards authorized under the 

Energy and Policy Conservation Act (EPCA).

• GeoExchange. GeoExchange Heating and Cooling Systems: Fascinating Facts.

References

B-5
Final

149

• GHPC. (n.d.). Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium. Retrieved 2007, from www.geoexchange.org

• IGSPHA. (n.d.). International Ground Source Heat Pump Association. Retrieved 2007, from 

www.igshpa.okstate.edu

• LBNL. (2003). Commercial Unitary Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps - Life Cycle Cost Analysis: 

Inputs and Results. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

• Max Neubauer, A. d. (2009). Ka-BOOM! The Power of Appliance Standards. ACEEE, ASAP.

• Navigant Consulting, Inc. (n.d.). In House Expertise.

• Navien America Inc. (n.d.). Navien Condensing 98%. Retrieved September 2010, from 

http://www.navienamerica.com/PDS/ftp/NavienCondensingTankless/DownLoad_Brochure_

Manual/NavienCodensing98_Brochure.pdf

• Product Literature. (n.d.). Literature from manufacturers and experts on specific products.

• RS Means Mechanical Cost Data. (2007). Means Construction Information Network.

• RS Means Mechanical Cost Data. (2010). Means Construction Information Network.

• SAIC. (n.d.). In House Expertise.

• Technology Cost and Performance File for Commercial Model for AEO2010. (2009). (E. 

Boedecker, Compiler)

References

B-6
June 2013

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Buildings Appliance and Equipment Costs and Efficiency 3

APPENDIX B
FINAL

EIA - Technology Forecast Updates –

Residential and Commercial Building 

Technologies – Advanced Case

Presented to:

U.S. Energy Information Administration

Prepared by

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1801 K Street, NW, Suite 500

Washington, D.C. 20006

With

SAIC

8301 Greensboro Drive

McLean, VA 22102

September 22, 2011
Final

DISCLAIMER

This presentation was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States 

Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their 

employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, 

express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or 

usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use 

would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, 

process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily 

constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government 

or any agency, contractor or subcontractor thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed 

herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency 

thereof. 

September 2011

1
Final

Objective 3

Methodology 4

Definitions 5

Market Transformation 6

Historical Shipment Data 7

Residential Gas-Fired Water Heaters 8

Residential Oil Water Heaters 11

Residential Electric Resistance Water Heaters 13

Residential Heat Pump Water Heaters 16

Residential Instantaneous Water Heaters 18

Residential Solar Water Heaters 20

Residential Gas-Fired Furnaces 22

Residential Oil-Fired Furnaces 25

Residential Hydronic Heating Systems (Boilers) 28

Residential Room Air Conditioners 30

Residential Central Air Conditioners 33

Residential Air Source Heat Pumps 35

Residential Ground Source Heat Pumps 37

Residential Gas Heat Pumps 39

Residential Refrigerator / Freezer 42

Residential Natural Gas Cooktops 46

Residential Clothes Washers 49

Residential Clothes Dryers 52

Residential Dishwashers 55

Commercial Gas-Fired Furnaces 58

Commercial Oil-Fired Furnaces 60

Commercial Electric Boilers 62

Commercial Gas-Fired Boilers 64

Commercial Oil-Fired Boilers 66

Commercial Gas Fired Chillers 68

Commercial Centrifugal Chillers 70

Commercial Reciprocating Chillers 72

Commercial Screw Chillers 74

Commercial Scroll Chillers 76

Commercial Rooftop Air Conditioners 78

Commercial Gas-Fired Engine-Driven Rooftop Air 

Conditioners 80

Commercial Rooftop Heat Pumps 83

Commercial Ground Source Heat Pumps 85

Commercial Electric Resistance Heaters 87

Commercial Gas-Fired Water Heaters 89

Commercial Electric Resistance Water Heaters 92

Commercial Oil-Fired Water Heaters 95

Commercial Gas-Fired Instantaneous

Water Heaters 97

Commercial Electric Booster Water Heaters 99

Commercial Gas Booster Water Heaters 100

Data Sources A-1

References B-1

Page Page

Table of Contents
Final

3

The objective of this study is to develop baseline and projected 

performance/cost characteristics for residential and commercial 

end-use equipment.

• 2005 and 2007 baselines, as well as today’s (2010)

— Review of literature, standards, installed base, contractor, and manufacturer 

information.

— Provide a relative comparison and characterization of the cost/efficiency of a 

generic product.

• Forecast of technology improvements that are projected to be available through 2035

— Review of trends in standards, product enhancements, and Research and 

Development (R&D).

— Projected impact of product improvements and enhancement to technology.

Objective

The performance/cost characterization of end-use equipment developed in 

this study will assist EIA in projecting national primary energy 

consumption.
Final

4

Input from industry, including government, R&D organizations, and 

manufacturers, was used to project product enhancements concerning 

equipment performance and cost attributes.

• Technology forecasting involves many uncertainties.

• Technology developments impact performance and cost forecasts.

• Varied sources ensure a balanced view of technology progress and the probable timing 

of commercial availability.

• All cost forecasts are shown in real, 2010 dollars.

Methodology
Final

5

The following tables represent the current and projected efficiencies for residential and 

commercial building equipment ranging from the installed base in 2005 and 2007, to 

the highest efficiency equipment that is expected to be commercially available by 2035, 

assuming advanced adoption. Below are definitions for the terms used in 

characterizing the status of each technology.

• 2005/2007 Installed Base: the currently installed and “in use” equipment for that year. 

Represents the installed stock of equipment, does not represent sales.

• 2010 Current Standard: the minimum efficiency required by current standards, or 

typical where no standard exists.

• Typical: the average, or “typical” product being sold in the particular timeframe.

• ENERGY STAR: the minimum efficiency required to meet the ENERGY STAR criteria, 

where applicable.

• Mid-Level: middle tier high-efficiency product available in the particular timeframe.

• High: the product with the highest efficiency available in the particular timeframe.

• Advanced adoption assumes increases in market incentives, market adoption, and/or 

technology research and development (R&D).

Definitions
Final

6

Market Transformation

The market for the reviewed products has changed since the analysis 

performed in 2007 and is reflected in the efficiency and cost 

characteristics.

• Over the past three years, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established 

ENERGY STAR specifications for a number of new products, including residential 

water heaters.

• Typical air conditioners have improved efficiencies as a result of increased Federal 

standards or otherwise. In 2007, the typical Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER) for a 

residential room air conditioner was 10.0, today it is 10.8; the typical EER for a 

commercial rooftop air conditioner was 10.1, today it is 11.2.

• Overall, there has been an increased market acceptance of energy efficient products 

driven by initiatives such as LEED and other green building programs.
Final

Commercial Appliances

130,000

135,000

140,000

145,000

150,000

155,000

160,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

7

Historical Shipment Data

Due to the severe recession and dramatic contraction in the housing market, over the 

past few years there has been a trend of decreased appliance shipments, except in 

commercial appliances where a specific trend is not evident. In 2010, shipments have 

increased across all appliance types.

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment 

Statistics Monthly: January 2011

Throughout the presentation, shipment trends 

for specific products are depicted. Overall, the 

recession and contraction of the housing 

market has significantly affected each 

product.

Major Appliances

55,000,000

60,000,000

65,000,000

70,000,000

75,000,000

80,000,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Comfort Conditioning

14,000,000

16,000,000

18,000,000

20,000,000

22,000,000

24,000,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

8

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas-Fired Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Current

Typical ENERGY High Typical High Typical High Typical High Base Standard STAR 

Typical Capacity (gal) 40 40 40 40 50 40 50 40 50 40 50

Energy Factor 0.6 0.59 0.62 0.67 0.85 0.62 0.85 0.62 1.4 0.85 1.4

Average Life (yrs) 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15 9-15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 470- 470- 480- 780- 1500- 450- 1380- 450- 1960- 1168.5 1893.50-

510 510 510 810 3000 500 2880 500 3360 3293.5

Total Installed Cost ($) 920- 920- 930- 1230- 1950- 1050- 1980- 1050- 2670- 1900- 2610-

960 960 960 1260 3450 1100 3480 1100 3570 3400 3510

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) - - 13 17 17 13 17 13 17 13 17

Higher efficiencies and different costs than ref. case
Final

• The current Federal standard, which came into effect in January 2004 mandates an EF of 0.59 for a 40-

gallon water heater. The equation for the Federal standard is: 

EF=0.67-(0.0019*Gal), which is used to expand the analysis to a greater range of storage 

capacities.

• An updated Federal standard will go into effect on April 16, 2015. The equation for the Federal standard 

is:

EF=0.675-(0.0015*Gal) for a volume ≤ 55 gallons and

EF=0.8012-(0.00078*Gal) for a volume > 55 gallons

• Per discussions with National Labs, there is a potential trend towards a capacity of 50 gallons after 2020.

• Gas-fired water heater capacities typically fall between 30 and 75 gallons.

• As part of the heating products Federal standards rulemaking, a high efficiency model was examined, 

EF=0.77 at 40 gallons, which represents a condensing unit with two inches of insulation and a power 

vent.

• The cost of installation is approximately $450, which is higher than electric water heaters for a number of 

reasons, which includes an extra 1.5 hours of labor for 2 plumbers that is required for gas units. 

• Generally, there are no storage gas water heaters between approximately 0.7 and 0.8 EF, which would 

fall in the “near-condensing” range of operation. Gas-fired water heaters are typically either condensing 

or non-condensing models.

• Gas heat pump water heaters use a gas-fired engine-driven heat pump or a gas-fired absorption heat 

pump to heat water. Waste heat from the engine could also be recovered for water heating. These units 

are not commercially available.

9

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas-Fired Water Heaters
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in residential gas-fired water heater shipments. 

10

Shipment Data » Residential Gas-Fired Water Heaters

Water Heaters, Gas

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011

3,500,000

3,700,000

3,900,000

4,100,000

4,300,000

4,500,000

4,700,000

4,900,000

5,100,000

5,300,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

11

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Oil Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical MidLevel High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30

Energy Factor 0.5 0.53 0.54 0.62 0.68 0.62 0.68 0.62 0.68 0.62 0.68

Average Life (yrs) 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1200-

1300

1300-

1400

1350-

1450

1450-

1550

1600-

1700

1440-

1540

1600-

1700

1420-

1520

1600-

1700

1420-

1520

1600-

1700

Total Installed Cost ($) 1800-

1900

1900-

2000

1950-

2050

2050-

2150

2200-

2300

2040-

2140

2200-

2300

2020-

2120

2200-

2300

2020-

2120

2200-

2300

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) - - 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157 157

Same as Reference Case
Final

• The current Federal standard, which came into effect in January 2004 mandates an EF of 

0.53 for a 30-gallon water heater. The equation for the Federal standard is:

EF=0.59-(0.0019*Gal), which is used to expand the analysis to a greater range

of storage capacities.

• An updated Federal standard will go into effect on April 16, 2015. The equation for the 

Federal standard is:

EF=0.68-(0.0019*Gal)

• Oil-fired water heaters often have small tanks with larger input ratings, relative to 

natural gas and electric residential water heaters.

• No condensing oil-fired, storage residential water heaters currently exist on the U.S. 

market, hence the range of efficiencies tops out at near-condensing efficiency levels.

• The max-tech model on the market is achieved using a proprietary “turbo flue” design. 

12

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Oil Water Heaters
Final

13

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Electric Resistance Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

Energy Factor 0.9 0.9 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.95 0.96 0.95 0.96

Average Life (yrs) 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 250-300 250-300 275-325 350-375 350-375 400-450 350-375 400-450 350-375 400-450

Total Installed Cost ($) 550-600 550-600 575-625 650-675 650-675 700-750 650-675 700-750 650-675 700-750

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) - - 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

Same as Reference Case
Final

• The current Federal minimum efficiency standard, which went into effect in January 

2004, requires an EF of 0.90 for a 50-gallon electric resistance water heater. The equation 

for the Federal standard is:

EF=0.97-(0.00132*volume), which is used to expand the analysis to a greater range

of storage capacities.

• An updated Federal standard will go into effect on April 16, 2015. The equation for the 

Federal standard is:

EF=0.96-(0.0003*Gal) for a volume ≤ 55 gallons and

EF=2.057-(0.00113*Gal) for a volume > 55 gallons

• Electric resistance water heater capacities usually range between 30 and 119 gallons.

• The max tech model, EF=2.35 at 50 gallons, is a heat pump water heater and is described 

in the following slides.

14

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Electric Resistance Water Heaters
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in residential electric resistance water heater shipments. 

15

Shipment Data » Residential Electric Resistance Water Heaters

Water Heaters, Electric

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011

3,600,000

3,800,000

4,000,000

4,200,000

4,400,000

4,600,000

4,800,000

5,000,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

16

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Heat Pump Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

ENERGY

STAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

Energy Factor 2 2 2.35 2.1 3 2.5 3.2 2.5 3.5

Average Life (yrs) 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15 13-15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1400- 1400- 1500- 1265- 1690- 1170- 1690- 1125- 1690-

1700 1700 2000 1465 1890 1470 1890 1425 1890

Total Installed Cost ($) 1500- 1500- 1600- 1365- 1790- 1270- 1790- 1225- 1790-

2200 2200 2500 1965 2390 1970 2390 1925 2390

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Lower costs and higher efficiencies than ref. case
Final

• There is not a unique Federal standard for heat pump water heaters (HPWH). Because integrated HPWHs 

are in the same product class as electric resistance water heaters under DOE’s classifications, the Federal 

standard that applies to electric resistance water heaters applies here as well.

• Since 1990, significant R&D efforts have gone into developing HPWHs. Improvements have advanced 

efficiency and reliability; however, the high first cost still precludes high-volume market penetration.

• Although there is an installed base listed for 2005, the market penetration of HPWHs was quite low at that 

time.

• Three major domestic storage water heater manufacturers (Rheem, AO Smith, and GE) have an integrated 

HPWH model on the market; however, new and established competitors offer integrated or retrofit units 

(for existing electric or indirect storage water heaters). 

• Stiebel Eltron has an 80 gallon, 2.5 energy factor high efficiency HPWH. This unit was not included in the 

analysis presented on the previous slide because it has a significantly larger capacity than the units 

included, making for a difficult comparison.

• Sales are estimated to be limited and driven in part by rebates and tax credits at the utility, local, state, and 

Federal level. Hence, it is not surprising that all HPWH products on the market meet ENERGY STAR 

minimums and that no HPWH products are being offered below the ENERGY STAR efficiency level. 

• While resistive heating elements are virtually 100% efficient at transferring heat to the water inside a water 

heater, there is a jump in efficiency when heat pump technology is adopted since the COP of heat pump 

systems is usually between 2 and 3, at least on a seasonal basis.

• Due to the typically slow rate at which heat pumps raise the water temperature in a storage water heater, it 

is not unusual for heat pump systems to use resistive heat for some proportion of the water heating process 

to meet consumer expectations. All HPWH systems examined by DOE allow the consumer to adjust the 

HPWH behavior.

17

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Heat Pump Water Heaters
Final

18

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Instantaneous Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (BTU/h) 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 185 185

Energy Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.98 0.82 0.98 0.82 0.98 0.82 0.98

Average Life (yrs) 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1050-

1150

1050-

1150

1050-

1150

1050-

1150

2150-

2250

1050-

1150

2150-

2250

1050-

1150

2150-

2250

1050-

1150

2150-

2250

Total Installed Cost ($) 1550-

1650

1550-

1650

1550-

1650

1550-

1650

2650-

2750

1550-

1650

2650-

2750

1550-

1650

2650-

2750

1550-

1650

2650-

2750

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85

Same as Reference Case
Final

• Most instantaneous hot water heaters sold in 2010 are gas-fired and have an efficiency 

of 0.80 EF or above, which is also the qualifying criteria for ENERGY STAR

• Navien manufactures the highest efficiency gas-fired model currently available on the 

market, which has an EF of 0.98. This is achieved through the use of electronic ignition, 

powered direct venting, and through condensing the flue gases.

• All of the major water heater manufacturers now offer an instantaneous model, all of 

which are imported and private-labeled.

• The maintenance cost includes cleaning the water inlet filter and the heat exchanger of 

mineral deposits and replacing the water valve approximately once every five years for 

all energy efficiency levels of instantaneous water heaters.

• When replacing a storage water heater with an instantaneous water heater, there are 

significant additional costs to upsize the gas supply line to 3/4 inch from the typical 1⁄2 

inch and change the venting.

• There is at least one electric (whole house) instantaneous water heater (4 chamber 

model) available on the market. This product retails for approximately $700-$750.

19

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Instantaneous Water Heaters
Final

20

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Solar Water Heaters

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard

Typical / ENERGY

STAR2 Typical2

Typical2Typical2

Typical Capacity (sq. ft.) 42-63 NA 42-63 42-63 42-63 42-63

Overall Efficiency (Solar 

Fraction) 0.5 NA 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Solar Energy Factor 2.5 NA 2.5 3 3.5 3.5

Average Life (yrs) 20 NA 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment Cost1($) 3300-

5200 NA

3300-

5200

2900-

4600

2400-

3900

2400-

3900

Total Installed Cost1($) 7600-

10000 NA 7600-10,000

7100-

9300

6700-

8700

6700-

8700

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 25 NA 25 25 25 25

1 Costs are for an indirect (active closed loop) system, including tank and backup heater. Smaller capacity/cost systems are typical for 

southern & western states (>2/3 of the current market). Higher capacity/cost systems are required in colder/cloudier regions.

2 ENERGY STAR requires OG-300 rating from SRCC. Most installations use SRCC rated collectors; a high efficiency option is not 

applicable.

Lower costs than ref. case
Final

• ENERGY STAR requires an OG-300 rating from the Solar Rating and Certification Corporation 

(SRCC). Most installations use SRCC rated collectors, so there is no high efficiency category.

• Solar water heaters (SWHs) can be either active or passive. An active system uses an electric pump 

to circulate the heat transfer fluid; a passive system has no pump. Most solar water heaters in the 

United States are the active type.

• Solar water heaters are also characterized as open loop (also called "direct") or closed loop (also 

called "indirect"). An open-loop system circulates household (potable) water through the collector. 

A closed-loop system uses a heat transfer fluid (water or diluted antifreeze, for example) to collect 

heat and a heat exchanger to transfer the heat to household water.

• Solar fraction represents the fraction of total annual water heating energy met by the solar water 

heater. A backup water heating system is required with SWHs, and it is typically most economical 

to size the system to provide about 50% of water heating energy (solar fraction = 0.5).

• Solar Energy Factor (SEF) is defined by the SRCC as the useful energy delivered by the system 

divided by the total electrical and/or fossil fuel required for backup heating, pumping, and controls 

(the free solar energy input is neglected).

• Over 2/3 of the current SWH market is in the southern or western US (including Hawaii). The 

collector area of 42 ft2 would be typical for these areas. Colder areas of the US would require a larger 

collector (63 ft2).

• Installed costs are higher for colder areas where larger collectors are required. Costs also vary 

widely depending on collector quality, type of system, and site-specific characteristics.

21

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Solar Water Heaters
Final

22

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas-Fired Furnaces

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75

AFUE (%) 78 78 80 90 98 90 98 90 98 90 98

Electric Consumption (kWh/yr) 780 780 430 371 340 371 340 371 340 371 340

Average Life (yrs) 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 700-

800

700-

800

700-

800

1200-

2200

2200-

3200

1200-

2200

1700-

1800

1200-

2200

1700-

1800

1200-

2200

1700-

1800

Total Installed Cost ($) 2000-

3000

2000-

3000

2000-

3000

2500-

3000

3500-

4000

2500-

3000

3000-

3500

2500-

3000

3000-

3500

2500-

3000

3000-

3500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

Same as Reference Case
Final

• The current standard for residential gas-fired furnaces is 78% AFUE; however, virtually all furnaces 

on the market have an AFUE of 80% or better.

• The minimum criteria for an ENERGY STAR qualified gas-fired furnace is 90% AFUE.

• York and Lennox manufacture the highest efficiency models currently available on the market, 

which have an efficiency of 98%.

• The high efficiency furnaces available are condensing furnaces, which use an additional heat 

exchanger to extract additional energy from the gases. Higher end models have variable speed 

blowers.

• Condensing furnaces use an additional heat exchanger to extract additional energy from the flue 

gases; some models also have variable speed blowers, which decrease electrical energy consumption, 

and inducer fan systems, which usually have modulating gas valves to allow the furnace to 

modulate in very small increments, providing an AFUE boost of a few percent.

• Non-condensing AFUE levels for natural gas top out at around 81%; above this level, the potential 

for exhaust gas condensation increases. This condensate is corrosive and will breach the appliance or 

vent over time and hence allow flue gases into the structure.

• High-efficiency condensing furnaces typically have aluminized steel heat exchangers and low NOx

emissions, flexible installation, direct vent, and sealed combustion systems. The furnace does not use 

room air for combustion, but instead draws the combustion air directly from outdoors. 

• Depending on the location of the home, piping materials in use, and other considerations, 

condensing furnaces may need an acid neutralizer and/or lift pump for the condensate.

• Furnaces may contain PSC or electronically commutated motors (ECM) fan motors, though the type 

of motor has no impact on the AFUE measurement. It only impacts SEER/EER of the associated air 

conditioner.

23

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas-Fired Furnaces
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in gas-fired furnace shipments. 

24

Shipment Data » Residential Gas-Fired Furnaces

Furnaces, Warm Air, Gas

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011

2,000,000

2,200,000

2,400,000

2,600,000

2,800,000

3,000,000

3,200,000

3,400,000

3,600,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

25

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Oil-Fired Furnaces

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105

AFUE (%) 80 78 80 85 98 82 98 82 98 82 98

Electric Consumption (kWh/yr) 1001 1001 1001 944 900 950 900 950 900 950 900

Average Life (yrs) 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25 15-25

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 2000-

2200

2000-

2200

2000-

2200

2200-

2800

3200-

3800

1900-

2100

3200-

3800

1800-

2000

3200-

3800

1775-

1975

3200-

3800

Total Installed Cost ($) 3000-

3500

3000-

3500

3000-

3500

3500-

4000

4500-

5000

2900-

3100

4500-

5000

2800-

3000

4500-

5000

2775-

2975

4500-

5000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

Same as Reference Case
Final

• The current NAECA Standard for oil-fired, forced air furnaces is 78% AFUE.

• The ENERGY STAR criteria for oil-fired furnaces is 85% AFUE.

• Since the latent heat content of oil is lower than that for either propane or natural gas, 

oil-fired appliances can typically operate at a higher AFUE rating than comparable gasfired appliances before condensation issues arise.

• There are condensing residential oil-fired furnaces on the market that operate at about 

95% AFUE. They have a tiny market share (<1%), due to market acceptance issues. 

• Condensate from condensing oil furnaces is typically even more corrosive than that of 

gas-fired systems due to the higher sulfur content in fuel oil. Hence, condensing oil 

furnaces also likely require the use of an acid neutralizer.

• Oil-fired furnaces, like gas-fired furnaces, achieve condensing conditions through the 

use of a secondary heat exchanger. Typically, these heat exchangers use a high-grade 

stainless steel (Al29-4C) as the primary heat exchange surface.

• Sooting is an issue for all oil-fired appliances, but secondary heat exchangers, with their 

narrow passages, are even more prone to be plugged by soot. Because of this, oil 

furnaces require frequent cleaning and maintenance.

26

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Oil-Fired Furnaces
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there was initially a 

decrease with a recent slight increase in oil-fired furnace shipments. 

27

Shipment Data » Residential Oil-Fired Furnaces

Furnaces, Warm Air, Oil

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

110,000

120,000

130,000

140,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

28

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Hydronic Heating Systems (Boilers)

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105 105

AFUE (%) 78 80 82 85 98 85 98 85 99 85 99

Average Life (yrs) 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1000-

1100

1000-

1800

1200-

2000

2100-

2500

2500-

3500

2100-

2500

2500-

3500

2100-

2500

2500-

3500

2100-

2500

2500-

3500

Total Installed Cost ($) 2800-

2900

2800-

3800

3000-

4000

4000-

4500

4500-

5500

4000-

4500

4500-

5500

4000-

4500

4500-

5500

4000-

4500

4500-

5500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130 130

Higher efficiencies for typical and high efficiency units
Final

• The NAECA standard for hot-water residential gas boilers is 80% AFUE, while the 

ENERGY STAR standard for boilers is 85% AFUE. The highest available efficiency is 

98% AFUE. 

• Hydronic systems represent about 6% of all U.S. residential heating systems.

• The bulk of U.S. boiler sales is for non-condensing boilers, primarily manufactured in 

North America. These are typically high-mass systems whose heat exchangers are 

made of iron or steel and which have simple on/off burners.

• Due to incentives and market pressure, the U.S. boiler industry has been shifting 

towards also providing condensing boilers. Most of these boilers are private-labeled 

products sourced from Europe, where the hydronic market is much bigger and 

condensing appliances are much more common and/or required by law.

• Typically, condensing boilers are low-mass in construction with modulating burners, 

variable-speed inducer fan systems, sealed powered direct-vent combustion, multiple 

sensor technologies, and electronic ignition and control. In the future, higher efficiency 

boilers may involve modulating burners, power venting, and electronic ignition.

• Most value-added components for condensing boilers are sourced abroad, even when 

the condensing boiler is assembled in North America (i.e. heat exchanger, gas valve, 

burner, blower systems, sensors, and/or controls). The market for boilers is primarily in 

retrofit applications.

29

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Hydronic Heating Systems (Boilers)
Final

30

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Room Air Conditioners

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5

EER 9.8 9.8 9.8 10.8 11.5 11 13 12 13 12 13

Average Life (yrs) 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13 9-13

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 230-

300

230-

300

230-

300

250-

320

400-

470

250-

320

480-

550

250-

320

480-

550

250-

320

480-

550

Total Installed Cost ($) 230-

300

230-

300

230-

300

250-

320

400-

470

250-

320

480-

550

250-

320

480-

550

250-

320

480-

550

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)* - - - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible

Higher efficiencies than ref. case
Final

• The residential room air conditioners analyzed in this study are window room air 

conditioners.

• The ENERGY STAR criteria requires an EER of 10.8, which also represents the most 

common efficiency on the market.

• According to the AHAM Directory of Certified Products, the most efficient product on 

the market has an EER of 11.5. Based on the DOE Building Technologies Program (BTP) 

R&D, it is anticipated that units may reach an EER of 13.0 by 2030.

• A wider range of costs reflects a variation in the marketplace

• It is assumed that the homeowners will install their own room air conditioner.

• Efficiency improvements are attained by:

— Higher efficiency compressor and fan motors, and

— An increased heat transfer area in the evaporator and condenser through the use of 

larger heat exchangers, finer fin spacing, micro-channel heat exchangers, and 

similar design options. 

• According to the ACEEE – AHAM Consensus Agreement, the Federal standards will 

be updated in 2014 from 9.8 to 11.0

31

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Room Air Conditioners
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in room air conditioner shipments. 

32

Shipment Data » Residential Room Air Conditioners

Air-Conditioners, Room

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

9,000,000

10,000,000

11,000,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

33

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Central Air Conditioners

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36

SEER 10.2 13 13.7 14.5 24 14 24 15 26 16 26

Average Life (yrs) 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19 14-19

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1000-

1500

2000-

2500

2050-

3750

2500-

4200

6500-

13500

2500-

4200

6500-

13500

2500-

4200

6500-

13500

2500-

4200

6500-

13500

Total Installed Cost ($) 2500-

2700

2500-

3500

2550-

4750

3000-

5200

7000-

14500

4000-

6200

8000-

15000

4000-

6200

8000-

15000

4000-

6200

8000-

15000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120 20-120

Higher efficiencies for high efficiency units
Final

• The current NAECA minimum SEER is 13.0.

• The ENERGY STAR criteria is 14.5 SEER and 12 EER for split systems, which is close to 

the efficiency of the typical product on the market.

• Energy efficiency is driven by several factors:

— Heat exchanger (surface area, number of tube rows, tube & fin vs. micro-channel)

— Compressor choices (i.e., type of compressor and single-stage vs. two-stage vs. 

variable-speed operation)

— Fan motor choices (PSC vs. ECM fan motors on inside and outside)

— Control choices (i.e., piston, TXV, or EEV expansion devices)

As an example, above 16 SEER, units typically have very large heat exchangers, an ECM 

evaporator fan motor and a two-stage scroll compressor. 

• Variable-speed compressor technology typically leads to a significant SEER boost, but 

does not affect the EER. Manufacturers have used the SEER boost to develop high-SEER 

condensing units with smaller enclosures. 

• The high efficiency units currently available use an evaporator ECM fan motor and have 

modulating capacity.

• Efficiency levels beyond 21 SEER are made possible through combining existing large 

heat exchangers with variable-speed compressors, ECM fan motors, and EEVs.

34

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Central Air Conditioners
Final

35

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Air Source Heat Pumps

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36

HSPF (Heating) 6.8 8 8 8.2 10.7 8.1 11 8.3 12 8.5 12

SEER (Cooling) 10 14 14 14.5 22 14.2 23 15 24 15.3 25

Average Life (yrs) 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16 14-16

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 3500-

4000

4000-

4500

4000-

4500

5500-

6000

7000-

7500

4000-

4500

7040-

7290

3940-

4140

6500-

6750

3940-

4140

6300-

6800

Total Installed Cost ($) 4500-

5500

5000-

6000

5000-

6000

6500-

7500

8000-

10000

5000-

6000

7130-

9780

4900-

5100

6800-

10000

4900-

5100

6525-

11225

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

Higher efficiency and lower costs than ref. case
Final

• The NAECA minimum HSPF is 7.7 and the minimum SEER is 13.

• The ENERGY STAR criteria states a minimum HSPF of 8.2 and a minimum SEER of 

14.5.

• Heat pumps are generally sized to meet the cooling load of the house. When the heating 

load exceeds heat pump heating capacity, resistance heat is supplemented; however, 

when the heating capacity exceeds the heating load, the heat pump starts and stops 

more frequently, causing wear and tear on the components and an overall loss of 

efficiency. Multi-stage and/or variable-speed compressors can help, as does 

sophisticated refrigerant management.

• High efficiency cooling does not necessarily lead to high efficiency heating. The range of 

SEER/HSPF combinations is very broad.

36

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Air Source Heat Pumps
Final

37

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Ground Source Heat Pumps

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36

COP (Heating) 3 3.1 3.1 3.5 4.3 3.5 5 3.6 5 3.7 5

EER (Cooling) 12 13.4 13.4 16.1 23 16.1 30 17.1 30 18 30

Average Life (yrs) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 4000-

6000

4000-

6000

4000-

6000

5000-

7000

7000-

9000

3900-

5900

7000-

9000

3800-

5800

7000-

9000

3800-

5800

7000-

9000

Total Installed Cost ($) 9000-

11000

9000-

11000

9000-

11000

10000-

12000

12000-

14000

8900-

10900

12000-

14000

8800-

10800

12000-

14000

8800-

10800

12000-

14000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70

Higher typical efficiencies and lower costs than ref. case
Final

• There are currently 19 ground source heat pump manufacturers in the US.

• Heating COP does not correlate with cooling EER (coefficient of determination, R2 = 

0.62). The highest efficiency GSHP is the Envision by WaterFurnace International, Inc. 

(30 EER & 5.0 COP).

• The ENERGY STAR® criteria for water-to-air ground source heat pumps are:

• The most common ground source heat pump is a closed-loop system in which water or 

an anti-freeze solution is circulated through plastic pipes buried underground. Open 

loop systems that employ ground water or surface water (e.g., open well, pond, lake) 

are used in some parts of the country, but water supply and water quality issues impose 

limitations on such applications.

• Installation cost is for a closed loop system and includes necessary accessories. The 

ground loop heat exchanger represents a majority of the installation cost.

• Electronically commutated motors (ECMs) improve performance on high end models.

38

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Ground Source Heat Pumps

Type

Tier 1 (12/1/2009) Tier 2 (1/1/2011) Tier 3 (1/1/2012)

Heating 

COP

Cooling 

EER

Heating 

COP

Cooling 

EER

Heating 

COP

Cooling 

EER

Closed Loop 3.3 14.1 3.5 16.1 3.6 17.1

Open Loop 3.6 16.2 3.8 18.2 4.1 21.1

Direct Expansion 3.5 15 3.6 16 3.6 16
Final

39

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas Heat Pumps

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard1 Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 60 60 60 60 60 60

Heating (GCOP) 1.3 NA 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.5

Cooling (GCOP) 0.6 NA 0.6 0.7 0.75 0.75

Annual Electric Use (kWh/yr) 2000 2000 2000 1500 1500 1500

Average Life (yrs) 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 6500-7500 6500-7500 6500-7500 6400-7400 6300-7300 6300-7300

Total Installed Cost ($) 8500-9500 8500-9500 8500-9500 8400-9400 8300-9300 8300-9300

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 150 150 150 150 150 150

1NAECA does not cover residential gas heat pumps, but the CEC Title 24, Part 6 Section 112 does indicate 

minimum cooling efficiency for gas heat pumps.

Higher efficiencies and lower costs than ref. case
Final

• Residential Gas Heat Pumps are not currently covered by NAECA. CEC Title 24, Part 6 

Section 112 does indicate cooling efficiency requirements for gas heat pumps, and two 

residential size units are listed there; Robur and Yazaki. Both units are 5-ton cooling 

capacity, which is too big for all but larger homes. The Yazaki unit offers cooling only 

and appears to be available only in Europe at the moment. Since only one product is 

available, no mid-level or high efficiency categories are included.

• The data represents air-source absorption heat pumps. Gas engine-driven vapor 

compression heat pumps are available in other parts of the world; York formerly offered 

the Triathlon gas engine-driven heat pump in the US. It is possible to couple either 

technology to the ground (ground source) rather than the atmosphere (air source).

• The absorption heat pump is a gas-fired, ammonia-water absorption cycle, combined 

with a high-efficiency low-pressure boiler integrated into one outdoor unit.

• The cooling efficiency of a gas-fired air source absorption heat pump is considerably 

lower than for an electric air source heat pump. Heating efficiency of an air source heat 

pump (electric or gas-fired absorption) decreases as outdoor temperature decreases; 

however the gas-fired absorption heat pump recovers waste heat from the combustion 

process to improve heating efficiency.

• Gas-fired cooling equipment currently comprises less than 1% of the residential air 

conditioning/heat pump market.

40

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Gas Heat Pumps
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in both air source and ground source heat pump shipments. 

41

Shipment Data » Residential Heat Pumps

Heat Pumps

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010

1,200,000

1,300,000

1,400,000

1,500,000

1,600,000

1,700,000

1,800,000

1,900,000

2,000,000

2,100,000

2,200,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year
Final

42

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Refrigerator / Freezer

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Capacity (cu. ft.) 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6 20.6

Energy Consumption (kWh/yr) 840 453 475 408 285 475 285 408 285 408 285

Average Life (yrs) 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 200-

400

400-

500

400-

500

425-

525

800-

1200

400-

500

800-

1200

400-

500

800-

1200

400-

500

800-

1200

Total Installed Cost ($) 200-

500

400-

600

400-

600

425-

625

800-

1300

400-

600

800-

1300

400-

600

800-

1300

400-

600

800-

1300

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

Higher efficiencies for typical units than ref. case
Final

• The current NAECA standard for a typical top-mount refrigerator/freezers is 453 kWh/yr while the typical top-mount 

refrigerator/freezer currently consumes approximately 475 kWh/yr. The best available top-mount refrigerator/freezer 

uses 285 kWh/yr.

• According to NAECA standards, for a refrigerator/freezer to qualify as ENERGY STAR, it must be at least 20% more 

energy efficient than the minimum Federal government standard. This equates to an annual energy use of 

approximately 408 kWh/yr.

• EISA 2007 requires that DOE publish a final rule no later than December 31, 2010 to determine whether to amend the 

standards in effect for products manufactured on or after January 1, 2014.

• A wider range of costs reflects a variation in the marketplace

• Improvement opportunities include:

— Higher efficiency and/or variable-speed compressor systems

— Larger heat exchangers

— Permanent-magnet fan systems (vs. SPM and PSC fan motors)

— Demand defrost systems

— Vacuum-insulated panels

— Thicker insulation (though at a loss of consumer utility)

— Better gasketing

— Optimized refrigerants (Isobutane vs. R134a) and air temperature

— Magnetic refrigeration cycle (currently used in laboratory applications)

• All manufacturers are using at least some of these technologies in an attempt to reach ENERGY STAR qualification.

• According to the ACEEE – AHAM Consensus Agreement, the Joint Stakeholders agree to jointly petition DOE to 

initiate a rulemaking by January 1, 2012 to be completed by December 31, 2012 to revise the test procedure for 

refrigerators/freezers to incorporate measured ice maker energy use. Additionally, the Federal standards will be 

revised in 2014. For top-mount units without ice makers, the standard is represented by 7.35 AV+ 207.0 and for units 

with ice makers, the standard is represented by 7.65 AV+ 267.0, where AV is the adjusted volume.1

43

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Refrigerator / Freezer

1Adjusted Volume (AV) for refrigerators is calculated as follows: AV = (Fresh Volume) + 1.63 x (Freezer Volume). When the new rulemaking is published, 

the formula for AV will become: AV = (Fresh Volume) + 1.76 x (Freezer Volume).
Final

• This analysis focuses on top-mount refrigerator-freezers because they have the largest 

market share of all refrigerator-freezer product classes at 50.6%*. The market share for 

bottom- and side-mount refrigerator-freezers are as follows:

— Bottom-mount: 12.5%*

— Side-mount: 26.9 %*

• Top-mount refrigerator-freezers also have the greatest percent of total available units at 

20.9%. The percent of total available units for bottom- and side-mount refrigeratorfreezers are as follows:

— Bottom-mount: 18.8%

— Side-mount: 9.5%

• When looking at all product classes, the energy consumption ranges from 

approximately 790 kWh/yr** to 230 kWh/yr, with the typical energy consumption at the 

current standard level.

• There are also significant differences in average equipment cost across the product 

classes:

— Top-mount: $400-$1500

— Bottom-mount: $1700-$2100

— Side-mount: $1400-$1800

44

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Refrigerator / Freezer

* 2008 data

** A product operating at this level is less efficient than the current Federal standard

Sources: CEC, AHAM, Technical Support Document
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in standard residential refrigerator / freezer shipments. 

45

Shipment Data » Residential Refrigerator / Freezer

Refrigerators, Standard

8,000,000

8,500,000

9,000,000

9,500,000

10,000,000

10,500,000

11,000,000

11,500,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

46

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Natural Gas Cooktops

DATA

2005 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12 9-12

Cooking Efficiency (%) 38 39.9 42 39.9 42 39.9 42 39.9 42

Average Life (yrs) 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18 17-18

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 225-300 250-350 375-450 250-350 375-450 250-350 375-450 250-350 375-450

Total Installed Cost ($) 275-350 300-400 425-500 300-400 425-500 300-400 425-500 300-400 425-500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)* - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible

Same as Reference Case
Final

• In 1990, gas cooktops were no longer allowed to have a constantly burning pilot light. 

Thus gas cooktops with an electrical supply must have electronic ignition systems.

• Efficiency levels vary little for cooktops on the market.

• The typical model on the market has a cooking efficiency of 39.9% and the highest 

efficiency model on the market has a cooking efficiency of 42%.

47

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Natural Gas Cooktops
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in residential natural gas cooktop shipments. 

48

Shipment Data » Residential Natural Gas Cooktops

Cooktops, Gas

Data is unavailable for dates prior to 2007.

2,200,000

2,300,000

2,400,000

2,500,000

2,600,000

2,700,000

2,800,000

2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Exluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

49

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Clothes Washers

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (ft3) 3 3.2 3 2.7 3.5 2.7 3.5 2.7 3.5 2.7 3.5

Modified Energy Factor (ft3/kWh/cycle) 2 1.26 2 2 3.88 2.2 3.88 2.2 3.88 2.2 3.88

Average Life (yrs) 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15

Water Consumption (gal/cycle) 14 30 11 20 13 11 13 11 13 11 13

Hot Water Energy (kWh/cycle) 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

Machine Energy (kWh/cycle) 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Dryer Energy (kWh/cycle) 0.7 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 550-

700

360-

440

550-

700

550-

700

800-

900

550-

700

850-

950

550-

700

850-

950

550-

700

850-

950

Total Installed Cost ($) 650-

800

460-

540

650-

800

650-

800

900-

1000

650-

800

950-

1050

650-

800

950-

1050

650-

800

950-

1050

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)* - - - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible

Same as Reference Case
Final

• This analysis examined front-loading residential clothes washers. It should be noted 

that there are high efficiency top-loading residential clothes washers on the market as 

well, though front-loaders are inherently more efficient than top-loaders.

• The current standard for standard-size front-loading and top-loading clothes washers is 

a modified energy factor (MEF) of 1.26. The ENERGY STAR criteria is 2 MEF; however, 

the most common front-loading models on the market exceed the ENERGY STAR 

criteria and have a MEF of 2.2.

• Only clothes washers with capacities of greater than 1.6 ft3 are eligible to earn ENERGY 

STAR.

• Energy efficiency improvement opportunities include:

— Higher efficiency motors and higher spin speeds

— Better load sensing (soiling and size and type of load)

— Better controls / greater number of wash programs

— Use of nylon beads

• The annual maintenance cost for residential clothes washers is negligible.

• According to the ACEEE – AHAM Consensus Agreement, the Federal standards frontloading residential clothes washers will be updated in 2015 (and will remain current 

through the 2018 standard updates) to a MEF of 2.2 and a water factor (WF) of 4.5

50

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Clothes Washers
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in automatic residential clothes washer shipments. 

51

Shipment Data » Residential Clothes Washers

Washers, Automatic

7,000,000

7,500,000

8,000,000

8,500,000

9,000,000

9,500,000

10,000,000

20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

52

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Clothes Dryers

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical MidLevel High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (ft3) 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

EF (lb/kWh)

electric:

3.01

gas:

2.67

electric:

3.01

gas:

2.67

electric:

3.1

gas:

2.75

gas:

2.85

electric:

3.16

gas:

3.02

electric:

3.17

gas:

2.81

electric:

4.51

gas: 3.02

electric:

3.17

gas:

2.81

electric:

4.51

gas:

3.02

electric:

3.17

gas:

2.81

electric:

4.51

gas:

3.02

Average Life (yrs) 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19 12-19

Retail Equipment Cost ($)

electric:

400-500

gas:

450-550 

electric:

400-500

gas:

450-550 

electric:

450-550

gas:

550-600

gas:

650-750

electric:

550-650

gas:

850-950

electric:

450-550

gas:

550-600

electric:

650-750

gas:

850-950

electric:

450-550

gas:

550-600

electric:

650-750

gas:

850-950

electric:

450-550

gas:

550-600

electric:

650-750

gas:

850-950

Total Installed Cost ($)

electric:

500-600

gas:

600-700

electric:

500-600

gas:

600-700

electric:

675-775

gas:

700-800

gas:

800-900

electric:

700-800

gas:

950-1050

electric:

675-775

gas:

700-800

electric:

900-1000

gas:

950-1050

electric:

675-775

gas:

700-800

electric:

900-1000

gas:

950-1050

electric:

675-775

gas:

700-800

electric:

900-1000

gas:

950-1050

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)* - - - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible

Same as Reference Case
Final

• The test procedure for residential clothes dryers was recently amended to include a new efficiency metric, 

combined energy factor (CEF), which adds a measure of standby/off-mode power. Although EF and CEF are 

both expressed in lbs/kWh of energy use, they can not be compared side-by-side since they are calculated 

differently. 

• There are both gas and electric models of clothes dryers on the market:

— For gas clothes dryers, the standard efficiency is 2.67 lb/kWh (CEF = 3.14 lb/kWh)

— For electric clothes dryers, the standard efficiency is 3.01 lb/kWh (CEF = 3.55 lb/kWh)

• Improvement opportunities include:

— Multi-step or modulating heat

— Higher efficiency drum motors

— Inlet air pre-heat

— Heat pump (for electric clothes dryers): heat pump residential clothes dryers, which operate much like a 

small air conditioner, are currently available in Europe and are anticipated to make it to the US market by 

2020.

— Better control systems for cycle termination (not reflected per the current test procedure, however)

— Using microwave technology

• No ENERGY STAR incentives currently exist to motivate manufacturers to adapt to existing energy efficiency 

opportunities. This is an especially important factor for heat pumps due to the high initial cost and the 

potential reliability issues. 

• The high electric clothes dryer EF value of 4.51 represents a product with heat pump technology, which is 

planned to enter the market around 2020.

• According to the ACEEE – AHAM Consensus Agreement, the Federal standards will be revised in 2015.

— For gas clothes dryers, the standard efficiency will be 2.81 lb/kWh (CEF = 3.30 lb/kWh)

— For electric clothes dryers, the standard efficiency will be 3.17 lb/kWh (CEF = 3.73 lb/kWh)

53

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Clothes Dryers
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in residential clothes dryer shipments.

54

Shipment Data » Residential Clothes Dryers

Dryers, Electric Dryers, Gas

5,000,000

5,200,000

5,400,000

5,600,000

5,800,000

6,000,000

6,200,000

6,400,000

6,600,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

1,200,000

1,300,000

1,400,000

1,500,000

1,600,000

1,700,000

1,800,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics Monthly: January 2011
Final

55

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Dishwashers

DATA

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical ENERGYSTAR High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Annual Use (kWh/yr) 720 355 355 324 190 355 175 353 166 353 156

Efficiency (cycle/kWh) 0.30 0.61 0.61 0.66 1.13 0.61 1.23 0.61 1.30 0.61 1.38

Annual Hot Water Energy Use (kWh/yr) 286 261 261 185 100 261 100 260 100 260 100

Average Life (yrs) 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13 10-13

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 200-

300

200-

300

200-

300

300-

1200 900 200-300 800 200-300 800 200-300 800

Total Installed Cost ($) 300-

400

300-

400

300-

400

400-

1300 1200 300-400 1100 300-400 1100 300-400 1100

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) - - - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible

Higher efficiencies and lower costs for high efficiency units
Final

• The current standard was established by the EISA 2007 amendments to EPCA and stipulates a 

maximum of 355 kWh/yr of energy use and 6.5 gal/cycle of water use for standard sized 

dishwashers, which typically handle eight place settings plus six serving pieces.

• The current ENERGY STAR qualifying criteria require a maximum of 324 kWh/yr of energy use and 

5.8 gal/cycle of water use for standard sized dishwashers.

• The most efficient dishwasher has an annual energy use of 190 kWh/yr, but at a high retail price and 

very small market share. Typical high efficiency units have an EF closer to the current standard.

• Dishwasher annual energy use is based on the U.S. DOE test procedure. This procedure is based on 

total energy use - including motor, dryer, booster heater (if present), and for hot water required from 

the water heater. The previous U.S. DOE test procedure was based on a usage estimate of 322 cycles 

per year, but as of September 2003 a new test procedure of 215 cycles per year was implemented.

• Efficiency improvement opportunities include:

— Better soil sensing in the water, the filter, and the controls to make use of that 

— Water distribution (small pipes, fine filter, small sump, alternating water use)

— Inline water heater (to minimize sump volume)

— High-efficiency, variable-speed pump motor

— Vent assembly to help drying of dishes

— Zeolithic drying

• According to the ACEEE – AHAM Consensus Agreement, the Federal standards will be revised in 

2013. The updated standard stipulates a maximum of 307 kwh/year and 5.0 gal/cycle of water use.

56

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Residential Dishwashers
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in residential dishwasher shipments.

57

Shipment Data » Residential Dishwashers

Dishwashers, Built-In

5,000,000

5,500,000

6,000,000

6,500,000

7,000,000

7,500,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

Higher efficiencies and lower costs than ref. case

58

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Furnaces

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

Combustion Efficiency (%)** 76 77 80 80 82 80 90 80 93 80 93

Average Life (yrs) 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20 15-20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1800-

2000

2000-

2400

2700-

2900

2700-

2900

2900-

3200

2700-

2900

3360-

3660

2700-

2900

4060-

4360

2700-

2900

3830-

4130

Total Installed Cost ($) 2800-

3000

3000-

3500

3050-

3275

3050-

3275

3275-

3625

3050-

3275

3735-

4035

3050-

3275

4205-

4505

3050-

3275

4435-

4735

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

*Capacity is input

** Gas furnaces less than 225,000 Btu/hr are rated by AFUE. Furnaces larger than 225,000 Btu/hr must been an 80% combustion efficiency.
Final

• EPACT standard for a gas-fired furnace is 80% combustion efficiency at maximum rated 

capacity.

• According to the U.S. DOE, combustion efficiency is a measure of how effectively the 

heat content of a fuel is transferred into usable heat.

• Commercial furnace efficiency ranges are as wide as those for residential and the 

technology options are similar (though usually scaled up).

• Besides scale, commercial units can differ in terms of the control system (i.e. integration 

with a Building Management System, twinning, or other staging strategies) and they 

may also use a heat recovery system to pre-heat inlet air.

• The maintenance cost is based on two cleanings per year.

59

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Furnaces
Final

60

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Furnaces

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

Thermal Efficiency (%) 81 81 81 82 82 82 82

Average Life (yrs) 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20 17-20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 3000-3600 3000-3600 3000-3600 3600-3700 3600-3700 3600-3700 3600-3700

Total Installed Cost ($) 3575-4125 3575-4125 3575-4125 4125-4225 4125-4225 4125-4225 4125-4225

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

* Capacity is input

Same as Reference Case
Final

• Commercial oil-fired furnaces with a capacity of 225,000 BTU/h or more must meet a 

thermal efficiency standard of 81% as stipulated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. The 

ASHRAE standard also mandates that furnaces that are not within the conditioned 

space must not have jacket losses that exceed 0.75% of the input rating.

• According to the U.S. DOE, thermal efficiency is interpreted as what is commonly 

known as “combustion efficiency” in other contexts, i.e., 100 percent minus percent flue 

loss

• The maintenance cost is based on two cleanings per year.

61

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Furnaces
Final

62

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Boilers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kW)* 165 165 165 165 165 165

Efficiency (%) 98 98 98 98 98 98

Average Life (yrs) 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 6000-7000 6000-7000 6000-7000 6000-7000 6000-7000 6000-7000

Total Installed Cost ($) 7500-9000 7500-9000 7500-9000 7500-9000 7500-9000 7500-9000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 100-150 100-150 100-150 100-150 100-150 100-150

* Capacity is output

Same as Reference Case
Final

• There are currently no Federal standards associated with electric boilers.

• The costs shown are for one 165kW unit, which would equate to a steady load of 

approximately 550,000 Btu/hr.

• Service life is determined mainly by water quality. Water conditioning (e.g., filters, 

softeners, de-alkizers, chemical feeders) may be necessary for a given application. 

• Annual maintenance in a typical application would include draining the unit for 

removal of any accumulated scale or sludge buildup.

• Minor end-use inefficiencies for electric boilers result from heat loss through the boiler 

(jacket losses).

63

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Boilers
Final

64

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Boilers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical MidRange High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

Combustion Efficiency (%) 76 77 80 80 90 98 80 98 82 98 82 98

Average Life (yrs) 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 5000-

6000

7000-

9000

9000-

11000

9000-

11000

13500-

16500

22500-

27500

13500-

16500

22500-

27500

13500-

16500

22500-

27500

13500-

16500

22500-

27500

Total Installed Cost ($) 12000-

13000

14000-

16000

16000-

18000

16000-

18000

20500-

23500

29500-

34500

20500-

23500

29500-

34500

20500-

23500

29500-

34500

20500-

23500

29500-

34500

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450

* Capacity is output

Same as Reference Case
Final

• The current requirement for gas-fired boilers is a minimum combustion efficiency of 

80% at the maximum rated capacity.

• Similar technologies to the those used in the residential market can be leveraged in the 

commercial arena. The higher efficiency units typically include electronic ignition, 

power burners, and improved heat exchangers. They may even condense and/or preheat incoming air.

• Since the last ASHRAE standard was published, ASHRAE has changed the metric for 

stating the efficiency of most classes of commercial boilers, excluding large oil hot water 

and large gas hot water boilers. Federal standards express efficiency in terms of 

combustion efficiency while efficiency levels in ASHRAE 90.1-2007 are expressed in 

terms of thermal efficiency. The thermal efficiency descriptor, as used in Standard 90.1-

2007, accounts for jacket losses as well as flue losses, while combustion efficiency only 

accounts for flue losses.

• Small, gas-fired, hot water, commercial packaged boilers (input capacity between 

300,000 and 2,500,000 Btu/hr) are the largest commercial packaged boiler equipment 

class in the market.

• The higher efficiency units typically include electronic ignition, power burners, and 

improved heat exchangers.

65

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Boilers
Final

66

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Boilers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200

Thermal Efficiency (%) 79 80 83 83.5 98 83.5 98 83.5 98 83.5 98

Average Life (yrs) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 11000-

12000

11000-

12000

12300-

13400

12300-

13400

24000-

26000

12300-

13400

24000-

26000

12300-

13400

24000-

26000

12300-

13400

24000-

26000

Total Installed Cost ($) 15000-

16000

15000-

16000

16600-

17700

16600-

17700

30000-

35000

16600-

17700

30000-

35000

16600-

17700

30000-

35000

16600-

17700

30000-

35000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

110-

155

* Capacity is output

Same as Reference Case
Final

• Commercial oil-fired boilers must meet a thermal efficiency standard of 83%.

• The higher efficiency units typically include improved heat exchangers, and multi-step 

or variable-output power burners.

• Since the last ASHRAE standard was published, ASHRAE has changed the metric for 

stating the efficiency of commercial boilers. Federal standards expresses efficiency in 

terms of combustion efficiency while efficiency levels in ASHRAE 90.1-2007 are 

expressed in terms of thermal efficiency. The thermal efficiency descriptor, as used in 

Standard 90.1-2007, accounts for jacket losses as well as flue losses, while combustion 

efficiency only accounts for flue losses.

67

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Boilers
Final

68

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Chillers1

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base:

Absorption

Installed

Base:

Engine

-Driven

Installed

Base:

Absorption

Installed

Base:

Engine–

Driven

AbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDriven

Typical Capacity (tons)* 150-

1500 400 150-1500 400 150-1500 400 150-1500 400 150-1500 400 150-1500 400

Efficiency (kW/ton2) 3.5 2.3 3.5 2.3 3.2 2.0 2.9 1.9 2.3 1.8 2.3 1.8

COP 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.5 1.1 1.8 1.2 1.9 1.5 2.0 1.5 2.0

Average Life (yrs) 23 25 23 25 23 25 23 25 23 25 23 25

Retail Equipment Cost ($/ton) 600-

750

700-

800

600-

750

700-

800

600-

750

700-

800

600-

750

700-

800

750-

900

700-

800

750-

900

700-

800

Total Installed Cost ($/ton) 750-

900

850-

950

750-

900

850-

950

750-

900

850-

950

750-

900

850-

950

900-

1150

850-

950

900-

1150

850-

950

Annual Maintenance Cost ($/ton) 15-30 35-45 15-30 35-45 15-30 35-45 15-30 35-45 15-30 35-45 15-30 35-45

1This analysis assumes a water-cooled chiller; both gas-fired chiller types (absorption and engine-driven) are shown.

2This is merely the cooling COP expressed in units of kW/ton for comparison to an electric chiller in terms of site efficiency; it does not 

represent the electrical consumption of the gas-fired chiller.

Higher efficiencies and costs than ref. case

* Capacity is output
Final

• Gas-fired chillers are available as either air-cooled (~25-50 tons) or water-cooled (150+ 

tons). This analysis includes only water-cooled chillers. Two direct-fired gas chiller 

technologies are in the market; absorption and engine-driven.

• Direct gas firing provides high enough temperatures to operate double effect absorption 

chillers, which operate at a 50-60% higher COP than single effect absorption chillers. 

Triple effect absorption chillers are expected to boost cooling COP another 50% beyond 

that of a double effect chiller. Prototype direct-fired triple effect absorption chillers 

have been tested by York and Trane, but are not commercially available. Some 

absorption chillers can be operated in reverse to provide heating; these are referred to as 

chiller/heaters.

• Gas-fired engine-driven chillers pair conventional vapor compression technologies 

(typically screw or centrifugal compressors) with natural gas powered reciprocating 

engines. Gas-fired engine-driven chillers exhibit higher peak cooling COP than 

absorbers, and engine modulation results in even better part load performance. 

Incremental efficiency improvements may be expected for engine driven chillers. 

Engine driven chillers allow the opportunity to recover waste heat on site for useful 

purposes. 

69

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Chillers
Final

70

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Centrifugal Chillers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical2 Mid3 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(tons)* 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350

Efficiency [fullload/IPLV] (kW/ton1

)

0.70 / 

0.67

0.70 / 

0.67

0.58 / 

0.55

0.56 / 

0.45

0.48 / 

0.39

0.56 / 

0.43

0.46 / 

0.36

0.56 / 

0.41

0.46 / 

0.36

0.56 / 

0.41

0.46 / 

0.36

COP [full-load/IPLV] 1 5.0 / 

5.2

5.0 / 

5.2

6.1 / 

6.4

6.3 / 

7.8

7.3 / 

9.0

6.3 / 

8.2

7.6 / 

9.7

6.3 / 

8.6

7.6 / 

9.7

6.3 / 

8.6

7.6 / 

9.7

Average Life (yrs) 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton)

250-

350

250-

350

250-

350

300-

400

400-

500

300-

400

400-

500

300-

400

400-

500

300-

400

400-

500

Total Installed Cost 

($/ton)

300-

450

300-

450

300-

450

350-

500

450-

600

350-

500

450-

600

350-

500

450-

600

350-

500

450-

600

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($/ton) 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30 15-30

1COP and kW/ton efficiencies listed are for full load rated conditions as well as integrated part load value (IPLV), which is 

more indicative of annual performance.

22010 typical efficiency based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007.

32010 mid efficiency based on FEMP recommendations.

Higher efficiencies than ref. case

* Capacity is output
Final

• For most chiller applications the seasonal performance (represented by the integrated 

part-load value; IPLV) is more indicative of performance than the full-load performance 

at rated conditions. The IPLV does not necessarily correlate well to the full-load 

efficiency, so both efficiency parameters are listed in the comparison table.

• The ASHRAE 90.1-2007 minimum efficiency requirements for centrifugal chillers 

greater than 300 tons capacity are the same as for 90.1-2004 (COP=6.10 full-load; 

COP=6.40 IPLV). 

• The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) recommends a full -load efficiency 

of 0.56 or less kW/ton for base-loaded chillers or an integrated part-load value efficiency 

of 0.45 kW/ton for chillers with seasonally variable loads.

• The highest efficiency centrifugal chillers incorporate some of the following:

— Variable speed compressors

— greater heat exchanger surface areas; enhanced tube configurations (counterflow)

— Optimized fluid flow velocities

— High efficiency electric motors

— Improved turbomachinery design, resulting in higher compressor efficiency

— Better piping and valving, including electronic expansion valves

— Evaporative condenser for the heat rejection equipment

• Installed costs vary widely depending on equipment needed for installation (e .g. crane) 

and size of system. This is a mature market with centrifugal chillers representing 75% of 

commercial chiller sales larger than 200 tons.

71

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Centrifugal Chillers
Final

72

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reciprocating Chillers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical2 Mid3 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(tons)

100-

200

100-

200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200

Efficiency [fullload/IPLV] (kW/ton1

)

1.26 / 

1.15

1.26 / 

1.15

1.26 / 

1.15

1.23 / 

0.90

1.00 / 

0.80

1.23 / 

0.90

1.00 / 

0.80

1.23 / 

0.90

1.00 / 

0.80

1.23 / 

0.90

1.00 / 

0.80

COP [full-load/IPLV] 1 2.80 / 

3.05

2.80 / 

3.05

2.80 / 

3.05

2.86 / 

3.91

3.52 / 

4.40

2.86 / 

3.91

3.52 / 

4.40

2.86 / 

3.91

3.52 / 

4.40

2.86 / 

3.91

3.52 / 

4.40

Average Life (yrs) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton)

400-

500

400-

500 400-500 450-550 500-600 450-550 500-600 450-550 500-600 450-550 500-600

Total Installed Cost 

($/ton)

475-

600

475-

600 475-600 525-650 575-700 525-650 575-700 525-650 575-700 525-650 575-700

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($/ton) 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40 25-40

1COP and kW/ton efficiencies listed are for full load rated conditions as well as integrated part load value (IPLV), which is more indicative of annual 

performance.

22010 typical efficiency based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007.

32010 mid efficiency based on FEMP recommendations.

Same as Reference Case
Final

• For most chiller applications the seasonal performance (represented by the integrated 

part-load value; IPLV) is more indicative of performance than the full-load performance 

at rated conditions. The IPLV does not necessarily correlate well to the full-load 

efficiency, so both efficiency parameters are listed in the comparison table.

• Reciprocating chillers are most cost effective for small loads. Reciprocating chiller 

market share continues to be supplanted by screw chiller market share.

• Reciprocating chillers can be used in either air-cooled or water cooled applications. 

Reciprocating chillers shown in the data are air-cooled. Air-cooled chillers are less 

efficient than the water-cooled models. Listed efficiencies include matched condensers 

and their associated energy use (as required for compliance with ASHRAE 90.1-2010).

• The ASHRAE 90.1-2007 minimum efficiency requirements for air-cooled reciprocating 

chillers are the same as for 90.1-2004 (COP=2.80 full-load; COP=3.05 IPLV). 

• The most recent Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) recommendations for 

reciprocating chillers (published 11/03) include a full -load efficiency of 1.23 or less 

kW/ton for base-loaded chillers or an integrated part-load value efficiency of 0.90 

kW/ton for chillers with seasonally variable loads.

• The highest efficiency reciprocating chillers incorporate some of the following:

— Multiple compressors for staged capacity control

— Improved heat-exchangers

73

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reciprocating Chillers
Final

74

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Screw Chillers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical2 Mid3 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(tons)* 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300 100-300

Efficiency [fullload/IPLV] 

(kW/ton1)

1.26 / 

1.15

1.26 / 

1.15

1.26 / 

1.15

1.22 / 

0.94

0.94 / 

0.79

1.20 / 

0.90

0.94 / 

0.79

1.10 / 

0.85

0.94 / 

0.79

1.10 / 

0.85

0.94 / 

0.79

COP [fullload/IPLV] 12.80 / 

3.05

2.80 / 

3.05

2.80 / 

3.05

2.88 / 

3.74

3.02 / 

4.45

2.93 / 

3.91

3.02 / 

4.45

3.20 / 

4.14

3.02 / 

4.45

3.20 / 

4.14

3.02 / 

4.45

Average Life (yrs) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton) 300-400 300-400 300-400 350-450 400-500 350-450 400-500 350-450 400-500 350-450 400-500

Total Installed 

Cost ($/ton) 375-500 375-500 375-500 400-525 450-575 400-525 450-575 400-525 450-575 400-525 450-575

Annual 

Maintenance Cost 

($/ton)

10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50 10-50

1COP and kW/ton efficiencies listed are for full load rated conditions as well as integrated part load value (IPLV), which is more indicative of 

annual performance.

22010 typical efficiency based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007.

32010 mid efficiency based on FEMP recommendations.

Higher typical efficiencies than ref. case

* Capacity is output
Final

• For most chiller applications the seasonal performance (represented by the integrated 

part-load value; IPLV) is more indicative of performance than the full-load performance 

at rated conditions. The IPLV does not necessarily correlate well to the full-load 

efficiency, so both efficiency parameters are listed in the comparison table.

• Screw chillers are available from ~50-1100 tons but are most cost effective for small 

(<300 tons) loads. Screw chillers dominate the current market for small to mid-size 

chillers.

• Screw chillers can be used in either air-cooled or water cooled applications. Screw 

chillers shown in the data are air-cooled. Air-cooled chillers are less efficient than the 

water-cooled models. Listed efficiencies include matched condensers and their 

associated energy use (as required for compliance with ASHRAE 90.1-2010).

• The ASHRAE 90.1-2007 minimum efficiency requirements for air-cooled screw chillers 

are the same as for 90.1-2004 (COP=2.80 full-load; COP=3.05 IPLV). 

• The most recent Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) recommendations for 

150+ ton screw chillers (published 12/10) include a full -load efficiency of 1.22 or less 

kW/ton for base-loaded chillers or an integrated part-load value efficiency of 0.94 

kW/ton for chillers with seasonally variable loads. 

• The highest efficiency screw chillers incorporate some of the following:

— Variable speed compressors and/or multiple compressors

— Improved heat-exchangers

75

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Screw Chillers
Final

76

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Scroll Chillers

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (tons)* 20-140 20-140 20-140 20-140 20-140 20-140

Efficiency [full-load/IPLV] (kW/ton1)

1.26 / 

1.15

1.26 / 

1.15 1.19/0.80 1.19/0.80 1.19/0.80 1.19/0.80

COP [full-load/IPLV] 1 2.80 / 

3.05

2.80 / 

3.05 2.96/4.40 2.96/4.40 2.96/4.40 2.96/4.40

Average Life (yrs) 20 20 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment Cost ($/ton) 300-400 300-400 350-450 350-450 350-450 350-450

Total Installed Cost ($/ton) 400-500 400-500 450-550 450-550 450-550 450-550

Annual Maintenance Cost ($/ton) 35-50 35-50 35-50 35-50 35-50 35-50

1COP and kW/ton efficiencies listed are for full load rated conditions as well as integrated part load value (IPLV), which is 

more indicative of annual performance.

Same as Reference Case

* Capacity is output
Final

• For most chiller applications the seasonal performance (represented by the integrated 

part-load value; IPLV) is more indicative of performance than the full-load performance 

at rated conditions. The IPLV does not necessarily correlate well to the full-load 

efficiency, so both efficiency parameters are listed in the comparison table.

• Scroll chillers can be used in either air-cooled or water cooled applications. Scroll 

chillers shown in the data are air-cooled, which is most common. Air-cooled chillers are 

less efficient than the water-cooled models. Listed efficiencies include matched 

condensers and their associated energy use (as required for compliance with ASHRAE 

90.1-2010).

• The most recent Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) recommendations for 

<150 ton scroll chillers (published 12/10) include a full -load efficiency of 1.19 or less 

kW/ton for base-loaded chillers or an integrated part-load value efficiency of 0.80 

kW/ton for chillers with seasonally variable loads. 

• The highest efficiency screw chillers incorporate some of the following:

— Multiple compressors for staged capacity control

— Improved heat-exchangers

77

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Scroll Chillers
Final

78

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Rooftop Air Conditioners

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical MidRange High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90

Efficiency (EER) 9.2 10.1 11.2 11.2 12.7 13.9 11.2 13.9 11.2 13.9 11.2 13.9

Average Life (yrs) 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 3300-

4500

4000-

5100

5500-

6500

5500-

6500

7000-

8000

20000-

21000

4900-

5900

14875-

15875

4900-

5900

14875-

15875

4900-

5900

14875-

15875

Total Installed Cost ($) 5000-

6200

5700-

7000

7500-

8500

7500-

8500

9000-

10000

22000-

24000

6900-

7900

20700-

22900

6900-

7900

20700-

22900

6900-

7900

20700-

22900

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

150-

300

Lower costs than ref. case

* Capacity is input
Final

• Effective January 1, 2010, the minimum efficiency standards for commercial rooftop air 

conditioners are as follows:

• Above, two EERs are listed. The first refers to systems with electric resistance heat or no 

heating, and the second refers to systems with all other heating system types that are 

integrated into the unitary equipment.

• This analysis examined 90,000 BTU/h (7.5 ton), cooling only units.

• The high efficiency unit includes a variable capacity digital scroll compressor, which 

saves energy during off-design hours, approximately 17% annual energy savings over a 

typical unit.

• Future increases in efficiency will result from the inclusion of more efficient 

compressors, larger heat exchanges, further advances in enhanced heat exchanger 

surfaces, and through the use of evaporative coolers.

79

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Rooftop Air Conditioners

Air-Cooled Products Efficiency Standards

≥ 65 - < 135 kBtu/h 11.2/11.0 EER

≥ 135 - < 240 kBtu/h 11.0/10.8 EER
Final

80

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Engine-Driven Rooftop Air 

Conditioners

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (tons) 25 25 11 11 11 11

Heating COP NA NA 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4

Cooling COP 0.7 0.7 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1

Average Life (yrs) 30 30 30 30 30 30

Retail Equipment Cost 

($/ton) 775-835 775-835 775-835 775-835 775-835 775-835

Total Installed Cost ($/ton) 1200-1300 1200-1300 1200-1300 1200-1300 1200-1300 1200-1300

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 55 55 55 55 55 55

* Capacity is output

Same as Reference Case
Final

• The only gas-fired engine-driven rooftop unit currently available in the US market is by 

Nextaire (an Aisin Seiki product line). It is an 11 ton heat pump with dual scroll 

compressors, variable refrigerant flow, and a variable speed supply fan. Engine coolant 

heat recovery improves the heating mode COP. This heat pump was introduced in 

2010.

• There are currently no Federal requirements on gas-fired engine-driven rooftop air 

conditioners or heat pumps.

• Annual sales of the engine-driven rooftop heat pump are estimated at less than 5,000 

units per year.

81

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Engine-Driven Rooftop Air 

Conditioners
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in unitary (rooftop) air conditioner shipments. 

82

Shipment Data » Commercial Rooftop Air Conditioners

Air-Conditioners, Unitary

This data includes both residential and commercial units. It should be noted that the vast 

majority of rooftop air conditioners are residential, not commercial. 

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

4,500,000

5,000,000

5,500,000

6,000,000

6,500,000

7,000,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

83

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Rooftop Heat Pumps

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90

Efficiency (EER) 9.3 9.8 11.0/10.8* 11.0 12.0 11 13 11 15 11 15

COP (Heating) 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.8

Average Life (yrs) 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 3500-

4500

4000-

5000

5000-

6000

5000-

6000

5500-

6500

5000-

6000

6000-

7000

5000-

6000

6900-

7900

5000-

6000

6300-

7300

Total Installed Cost ($) 5000-

6500

6000-

7100

6500-

7300

6500-

7300

7900-

9500

6500-

7300

8400-

9400

6500-

7300

9300-

10300

6500-

7300

8700-

9700

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

100-

150

Higher efficiencies and higher cost than ref. case

* Capacity is output

** The first EER refers to systems with electric resistance heat or no heating, and the second refers to systems with all other heating system types 

that are integrated into the unitary equipment.
Final

• Effective January 1, 2010, the minimum efficiency standards for commercial rooftop 

heat pumps are as follows:

• Above, two EERs are listed. The first refers to systems with electric resistance heat or no 

heating, and the second refers to systems with all other heating system types that are 

integrated into the unitary equipment.

• Installed costs vary widely depending on size of building and unit for retrofit 

applications.

84

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Rooftop Heat Pumps

Air-Cooled Products Efficiency Standards

≥ 65 - < 135 kBtu/h 11.0./10.8 EER

3.3 COP @470F

≥ 135 - < 240 kBtu/h 10.6/10.4 EER

3.2 COP @470F
Final

85

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Ground Source Heat Pumps

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100 80-100

COP (Heating) 3.4 3.5 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9

EER (Cooling) 13.8 14 14 27.8 14 27.8 14 27.8 14 27.8

Average Life (yrs) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 7000-

8000

7000-

8000

7000-

8000

10000-

12000

7000-

8000

10000-

12000

7000-

8000

10000-

12000

7000-

8000

10000-

12000

Total Installed Cost ($) 14000-

15000

14000-

15000

14000-

15000

17000-

20000

12000-

13000

15000-

17000

12000-

13000

15000-

17000

12000-

13000

15000-

17000

Annual Maintenance Cost (¢/sqft) 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15 12-15

Lower installed costs than ref. case

* Capacity is output
Final

• There is no Federal standard for commercial ground source heat pumps.

• Commercial design applications vary in size, style, and configuration.

• The most common ground source heat pump is a closed-loop system in which water or 

an anti-freeze solution is circulated through plastic pipes buried underground. Openloop systems employ groundwater, or surface water such as a pond or lake, but water 

supply and water quality issues impose limitations on such applications.

• Input and output ratios (i.e., efficiencies) of a given machine change with different 

entering water temperatures, air flow rates, water flow rates, and relative humidity.

• Useful life is based on the expected life of the compressor. Replacement cost would be 

less than installed cost, since the ground loop is already in place and would have a 

useful life much longer than the compressor. A closed-loop system can last up to 50 

years.

• There is an expectation that large, central facilities are used in commercial buildings. 

This is not always the case. Distributed, small units with zonal ducting and controls are 

almost always more efficient and less expensive.

• Adoption of commercial ground source heat pumps is slow due to the high initial cost.

86

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Ground Source Heat Pumps
Final

87

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Resistance Heaters

DATA

2010 2020 2030 2035

Small Large Small Large Small Large Small Large

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)* 17 170 17 170 17 170 17 170

Efficiency (%) 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98

Average Life (yrs) 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 500-

700

3400-

3800

500-

700

3400-

3800

500-

700

3400-

3800

500-

700

3400-

3800

Total Installed Cost ($) 600-

800

3500-

3900

600-

800

3500-

3900

600-

800

3500-

3900

600-

800

3500-

3900

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) ** - - - - - - - -

* *Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible

Same as Reference Case

* Capacity is output
Final

• This analysis examined electric unit heaters

• Electric unit heaters range in capacity from 14 to 170 kBtu/hr, with 17 and 170 kBtu/hr 

being the most typical units on the market

• Electric resistance heaters are considered 100% efficient because there is no heat loss 

through ducts or combustion. For this analysis, the efficiency is 98% to account for IR 

losses and fan inefficiency.

• Installation time and costs are estimated to be minimal

88

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Resistance Heaters
Final

89

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Typical Input Capacity (kBTU/h) 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200

Thermal Efficiency (%) 77 78 80 80 96 80 96 80 99 80 99

Average Life (yrs) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 2800-

4200

3000-

4500

3500-

4500

3500-

4500

5000-

6500

3500-

4500

5000-

6500

3500-

4500

5000-

6500

3500-

4500

5000-

6500

Total Installed Cost ($) 3200-

4700

3500-

5000

4000-

5000

4000-

5000

5500-

7000

4000-

5000

5500-

7000

4000-

5000

5500-

7000

4000-

5000

5500-

7000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

Higher efficiencies for high efficiency units
Final

• Commercial gas-fired water heaters with a capacity of 75,000 BTU/h or more must meet 

a thermal efficiency standard of 80% as stipulated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007. 

• Baseline units are constructed quite similarly to residential units, though typically at 

higher storage and/or input capacities. 

• High-efficiency, integrated commercial storage water heaters feature condensing heat 

exchangers , consisting of either stainless or enameled tubing and an inducer fan system 

or power burner. Other designs incorporate an external heating module with a storage 

tank assembly. Either design approach can yield a condensing appliance. 

• Maintenance for water heaters consists of sediment and scale removal once or twice per 

year. Estimated cost for a gas water heater would be $100 per year for one cleaning 

performed by a plumber.

90

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Water Heaters
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in commercial gas-fired water heater shipments. 

91

Shipment Data » Commercial Gas-Fired Water Heaters

Commercial Water Heaters, Gas

70,000

75,000

80,000

85,000

90,000

95,000

100,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

92

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Resistance Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (gal) 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

Typical Capacity (kW) 45 45 45 45 45 45 45

Thermal Efficiency (%) 98 98 98 98 98 98 98

Average Life (yrs) 14 14 14 14 14 14 14

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 3400-5300 3400-5300 3400-5300 3400-5300 3400-5300 3400-5300 3400-5300

Total Installed Cost ($) 4000-6000 4000-6000 4000-6000 4000-6000 4000-6000 4000-6000 4000-6000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

Same as Reference Case
Final

• The EPACT standard will remain in effect for electric water heaters.

• The most efficient units on the market include an electric booster element as backup.

93

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Resistance Water Heaters
Final

Since the last analysis was performed in 2007, there has been a 

decrease in commercial electric resistance water heater shipments. 

94

Shipment Data » Commercial Electric Resistance Water Heaters

Commercial Water Heaters, Electric

40,000

45,000

50,000

55,000

60,000

65,000

70,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Unit Shipments, Excluding Exports

Year

Source: Appliance Magazine 2010, U.S. Appliance Shipment Statistics 

Monthly: January 2011
Final

95

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical MidRange High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (gal) 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70

Typical Input Capacity (kBTU/h) 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

Thermal Efficiency (%) 78 79 78 80 82 85 80 85 80 85 80 85

Average Life (yrs) 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20 12-20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 4100 4150 4100 4200 4300 4400 4200 4400 4200 4400 4200 4400

Total Installed Cost ($) 4600 4650 4600 4700 4800 4900 4700 4900 4700 4900 4700 4900

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) 100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200

Same as Reference Case
Final

• Commercial oil-fired water heaters with a capacity of 105,000 BTU/h or more must meet 

a thermal efficiency standard of 78% as stipulated in ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007.

• Condensing commercial water heaters do not exist, the highest attainable efficiency 

with oil-fired storage water heaters is thus about 86% TE.

• Maintenance for commercial oil-fired water heaters consists of sediment and scale 

removal once or twice per year.

96

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Oil-Fired Water Heaters
Final

97

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Instantaneous Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity (kBtu/hr)

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

180-

230

Thermal Efficiency (%) 76 77 80 84 85 84 90 84 92 84 92

Average Life (yrs) 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 500-

750

600-

850

800-

1000

1250-

1300

1350-

1450

1250-

1300

1350-

1450

1250-

1300

1350-

1450

1250-

1300

1350-

1450

Total Installed Cost ($) 650-

900

750-

1000

900-

1250

1500-

1800

1600-

2000

1500-

1800

1600-

2000

1500-

1800

1600-

2000

1500-

1800

1600-

2000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) - - - - - - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible

Higher efficiencies for high efficiency units
Final

• Commercial gas-fired instantaneous water heaters with a capacity of 200,000 BTU/h or 

more must meet a thermal efficiency standard of 80% as stipulated in ASHRAE 

Standard 90.1-2007.

• Commercial instantaneous systems use similar technologies for improving energy 

efficiency as residential systems; however, unlike condensing residential systems, 

condensing commercial systems typically do not use multiple heat exchangers.

• Depending on the manufacturer, input ratings for condensing systems usually top out 

at 800,000 BTU/h, requiring the use of multiple units for staging purposes; however, 

there are reliability, comfort, and efficiency benefits to staging multiple units.

• When replacing a storage water heater with an instantaneous water heater, there may 

be significant additional costs to upsize the gas supply line and change the venting.

• Using multiple water heaters located at the source improves the efficiency of the system, 

but at a higher installed cost. Each smaller, point-of-use electric instantaneous water 

heater retails for approximately $150-$250. They typically have a storage capacity of 2-7 

gallons.

98

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas-Fired Instantaneous Water Heaters
Final

99

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Electric Booster Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kBtu/hr) 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200 100-200

Thermal Efficiency (%) 98 98 98 98 98 98

Average Life (yrs) 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8

Retail Equipment Cost ($) 1200-1500 1200-1500 1200-1500 1200-1500 1200-1500 1200-1500

Total Installed Cost ($) 1400-1700 1400-1700 1400-1700 1400-1700 1400-1700 1400-1700

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) * - - - - - -

* Annual Maintenance Cost is negligible

Same as Reference Case
Final

100

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Gas Booster Water Heaters

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current 

Standard Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(kBtu/hr)

100-

200

100-

200 100-200 100-200

100-

200

100-

200

100-

200 100-200 100-200

100-

200 100-200

Thermal 

Efficiency (%) 79 79 80 80 90 82 92 85 95 85 95

Average Life (yrs) 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8 3-8

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($)

5000-

6000

5000-

6000

5000-

6000

5000-

6000

10000-

11000

5000-

6000

10000-

11000

5000-

6000

10000-

11000

5000-

6000

10000-

11000

Total Installed 

Cost ($)

5300-

6300

5300-

6300

5300-

6300

5300-

6300

10300-

11300

5300-

6300

10300-

11300

5300-

6300

10300-

11300

5300-

6300

10300-

11300

Annual 

Maintenance 

Cost ($)

150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Same as Reference Case
Final

• Booster water heaters are used for high water temperature applications, which typically 

include commercial dishwashers, laundromats, hospitals, and car washes where water 

temperature must reach higher than 1800F.

• Booster water heaters are installed, often at the point of use, in series with the main 

service water heating system to boost service water temperatures. The main service 

water heating system may provide 110-140 F water, and the booster water heater may 

increase that temperature to 180-195 F. Typical commercial applications for booster 

water heaters include commercial dishwashers, laundromats, hospitals, and car washes.

• There is currently no energy efficiency standard for electric booster water heaters. Gas 

booster water heater minimum efficiency is dictated by ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007 

under the “gas instantaneous water heaters” category.

• Booster water heaters typically have short lifetimes because of high usage and extreme 

temperatures.

• Typical sales are small due to the limited number of applications.

101

Performance / Cost Characteristics » Commercial Booster Water Heaters
Final

102

Appendix A

Data Sources

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1801 K Street, NW, Suite 500

Washington, D.C. 20006

(202) 973-2400

www.navigantconsulting.com
Final

A-1

Data Sources » Residential Gas-Fired Water Heaters

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY

STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) AHRI /

Distributors EERE AHRI /Distributors

NCI

Energy Factor AHRI EERE AHRI ENERGY

STAR AHRI

Average Life (yrs) EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors EERE Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors /

RS Means 2010 EERE

Distributors /

RS Means

2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Oil Water Heaters

A-2

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed

Base

Current

Standard Typical Mid-Level High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) AHRI /

Distributors EERE AHRI EERE

NCI

Energy Factor AHRI EERE AHRI

Average Life (yrs) Ka-BOOM! 

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors /

RS Means 2007 EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Electric Resistance Water Heaters

A-3

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) AHRI /

Distributors EERE

NCI

Energy Factor AHRI EERE DEER, 2008 AHRI

Average Life (yrs) EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors /

RS Means 2010 EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Heat Pump Water Heaters

A-4

SOURCES

2005 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) AHRI EERE

NCI

Energy Factor AHRI ENERGY STAR AHRI

Average Life (yrs) ACEEE, 2007 EERE

Retail Equipment Cost w/o Tank($) RS Means 2010 /

ACEEE, 2007 EERE / Distributors

Total Installed Cost w/o Tank ($) RS Means 2010 /

ACEEE, 2007 EERE / Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Instantaneous Water Heaters

A-5

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (BTU/h) EERE

NCI

Energy Factor Distributors EERE AHRI ENERGY STAR Distributors

Average Life (yrs) ENERGY STAR EERE

Retail Equipment Cost w/o Tank ($) Distributors /

RS Means 2010 EERE

Total Installed Cost w/o Tank ($) DEER, 2008 EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Solar Water Heaters

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (sq. ft.) SRCC

SAIC

Overall Efficiency (Solar 

Fraction) 0.3-0.5 (RETScreen); 0.58-0.83 (SRCC); 0.5-0.75 (EERE)

Solar Energy Factor ENERGY STAR range=0.53-47, median=2, average=2.83

Average Life (yrs) 20 year system life (EERE); Collector warranties are 10 years (ENERGY STAR/SRCC)

Retail Equipment Cost1($) RS Means

Total Installed Cost1($) RS Means

1Costs are for an indirect (active closed loop) system, including tank and backup heater. Smaller capacity/cost systems are typical for southern 

& western states (>2/3 of the current market). Higher capacity/cost systems are required in colder/cloudier regions.

2ENERGY STAR requires OG-300 rating from SRCC. Most installations use SRCC rated collectors; a high efficiency option is not applicable.

A-6
Final

Data Sources » Residential Gas-Fired Furnaces

A-7

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) AHRI Distributors AHRI

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

AFUE (%) AHRI EERE ENERGY STAR AHRI

Electric Consumption (kWh/yr) AHRI EERE AHRI

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Oil-Fired Furnaces

A-8

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) AHRI Distributors AHRI

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

AFUE (%) AHRI EERE AHRI ENERGY STAR AHRI

Electric Consumption (kWh) AHRI EERE

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE Distributors EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Hydronic Heating Systems (Boilers)

A-9

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) EERE

NCI

AFUE (%) AHRI EERE ENERGY STAR EERE

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Room Air Conditioners

A-10

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Distributors AHAM

NCI

EER Distributors Federal Standard AHAM ENERGY STAR AHAM

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 Ka-BOOM!

Ka-BOOM! /

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Residential Central Air Conditioners

A-11

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Distributors EERE

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

SEER Distributors Federal Standard EERE ENERGY STAR EERE

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors EERE /

Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Air Source Heat Pumps

A-12

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Distributors / 

Product Literature AHRI

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

HSPF (Heating) AHRI Federal Standard AHRI ENERGY STAR AHRI /

CEC

SEER (Cooling) AHRI Federal Standard AHRI ENERGY STAR AHRI /

CEC

Average Life (yrs) EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($)

Distributors /

RS Means 2010 /

NCI

EERE

Total Installed Cost ($)

Distributors /

RS Means 2010 /

NCI

EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Residential Ground Source Heat Pumps

A-13

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Mid-Range High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) AHRI/SAIC

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

COP (Heating) SAIC ASHRAE 90.1-2007, ENERGY STAR

EER (Cooling) SAIC ASHRAE 90.1-2007, ENERGY STAR

Average Life (yrs) System life 25 years, ground loop life 50 years (EERE)

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors / CEC

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors / CEC

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Residential Gas Heat Pumps

A-14

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Manufacturer/SAIC

SAIC

Heating (GCOP) Manufacturer/SAIC Manufacturer/SAIC Manufacturer/SAIC

Cooling (GCOP) Manufacturer/SAIC CEC/T24 Manufacturer/SAIC

Annual Electric Use (kWh/yr) Manufacturer/SAIC

Average Life (yrs) SAIC

Retail Equipment Cost ($) SAIC

Total Installed Cost ($) SAIC

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Residential Refrigerator / Freezer

A-15

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Energy Consumption (kWh/yr) Distributors ENERGY STAR CEC ENERGY STAR CEC

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 Ka-BOOM!

Ka-BOOM! /

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE /

Distributors EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors /

RS Means 2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Natural Gas Cooktops

A-16

SOURCES

2005 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Distributors /

Product Literature EERE

NCI

Cooking Efficiency (%) Distributors /

Product Literature EERE

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI / EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Clothes Washers

A-17

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (ft3) Distributors CEC ENERGY STAR CEC

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

Modified Energy Factor (ft3/kWh/cycle) Distributors Standards CEC ENERGY STAR CEC

Average Life (yrs)

Appliance Magazine,

2005 /

EERE

Ka-BOOM! /

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Water Consumption (gal/cycle) EERE /

Distributors CEC

Hot Water Energy (kWh/cycle) EERE /

Distributors

Machine Energy (kWh/cycle) EERE /

Distributors

Dryer Energy (kWh/cycle) EERE /

Distributors

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE /

Distributors DEER, 2008

EERE /

Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) RS Means 2010 DEER, 2008 RS Means 2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Residential Clothes Dryers

A-18

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Mid-Level High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (ft3) NCI CEC CEC /

Distributors

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

EF (lb/kWh) NCI EERE

Machine Energy (kWh/cycle) NCI EERE

Average Life (yrs) NCI Ka-BOOM! /

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) NCI EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE EERE
Final

Data Sources » Residential Dishwashers

A-19

SOURCES

2005 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical ENERGY STAR High Typical / High

Typical Annual Use (kWh/yr) Product Literature EERE Distributors ENERGY STAR CEC

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

Efficiency (cycle/kWh) NCI EERE CEC

Average Life (yrs) Appliance Magazine, 2005 Ka-BOOM! /

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) EERE Distributors EERE

Total Installed Cost ($) EERE DEER, 2008 DEER, 2008 EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Furnaces

A-20

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Arthur D. Little, 1997 AHRI

NCI

AFUE ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004

ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004 /

CEC

AHRI

Average Life (yrs)

2003 ASHRAE

Handbook –

HVAC Applications

Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($)

RS Means 2010/

NCI /

Distributors

RS Means 2010

Total Installed Cost ($)

RS Means 2010/

NCI /

Distributors

RS Means 2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

RS Means 2010/

NCI /

Distributors
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Oil-Fired Furnaces

A-21

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)

NCI /

Distributors /

AHRI

AHRI

NCI

Thermal Efficiency (%) ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004 AHRI AHRI /CEC AHRI

Average Life (yrs) 2003 ASHRAE Handbook –

HVAC Applications Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) RS Means 2010

Total Installed Cost ($) RS Means 2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI / Distributors
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Electric Boilers

A-22

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (kW) BSRIA

SAIC

Efficiency (%) SAIC

Average Life (yrs) ASHRAE 2007 HVAC Applications

Retail Equipment Cost ($) RS Means/SAIC

Total Installed Cost ($) RS Means/SAIC

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) RS Means/SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Boilers

A-23

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Mid-Range High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)

Arthur D. Little /

Building Services Research and

Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998

NCI EERE

NCI

Combustion Efficiency (%) ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004 CEC AHRI

Average Life (yrs)

Building Services Research and

Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998 /

Appliance Magazine, 2005

EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) CEC /

RS Means 2010 DEER, 2008 EERE /Appliance Magazine, 2010

Total Installed Cost ($) CEC /

RS Means 2010 NCI EERE /Appliance Magazine, 2010

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI EERE /

Appliance Magazine, 2010
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Oil-Fired Boilers

A-24

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h)

Building Services Research

and Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998

NCI EERE

NCI

Combustion Efficiency (%) ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004 AHRI

Average Life (yrs)

Building Services Research

and Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998 /

NCI

EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($)

Distributors /

RS Means 2010 /

NCI

EERE

Total Installed Cost ($)

Distributors /

RS Means 2010 /

NCI

EERE

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI EERE
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Chillers

A-25

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed 

Base: 

Absorption

Installed 

Base: 

EngineDriven

Installed 

Base: 

Absorption

Installed 

Base: 

EngineDriven

AbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDrivenAbsorptionEngineDriven

Typical 

Capacity (tons) BSRIA/Distributors

Efficiency 

(kW/ton)

Product Literature/SAIC

COP

Average Life 

(yrs) 2007 ASHRAE Applications Handbook/Distributors

Retail 

Equipment 

Cost ($/ton)

Distributors/RS Means/SAIC Total Installed 

Cost ($/ton)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Cost ($/ton)
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Centrifugal Chillers

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Mid High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(tons) US Census SAIC

Efficiency 

(kW/ton)

DEER/FEMP/Product Literature SAIC

COP

Average Life (yrs) 2007 ASHRAE Applications Handbook

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton)

RS Means/Distributors/SAIC

Total Installed 

Cost ($/ton)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Cost ($/ton)

SAIC

A-26
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Reciprocating Chillers

A-27

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Mid High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical 

Capacity (tons) BSRIA / DEER SAIC

Efficiency 

(kW/ton)

DEER/FEMP/Product Literature SAIC

COP

Average Life 

(yrs) Manufacturers

Retail 

Equipment 

Cost ($/ton) RS Means/Distributors/SAIC

Total Installed 

Cost ($/ton)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Cost ($/ton)

SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Screw Chillers

A-28

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Mid High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Typical Capacity 

(tons) SAIC

Efficiency 

(kW/ton)

DEER/FEMP/Product Literature SAIC

COP

Average Life (yrs) Manufacturers

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($/ton) RS Means/Distributors/SAIC

Total Installed Cost 

($/ton)

Annual 

Maintenance Cost 

($/ton)

SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Scroll Chillers

A-29

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (tons)

SAIC/Manufacturers

Efficiency [full-load/IPLV] (kW/ton)

Product Literature SAIC

COP [full-load/IPLV] 

Average Life (yrs)

Manufacturers

Retail Equipment Cost ($/ton)

RS Means/SAIC

Total Installed Cost ($/ton)

Annual Maintenance Cost ($/ton)

SAIC
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Rooftop Air Conditioners

A-30

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Mid-Range High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) AHRI / NCI

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

Efficiency (EER) ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004

Distributors /

NCI EERE AHRI

Average Life (yrs) 2003 ASHRAE Handbook –

HVAC Applications Appliance Magazine, 2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) NCI /

LBNL, 2003

Distributors /

NCI /

DEER, 2008

EERE Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI /

LBNL, 2003

Distributors /

NCI /

DEER, 2008

EERE Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) EERE
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Engine-Driven Rooftop Air Conditioners

A-31

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (tons) Distributors

Heating COP NA Product 

Literature

Distributors/SAIC

Cooling COP Product Literature

Average Life (yrs)

Distributors/SAIC

Retail Equipment Cost 

($/ton)

Total Installed Cost ($/ton)

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Rooftop Heat Pumps

A-32

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) AHRI

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

Efficiency (EER) ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004 EERE

COP (Heating) NCI / EERE EERE

Average Life (yrs) 2003 ASHRAE Handbook - HVAC Applications

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors / RS Means 2010 / NCI / DEER

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors / RS Means 2010 / NCI / DEER

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) Distributors / RS Means 2010 / NCI / DEER
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Ground Source Heat Pumps

A-33

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) GHPC

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

COP (Heating) IGSPHA / GHPC

EER (Cooling) GHPC

Average Life (yrs) GHPC

Retail Equipment Cost ($) NCI / Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI / Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost (¢/sqft) GHPC
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Electric Resistance Heaters

A-34

DATA

2010 2020 2030 2035

Small Large Small Large Small Large Small Large

Typical Capacity (kBTU/h) Distributors

NCI

Efficiency (%) NCI

Average Life (yrs)

Technology Cost and 

Performance File for 

Commercial Model for 

AEO2010

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Water Heaters

A-35

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) Arthur D. Little / Distributors / AHRI AHRI

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

Typical Input Capacity (BTU/h) Arthur D. Little /

AHRI CEC AHRI

Thermal Efficiency (%)

EERE /

ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004

AHRI

Average Life (yrs)

Building Services Research

and Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998 /

Appliance Magazine, 2005

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors /

CEC / NCI Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors / CEC / NCI

Annual Maintenance Cost (¢/sqft) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Electric Resistance Water Heaters

A-36

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (gal) NCI / Product Literature AHRI

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

Typical Capacity (kW) Product Literature

Thermal Efficiency (%) Product Literature ASHRAE Standard

90.1-2004 AHRI

Average Life (yrs)

Appliance Magazine, 2005 /

Building Services Research and

Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998

Appliance Magazine, 2005

Retail Equipment Cost ($) Distributors / NCI Distributors

Total Installed Cost ($) Distributors / NCI NCI

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Oil-Fired Water Heaters

A-37

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical Mid-Range High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal) NCI AHRI / NCI

NCI

Typical Input Capacity (kBTU/h) NCI AHRI / NCI AHRI / CEC

Thermal Efficiency (%) NCI ASHRAE Standard

90.1-1999

ANSI / ASHRAE /

IESNA Standard

90.1-2007

AHRI / CEC

Average Life (yrs) NCI Appliance Magazine, 2005

Retail Equipment Cost ($) NCI Distributors / NCI

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI Distributors / NCI NCI

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) NCI Distributors / NCI NCI
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas-Fired Instantaneous Water Heaters

A-38

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity (gal)

Building Services Research and

Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998 /

AHRI

AHRI

Building Services Research and

Information Association & Ducker

Research Company, 1997, 1998 /

AHRI

NCI / Max Tech 

(Desroches)

Thermal Efficiency (%) AHRI

ANSI / ASHRAE /

IESNA Standard

90.1-2007

Average Life (yrs) EERE

Retail Equipment Cost ($) CEC / NCI / Distributors Distributors / NCI

Total Installed Cost ($) CEC / NCI / Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) CEC / NCI / Distributors
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Electric Booster Water Heaters

A-39

DATA

2003 2007 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Typical Typical

Typical Capacity (gal) SAIC/Distributors

SAIC

Thermal Efficiency (%) Product Literature

Average Life (yrs)

Retail Equipment Cost ($)

Total Installed Cost ($) SAIC/Distributors

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Gas Booster Water Heaters

A-40

SOURCES

2003 2007 2010 2010 2020 2030 2035

Installed Base Current 

Standard Typical High Typical / High

Typical Capacity 

(gal) Distributors/SAIC

SAIC

Thermal 

Efficiency (%) Product Literature

Average Life (yrs) Product Literature/SAIC

Retail Equipment 

Cost ($)

Distributors/SAIC Total Installed 

Cost ($)

Annual 

Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Final

143

Appendix B

References

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1801 K Street, NW, Suite 500

Washington, D.C. 20006

(202) 973-2400

www.navigantconsulting.com
Final

144

• ACEEE. (2007). Top Rated Energy-Efficient Appliances. American Council for an EnergyEfficient Economy.

• AHAM - ACEEE. (2010). Agreement on Minimum Federal Efficiency Standards, Smart Appliances, 

Federal Incentives and Related Matters for Specified Appliances.

• AHAM. (n.d.). AHAM Directory of Certified Products. Retrieved September 2010, from 

http://www.ahamdir.com/dirsvc/aham.nsf/fraRAC?OpenFrameset&pgm=Room%20Air%20C

onditioners

• AHRI. (n.d.). Certification Directory. Retrieved September 2010, from Directory of Certified 

Product Performance: http://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx

• Appliance Magazine. (2010). Appliance Market Research Report - U.S. Appliance Industry: Market 

Share, Life Expectancy & Replacement Market, and Saturation Levels. Appliance Magazine.

• Appliance Magazine. (2005). Portrait of the U.S. Appliance Industry. Appliance Magazine.

• Arthur D. Little. (1997). Massachusetts Market Transformation Scoping Study; Final Report.

Massachusetts Gas DSM / Market Transformation Collaborative.

References

B-1
Final

145

• ASHRAE. (2003). 2003 ASHRAE Handbook - HVAC Applications. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (2007). ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (1999). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (2004). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004. ASHRAE, Inc.

• Building Services Research and Information Association & Ducker Research Company. (1997, 

1998). U.S. Market for Central Plant Air Conditioning; Market for Ducted Warm Air Central 

Heating; U.S. Market for Hydronic Heating and Burners; U.S. Water Heating Market; U.S. Unitary 

and Close Control Air Conditioning.

• California Energy Commission. (n.d.). Retrieved September 2010, from Appliance Efficiency 

Database: http://www.appliances.energy.ca.gov/AdvancedSearch.aspx

• DEER. (2008, June). Database for Energy Efficiency Resources. Retrieved September 2010, from 

California Energy Commission: www.energy.ca.gov/deer

• Desroches, L.-B. a. (2011). Max Tech and Beyond, Maximizing Appliance and Equipment Efficiency 

by Design. Berkeley: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

• Distributors. (n.d.). NCI discussions with distributors and online research (i.e. Grainger, 

Home Depot, Lowes, Sears, and others).

References

B-2
Final

146

• EERE. (2006). Buildings Energy Data Book.

• EERE. (2000). Clothes Washers Technical Support Document, Final Rule Technical Support 

Document: Energy Efficiency Standards for Consumer Products: Clothes Washers.

• EERE. (2009). Commercial Heating, Air Conditioning and Water Heating Equipment (i.e. ASHRAE 

Equipment).

• EERE. (2006). DOE Appliance Standards Framework, Rulemaking Framework for Residential Water 

Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment and Pool Heaters.

• EERE. (2005). Draft Technical Analysis for Refrigerators, Analysis of Amended Energy Conservation 

Standards for Residential Refrigerators-Freezers.

• EERE. (2010). Energy Conservation Program for Appliance Standards: Residential Central Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps.

• EERE. (2001). Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Central Air Conditioners and 

Heat Pumps Energy Conservation Standards; Final Rule.

References

B-3
Final

147

• EERE. (2007). Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Energy Conservation 

Standards for Residential Furnaces and Boilers; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2009). Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Certain Consumer 

Products and for Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2010). Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Water 

Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment, and Pool Heaters; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2009). Final Rule Technical Support Document: Residential Dishwashers, Dehumidifiers, 

Cooking Products, and Commercial Clothes Washers.

• EERE. (2004). Joint Stakeholders Comments on Standards for Commercial Package Air Conditioners 

and Heat Pumps.

• EERE. Preliminary Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Consumer 

Products: Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers.

• EERE. (2010). Residential Clothes Dryers and Room Air Conditioners Preliminary Technical Support 

Document.

References

B-4
Final

148

• EERE. (2006). Technical Analysis for Residential Furnaces and Boilers, Energy Conservation 

Program for Residential Furnaces and Boilers; Proposed Rule.

• EERE. (2006). Technical Analysis for Rulemaking Framework for Dishwashers/Cooktops/Ovens, 

Rulemaking Framework for Commercial Clothes Washers and Residential Dishwashers, 

Dehumidifiers, and Cooking Products.

• EERE. (2005). Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and 

Industrial Equipment: Commercial Unitary Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps.

• ENERGY STAR. (n.d.). Retrieved September 2010, from ENERGY STAR Products: 

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=products.pr_find_es_products

• Federal Standard. (n.d.). National energy conservation standards authorized under the 

Energy and Policy Conservation Act (EPCA).

• GeoExchange. GeoExchange Heating and Cooling Systems: Fascinating Facts.

References

B-5
Final

149

• GHPC. (n.d.). Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium. Retrieved 2007, from www.geoexchange.org

• IGSPHA. (n.d.). International Ground Source Heat Pump Association. Retrieved 2007, from 

www.igshpa.okstate.edu

• LBNL. (2003). Commercial Unitary Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps - Life Cycle Cost Analysis: 

Inputs and Results. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

• Max Neubauer, A. d. (2009). Ka-BOOM! The Power of Appliance Standards. ACEEE, ASAP.

• Navigant Consulting, Inc. (n.d.). In House Expertise.

• Navien America Inc. (n.d.). Navien Condensing 98%. Retrieved September 2010, from 

http://www.navienamerica.com/PDS/ftp/NavienCondensingTankless/DownLoad_Brochure_

Manual/NavienCodensing98_Brochure.pdf

• Product Literature. (n.d.). Literature from manufacturers and experts on specific products.

• RS Means Mechanical Cost Data. (2007). Means Construction Information Network.

• RS Means Mechanical Cost Data. (2010). Means Construction Information Network.

• SAIC. (n.d.). In House Expertise.

• Technology Cost and Performance File for Commercial Model for AEO2010. (2009). (E. 

Boedecker, Compiler)

References

B-6
June 2013

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Buildings Appliance and Equipment Costs and Efficiency 4

APPENDIX C
EIA - Technology Forecast Updates –

Residential and Commercial Building 

Technologies – Reference Case

Presented to:

U.S. Energy Information Administration

Prepared by: 

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1200 19th Street, NW, Suite 700

Washington, D.C. 20036

And

SAIC

8301 Greensboro Drive

McLean, VA 22102

December 19, 2012 Confidential and Proprietary, 

©2012 Navigant Consulting, Inc.

Do not distribute or copy
Final

DISCLAIMER

This presentation was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States 

Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their 

employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, 

express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or 

usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use 

would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, 

process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily 

constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government 

or any agency, contractor or subcontractor thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed 

herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency 

thereof. 

December 2012

1
Final

2

Objective 3

Methodology 4

Definitions 5

Calculations 6

Market Transformation 7

Residential General Service Incandescent Lighting 8

Residential Reflector Lighting 11

Residential Compact Fluorescent Lighting 14

Residential Linear Fluorescent Lighting 16

Residential Torchieres 23

Residential Solid State Lighting 26

Commercial General Service Incandescent Lighting 29

Commercial Compact Fluorescent Lighting 31

Commercial Halogen Lighting – PAR 38 and Edison 33

Commercial Solid State Lighting 36

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – T8 and 

T12 (Less Than/Equal To Four Foot) 40

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – T5 44

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – T8 and 

T12 (Greater Than Four Foot) 47

Commercial High Intensity Discharge –

Low Bay Lighting 54

Page Page

Table of Contents

Commercial High Intensity Discharge –

High Bay Lighting 62

Commercial Supermarket Display Cases 73

Commercial Compressor Rack Systems 75

Commercial Condensers 77

Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators 79

Commercial Walk-In Freezers 82

Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators 85

Commercial Reach-In Freezers 87

Commercial Ice Machines 89

Commercial Beverage Merchandisers 92

Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines 94

Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation 96

Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation 98

Commercial Fan Coil Units 100

Data Sources A-1

References B-1
Final

3

The objective of this study is to develop baseline and projected performance/cost 

characteristics for residential and commercial 

end-use equipment.

• 2003/2007 (commercial) and 2005/2009 (residential) baselines, as well as today’s (2011)

— Review of literature, standards, installed base, contractor, and manufacturer information.

— Provide a relative comparison and characterization of the cost/efficiency of a generic product.

• Forecast of technology improvements that are projected to be available through 2040

— Review of trends in standards, product enhancements, and Research and Development (R&D).

— Projected impact of product improvements and enhancement to technology.

Objective

The performance/cost characterization of end-use equipment developed in this study 

will assist EIA in projecting national primary energy consumption.
Final

4

Input from industry, including government, R&D organizations, and manufacturers, 

was used to project product enhancements concerning equipment performance and cost 

attributes.

• Technology forecasting involves many uncertainties.

• Technology developments impact performance and cost forecasts.

• Varied sources ensure a balanced view of technology progress and the probable timing of 

commercial availability.

• All cost forecasts are shown in 2011 dollars.

Methodology
Final

5

The following tables represent the current and projected efficiencies for residential and 

commercial building equipment ranging from the installed base in 2003 and 2007 (for 

commercial products) and 2005 and 2009 (for residential) to the highest efficiency 

equipment that is expected to be commercially available by 2040, assuming incremental

adoption. Below are definitions for the terms used in characterizing the status of each 

technology.

• 2003/2007; 2005/2009 Installed Base: the installed and “in use” equipment for that year. Represents 

the installed stock of equipment, but does NOT represent sales.

• 2011 Current Standard: the minimum efficiency (or maximum energy use) required (allowed) by 

current DOE standards, when applicable.

• Typical: the average, or “typical,” product being sold in the particular timeframe.

• ENERGY STAR: the minimum efficiency required (or maximum energy use allowed) to meet the 

ENERGY STAR criteria, when applicable.

• Mid-Level: middle tier higher-efficiency product available in the particular timeframe.

• High: the product with the highest efficiency available in the particular timeframe.

• Lumens: All reported lumens are mean lumens, not initial lumens.

• CCT: The correlated color temperature (CCT) is a specification of the color appearance of the light 

emitted by a lamp.

Definitions
Final

6

The following metrics are commonly referred to throughout the tables to follow. Below 

are the calculations for each metric.

• System Wattage = (Lamp Wattage * Ballast Factor) / Ballast Efficiency

• System Lumens = Lamp Lumens * Ballast Factor

• Lamp Efficacy = Lamp Lumens / Lamp Wattage

• System Efficacy = System Lumens / System Wattage

• Lamp Cost ($/klm) = Lamp Cost / (Lamp Lumens / 1000)

• Total Equipment Cost = Lamp Cost + Fixture (including ballast) Cost

• System Cost ($/klm) = Total Equipment Cost / (System Lumens / 1000)

• Total Installed Cost = Total Equipment Cost + Labor Installation Cost

• BLE = A/(1+B*Avg Total Lamp Arc Power^(-C))

Calculations
Final

7

Market Transformation

The market for the reviewed products has changed since the analysis was performed in 

2008. These changes are noted and reflected in the efficiency and cost characteristics.

• EPACT 2005 established standards for certain types of self-contained Commercial Refrigeration 

Equipment and batch Automatic Ice Makers which went into effect in 2010.

• EISA 2007 set several requirements for Walk-in Coolers and Freezers which went into effect in 2009.

• DOE issued Federal minimum efficiency standards that have or will soon go into effect for General 

Service Fluorescent Lamps (July 2012 effective date), Incandescent Reflector Lamps (July 2012), 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts (2014), Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines (Aug. 2012), and certain 

Commercial Refrigeration Equipment (Jan. 2012) not covered by the EPACT 2005 standards.
Final

8

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (60 Watts)

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2014120202

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High

60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W

Lamp Wattage

60 60 60 60 60 43 43 N/A N/A

Lamp Lumens 

850 850 830 860 870 750 750 N/A N/A

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

14.2 14.2 13.8 14.3 14.5 17.4 17.4 N/A N/A

Lamp Price

$0.25 $0.25 $0.31 $0.34 $0.37 $4.57 $4.57 N/A N/A

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$0.29 $0.29 $0.37 $0.40 $0.43 $6.09 $6.09 N/A N/A

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

1 1 2 1 1 3 3 N/A N/A

CRI

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A N/A

1 The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 prescribes standards for current 60 watt incandescent lamps as of January 1, 2014. 

Starting in 2014, we assume 60 watt incandescents will be replaced by halogen infrared incandescents. 

2

In 2020, EISA 2007 sets a minimum efficacy for general service lamps of 45 lm/W. These standards can not be met with existing

commercialized incandescent lamp technologies and current trends in industry lead us to believe they will not be met.
Final

9

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (75 Watts)

1 The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 prescribes standards for current 75 watt incandescent lamps as of January 1, 2013. 

Starting in 2014, we assume 75 watt incandescents will be replaced by halogen infrared incandescents. 

2

In 2020, EISA 2007 sets a minimum efficacy for general service lamps of 45 lm/W. These standards can not be met with existing

commercialized incandescent lamp technologies and current trends in industry lead us to believe they will not be met.

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2013120202

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High

75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W

Lamp Wattage

75 75 75 75 75 53 53 N/A N/A

Lamp Lumens 

1170 1170 1060 1170 1190 1050 1050 N/A N/A

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

15.6 15.6 14.1 15.6 15.9 19.8 19.8 N/A N/A

Lamp Price

$0.36 $0.37 $0.35 $0.40 $0.49 $4.69 $4.69 N/A N/A

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$0.32 $0.32 $0.33 $0.34 $0.41 $4.47 $4.47 N/A N/A

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

1 1 2 1 1 3 3 N/A N/A

CRI

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A N/A
Final

10

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (60 and 75 Watts)

• The residential incandescent lighting characterized in this report is a 60 watt and a 75 watt medium 

screw based incandescent lamp.

• A standard 60 watt incandescent lamp produces approximately 860 lumens. A standard 75 watt 

incandescent lamp produces approximately 1170 lumens (GE, 2012; OSRAM, 2012; Philips, 2012; 

Sylvania, 2012). There is little variation in light output between products. Therefore, there is little 

variation in lamp efficacy.

• The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) established standards for 60W lamps 

effective in 2014 and 75W lamps effective in 2013. These standards can be achieved if incandescent 

bulbs use halogen infrared technologies. 

• EISA 2007 also established a requirement that DOE establish standards for general service lamps that 

are equal to or greater than 45 lm/W by 2020. These standards can not be achieved by any 

incandescent technology currently on the market and given current and projected trends in industry 

it is not likely they will be met. It is currently assumed that industry will increase their investment in 

LED technology at the expense of incandescent technology. 

• California’s Appliance Efficiency Regulations include efficiency regulations for general service 

incandescent lamps with certain bases. California is currently undergoing a rulemaking to reduce 

indoor residential lighting by not less than 50% of 2007 levels over the next 10 years in accordance 

with Assembly Bill 1109. They are going to regulate general purpose lighting (incandescent lamps) 

and portable lighting fixtures. 

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (60 and 75 Watts)
Final

11

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Reflector Lighting

DATA

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical

Typical Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

65 65 50 16 65 50 15

Lamp Lumens 

620 620 660 750 630 630 720

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

9.5 9.5 13.2 46.9 9.7 12.6 48.0

Lamp Price

$1.36 $1.37 $4.19 $5.87 $3.38 $6.12 $6.36

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$2.20 $2.21 $6.35 $7.82 $5.36 $9.72 $8.83 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

2.0 2.0 3.0 8.0 1.8 3.0 8.0

CRI

100 100 100 82 100 100 82
Final

12

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Reflector Lighting

DATA

2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

65 50 15 65 50 15 65 50 15

Lamp Lumens 

636 662 756 643 695 794 649 729 833

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

9.8 13.2 50.4 9.9 13.9 52.9 10.0 14.6 55.6

Lamp Price

$3.30 $5.97 $6.20 $3.21 $5.82 $6.05 $3.13 $5.67 $5.89

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$5.18 $9.02 $8.20 $5.00 $8.38 $7.62 $4.83 $7.78 $7.07 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

1.8 3.1 8.2 1.9 3.2 8.4 1.9 3.2 8.6

CRI

100 100 82 100 100 82 100 100 82
Final

13

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Reflector Lighting

• The residential reflector lamps characterized in this report is a 65W BR30 incandescent, a 50W PAR30 

halogen, and a 16W BR30 Reflector compact fluorescent.

• EPACT92 established minimum performance standards for some reflector lamps and provided 

exemptions for certain specialty applications (e.g., ER/BR, vibration service, more than 5% 

neodymium oxide, impact resistant, infrared heat, colored). EPACT92 effectively phased-out Rshaped tungsten filament incandescent reflector lamps at certain wattages and bulb diameters, 

replacing them with more efficient and cost effective tungsten-halogen parabolic aluminized 

reflector (PAR) lamps. EISA 2007 took away certain exemptions from EPACT 1992, requiring certain 

previously exempted lamps to meet EPACT92 minimum performance standards by January 1, 2008. 

The 65W BR30, a large majority of the incandescent reflector lamp market is still exempted.

• The following future improvements for the system were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: 

— Incandescents: Efficacy +3%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

— Halogen: Efficacy +15%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

— CFL: Efficacy +15%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

• These improvements can be made by improved filament design and placement, higher pressure 

capsules, or higher efficiency reflector coatings.

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

Residential Reflector Lamps
Final

14

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Compact Fluorescent Lighting

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Energy 

Star Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W

Lamp Wattage

13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13

Lamp Lumens 

825 825 715 825 875 900 919 945 965 992 1013 1042

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

63.5 63.5 55.0 63.5 67.2 69.2 70.7 72.7 74.2 76.3 77.9 80.1

Lamp Price

$3.14 $2.15 N/A $1.57 $2.38 $3.33 $2.32 $3.25 $2.26 $3.17 $2.21 $3.09

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$4.22 $2.61 N/A $1.90 $2.72 $3.70 $2.53 $3.44 $2.35 $3.19 $2.18 $2.96 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

10.0 10.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 10.0 10.3 10.3 10.5 10.5 10.8 10.8

CRI

82 82 80 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82
Final

15

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Compact Fluorescent Lighting

• The residential compact fluorescent lamp characterized in this report is a 13 watt compact 

fluorescent lamp.

• Compact Fluorescents contain mercury and therefore require appropriate disposal. In addition, 

because the color rendering index of compact fluorescents is lower than that incandescent lamps (82 

compared to 100), the quality of the light of a compact fluorescent falls short of incandescent lamps.

• EPACT 2005 sets performance for medium based compact fluorescent lamps. It adopts Energy Star 

performance requirements (August 6, 2001 version) for efficacy, lumen maintenance, lamp life, rapid 

cycle stress test, CRI, etc. The standard is effective for lamps manufactured on or after January 1, 

2006. The Secretary may revise these requirements by rule or establish other requirements at a later 

date. [Note: EPACT 2005 standards do not apply to CFL lamps with screw bases other than medium (e.g., pin 

based)]

• Energy Star® and the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) offer voluntary specifications for CFL 

lamps.

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: Efficacy +15%, Life 

+7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012).

— Improvements in efficacy can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors in compact 

fluorescent lamps. Lifetime improvements can be made by improving the electrodes. 

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

Residential Compact Florescent Lamps
Final

16

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8)

DATA

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Current 

Standard 

Mid-Level 

T12 High T12 Baseline T8 

Mid-Level 

T8 High T8 

32WT8 40WT12 32WT8 40WT12 40WT12 34WT12 32WT8 32WT8 28WT8 

Lamp Wattage 64 80 64 80 80 68 64 64 56

Lamp Lumens 5040 5720 5040 5720 6500 5580 5040 5420 5120

System Wattage 65 70 65 70 70 60 65 65 57

System Lumens 4435 3890 4435 3890 4420 3794 4435 4770 4506

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 78.8 71.5 78.8 71.5 81.3 82.1 78.8 84.7 91.4

System Efficacy (lm/W) 68.7 55.6 68.7 55.6 63.1 63.8 68.7 73.8 79.7

Lamp Price ($) $3.35 $1.85 $1.71 $1.85 $5.91 $5.79 $1.71 $2.67 $2.88 

Ballast Price ($) $15.71 $11.22 $9.94 $11.22 $11.22 $11.22 $9.94 $9.94 $9.94 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $0.66 $0.32 $0.34 $0.32 $0.91 $1.04 $0.34 $0.49 $0.56 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 20 15 20 15 24 24 20 20 18

CRI 75 70 75 70 85 85 75 82 82

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 83% 78% 87% 78% 78% 78% 87% 87% 87%
Final

17

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8)

DATA

2020 2030 2040

Typical T8 High T8 Typical T8 High T8 Typical T8 High T8

32WT8 28WT8 32WT8 28WT8 32WT8 28WT8

Lamp Wattage 64 56 64 56 64 56

Lamp Lumens 5700 5197 5700 5282 5700 5367

System Wattage 65 57 65 57 65 57

System Lumens 5016 4573 5016 4648 5016 4723

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 89.1 92.8 89.1 94.3 89.1 95.8

System Efficacy (lm/W) 77.7 80.9 77.7 82.3 77.7 83.6

Lamp Price ($) $2.76 $2.84 $2.71 $2.79 $2.67 $2.74 

Ballast Price ($) $9.79 $9.79 $9.62 $9.62 $9.46 $9.46 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $0.48 $0.55 $0.48 $0.53 $0.47 $0.51 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 25 19 26 19 26 20

CRI 85 82 85 82 85 82

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 87% 87% 87% 87% 87% 87%
Final

Residential Linear Fluorescent Lighting (T12/T8)

• This report assumes that T12 and T8 residential linear fluorescent lamps provide the same utility to 

consumers. Each characterized technology is a two-lamp, one-ballast system that emits approximately 

4,500 system lumens.

• In a change from the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report characterizes a range of efficacies for T12 

and T8 lamps and does not use T5 lamps for direct comparison because T5 lamps are almost never 

used as residential replacement options.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Low efficiency and mid-range efficiency T12s: 2 F40T12 lamps with a residential low power 

factor electronic ballast (ballast factor =0.68, ballast luminous efficiency (BLE)= 77.7%)

— High efficiency T12: 2 F34T12 lamps with a residential low power factor electronic ballast 

(ballast factor =0.68, BLE =77.7%)

— Baseline and mid-range efficiency T8s: 2 F32T8 lamps with instant start electronic ballast 

(ballast factor=0.88, BLE=87.2%)

— High efficiency T8: 2 F28T8 lamps with instant start electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, 

BLE=87.2%)

• Since 1995, DOE standards have required that the lamps characterized by this report have a minimum 

efficacy of 75 lm/W and a minimum CRI of 69 for >35W lamps or 45 for <35W lamps.

• In 2005, DOE standards raised the minimum ballast efficacy factor (BEF) of the ballasts paired with the 

characterized lamps, effectively promoting the use of T8 lamp and ballast systems. Residential ballasts 

were originally exempted from regulation.

18

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8)
Final

Residential Linear Fluorescent Lighting (T12/T8)

• Beginning July 14, 2012 (or July 14, 2014 for T8 700-series phosphor lamps), DOE fluorescent lamp 

standards will require a minimum efficacy of 89 lm/W. While the amended performance-based 

standards do not explicitly prohibit T12 lamps, no T12 lamps met the standard at the time of its 

announcement. Since then, however, T12 lamps meeting the standard have entered the market.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized residential ballasts 

have a minimum BLE = 0.993 / (1 + 0.41 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). Residential ballasts 

also must have a minimum power factor of 0.5.

• California's Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• ENERGY STAR residential fixtures require ≥ 65 lm/W per lamp-ballast platform before September 1, 

2013 and ≥ 70 lm/W per lamp-ballast platform thereafter.

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30-year period in addition to the 

improvements necessitated by DOE standards: Efficacy +5%, Life +10%, and Price -5% (NCI, 2012). 

Improvements can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors. Improvements in life can be made 

by using better electrodes. Additional future energy savings are expected to come from increased use 

of dimming ballasts and occupancy sensors with linear fluorescent lighting.

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

19

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8) (cont.’d)
Final

20

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T5)

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

28WT5 28WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 

Lamp Wattage 

56 56 56 52 56 52 56 52 56 52

Lamp Lumens 

5320 5320 5320 5320 5400 5400 5488 5488 5577 5577

System Wattage 

63 63 63 59 61 57 61 57 61 57

System Lumens 

5320 5320 5320 5320 5400 5400 5488 5488 5577 5577

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

95.0 95.0 95.0 102.3 96.4 103.8 98.0 105.5 99.6 107.3

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

84.3 84.3 84.3 90.7 88.7 95.5 90.2 97.1 91.6 98.7

Lamp Price ($) $3.56 $3.18 $3.18 $3.97 $3.13 $3.91 $3.08 $3.85 $3.03 $3.78 

Ballast Price ($) $20.94 $20.94 $20.94 $20.94 $26.72 $26.72 $26.26 $26.26 $25.81 $25.81 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $0.67 $0.60 $0.60 $0.75 $0.58 $0.72 $0.56 $0.70 $0.54 $0.68 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

20 20 20 25 21 26 21 27 22 27

CRI

85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 88.7% 88.7% 88.7% 88.7% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0%
Final

Residential Linear Fluorescent Lighting (T5)

• The residential T5 lamps characterized in this report are part of a two-lamp, one-ballast systems that 

emit approximately 5,300 system lumens. 

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report characterizes a range of efficacies within the T5 

family and does not use T12 and T8 lamps for direct comparison because of a distinct utility for T5 

lamps. Notably, T5 systems are very rarely used in the residential sector.

• T5 lamps are approximately 40% narrower than T8 lamps and almost 60% narrower than T12 lamps. 

This allows T5 lamps to be coated with higher quality, more efficient phosphor blends than larger 

diameter lamps, resulting in a more efficacious lamp. The compact size of T5 lamps also permits 

greater flexibility in lighting design and construction.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical: 2 F28T5 lamps with a programmed start electronic ballast (ballast factor =1, 

BLE=88.7%)

— Best available: 2 F26T5 lamps with a programmed start electronic ballast (ballast factor =1, 

BLE=88.7%)

21

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T5)
Final

Residential Linear Fluorescent Lighting (T5)

• Currently no federal standards exist for the T5 lamps or their corresponding ballasts.

• Beginning July 14, 2012, DOE fluorescent lamp standards will require a minimum efficacy of 86 

lm/W.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE = 0.993 / (1 + 0.51 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)).

• California's Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30-year period: Efficacy +5%, Life 

+10%, and Price -5% (NCI, 2012). Improvements can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors. 

Improvements in life can be made by using better electrodes. Additional future energy savings are 

expected to come from increased use of dimming ballasts and occupancy sensors with linear 

fluorescent lighting.

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

22

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T5) (Cont.’d)
Final

23

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Torchieres

DATA

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical

Typical Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

253 150 154 37 150 150 40

Lamp Lumens 

4300 2670 2670 2670 2733 2650 2666

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

17.0 17.8 17.3 72.7 18.2 17.7 66.6

Lamp Price

$4.15 $2.27 $1.10 $12.71 $2.87 $3.88 $12.33

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$0.97 $0.85 $0.42 $4.76 $1.05 $1.46 $4.63 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

2.1 1.0 1.8 10.0 0.8 3.0 9.5

CRI 98 100 100 82 100 100 82
Final

24

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Torchieres

DATA

2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

150 150 40 150 150 40 150 150 40

Lamp Lumens 

2760 2783 2799 2788 2922 2939 2816 3068 3086

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

18.4 18.6 70.0 18.6 19.5 73.5 18.8 20.5 77.1

Lamp Price

$2.80 $3.78 $12.02 $2.73 $3.69 $11.72 $2.66 $3.60 $11.43

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$1.01 $1.36 $4.30 $0.98 $1.26 $3.99 $0.94 $1.17 $3.70 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

0.8 3.1 9.7 0.8 3.2 10.0 0.8 3.2 10.2

CRI

100 100 82 100 100 82 100 100 82
Final

25

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Torchieres

• The residential torchiere characterized in this report emits approximately 2,683 lumens. The typical 

characteristics are a weighted average of a halogen, incandescent, and CFL torchieres based. The 

2005 typical wattage is based on 2003 installed base data. The 2009 typical wattage is based on 

EPACT standards.

• Energy Star® and the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) offer voluntary specifications for 

torchieres.

• The following future improvements for the system were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: 

— Incandescents: Efficacy +3%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

— Halogen: Efficacy +15%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

— CFL: Efficacy +15%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

Residential Torchieres
Final

26

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Solid State Lighting (LED A19 Replacement)

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED A19 LED A19 LED A19 LED A19 LED A19 LED

Typical Wattage

36 18 13 5 4 4

Lumens

630 800 800 800 800 800

Efficacy (lm/W)

17.3 44.0 60.0 157.0 202.0 202.0

Lamp Price ($)

$189.82 $68.00 $26.40 $4.00 $2.40 $2.40 

Cost ($/klm)

$301.00 $85.00 $33.00 $5.00 $3.00 $3.00 

Average Life (1000 hrs)

50 20 25 50 50 50

CRI

92 80 90 92 92 92

CCT

2700 3000 2700 2700 2700 2700
Final

27

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Solid State Lighting (LED PAR38 Replacement)

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED PAR38 LED PAR38 LED PAR38 LED PAR38 LED PAR38 LED

Typical Wattage 36 28 20 6 5 5

Lumens 630 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000

Efficacy (lm/W) 17.3 36.0 50.0 157.0 202.0 202.0

Lamp Price ($) $189.82 $164.00 $51.00 $7.00 $5.00 $5.00 

Cost ($/klm) $301.00 $164.00 $51.00 $7.00 $5.00 $5.00 

Average Life (1000 hrs) 50 20 25 50 50 50

CRI 92 80 90 92 92 92

CCT 2700 3000 2700 2700 2700 2700
Final

28

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Solid-State Lighting (LED A19 and PAR38 Replacements)

Residential Solid-State Lighting

• The residential solid-state lighting characterized in this report are replacements for a 60W A19 lamp 

and a 75W PAR38 lamp. These represent the most common uses of LED technology in the residential 

sector.

• This report characterizes two distinct applications for LEDs in the residential sector rather than one, 

as was done in the 2008 EIA Reference Case. Because of rapid LED technology development, the 

market is best characterized by the state of the technology at a given time rather than a range of 

performance at any one time. 

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 60W A19 equivalent: 13W LED emitting 800 lumens

— 75W PAR38 equivalent: 20W LED emitting 1000 lumens

• No federal standards exist for solid-state lighting.

• The 2012 Solid State Lighting Multi-Year Program Plan and 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model 

served as sources for many of the projections for LED technology.

• Installation costs and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.
Final

29

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial General Service Incandescent Lighting

1 The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 prescribes standards for current 100 watt incandescent lamps as of January 1, 2012. Starting in 

2012, 100-watt incandescents will be replaced by halogen infrared incandescents. 

2

In 2020, EISA 2007 sets a minimum efficacy for general service lamps of 45 lm/W. These standards can not be met with existing commercialized 

incandescent lamp technologies and current trends in industry lead us to believe they will not be met.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2012120202

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical Typical 

Typical Typical Low Typical High 72W Inc 72W Inc

System Wattage 

100 100 100 100 100 72 N/A

System Lumens 

997 997 903 965 1003 879 N/A

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

16.9 16.9 15.3 16.2 17.0 20.7 N/A

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

10.0 10.0 9.0 9.6 10.0 12.2 N/A

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $0.23 $0.19 $0.40 $0.35 $0.39 $3.09 N/A

System Cost ($/klm) $17.07 $13.97 $20.46 $21.29 $22.59 $19.14 N/A

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

1 1 2 1 1 3 N/A

CRI

100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A

Total Installed Cost ($) $89.76 $73.45 $85.40 $85.35 $85.39 $71.00 N/A

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $3.58 $3.58 $3.58 $3.58 $3.58 $0.86 N/A
Final

30

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial General Service Incandescent Lighting

• The Commercial incandescent lighting characterized in this report is a 100 watt medium screw based 

incandescent lamp (NCI, 2002) in an open down light recessed can fixture (~$20) with a fixture 

efficiency of 59% (DOE, 2008).

• A The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) established standards for 100W 

lamps effective in 2012. These standards can be achieved if incandescent bulbs use halogen infrared 

technologies. 

• EISA 2007 also established a requirement that DOE establish standards for general service lamps that 

are equal to or greater than 45 lm/W by 2020. These standards can not be achieved by any 

incandescent technology currently on the market and given current and projected trends in industry 

it is not likely they will be met. It is currently assumed that industry will increase their investment in 

LED technology at the expense of incandescent technology. 

• California’s Appliance Efficiency Regulations include efficiency regulations for general service 

incandescent lamps with certain bases. California’s Appliance Efficiency Regulations include 

efficiency regulations for general service incandescent lamps with certain bases. California is 

currently undergoing a rulemaking to reduce commercial lighting by not less than 25% of 2007 levels 

over the next 10 years in accordance with Assembly Bill 1109. They are going to regulate general 

purpose lighting (incandescent lamps).

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the fluorescent and incandescent energy conservation standard advanced notice of 

proposed rulemaking (lamps ANOPR). Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,376 

operating hours per year. (lamps ANOPR)

Commercial General Service Incandescent Lighting
Final

31

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Compact Fluorescent Lamps

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

26W 26W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W

System Wattage 

26 26 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23

System Lumens 

1068 1068 976 976 1010 1025 1060 1076 1113 1130 1169

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

67.3 67.3 69.6 69.6 72.0 73.0 75.6 76.7 79.3 80.5 83.3

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

41.1 41.1 42.4 42.4 43.9 44.6 46.1 46.8 48.4 49.1 50.8

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$4.01 $3.28 $1.56 $1.56 $1.73 $1.52 $1.69 $1.49 $1.65 $1.45 $1.61 

System Cost ($/klm)

$22.14 $18.12 $23.05 $23.05 $22.65 $22.48 $22.09 $21.92 $21.54 $21.37 $21.00 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

10.0 10.0 10.0 12.0 12.0 12.3 12.3 12.6 12.6 12.9 12.9

CRI

82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82

Total Installed Cost ($)

$96.56 $79.02 $80.00 $80.00 $80.00 $78.00 $78.00 $76.05 $76.05 $74.15 $74.15 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 
Final

32

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Compact Fluorescent Lamps

• The commercial compact fluorescent lamp characterized in this report is a 23 watt screw-base 

compact fluorescent lamp in an open down light recessed can fixture (~$20) with a fixture 

efficiency of 61%.

• EPACT 2005 sets performance for medium based compact fluorescent lamps. It adopts 

Energy Star performance requirements (August 6, 2001 version) for efficacy, lumen 

maintenance, lamp life, rapid cycle stress test, CRI, etc. The standard is effective for lamps 

manufactured on or after January 1, 2006. The Secretary may revise these requirements by 

rule or establish other requirements at a later date. [Note: EPACT 2005 standards do not apply to 

CFL lamps with screw bases other than medium (e.g., pin based)]

• Energy Star® and the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) offer voluntary specifications 

for CFL lamps.

• California’s Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires 

(including fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005)

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: Efficacy 

+15%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). Improvements in efficacy can be made by 

using more rare-earth phosphors in compact fluorescent lamps. Lifetime improvements can 

be made by improving the compact fluorescent lamp electrodes.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment 

from RS Means and the lamps ANOPR. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,650 

operating hours per year. 

Commercial Compact Fluorescent Lamps
Final

33

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Halogen Lighting (PAR 38)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

90W PAR 

38 70W HIR 90W PAR 38 70W HIR 90W PAR 38 70W HIR 90W PAR 38 70W HIR 90W PAR 38 70W HIR 90W PAR 38 70W HIR

System Wattage 

90 70 90 70 90 70 90 70 90 70 90 70

System Lumens 

1218 1172 1218 1172 1230 1306 1291 1372 1355 1441 1423 1513

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

14.6 18.0 14.6 18.0 14.7 20.1 15.4 21.1 16.2 22.1 17.0 23.2

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

13.5 16.7 13.5 16.7 13.7 18.7 14.3 19.6 15.1 20.6 15.8 21.6

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$4.98 $6.76 $4.07 $5.53 $2.87 $11.19 $2.80 $10.91 $2.73 $10.64 $2.66 $10.37 

System Cost ($/klm)

$19.01 $21.46 $15.56 $17.56 $19.35 $27.34 $18.87 $26.65 $18.39 $25.99 $17.93 $25.34 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

2.5 3.0 2.5 3.0 2.4 3.6 2.5 3.7 2.5 3.8 2.6 3.9

CRI

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Total Installed Cost ($)

$96.56 $97.92 $79.02 $80.13 $81.00 $93.00 $80.19 $92.07 $79.39 $91.15 $78.59 $90.24 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$1.47 $1.22 $1.47 $1.22 $1.47 $1.22 $1.47 $1.22 $1.47 $1.22 $1.47 $1.22 
Final

34

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Halogen Lighting (Edison)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

90W Edison 90W Edison 90W Edison 90W Edison 90W Edison 90W Edison

System Wattage 

90 90 72 72 72 72

System Lumens 

1218 1218 1395 1465 1538 1615

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

14.6 14.6 20.8 21.9 23.0 24.1

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

13.5 13.5 19.4 20.3 21.4 22.4

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$4.98 $4.07 $1.33 $1.30 $1.26 $1.23 

System Cost ($/klm)

$19.01 $15.56 $15.76 $15.37 $14.99 $14.61 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

2.5 2.5 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1

CRI

100 100 100 100 100 100

Total Installed Cost ($)

$96.56 $79.02 $80.00 $78.00 $76.05 $74.15 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$1.92 $1.57 $1.41 $1.41 $1.41 $1.41 
Final

35

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Halogen Lighting (Par 38 and Edison)

• The commercial halogen lighting characterized in this report is a lamp that emits approximately 1200-1400 lumens in 

an open down light recessed can fixture (~$20) with a fixture efficiency of 93% (DOE, 2008).

• Multiple types of halogen lamps were analyzed, including:

— Typical efficiency unit: 90W halogen PAR38 

— High efficiency unit: 70W halogen infrared reflector PAR38 

— Typical efficiency unit: 72 W halogen Edison A-line lamp

• Halogen infrared reflector (HIR) lamps contain a tungsten halogen capsule with a film coating on the inside of the 

capsule. The coating reflects infrared radiation back into the lamp filament, which forces the filament to burn at a 

higher temperature. This increases the efficacy of the lamp, without reducing operating life. 

• EPACT92 established minimum performance standards for some reflector lamps and provided exemptions for 

certain specialty applications (e.g., ER/BR, vibration service, more than 5% neodymium oxide, impact resistant, 

infrared heat, colored). EPACT92 effectively phased-out R-shaped tungsten filament incandescent reflector lamps at 

certain wattages and bulb diameters, replacing them with more efficient and cost effective tungsten-halogen parabolic 

aluminized reflector (PAR) lamps. EISA2007 took away certain exemptions from EPACT 1992, requiring certain 

previously exempted lamps to meet EPACT92 minimum performance standards by January 1, 2008.

• The following future improvements for the system were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: Efficacy +15%, Life 

+7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). These improvements can be made by improved filament design and placement, 

higher pressure capsules, or higher efficiency reflector coatings.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and installation costs are 

calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS Means and the lamps ANOPR. 

Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,450 operating hours per year. (lamps ANOPR)

Commercial Halogen Lighting
Final

36

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Edison Socket Substitute)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED

Wattage

36.4 12.7 10.8 3.8 3.2 3.2

Lumens 548 650 650 650 650 650

Efficacy (lm/W) 15.1 51.0 60.0 170.0 202.0 202.0

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $392.68 $205.00 $80.00 $20.00 $13.00 $13.00

Life (1000 hrs) 50 25 50 75 75 75

CRI

92 85 90 92 92 92

CCT

2700 3000 2700 2700 2700 2700

Total Installed Cost ($) $270.44 $186.77 $105.52 $66.52 $61.97 $61.97

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07
Final

37

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Edison Socket Substitute)

Commercial Solid-State Lighting (Edison Socket Substitute)

• The commercial solid-state lighting characterized is a replacement for a 65W BR30 lamp. This 

represents the most common use of LED technology in Edison sockets in the commercial sector.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 65W BR30 equivalent: 11W LED emitting 650 lumens in a downlight fixture

• No federal standards exist for solid-state lighting.

• The 2012 Solid State Lighting Multi-Year Program Plan and 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model 

served as sources for many of the projections for LED technology.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 lamps rulemaking. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,376 

operating hours per year. (DOE, 2009)
Final

38

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA

2003 2007 2011

Installed Base Baseline High 

Efficiency 

HE w/ Occ. 

Sensor 

HE w/ Spec. 

Reflector 

HE w/ OS & 

Spec. Ref. 

32WT8 32WT8 32WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8

System Wattage 65 65 65 57 57 57 57

System Lumens 3282 3282 3282 3334 3334 3942 3942

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 78.8 78.8 78.8 91.4 91.4 91.4 91.4

System Efficacy (lm/W) 50.1 50.1 50.1 58.2 58.2 68.8 68.8

Cost ($/klm) $0.38 $0.38 $0.38 $0.63 $0.63 $0.63 $0.63 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $13.81 $13.81 $13.81 $14.38 $15.29 $17.64 $18.40 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 20 20 20 18 9 18 9

CRI

75 75 75 82 82 82 82

Total Installed Cost ($) $74.00 $74.00 $74.00 $76.63 $79.64 $98.20 $101.21 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $3.03 $3.03 $3.03 $3.16 $4.41 $3.16 $4.41 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 86.0% 86.0% 86.0% 86.0% 86.0% 86.0% 86.0%
Final

39

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)

DATA

2020 2030 2040

Base HE HE w/ 

OS 

HE w/ 

SR HE Max Base HE HE w/ OS 

HE w/ 

SR 

HE 

Max Base HE HE w/ OS 

HE w/ 

SR 

HE 

Max 

32WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 32WT8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F32T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8

System Wattage 

62 54 54 54 54 62 54 54 54 54 62 54 54 54 54

System Lumens 

3712 3384 3384 4002 4002 3712 3440 3440 4067 4067 3712 3495 3495 4133 4133

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

89.1 92.8 92.8 92.8 92.8 89.1 94.3 94.3 94.3 94.3 89.1 95.8 95.8 95.8 95.8

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

60.0 62.6 62.6 74.0 74.0 60.0 63.6 63.6 75.2 75.2 60.0 64.6 64.6 76.4 76.4

Cost ($/klm) 

$0.54 $0.61 $0.61 $0.61 $0.61 $0.53 $0.59 $0.59 $0.59 $0.59 $0.52 $0.57 $0.57 $0.57 $0.57 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

$12.68 $13.96 $14.84 $17.11 $17.86 $12.46 $13.50 $14.35 $16.55 $17.27 $12.25 $13.06 $13.88 $16.01 $16.70 

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs) 25 19 9 19 9 26 19 10 19 10 26 20 10 20 10

CRI

85 82 82 82 82 85 82 82 82 82 85 82 82 82 82

Total Installed Cost ($)

$75.73 $75.91 $78.88 $97.15 $100.13 $74.93 $75.11 $78.03 $95.99 $98.92 $74.14 $74.31 $77.18 $94.84 $97.71 

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($) $3.03 $3.16 $4.41 $3.16 $4.41 $3.03 $3.16 $4.41 $3.16 $4.41 $3.03 $3.16 $4.41 $3.16 $4.41 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE)

91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1%
Final

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – ≤ 4 ft. T8/T12

• The commercial linear fluorescent lighting (≤ 4 ft.) characterized in this report is a two-lamp system (one ballast and 

one fixture) that emits approximately 4,000 system lumens. 

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report excludes F34T12 lamps and F32T8 HE magnetic systems. T12 

lamps have largely disappeared from the market, and F32T8 HE magnetic systems are a niche product for sensitive 

applications that do not represent any significant portion of the market. This report also assumes that the high 

efficiency T8 lamp has a reduced wattage of 28W rather than 32W.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Baseline F32T8: 2 32W T8 lamps with instant start electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, BLE=86%), fixture 

efficiency = 74%

— F32T8 HE unit: 2 28W T8 lamps with instant start electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, BLE=86%), fixture 

efficiency = 74%

— F32T8 HE unit w/ occupancy sensor: 2 28W T8 lamps with a electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, BLE=86%) and 

occupancy sensor (designed for 1,000 sq. ft. or ~25 two lamp systems), fixture efficiency = 74%. Note that 

occupancy sensor is assumed to be associated with a 50% reduction in lamp lifetime.

— F32T8 HE unit w/ specular reflector: 2 28W T8 lamps with instant start electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, 

BLE=86%), fixture efficiency = 88%

— F32T8 HE unit w/ OS and SR: 2 28W T8 lamps with electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, BLE=86%) and 

occupancy sensor (designed for 1,000 sq. ft. or ~25 two lamp systems), fixture efficiency = 88%. Note that 

occupancy sensor is assumed to be associated with a 50% reduction in lamp lifetime.

• Since 1995, DOE standards have required that the lamps characterized by this report have a minimum efficacy of 75 

lm/W and a minimum CRI of 45 for <35W lamps.

• In 2005, DOE standards raised the minimum BEF of the ballasts paired with the characterized lamps, effectively 

promoting the use of T8 lamp and ballast systems. 

40

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting
Final

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – ≤ 4 ft. T8/T12

• Beginning July 14, 2012 (or July 14, 2014 for T8 700-series phosphor lamps), DOE fluorescent lamp 

standards will require a minimum efficacy of 89 lm/W. While the amended performance-based 

standards do not explicitly prohibit T12 lamps, no T12 lamps met the standard at the time of its 

announcement. Since then, however, T12 lamps meeting the standard have entered the market.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE = 0.993 / (1 + 0.27 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). 

• California's Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• Though system watts for the F32T8 HE with the occupancy sensor are the same as the F32T8 HE, 

occupancy sensors can result in 17% to 60% energy savings due to reduced operating hours. (LRC) 

Savings potential is highly dependent on the time-delay programmed into the sensor, which ranges 

from 5-30 minutes and room type. Shorter time delays save more energy, but possibly at expense of 

lamp life. Occupancy sensors can reduce fluorescent lamp lifetime by as much as 50%. (Lutron) This 

decrease in lifetime results in higher overall maintenance costs. 

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30-year period: Efficacy +5%, Life 

+10%, and Price -5% (NCI, 2012). Improvements in efficacy and life can be made with better 

phosphors and electrodes. Additional future energy savings are expected to come from increased 

use of dimming ballasts and occupancy sensors with linear fluorescent lighting.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,435 operating hours per year. (DOE, 2009)

41

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting (cont.’d)
Final

42

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

28WT5 28WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 

System Wattage 

66 63 63 59 61 57 61 57 61 57

System Lumens 

4698 4698 4698 4698 4768 4768 4846 4846 4925 4925

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

95.0 95.0 95.0 102.3 96.4 103.8 98.0 105.5 99.6 107.3

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

71.2 74.4 74.4 80.1 78.3 84.4 79.6 85.7 80.9 87.1

Cost ($/klm) 

$1.53 $0.67 $0.67 $0.84 $0.65 $0.81 $0.63 $0.79 $0.61 $0.76 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) 

$28.68 $28.46 $28.46 $28.84 $27.62 $27.99 $26.72 $27.07 $25.84 $26.18 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

20 20 20 25 21 26 21 27 22 27

CRI 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85

Total Installed Cost ($) $164.95 $161.39 $161.39 $163.17 $159.38 $161.14 $157.15 $158.88 $154.92 $156.62 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $2.81 $2.93 $2.93 $2.71 $2.93 $2.71 $2.93 $2.71 $2.93 $2.71 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 89% 89% 89% 89% 92% 92% 92% 92% 92% 92%
Final

Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

• The commercial T5 linear fluorescent lighting characterized in this report is a two-lamp system (one 

ballast and one 88.3% efficient fixture) that emits approximately 4,700 system lumens.

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report assumes that the high efficiency T5 lamp has 

a reduced wattage of 26 W rather than 28 W.

• T5 lamps are approximately 40% narrower than T8 lamps and almost 60% narrower than T12 lamps. 

This allows T5 lamps to be coated with higher quality, more efficient phosphor blends than larger 

diameter lamps, resulting in a more efficacious lamp. The compact size of T5 lamps also permits 

greater flexibility in lighting design and construction.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical: 2 F28T5 lamps with a programmed start electronic ballast (ballast factor =1, 

BLE=88.7%)

— Best available: 2 F26T5 lamps with a programmed start electronic ballast (ballast factor =1, 

BLE=88.7%)

• Currently no federal standards exist for the T5 lamps or corresponding ballasts characterized in this 

report.

43

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting
Final

Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

• Beginning July 14, 2012, DOE fluorescent lamp standards will require a minimum efficacy of 86 

lm/W for standard output T5 lamps.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE = 0.993 / (1 + 0.51 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). 

• California's Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30-year period: Efficacy +5%, Life 

+10%, and Price -5% (NCI, 2012). Efficiency and life improvements can be made by using improved 

phosphors and electrodes. Additional future energy savings are expected to come from increased 

use of dimming ballasts and occupancy sensors with linear fluorescent lighting.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and 2009 lamps rulemaking. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,435 operating 

hours per year. (DOE, 2009)

44

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)
Final

45

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (4-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting 

Substitute)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base T8 T8 T8 T8

LED LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8

Typical Wattage 36.4 80.0 55.4 29.6 25.0 25.0

Lumens 548 5040 5040 5040 5040 5040

Efficacy (lm/W) 15.1 63.0 91.0 170.0 202.0 202.0

Cost ($/klm) $392.68 $301.00 $110.00 $20.00 $13.00 $13.00

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 50 25 50 75 75 75

CRI 92 70 80 85 85 85

CCT 2700 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500

Total Installed Cost ($) $270.44 $1,570.56 $607.92 $154.32 $119.04 $119.04

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07
Final

46

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (4-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting 

Substitute)

Commercial Solid-State Lighting (4-ft Linear Fluorescent Substitute)

• The commercial solid-state lighting characterized is a replacement for 2 4-ft 32W T8 lamps in a 

troffer fixture. This represents the most common use of LED technology in the 4-ft linear fluorescent 

lighting market.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 2 F32T8 lamps equivalent: 56W LED emitting 5040 lumens

• No federal standards exist for solid-state lighting.

• The 2012 Solid State Lighting Multi-Year Program Plan and 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model 

served as sources for many of the projections for LED technology.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 lamps rulemaking. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,376 

operating hours per year. (DOE, 2009)
Final

47

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA

2003 2007

Installed Base 

75WT12 60WT12 59WT8 59WT8 HE 75WT12 60WT12 59WT8 55WT8

System Wattage 158 126 113 100 148 119 113 106

System Lumens 10208 7546 8300 8311 9376 7404 8379 8844

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 78.7 77.7 86.9 98.2 78.7 77.7 86.9 98.5

System Efficacy (lm/W) 64.6 59.9 73.5 83.1 63.1 62.3 73.9 83.7

Cost ($/klm) $0.99 $0.73 $0.80 $1.23 $0.52 $0.38 $0.42 $0.51 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $5.31 $6.54 $6.36 $7.09 $4.41 $4.41 $6.35 $9.26 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 12 12 15 18 12 12 15 24

CRI 70 62 75 85 62 62 75 78

Total Installed Cost ($) $106.42 $102.16 $105.35 $111.74 $83.44 $83.44 $103.93 $162.76 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $4.64 $4.64 $4.39 $4.22 $4.66 $4.66 $4.40 $4.55 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 88.9% 88.9% 88.9% 88.9% 88.9% 88.9% 91.6% 91.7%
Final

48

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)

DATA

2011 2020 2030 2040

Electronic 

HE Typical High Efficiency Typical HE Typical HE Typical HE 

60WT12 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8

System Wattage 119 113 106 112 104 112 104 112 104

System Lumens 7404 8379 8844 8865 8977 8865 9124 8865 9272

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 77.7 86.9 98.5 92.0 99.9 92.0 101.6 92.0 103.2

System Efficacy (lm/W) 62.3 73.9 83.7 79.3 86.2 79.3 87.6 79.3 89.0

Cost ($/klm) $0.38 $0.42 $0.59 $0.60 $0.57 $0.59 $0.55 $0.58 $0.53 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $4.41 $6.35 $6.48 $6.42 $6.29 $6.31 $6.08 $6.20 $5.88 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 12 15 18 15 19 16 19 16 20

CRI 62 75 82 82 82 82 82 82 82

Total Installed Cost ($) $83.44 $103.93 $108.05 $107.63 $107.19 $106.67 $106.24 $105.70 $105.28 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $4.66 $4.40 $4.23 $4.40 $4.23 $4.40 $4.23 $4.40 $4.23 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 88.9% 91.6% 91.6% 92.9% 92.9% 92.9% 92.9% 92.9% 92.9%
Final

49

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – 8 ft. T8/T12

• The commercial linear fluorescent lighting (> 4 ft.) characterized in this report is a two-lamp system 

(one ballast and one fixture) that emits approximately 8,000 system lumens.

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report:

— Assumes that the high efficiency 8 ft. T8 lamp has a reduced wattage of 55 W rather than 59 

W. 

— Continues to includes 75W T12 lamps only in the installed base

— Characterizes the 60W T12 lamps with an electronic ballast rather than a magnetic ballast 

because of the inability to meet current ballast standards with magnetic ballasts

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 2 F96T12 lamps (60W each) with electronic ballast (ballast factor =0.88, BLE=88.9%), fixture 

efficiency= 90.2%

— 2 F96T8 lamps (59W each) with electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, BLE=91.6%), fixture 

efficiency= 92.8%

— 2 high efficiency F96T8 lamps (55W each) with electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88,

BLE=91.6%), fixture efficiency= 92.8.%

• Since 1994, DOE standards have required that the lamps characterized by this report have a 

minimum efficacy of 80 lm/W and a minimum CRI of 69 for >35W lamps.

• In 2005, DOE standards raised the minimum BEF of the ballasts paired with the characterized lamps, 

effectively promoting the use of T8 lamp and ballast systems. 
Final

50

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – 8 ft. T8/T12

• Beginning July 14, 2012 (or July 14, 2014 for T8 700-series phosphor lamps), DOE fluorescent lamp 

standards will require a minimum efficacy of 97 lm/W. While the amended performance-based 

standards do not explicitly prohibit T12 lamps, no T12 lamps met the standard at the time of its 

announcement. Since then, however, T12 lamps meeting the standard have entered the market.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE = 0.993 / (1 + 0.27 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). 

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30-year period: Efficacy +5%, Life 

+10%, and Price -5% (NCI, 2012). Improvements can be made through improved phosphors and 

electrodes. Additional future energy savings are expected to come from increased use of dimming 

ballasts and occupancy sensors with linear fluorescent lighting.

• California’s Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 lamps rulemaking. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,435 

operating hours per year. (NCI, 2009)
Final

51

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Output)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO

System Wattage 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165

System Lumens 11488 11596 11596 12740 11770 12931 11964 13143 12157 13355

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 82.6 82.6 82.6 90.7 83.8 92.1 85.2 93.6 86.5 95.1

System Efficacy (lm/W) 69.6 70.3 70.3 77.2 71.3 78.3 72.5 79.6 73.7 80.9

Cost ($/klm) $0.99 $0.51 $0.51 $0.58 $0.48 $0.54 $0.48 $0.54 $0.47 $0.52 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $9.29 $9.26 $9.26 $8.69 $8.69 $8.16 $8.69 $8.16 $8.41 $7.89 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 24 24 24 18 26 19 26 19 26 20

CRI 78 78 78 86 78 86 78 86 78 86

Total Installed Cost ($) $163.88 $162.76 $162.76 $166.10 $159.36 $162.59 $159.36 $162.59 $157.57 $160.75 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $4.64 $4.55 $4.55 $4.83 $4.55 $4.83 $4.55 $4.83 $4.55 $4.83 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 88.9% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7%
Final

52

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Output)

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – 8 ft. T8/T12 High Output

• The high output commercial linear fluorescent lighting (> 4 ft.) characterized in this report is a twolamp system (one ballast and one 92.8% efficient fixture) that emits approximately 10,000 system 

lumens.

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report characterizes a best available unit in addition 

to the typical unit.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical: 2 F96T8HO lamps (86W each) with electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.78, BLE=91.7%)

— Best available: 2 F96T8HO lamps (86W each) with electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.78, 

BLE=91.7%) and emitting additional lumens

• Since 1994, DOE standards have required that the lamps characterized by this report have a 

minimum efficacy of 80 lm/W and a minimum CRI of 69 for >35W lamps.

• In 2005, DOE standards raised the minimum BEF of the ballasts paired with the characterized lamps, 

effectively promoting the use of T8 lamp and ballast systems. 
Final

53

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Output) (Cont.’d)

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – 8 ft. T8/T12 High Output

• Beginning July 14, 2012 (or July 14, 2014 for T8 700-series phosphor lamps), DOE fluorescent lamp 

standards will require a minimum efficacy of 92 lm/W. While the amended performance-based 

standards do not explicitly prohibit T12 lamps, no T12 lamps met the standard at the time of its 

announcement. Since then, however, T12 lamps meeting the standard have entered the market.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE of 0.993 / (1 + 0.38 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). 

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: Efficacy +5%, Life 

+10%, and Price -5% (NCI, 2012). Improvements can be made through improved phosphors and 

electrodes. Additional future energy savings are expected to come from increased use of dimming 

ballasts and occupancy sensors with linear fluorescent lighting.

• California’s Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high-efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 lamps rule. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,435 operating hours 

per year. (DOE, 2009)
Final

54

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Low Bay HID Lighting (Metal Halide)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

175W

MV

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

System Wattage 208 210 211 199 170 199 170 199 170 199 170

System Lumens 5176 6669 7171 10186 11409 10492 11751 10832 12131 11171 12512

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W) 39.0 50.3 50.3 71.4 93.3 73.6 96.1 76.0 99.2 78.3 102.4

System Efficacy 

(lm/W) 24.9 31.8 34.0 51.2 67.2 52.8 69.3 54.5 71.5 56.2 73.7

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $2.19 $2.75 $5.81 $5.67 $5.06 $5.42 $4.84 $5.17 $4.61 $4.92 $4.39 

System Cost ($/klm) $35.80 $26.17 $44.58 $39.92 $35.64 $38.18 $34.09 $36.35 $32.46 $34.64 $30.93 

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs) 24 10 10 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 16

CRI 15 65 67 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69

Total Installed Cost 

($) $328.83 $318.18 $771.67 $858.59 $858.59 $852.49 $852.49 $845.72 $845.72 $838.94 $838.94 

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($) $3.93 $4.81 $4.83 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 
Final

55

Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

• The commercial metal halide low bay lighting characterized in this report is a one-lamp and oneballast system in a low bay fixture with 81.5% efficiency that emits approximately 10,000 system 

lumens. 

• Low bay lighting is defined as “interior lighting where the roof trusses or ceiling height is less than 

25ft. above the floor.” (IESNA, 2000)

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report:

— Characterizes a best available unit in addition to the typical unit.

— Increases the ballast efficiency to increase system efficiency for the high efficiency unit rather than 

increase the lamp efficacy due to the existence of more data on ballast efficiency than lamp 

efficacy at this time. 

— Characterizes metal halide lamps separately from high pressure sodium lamps because of their 

separate utilities. Metal halide lamps provide an intense white light and are typically used in retail 

applications; high pressure sodium lamps provide a yellow light and are typically used in 

warehouses and distribution centers.

• A 175W mercury vapor lamp with a magnetic ballast is included in the 2003 reference case for 

comparison, but EPACT 2005 prohibited the manufacture and import of mercury vapor lamp ballasts 

after January 1, 2008, causing mercury vapor lamp sales to decline until ultimately disappearing after 

the failure of all existing mercury vapor lamp ballasts.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical efficiency unit: 175W metal halide lamp with pulse start magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=88%)

— High efficiency unit: 175W metal halide lamp with pulse start magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=88.4%)
Final

56

Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (Metal Halide) (Cont.’d)

• In 2010, DOE published a determination that energy conservation standards for HID lamps would be 

technologically feasible and economically justified. The rulemaking to establish standards for these 

lamps is ongoing and is expected to be completed by June 2014. No current standards exist for HID 

lamps.

• EISA 2007 established efficiency standards for probe start magnetic ballasts (94%) and pulse start 

magnetic or electronic ballasts (88%) for ballasts that operate metal halide lamps between 150 and 400 

watts, effective January 1, 2009. The 94% efficiency requirement effectively banned probe start 

magnetic ballasts.

• A DOE rulemaking is ongoing to establish new and amended energy conservation standards for metal 

halide lamp fixtures as directed by EISA 2007. This rulemaking is expected to be completed by June 

2014.

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: Efficacy +10%, Life 

+10%, and Price -5% (NCI, 2012). Improvements can be made by using ceramic arc tubes.

• Utilities in MA, NY, OR, TX, VT, WA, WI, FL and CA offer non-regulatory incentive programs to 

promote energy efficient HID lighting. Incentive programs favor efficient T5 high output lamps or T8 

lamps for low bay applications.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs and is based on the ongoing DOE metal 

halide lamp fixtures rulemaking. Annual maintenance costs are calculated using labor rate and labor 

time to install/replace equipment from RS Means and the 2009 lamps rule. Maintenance costs include 

labor only based on 3,650 operating hours per year.
Final

57

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Low Bay HID Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

175W MV 70W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS

System Wattage 208 93 130 130 122 130 122 130 122 130 122

System Lumens 5176 4130 7213 7213 7213 7213 7213 7213 7213 7213 7213

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W) 39.0 77.9 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5

System Efficacy 

(lm/W) 24.9 44.4 55.5 55.5 59.1 55.5 59.1 55.5 59.1 55.5 59.1

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $2.19 $3.11 $5.37 $5.37 $5.37 $5.29 $5.29 $5.20 $5.20 $5.11 $5.11 

System Cost ($/klm) $35.80 $41.15 $43.68 $43.68 $45.58 $43.03 $44.89 $42.30 $44.13 $41.57 $43.37 

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs) 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24

CRI 15 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22

Total Installed Cost 

($) $328.83 $312.86 $767.01 $767.01 $780.68 $762.29 $775.74 $757.04 $770.27 $751.78 $764.79 

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($) $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $4.03 $3.93 $4.03 $3.93 $4.03 $3.93 $4.03 
Final

58

Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

• The commercial high pressure sodium low bay lighting characterized in this report is a one-lamp and 

one-ballast system in a low bay fixture with 76.3% efficiency that emits approximately 7,000 system 

lumens. 

• Low bay lighting is defined as “interior lighting where the roof trusses or ceiling height is less than 

25ft. above the floor.” (IESNA, 2000)

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report:

— Characterizes a best available unit in addition to the typical unit. 

— Increases the ballast efficiency to increase system efficiency rather than increase the lamp efficacy 

due to the existence of more data on ballast efficiency than lamp efficacy at this time. 

— Analyzes a 100W unit rather than a 70W unit as the typical low bay unit.

— Characterizes high pressure sodium lamps separately from metal halide lamps because of their 

separate utilities. Metal halide lamps provide an intense white light and are typically used in retail 

applications; high pressure sodium lamps provide a yellow light and are typically used in 

warehouses and distribution centers.

• A 175W mercury vapor lamp with a magnetic ballast is included in the 2003 reference case for 

comparison, but EPACT 2005 prohibited the manufacture and import of mercury vapor lamp ballasts 

after January 1, 2008, causing mercury vapor lamp sales to decline until ultimately disappearing after 

the failure of all existing mercury vapor lamp ballasts.
Final

59

Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium) (Cont.’d)

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical efficiency unit: 100W high pressure sodium lamp with magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=76.9%)

— High efficiency unit: 100W high pressure sodium lamp with magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=82%)

• In 2010, DOE published a determination that energy conservation standards for HID lamps would be 

technologically feasible and economically justified. The rulemaking to establish standards for these 

lamps is ongoing and is expected to be completed by June 2014. No current standards exist for HID 

lamps.

• Efficacy and lifetime are not expected to improve over a 30 year period for HPS lamps. Manufacturers 

do not plan to devote resources to HPS research and development. Price is expected to decrease 5% 

over 30 years. (NCI, 2012)

• Utilities in MA, NY, OR, TX, VT, WA, WI, FL and CA offer non-regulatory incentive programs to 

promote energy efficient HID lighting. Incentive programs favor efficient T5 high output lamps or T8 

lamps for low bay applications.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs and is based on the ongoing DOE metal 

halide lamp fixtures rulemaking. Annual maintenance costs are calculated using labor rate and labor 

time to install/replace equipment from RS Means and the 2009 lamps rule. Maintenance costs include 

labor only based on 3,650 operating hours per year.
Final

60

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Low Bay Applications)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base HPS HPS HPS HPS

LED LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED

Typical Wattage 36 11 100 42 36 36

Lumens 548 630 7200 7200 7200 7200

Efficacy (lm/W) 15.1 55.3 72.0 170.0 202.0 202.0

Cost ($/klm) $392.68 $160.00 $112.00 $20.00 $13.00 $13.00

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 50 50 50 75 75 75

CRI 92 92 80 80 80 80

CCT 2700 2700 5500 5500 5500 5500

Total Installed Cost ($) $270.44 $154.32 $859.92 $197.52 $147.12 $147.12

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07
Final

61

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Low Bay Applications)

Commercial Solid-State Lighting (Low Bay Applications)

• The commercial solid-state lighting technology characterized in this report is a replacement for a 

100W high pressure sodium lamp. This represents the most common use of LED technology in the 

low bay market.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 100W HPS lamp equivalent: 100W LED emitting 7,200 lumens

• No federal standards exist for solid-state lighting.

• The 2012 Solid State Lighting Multi-Year Program Plan and 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model 

served as sources for many of the projections for LED technology.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 Lamps Rule. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,376 operating 

hours per year. (DOE, 2009)
Final

62

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial High Bay HID Lighting (Metal Halide)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

400W MV 250W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH

System Wattage 453 293 465 480 423 455 423 455 423 455 423

System Lumens 13061 12245 20607 21261 23551 21899 24257 22607 25042 23316 25827

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 36.0 54.0 63.0 65.0 72.0 67.0 74.2 69.1 76.6 71.3 79.0

System Efficacy (lm/W) 28.8 41.8 44.3 44.3 55.6 48.2 57.3 49.7 59.2 51.3 61.0

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $1.16 $1.31 $2.38 $3.55 $3.21 $3.40 $3.07 $3.24 $2.92 $3.08 $2.78 

System Cost ($/klm) $11.06 $12.83 $21.54 $16.19 $22.14 $15.48 $21.17 $14.74 $20.16 $14.05 $19.21 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 24.0 10.0 20.0 18.4 18.4 19.2 19.2 20.1 20.1 21.0 21.0

CRI 50 65 68 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66

Total Installed Cost ($) $287.32 $300.09 $926.65 $827.03 $1,004.28 $821.87 $996.45 $816.13 $987.77 $810.40 $979.08 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $3.93 $4.81 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 
Final

63

Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

• The commercial metal halide high bay lighting characterized in this report is a one-lamp and oneballast system in a high bay fixture with 81.8% efficiency that emits approximately 24,000 system 

lumens. 

• High bay lighting is defined as “interior lighting where the roof trusses or ceiling height is greater than 

25ft. above the floor.” (IESNA, 2000)

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report:

— Characterizes a best available unit in addition to the typical unit. 

— Increases the ballast efficiency to increase system efficiency rather than increase the lamp efficacy 

due to the existence of more data on ballast efficiency than lamp efficacy at this time. 

— Analyzes a 400W unit rather than a 250W unit as the typical high bay unit.

— Characterizes metal halide lamps separately from high pressure sodium lamps because of their 

separate utilities. Metal halide lamps provide an intense white light and are typically used in retail 

applications; high pressure sodium lamps provide a yellow light and are typically used in 

warehouses and distribution centers.

• A 400W mercury vapor lamp with a magnetic ballast is included in the 2003 reference case for 

comparison, but EPACT 2005 prohibited the manufacture and import of mercury vapor lamp ballasts 

after January 1, 2008, causing mercury vapor lamp sales to decline until ultimately disappearing after 

the failure of all existing mercury vapor lamp ballasts.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical efficiency unit: 400W metal halide lamp with pulse start magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=88%)

— High efficiency unit: 400W metal halide lamp with pulse start magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=94.5%)
Final

64

Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (Metal Halide) (Cont.’d)

• In 2010, DOE published a determination that energy conservation standards for HID lamps would 

be technologically feasible and economically justified. The rulemaking to establish standards for 

these lamps is ongoing and is expected to be completed by June 2014. No current standards exist for 

HID lamps.

• EISA 2007 established efficiency standards for probe start magnetic ballasts (94%) and pulse start 

magnetic or electronic ballasts (88%) for ballasts that operate metal halide lamps between 150 and 

400 watts, effective January 1, 2009. The 94% efficiency requirement effectively banned probe start 

magnetic ballasts.

• A DOE rulemaking is ongoing to establish new and amended energy conservation standards for 

metal halide lamp fixtures as directed by EISA 2007. This rulemaking is expected to be completed 

by June 2014.

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: Efficacy +10%, 

Life +10%, and Price -5% (NCI, 2012). Improvements can be made by using ceramic arc tubes.

• Utilities in MA, NY, OR, TX, VT, WA, WI, FL and CA offer non-regulatory incentive programs to 

promote energy efficient HID lighting. Incentive programs favor efficient T5 high output lamps or 

T8 lamps for low bay applications.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs and is based on the ongoing DOE 

metal halide lamp fixtures rulemaking. Annual maintenance costs are calculated using labor rate 

and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS Means and the 2009 lamps rule. Maintenance 

costs include labor only based on 3,650 operating hours per year.
Final

65

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial High Bay HID Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

400W MV 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS

System Wattage 453 190 190 190 171 190 171 190 171 190 171

System Lumens 13061 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W) 36.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0

System Efficacy 

(lm/W) 28.8 56.6 56.6 56.6 62.9 56.6 62.9 56.6 62.9 56.6 62.9

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $1.16 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.58 $4.58 $4.50 $4.50 $4.43 $4.43 

System Cost ($/klm) $11.06 $30.96 $30.96 $30.96 $31.79 $30.50 $31.31 $29.98 $30.78 $29.47 $30.25 

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs) 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24

CRI 50 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22

Total Installed Cost 

($) $287.32 $815.84 $815.84 $815.84 $824.72 $810.84 $819.59 $805.29 $813.90 $799.74 $808.20 

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($) $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 
Final

66

Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

• The commercial high pressure sodium high bay lighting characterized in this report is a one-lamp 

and one-ballast system in a fixture with 79.7% efficiency that emits approximately 11,000 system 

lumens. 

• High bay lighting is defined as “interior lighting where the roof trusses or ceiling height is greater 

than 25ft. above the floor.” (IESNA, 2000)

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report:

— Characterizes a best available unit in addition to the typical unit. 

— Increases the ballast efficiency to increase system efficiency rather than increase the lamp 

efficacy due to the existence of more data on ballast efficiency than lamp efficacy at this time. 

— Characterizes high pressure sodium lamps separately from metal halide lamps because of their 

separate utilities. Metal halide lamps provide an intense white light and are typically used in 

retail applications; high pressure sodium lamps provide a yellow light and are typically used in 

warehouses and distribution centers.

• A 400W mercury vapor lamp with a magnetic ballast is included in the 2003 reference case for 

comparison, but EPACT 2005 prohibited the manufacture and import of mercury vapor lamp 

ballasts after January 1, 2008, causing mercury vapor lamp sales to decline until ultimately 

disappearing after the failure of all existing mercury vapor lamp ballasts.
Final

67

Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium) (Cont.’d)

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical efficiency unit: 150W high pressure sodium lamp with magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=78.9%)

— High efficiency unit: 150W high pressure sodium lamp with magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=87.7%)

• In 2010, DOE published a determination that energy conservation standards for HID lamps would be 

technologically feasible and economically justified. The rulemaking to establish standards for these 

lamps is ongoing and is expected to be completed by June 2014. No current standards exist for HID 

lamps.

• Efficacy and lifetime are not expected to improve over a 30 year period for HPS lamps. Manufacturers 

do not plan to devote resources to HPS research and development. Price is expected to decrease 5% 

over 30 years. (NCI, 2012)

• Utilities in MA, NY, OR, TX, VT, WA, WI, FL and CA offer non-regulatory incentive programs to 

promote energy efficient HID lighting. Incentive programs favor efficient T5 high output lamps or T8 

lamps for low bay applications.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs and is based on the ongoing DOE metal 

halide lamp fixtures rulemaking. Annual maintenance costs are calculated using labor rate and labor 

time to install/replace equipment from RS Means and the 2009 lamps rule. Maintenance costs include 

labor only based on 3,650 operating hours per year.
Final

68

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial T5 HO Lighting (High Bay Applications)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

54WT5HO 54WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO

System Wattage 240 234 234 221 231 218 231 218 231 218

System Lumens 18060 17646 17646 17646 17910 17910 18204 18204 18498 18498

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 88.0 85.2 85.2 90.2 86.5 91.5 87.9 93.1 89.3 94.6

System Efficacy (lm/W) 75.2 75.5 75.5 79.9 77.5 82.1 78.8 83.4 80.0 84.8

Cost ($/klm) $1.06 $0.26 $0.26 $0.38 $0.25 $0.37 $0.24 $0.36 $0.24 $0.35 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $8.50 $8.30 $8.30 $8.82 $8.05 $8.56 $7.79 $8.27 $7.53 $8.00 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 21 22 22

CRI 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85

Total Installed Cost ($) $184.10 $174.12 $174.12 $183.24 $171.92 $180.91 $169.48 $178.32 $167.04 $175.72 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $2.81 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 92.4% 92.4% 92.4% 92.4% 93.5% 93.5% 93.5% 93.5% 93.5% 93.5%
Final

Commercial T5 HO Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Bay Applications)

• The commercial T5 HO linear fluorescent lighting characterized in this report is a four-lamp 

system (one ballast and one 95.9% efficient fixture) that emits approximately 17,000 system lumens.

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report characterizes a best available unit in 

addition to the typical unit and assumes that the high efficiency T5 HO lamp has a reduced 

wattage of 51 W rather than 54 W.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical: 4 54W T5 high output lamps with electronic ballast (ballast factor=1, BLE=92.4%)

— Best available: 4 51W T5 lamps with electronic ballast (ballast factor =1, BLE=92.4%)

• Currently no federal standards exist for the T5 lamps or corresponding ballasts characterized in 

this report.

69

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial T5 HO Lighting (High Bay Applications)
Final

Commercial T5 HO Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Bay Applications)

• Beginning July 14, 2012, DOE fluorescent lamp standards will require a minimum efficacy of 76 

lm/W.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE of 0.993 / (1 + 0.51 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). 

• Many utilities offer rebates for T5 high output fixtures, generally to replace HID high bay fixtures. 

The programs include new construction incentives, customized programs, retrofit and upgrade 

incentives.

• California's Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher. (CEC, 2005)

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: Efficacy +5%, Life 

+10%, and Price -5% (NCI, 2012). Efficiency and life improvements can be made by using improved 

phosphors and electrodes. Additional future energy savings are expected to come from increased 

use of dimming ballasts and occupancy sensors with linear fluorescent lighting.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and 2009 lamps rulemaking. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,435 operating 

hours per year. (DOE, 2009)

70

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial T5 HO Lighting (High Bay Applications) (Cont.’d)
Final

71

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (High Bay Applications)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base HPS HPS HPS HPS

LED LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED

Typical Wattage 36 11 125 63 53 53

Lumens 548 630 10700 10700 10700 10700

Efficacy (lm/W) 15.1 55.3 85.4 170.0 202.0 202.0

Cost ($/klm) $392.68 $160.00 $63.00 $20.00 $13.00 $13.00

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 50 50 50 75 75 75

CRI 92 92 80 80 80 80

CCT 2700 2700 5500 5500 5500 5500

Total Installed Cost ($) $270.44 $154.32 $727.62 $267.52 $192.62 $192.62

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07
Final

72

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (High Bay Applications)

Commercial Solid-State Lighting (High Bay Applications)

• The commercial solid-state lighting technology characterized is a replacement for a 150W high 

pressure sodium lamp. This represents the most common use of LED technology in the high bay 

market.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 150W HPS lamp equivalent: 125W LED emitting 10,700 lumens

• No federal standards exist for solid-state lighting.

• The 2012 Solid State Lighting Multi-Year Program Plan and 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model 

served as sources for many of the projections for LED technology.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 Lamps Rule. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,376 operating 

hours per year. (DOE, 2009)
Final

Commercial Supermarket Display Cases

73

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Supermarket Display Cases

1 DOE’s Federal energy standards for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment (CRE) went into effect on January 1, 2012. The 2020 Typical values are 

based on this standard.

2 The annual energy use for the display case includes the energy from the supermarket compressors and condensers necessary to cool the display 

case. This energy is also partially calculated in the commercial compressor rack and condenser annual energy consumption values.

3 Maintenance cost includes preventative maintenance costs such as cleaning evaporator coils, drain pans, fans, and intake screens as well as lamp 

replacements and other lighting maintenance activities.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical1 High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 20,000 20,730 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000

Median Store Size (ft3) 44,000 47,500 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000

Energy Use (kWh/yr)221,000 23,117 21,134 18,440 17,002 17,438 16,140 17,438 16,140 17,438 16,140

Average Life (yrs) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Retail Equipment Cost $4,371 $10,094 $7,425 $7,600 $8,173 $8,763 $7,803 $8,763 $7,803 $8,763 $7,803 

Total Installed Cost $6,452 $12,176 $9,603 $9,777 $10,351 $10,937 $9,981 $10,937 $9,981 $10,937 $9,981 

Annual Maintenance Cost3$283 $337 $376 $376 $376 $376 $376 $376 $376 $376 $376 
Final

Commercial Supermarket Display Cases

74

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Supermarket Display Cases

• DOE set Federal energy efficiency standards for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment (CRE). These standards set 

maximum daily energy consumption levels, in kWh/day, for display cases manufactured and/or sold in the United 

States on or after January 1, 2012. The daily energy consumption is based on the total display area of the display case 

(TDA).

— Vertical, open, medium temperature, remote condensing display case (VOP.RC.M) ≤ 0.82*TDA + 4.07

• The Food Marketing Institute reported the median total supermarket size in 2003 was 44,000 sq. ft., in 2007 it was 

47,500 sq. ft., and in 2010, the last year that was reported by the study, it was 46,000 sq. ft. (FMI, 2012)

• The unit used to estimate energy use and installed cost is a vertical, open, medium temperature, remote condensing 

display case 12 ft. in length with a total display area of 53 sq. ft.

• Commercial central refrigeration systems consist of refrigerated display cases, condensing units, and centralized 

compressor racks.

• A typical commercial supermarket display case contains T8 electronic lighting, evaporators, evaporator fans, piping, 

insulation, valves, and controls.

• The efficiency of supermarket display cases can be increased through the use of improved evaporator coils, larger 

evaporators, higher efficiency evaporator fan blades, high efficiency doors, LED lighting, thicker insulation, improved 

insulation, etc.

• Approximately 20 percent of the total annual electricity consumption for a typical supermarket is directly attributable 

to display cases (this does not include the energy consumed by compressors and condensers necessary to cool the 

display cases). (NCI, 2009)

• As part of DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking, DOE estimates 177,000 display cases were shipped in 2005. Of those 

display cases 38,743 were vertical, open, medium temperature, remote condensing display cases (VOP.RC.M), which 

represented the most common type of remote condensing display case shipped in 2005. 
Final

Commercial Compressor Rack Systems

75

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Compressor Rack Systems

1 The total capacity represents the capacity required for the entire refrigeration system of a typical supermarket. This usually includes two 

low temperature racks and two medium temperature racks. For 2007 and beyond a 1,077 MBtu/hr total cooling capacity is the sum of

769 MBtu/hr for the medium temperature racks and 308 MBtu/hr for the low temperature racks.

2 The total installed cost is based on the entire supermarket compressor rack system (two medium temperature racks and two low 

temperature racks). The equipment purchase price for an entire supermarket compressor rack system is approximately $130,000, the 

installation cost (including piping, electrical, startup and commissioning) is approximately $400,000, and the rack defrost and lighting 

controls are approximately $100,000. Therefore the total installed cost for a typical supermarket compressor rack system is 

approximately $630,000.

3 Maintenance cost includes oil changes, bearing lubrication, filter replacement, and system functionality checks.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Total Capacity (MBtu/hr)1

1,050 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077

Power Input (kW) 180 184 162 146 162 146 162 146 162 146

Energy Use (MWh/yr) 1,000 1,023 900 810 900 810 900 810 900 810

Average Life (yrs) 20 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Total Installed Cost ($1000)2$630 $630 $630 $693 $630 $693 $630 $693 $630 $693 

Annual Maintenance Cost 

($1000)3 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 
Final

Commercial Compressor Rack Systems

76

• Commercial compressor rack systems that serve commercial supermarket display cases and walk-ins consist of a 

number of parallel-connected compressors located in a separate machine room. By modulating compressor capacity, 

these integrated systems provide higher efficiency and mechanical longevity.

• Rack integrators generally supply a packaged compressor rack for which much of the necessary piping, insulation, 

components, and controls are pre-assembled. 

• A typical supermarket will have 10 to 20 compressors mounted in racks in the 3-hp to 15-hp size range. Usually there 

are 3 to 5 compressors per rack serving a series of loads with nearly identical evaporator temperature.

• The duty cycle for compressors is usually in the range 60% to 70%.

• The typical supermarket uses a reciprocating compressor system that has two medium temperature compressor racks 

with an overall capacity of 769 MBtu/hr and two low temperature compressor racks with an overall capacity of 308 

MBtu/hr. (NCI, 2009)

• Approximately 34 percent of the total annual electricity consumption for a typical supermarket is attributable to 

compressors. (NCI, 2009)

• There are an estimated 140,000 compressor rack systems installed in supermarkets across the U.S. as of 2008. (NCI, 

2009)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Compressor Rack Systems
Final

Commercial Condensers

77

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Condensers

1 Total capacity is the total heat rejected (THR) of condensers comprised of two low temperature condensers (THRL = 240 MBtu/hr each, 

suction temperature = -25°F, condensing temperature 110 F) and two medium temperature (THRM = 520 MBtu/hr each, suction 

temperature = 15°F, condensing temperature = 115°F) condensers; ambient temperature = 95°F. (NCI, 2009)

2 Maintenance cost includes coil cleaning, leak checking, belt replacement as necessary, and system functionality checks.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Total Capacity (MBtu/hr)1

1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520

Power Input (kW) 25 25 22 20 22 20 22 20 22 20

Energy Use (MWh/yr) 138 138 120 108 120 108 120 108 120 108

Average Life (yrs) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Total Installed Cost ($1000) $47 $54 $54 $60 $54 $60 $54 $60 $54 $60 

Annual Maintenance Cost2 $817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090
Final

Commercial Condensers

78

• Condensers are designed with multiple methods of cooling: air-cooled, water-cooled, and evaporative. These units 

can be single-circuit or a multiple circuit.

• Commercial condensers are remotely located, typically installed on the roof of a supermarket. 

• For use with parallel compressors in supermarkets, air-cooled units are the most commonly used condensers. This 

analysis is based on multiple air-cooled condensers connected to a supermarket refrigeration system comprised of 

two low temperature condensers and two medium temperature condensers, using R-404A refrigerant. 

• Each compressor rack has a dedicated condenser or a separate circuit of a single common condenser. Condenser 

temperatures of multiple racks are often different. 

• The duty cycle for condensers is usually in the range 50 - 70%.

• Approximately 5 percent of the total annual electricity consumption for a typical supermarket is attributable to 

condensers. (NCI, 2009)

• There are an estimated 140,000 condensers installed in supermarkets across the U.S. as of 2008. (NCI, 2009)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Condensers
Final

Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

79

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

1 EISA 2007 includes prescriptive standards for walk-in refrigerators that went into effect in 2009. All units for 2011 and beyond include these 

prescriptive standards.

2 The size for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which states the typical footprint of a walk-in refrigerator is 240 sq. ft. The 

size for 2011 and beyond is based on the NOPR analysis shipment data from DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking which states the typical 

footprint of a walk-in refrigerator is 96 sq. ft.

3

Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 are based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assume a cost of $4,163 and $4,891 respectively. Installation 

cost for 2011 and beyond is based on DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking which assumes installation cost scales based on the cooling capacity 

(which for a cooling capacity of 18,000 Btu/hr is $1,054).

4 Maintenance cost includes checking and maintaining refrigerant charge levels, checking settings, and cleaning heat exchanger coils.

DATA

2003 2007 201112020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 44,970 44,970 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000

Size (ft2)

2

240 240 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96

Energy Use (kWh/yr) 42,300 42,182 12,337 6,329 4,822 6,329 4,822 6,329 4,822 6,329 4,822

Insulated Box Average Life 

(yrs) 18 18 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Compressor Average Life 

(yrs) 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

Retail Equipment Cost $19,252 $33,821 $13,026 $15,087 $18,821 $15,087 $18,821 $15,087 $18,821 $15,087 $18,821 

Total Installed Cost3

$23,415 $38,712 $14,080 $16,141 $19,875 $16,141 $19,875 $16,141 $19,875 $16,141 $19,875 

Annual Maintenance Cost4 $817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090 $2,755 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 
Final

Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

80

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

• The commercial walk-in refrigerator characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond, which is the typical unit 

according to DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking, is a small non-display cooler with a footprint of 96 sq. ft. and 

includes a floor and a single door. The typical size of 240 sq. ft. was used for 2003 and 2007 because that was the 

typical size reported in the ADL, 1996 and NCI, 2009 reports respectively.

• A typical walk-in refrigerator includes:

- insulated floor and wall panels

- merchandising doors, shelving, and lighting (not included in cost estimate)

- semi-hermetic reciprocating compressor

- refrigerant (R404A)

- condenser

- evaporator

• The high efficiency unit is based on the energy savings potential and cost premiums of several advanced refrigeration 

technologies identified in the preliminary analysis of DOE’s ongoing Walk-In rulemaking. These include: 

- ECM (electronically commutated motor) evaporator and condenser fan motors

- floating heat pressure

- ambient sub-cooling

- evaporator fan shutdown

• The installation cost consists of freight and delivery costs in addition to on-site assembly.

• DOE is currently working on a Federal energy consumption standard for commercial walk-in refrigerators. The 

estimated effective date is 2016.

• As part of DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking, DOE estimates 85,333 walk-in coolers will be shipped in 2015. Of 

those walk-in coolers, 41,403 will be small non-display coolers, which represents the most common type of walk-in 

cooler estimated to ship in 2015.
Final

Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

81

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

• The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 included prescriptive standards for walk-in refrigerators 

(coolers) that went into effect in 2009. These prescriptive standards, which are included in all units for 2011 and 

beyond, state that all walk-in refrigerators manufactured after January 1, 2009 must:

— have automatic door closers 

— have strip doors, spring hinged doors, or other method of minimizing infiltration when doors are open

— contain wall, ceiling, and door insulation of at least R–25, except for glazed portions of doors and structural 

members

— use electronically commutated motors or 3-phase motors (for evaporator fan motors of under 1 horsepower and 

less than 460 volts)

— use electronically commutated motors, permanent split capacitor-type motors, or 3-phase motors (for condenser 

fan motors of under 1 horsepower)

— use light sources with an efficacy of 40 lumens per watt or more, including ballast losses (if any), except that 

light sources with an efficacy of 40 lumens per watt or less, including ballast losses (if any), may be used in 

conjunction with a timer or device that turns off the lights within 15 minutes of when the walk-in refrigerator is 

not occupied by people.
Final

Commercial Walk-In Freezers

82

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Freezers

1 EISA 2007 includes prescriptive standards for walk-in freezers that went into effect in 2009. All units for 2011 and beyond include these 

prescriptive standards.

2 The size for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which states the typical footprint of a walk-in freezer is 80 sq. ft. The size for 

2011 and beyond is based on the NOPR analysis shipment data from DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking which states the typical footprint of a 

walk-in freezer is 64 sq. ft.

3

Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 are based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assume a cost of $1,040. Installation cost for 2011 and 

beyond is based on DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking which assumes installation cost scales based on the cooling capacity (which for a cooling 

capacity of 9,000 Btu/hr is $852).

4 Maintenance cost includes checking and maintaining refrigerant charge levels, checking settings, and cleaning heat exchanger coils.

DATA

2003 2007 201112020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 4,929 4,929 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000

Size (ft2)

2

80 80 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64

Energy Use (kWh/yr) 15,600 15,524 28,455 13,844 12,319 13,844 12,319 13,844 12,319 13,844 12,319

Insulated Box Average Life 

(yrs) 18 18 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Compressor Average Life 

(yrs) 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

Retail Equipment Cost $7,597 $13,008 $12,068 $14,070 $20,637 $14,070 $20,637 $14,070 $20,637 $14,070 $20,637 

Total Installed Cost3

$8,637 $14,049 $12,920 $14,921 $21,489 $14,921 $21,489 $14,921 $21,489 $14,921 $21,489 

Annual Maintenance Cost4

$545 $545 $2,755 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 
Final

Commercial Walk-In Freezers

83

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Freezers

• The commercial walk-in freezer characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond, which is the typical unit 

according to DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking, is a small non-display freezer with a footprint of 64 sq. ft. and 

includes a floor and a single door. The typical size of 80 sq. ft. was used for 2003 and 2007 because that was the 

typical size reported in the ADL, 1996 and NCI, 2009 reports respectively.

• A typical walk-in freezer includes:

- insulated floor, door, and wall panels

- semi-hermetic reciprocating compressor

- refrigerant (R404A)

- condenser

- evaporator

• The high efficiency unit is based on the energy savings potential and cost premiums of several advanced refrigeration 

technologies determined by the preliminary analysis from DOE’s ongoing Walk-In standard rulemaking. These 

include: 

- ECM (electronically commutated motor) evaporator and condenser fan motors

- external heat rejection

- hot gas defrost

- evaporator fan shutdown

• DOE is currently working on a Federal energy consumption standard for commercial walk-in freezers. The estimated 

effective date is 2016.

• As part of DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking, DOE estimates 34,985 walk-in freezers will be shipped in 2015. Of 

those walk-in freezers, 17,291 will be small non-display freezers, which represents the most common type of walk-in 

freezers estimated to ship in 2015.
Final

Commercial Walk-In Freezers

84

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Freezers

• EISA 2007 included prescriptive standards for walk-in freezers that went into effect in 2009. These prescriptive 

standards, which are included in all units for 2011 and beyond, state that all walk-in freezers manufactured after 

January 1, 2009 must:

— have automatic door closers 

— have strip doors, spring hinged doors, or other method of minimizing infiltration when doors are open

— contain wall, ceiling, and door insulation of at least R–32, except for glazed portions of doors and structural 

members

— contain floor insulation of at least R–28

— use electronically commutated motors or 3-phase motors (for evaporator fan motors of under 1 horsepower and 

less than 460 volts)

— use electronically commutated motors, permanent split capacitor-type motors, or 3-phase motors (for condenser 

fan motors of under 1 horsepower)

— use light sources with an efficacy of 40 lumens per watt or more, including ballast losses (if any), except that 

light sources with an efficacy of 40 lumens per watt or less, including ballast losses (if any), may be used in 

conjunction with a timer or device that turns off the lights within 15 minutes of when the walk-in freezer is not 

occupied by people.
Final

Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators

85

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators

1 EPACT 2005 energy standards went into effect in 2010. The 2011 Low values are based on this standard.

2 ENERGY STAR® set energy consumption levels for solid door commercial refrigerators, including reach-in refrigerators, that went into effect in 

2010. The 2011 Typical values are based on this energy consumption level.

3 Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assumes a cost of $156. Installation cost for 2011 and beyond is 

based on DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking which assumes a cost of $817.

4 Maintenance is only performed if there is a problem with the equipment.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low1 Typical2 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 3,000 2,700 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000

Size (ft3) 48 48 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49

Energy Use (kWh/yr) 3,800 2,477 2,533 1,598 993 1,598 993 1,598 993 1,598 993

Energy Use (kWh/yr/ft3) 79 52 52 33 20 33 20 33 20 33 20

Average Life (yrs) 8 9 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost $2,810 $2,988 $3,131 $3,146 $3,191 $3,146 $3,191 $3,146 $3,191 $3,146 $3,191 

Total Installed Cost3$2,966 $3,144 $3,948 $3,963 $4,008 $3,963 $4,008 $3,963 $4,008 $3,963 $4,008

Annual Maintenance Cost4 Negligible Negligible $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 
Final

Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators

86

• The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005) set maximum daily energy consumption levels, in kWh/day, for 

commercial reach-in refrigerators that went into effect on January 1, 2010. The daily energy consumption is based on 

the volume of the unit (V).

— Refrigerators with solid doors ≤ 0.10*V + 2.04

— Refrigerators with transparent doors ≤ 0.12*V + 3.34

• Energy Star® also set maximum daily energy consumption levels, in KWh/day, for commercial reach-in refrigerators 

that went into effect on April 1, 2009 for glass and mixed door models and on January 1, 2010 for solid door models. 

These efficiency levels are also based on the volume of the unit (V).

• The commercial reach-in refrigerator characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond, which is the typical unit 

according to DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking, is a 49 cubic ft. solid two-door unit with a cooling capacity of 1,000 

Btu/hr. The typical size of 48 cubic ft. solid two-door unit with a cooling capacity of 3,000 Btu/hr and 2,700 Btu/hr was 

used for 2003 and 2007 because that was the typical size and capacity reported in the ADL, 1996 and NCI, 2009 

reports respectively.

• The efficiency of commercial reach-in refrigerators can be increased through the use of efficient compressors, efficient 

evaporator fans, efficient condenser fans, electric defrost, and more efficient lighting.

• Annual shipments of reach-in refrigerators in the U.S. in 2008 are estimated to be 263,000 with an estimated installed 

base of 1,556,000. (NCI, 2009)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators

Reach-In Refrigerator Size 0 < V < 15 15 ≤ V < 30 30 ≤ V < 50 50 ≤ V

Solid Door ≤ 0.089*V + 1.411 ≤ 0.037*V + 2.200 ≤ 0.056*V + 1.635 ≤ 0.060*V + 1.416

Glass Door ≤ 0.118*V + 1.382 ≤ 0.140*V + 1.050 ≤ 0.088*V + 2.625 ≤ 0.110*V + 1.500
Final

Commercial Reach-In Freezers

87

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reach-In Freezers

1 EPACT 2005 energy standards went into effect in 2010. The 2011 Low values are based on this standard.

2 ENERGY STAR® set energy consumption levels for solid door commercial freezers, including reach-in freezers, that went into effect in 2010. The 

2011 Typical values are based on this energy consumption level.

3 Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assumes a cost of $156. Installation cost for 2011 and beyond is 

based on DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking which assumes a cost of $816.

4 Maintenance is only performed if there is a problem with the equipment.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low1 Typical2 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 2,200 2,200 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800

Size (ft3) 24 24 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49

Energy Use (kWh/yr) 4,600 3,960 7,658 5,151 3,037 5,151 3,037 5,151 3,037 5,151 3,037

Energy Use (kWh/yr/ft3) 192 165 156 105 62 105 62 105 62 105 62

Average Life (yrs) 8 9 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost $2,498 $2,905 $3,277 $3,290 $3,353 $3,290 $3,353 $3,290 $3,353 $3,290 $3,353 

Total Installed Cost3$2,654 $3,061 $4,093 $4,107 $4,170 $4,107 $4,170 $4,107 $4,170 $4,107 $4,170

Annual Maintenance Cost4 Negligible Negligible $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 
Final

Commercial Reach-In Freezers

88

• EPACT 2005 set maximum daily energy consumption levels, in kWh/day, for commercial reach-in freezers that went 

into effect on January 1, 2010. The daily energy consumption is based on the volume of the unit (V). 

— Freezers with solid doors ≤ 0.40*V + 1.38

— Freezers with transparent doors ≤ 0.75*V + 4.10

• Energy Star® also set maximum daily energy consumption levels, in KWh/day, for commercial reach-in freezers that 

went into effect on April 1, 2009 for glass and mixed door models and on January 1, 2010 for solid door models. These 

efficiency levels are also based on the volume of the unit (V).

• The commercial reach-in freezer characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond, which is the typical unit 

according to DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking, is a 49 cubic ft. solid two-door unit with a cooling capacity of 1,800 

Btu/hr. The typical size of 24 cubit ft. solid one-door unit with a cooling capacity of 2,200 Btu/hr was used for 2003 

and 2007 because that was the typical size and capacity reported in the ADL, 1996 and NCI, 2009 reports respectively.

• The efficiency of commercial reach-in freezers can be increased through the use of efficient compressors, efficient 

evaporator fans, efficient condenser fans, electric defrost, and more efficient lighting.

• Annual shipments of reach-in freezers in the U.S. in 2008 are estimated to be 52,000 with an estimated installed base 

of 1,156,000. (NCI, 2009)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reach-In Freezers

Reach-In Freezer Size 0 < V < 15 15 ≤ V < 30 30 ≤ V < 50 50 ≤ V

Solid Door ≤ 0.250*V + 1.250 ≤ 0.400*V - 1.000 ≤ 0.163*V + 6.125 ≤ 0.158*V + 6.333

Glass Door ≤ 0.607*V + 0.893 ≤ 0.733*V – 1.000 ≤ 0.250*V + 13.500 ≤ 0.450*V + 3.500
Final

Commercial Ice Machines

89

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Ice Machines

1 EPACT 2005 energy standards went into effect in 2010. The 2011 Low values are based on this standard.

2 ENERGY STAR® set energy consumption levels for ice makers that went into effect in 2008. The 2011 Typical values are based on this energy 

consumption level.

3 The output for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which states the typical ice output is 500 lbs/day. The output for 2011 and 

beyond is based on the preliminary analysis shipment data from DOE’s on-going Automatic Ice Maker rulemaking which states the typical ice 

output is 300 lbs/day.

4 The annual energy use is based on assuming 4,380 hours per year of use, which is a utilization rate of 50%.

5

Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assumes a cost of $209 and $521 respectively. Installation cost 

for 2011 and beyond is based on DOE’s on-going Automatic Ice Maker rulemaking which assumes a cost of $372.

5 Maintenance cost includes cleaning and maintaining refrigerant levels, replacing filters, checking water distribution lines for leaks, cleaning, 

sanitizing, and descaling the bin and water system. Maintenance cost decreases as the size of the ice machine (i.e. output) decreases.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low1 Typical2 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Output (lbs/day)3

500 500 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

Water Use (gal/100 lbs) 24 28 22 20 18 20 18 20 18 20 18

Energy Use (kWh/100 lbs) 7.0 5.5 7.7 6.9 6.1 6.9 6.1 6.9 6.1 6.9 6.1

Energy Use (kWh/yr)4

6,388 5,019 4,249 3,833 3,408 3,833 3,408 3,833 3,408 3,833 3,408

Average Life (yrs) 8.0 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5

Retail Equipment Cost $2,289 $3,954 $4,059 $4,077 $4,152 $4,077 $4,152 $4,077 $4,152 $4,077 $4,152 

Total Installed Cost (with 

Bin)5 $2,498 $4,475 $4,431 $4,449 $4,524 $4,449 $4,524 $4,449 $4,524 $4,449 $4,524 

Annual Maintenance Cost6

$218 - $327 $218 - $327 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 
Final

Commercial Ice Machines

90

• The commercial ice machine characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond is an air-cooled, ice maker head unit 

with an approximate output of 300 lbs/day. Commercial ice machines are typically integrated with an insulated ice 

storage bin or mounted on top of a separate storage bin. The retail equipment cost includes the ice making head and 

the integrated storage bin.

• Commercial ice machine condensers are either air-cooled or water-cooled. Approximately 90% of all units are the aircooled type.

• ENERGY STAR® set maximum energy consumption levels, in KWh/100 lbs ice, for air cooled ice machines that went 

into effect on January 1, 2008. These efficiency levels are based on the harvest rate, in lbs/24 hrs. (H).

• Commercial ice machine maintenance includes periodic cleaning (every 2 to 6 weeks) to remove lime and scale, and 

sanitizing to kill bacteria. Some ice machines are self-cleaning/sanitizing.

• As part of DOE’s on-going Automatic Ice Makers rulemaking, DOE estimates 263,552 ice machines will be shipped in 

2016. Of those ice-machines 71,357 will be air cooled, ice making head units with a harvest capacity rate between 50 

lbs/24 hr. and 450 lbs/24 hrs., which represents the most common type of ice maker estimated to ship in 2016.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Ice Machines

Equipment Type Harvest Rate Energy Use Potable Water Use Limit

Ice Maker Head

< 450 9.23 – 0.0077*H ≤ 25

≥ 450 6.20 – 0.0010*H ≤ 25
Final

Commercial Ice Machines: EPACT 2005

91

• EPACT 2005 issued standard levels for commercial ice machines with capacities between 50 and 2500 pounds per 24-

hour period that are manufactured and/or sold in the United States on or after January 1, 2010. The energy 

consumption is based on the harvest rate in pounds per 24 hours (H).

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Ice Machines

Water use is for the condenser only and does not include potable water used to make ice.

Equipment Type

Type of

Cooling

Harvest Rate

(lbs ice/24 hrs)

Maximum Energy Use

(kWh/100 lbs ice)

Maximum Condenser Water

Use (gal/100 lbs ice)

Ice Making Head

Water

<500 7.80-0.0055 H 200-0.022 H

≥500 and <1436 5.58-0.0011 H 200-0.022 H

≥1436 4.0 200-0.022 H

Air

<450 10.26-0.0086 H Not Applicable

≥450 6.89-0.0011 H Not Applicable

Remote Condensing

(but not remote compressor)

Air

<1000 8.85-0.0038 H Not Applicable

≥1000 5.10 Not Applicable

Remote Condensing

and Remote Compressor

Air

<934 8.85-0.0038 H Not Applicable

≥934 5.3 Not Applicable

Self Contained

Water

<200 11.40-0.019 H 191-0.0315 H

≥200 7.60 191-0.0315 H

Air

<175 18.0-0.0469 H Not Applicable

≥175 9.80 Not Applicable
Final

Commercial Beverage Merchandisers

92

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Beverage Merchandisers

1 EPACT 2005 energy standards went into effect in 2010. The 2011 Low values are based on this standard.

2 ENERGY STAR® set energy consumption levels for glass door beverage merchandisers that went into effect in 2009. The 2011 Typical values are 

based on this energy consumption level.

3 Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assumes a cost of $156. Installation cost for 2011 and beyond is 

based on DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking which assumes a cost of $817.

4 Maintenance is only performed if there is a problem with the equipment.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low1 Typical2 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 1,200 2,500 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100

Size (ft3) 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27

Energy Use (kWh/yr) 3,900 2,527 2,523 1,763 996 1,763 996 1,763 996 1,763 996

Average Life (yrs) 8.0 8.5 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0

Retail Equipment Cost $1,457 $2,706 $2,662 $2,810 $2,935 $2,810 $2,935 $2,810 $2,935 $2,810 $2,935 

Total Installed Cost3

$1,613 $2,862 $3,479 $3,626 $3,752 $3,626 $3,752 $3,626 $3,752 $3,626 $3,752 

Annual Maintenance Cost4 Negligible Negligible $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 
Final

Commercial Beverage Merchandisers

93

• EPACT 2005 sets maximum daily energy consumption levels, in kWh/day, for commercial refrigerators with a selfcontained condensing unit designed for pull-down temperature applications and transparent doors (i.e., beverage 

merchandisers) that went into effect on January 1, 2010. The daily energy consumption is based on the volume of the 

unit (V).

— Beverage merchandisers with transparent doors ≤ 0.126*V + 3.51

• Energy Star® also set maximum daily energy consumption levels, in KWh/day, for beverage merchandisers that went 

into effect on April 1, 2009 for glass and mixed door models. These efficiency levels are also based on the volume of 

the unit (V).

• The beverage merchandiser characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond, which is the typical unit according to 

DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking, is a 27 cubic foot cooler with a single hinged, transparent door, bright lighting, and 

shelving with a cooling capacity of 2,100 Btu/hr. A similar beverage merchandiser with a cooling capacity of 1,200 

Btu/hr and 2,500 Btu/hr was used for 2003 and 2007 because that was the typical capacity reported in the ADL, 1996 

and NCI, 2009 reports respectively.

• The efficiency of beverage merchandisers can be increased through the use of more efficient compressors and 

fluorescent lighting with electronic ballasts.

• Beverage merchandisers have an estimated installed base of 920,000 units in 2008. Of those beverage merchandisers 

460,000 are one-door units, which represents the most common type of beverage merchandiser.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Beverage Merchandisers

Beverage Merchandiser Size 0 < V < 15 15 ≤ V < 30 30 ≤ V < 50 50 ≤ V

Glass Door ≤ 0.118*V + 1.382 ≤ 0.140*V + 1.050 ≤ 0.088*V + 2.625 ≤ 0.110*V + 1.500
Final

Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines

94

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines

1 DOE’s Federal energy standards for Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines will go into effect on August 31, 2012. The 2020 Typical values are 

based on this standard.

2 Energy use is based on a zone-cooled machine tested in 75°F steady state ambient conditions.

3 Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assumes a cost of $75 and $104 respectively. Installation cost 

for 2011 and beyond is based on DOE’s Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machine rulemaking which assumes a cost of $84.

4 Maintenance cost includes preventative maintenance costs such as checking and maintaining refrigerant charge levels, cleaning heat exchanger 

coils and also includes an annualized cost for refurbishments/remanufacturing. 

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical1 High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 700 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400

Can Capacity 500 650 650 650 650 650 650 650 650 650 650

Energy Use (kWh/yr)2

3,000 2,913 2,383 2,029 1,821 1,740 1,566 1,740 1,566 1,740 1,566

Average Life (yrs) 14 14 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Retail Equipment Cost $1,769 $1,907 $1,742 $2,046 $2,096 $2,137 $2,632 $2,137 $2,632 $2,137 $2,632 

Total Installed Cost3

$1,844 $2,011 $1,826 $2,130 $2,180 $2,221 $2,716 $2,221 $2,716 $2,221 $2,716 

Annual Maintenance Cost4

$180 $177 $159 $159 $159 $159 $159 $159 $159 $159 $159 
Final

Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines

95

• DOE set Federal energy efficiency standards for refrigerated vending machines. These standards set maximum daily 

energy consumption levels, in kWh/day, for commercial refrigerated vending machines manufactured and/or sold in 

the United States on or after August 31, 2012. The daily energy consumption is based on the volume of the unit (V).

— Refrigerated Vending Machines that are fully-cooled (Type A) ≤ 0.055*V + 2.56

— Refrigerated Vending Machines that are zone-cooled (Type B) ≤ 0.073*V + 3.16

• Energy Star® also set maximum daily energy consumption efficiency levels, also in KWh/day, for refrigerated 

vending machines that went into effect on July 1, 2007. These efficiency levels are based on vendible capacity (C).

— Refrigerated Vending Machines ≤ 0.45*(8.66 + 0.009*C)

• The annual maintenance cost is consists of preventive maintenance including checking and maintaining refrigerant 

charge levels, cleaning heat exchanger coils, and replacement of lighting and the annualized value of a single 

refurbishment at approximately the mid-point of the machine’s useful life. The preventative annual maintenance cost 

is approximately $98 and the annualize value of a one-time refurbishment cost of $599 over the lifetime of the 

machine is $61. Therefore, the annual maintenance cost is $159 for refrigerated vending machines.

• As part of DOE’s Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machine rulemaking, DOE estimates 190,200 refrigerated vending 

machines will be shipped in 2012. Of those refrigerated vending machines 63,700 will be zone-cooled, medium size 

units, which represents the most common type of refrigerated vending machine estimated to ship in 2012.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines
Final

Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation

96

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation

1Based on 3800 effective full load hours per year (operating 3800 hours per year at constant load) (ADL, 1999).

2Total installed cost of 15,000 CFM CAV AHU and hypothetical supply ductwork layout. 

3Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 91% motor efficiency.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Survey 

Base

Survey 

Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) 

15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000

System Fan Power (kW) 

11.75 11.55 10.82 10.28 9.20 9.74 8.66 9.20 8.12 8.66 7.57

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM) 

0.783 0.770 0.721 0.685 0.613 0.649 0.577 0.613 0.541 0.577 0.505 

Annual Fan Energy Use (kWh/yr)1 

44,631 43,890 41,120 39,064 34,952 37,008 32,896 34,952 30,840 32,896 28,784

Average Life (yrs) 

20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Total Installed Cost ($)2 

$73,500 $73,500 $73,500 $73,500 $80,000 $73,500 $80,000 $73,500 $80,000 $73,500 $80,000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500
Final

Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation

97

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation

• Constant air volume (CAV) ventilation systems are common, inexpensive, and straightforward air-side HVAC 

systems. These systems provide a constant flow rate of air (typically a mix of recirculated and outside air) and adjust 

the supply temperature of that air in order to maintain space temperature setpoint. These systems are most 

applicable to single zone applications in order to ensure adequate temperature control. Many existing buildings 

utilize CAV systems that serve multiple zones where individual zone space temperatures are maintained by reheating 

air delivered to that zone after it is cooled by the central cooling coil; this is prohibited by most current energy codes. 

New building CAV systems are common for single zone applications. This analysis examines only the fan energy of 

the CAV system.

• The unit characterized in this report is a 15,000 CFM CAV system. The average commercial building is approximately 

15,000 square feet (CBECS 2003 and BED 2007). Assuming 1 CFM is needed per square foot of floor area results in a 

15,000 CFM air handling unit.

• A 15,000 CFM CAV packaged indoor air handling unit with cooling and heating coils can be installed for 

approximately $56,500 (RS Means 2012). Ductwork would cost approximately $17,000 additional ($73,500 total).

• ASHRAE Standard 90.1, which is used as a basis for most state energy codes, limits the fan power (brake HP or 

nameplate HP) for CAV systems. The 2007 version of Standard 90.1 was used to represent the 2011 minimum 

efficiency level (state energy codes typically refer to older versions of Standard 90.1 due to code revision cycles).

• Fan energy is affected by several factors, including: fan type (e.g., centrifugal, axial), fan blade shape (e.g., forwardcurved, backward-curved, backward-inclined, airfoil), drive type (belt or direct), configuration (plenum or housed 

centrifugal), system effects, duct design, filter and coil pressure drops, and motor efficiency. 
Final

Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation

98

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation

1Based on 887 effective full load hours (power-based) per year (operating 3800 hours per year at variable load).

2Total installed cost of 15,000 CFM VAV AHU, VFD, (10) VAV boxes, and hypothetical supply ductwork layout. 

3Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 91% motor efficiency.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Survey 

Base

Survey 

Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) 

15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000

System Fan Power (kW) 

16.35 15.00 14.76 14.03 12.55 13.29 11.81 12.55 11.07 11.81 10.33

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM) 

1.090 1.000 0.984 0.935 0.837 0.886 0.787 0.837 0.738 0.787 0.689 

Annual Fan Energy Use (kWh/yr)1 

14,502 13,305 13,096 12,441 11,131 11,786 10,477 11,131 9,822 10,477 9,167

Average Life (yrs) 

20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Total Installed Cost ($)2 

$91,000 $91,000 $91,000 $91,000 $100,000 $91,000 $100,000 $91,000 $100,000 $91,000 $100,000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500
Final

Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation

99

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation

• Variable air volume (VAV) ventilation systems are the most common multi-zone system type specified today for 

conditioning commercial buildings. These systems provide conditioned air to multiple zone terminal units (VAV 

boxes) that use dampers to modulate the amount of cool air to each zone. An individual zone thermostat controls the 

VAV box damper to allow more or less cooling. If a zone requires heating then the VAV box provides the minimum 

flow rate and typically includes a reheat coil to meet space temperature setpoint. As VAV box dampers close in the 

system, a variable frequency drive reduces fan speed and flow continuously to meet current requirements.

• This analysis examines only the fan energy of the VAV system. VAV systems vary fan speeds between about 30-100% 

speed (and flow); most hours of operation being much lower than full speed. Since fan power varies with the cube of 

fan speed according to fan affinity laws, SAIC estimated the fan-power equivalent full load hours (EFLH) of 887 

hours given an annual runtime of 3800 hours and a typical VAV operating profile. The unit characterized in this 

report is a 15,000 CFM VAV system. 

• A 15,000 CFM VAV packaged indoor air handling unit with cooling and heating coils can be installed for 

approximately $59,000 (RS Means 2012). Ductwork, (10) VAV boxes with reheat, and a VFD would cost 

approximately $32,000 additional ($91,000 total).

• ASHRAE Standard 90.1, which is used as a basis for most state energy codes, limits the fan power for VAV systems 

(brake HP or nameplate HP). The 2007 version of Standard 90.1 was used to represent the 2011 minimum efficiency 

level (state energy codes typically refer to older versions of Standard 90.1 due to code revision cycles).

• Fan energy is affected by several factors, including: fan type (e.g., centrifugal, axial), fan blade shape (e.g., forwardcurved, backward-curved, backward-inclined, airfoil), drive type (belt or direct), configuration (plenum or housed 

centrifugal), system effects, duct design, filter and coil pressure drops, and motor VFD efficiency. 
Final

Commercial Fan Coil Unit

100

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Fan Coil Unit

1 Based on 2250 effective full load hours per year (operating 2250 hours per year at constant load) (ADL, 1999).

2 Total installed cost of 2-ton horizontal 2-pipe fan coil unit, housing and controls. 

3 Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 60% 

motor efficiency.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Survey 

Base

Survey 

Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) 

800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

System Fan Power (W) 

315 304 875 241 148 232 143 223 136 215 130

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM) 

0.394 0.380 1.094 0.302 0.185 0.290 0.178 0.279 0.171 0.268 0.163 

Annual Fan Energy Use (kWh/yr)1 

709 684 1,969 543 333 522 321 502 307 483 293

Average Life (yrs) 

20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Total Installed Cost ($)2 

$2,400 $2,400 $2,400 $2,400 $2,600 $2,400 $2,600 $2,400 $2,600 $2,400 $2,600

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 
Final

Commercial Fan Coil Unit

101

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Fan Coil Unit

• Commercial fan coil units (FCUs) are self‐contained, mass‐produced assemblies that provide cooling, heating, or 

cooling and heating, but do not include the source of cooling or heating. The unit characterized in this report is a 

cooling only (2-pipe), horizontal unit with housing and controls. Fan coil units are typically installed in or adjacent to 

the space being served and have no (or very limited) ductwork.

• Four‐pipe units have separate circuits for heating and cooling. Two‐pipe units with electric heat are a low‐cost 

alternative to four‐pipe units but may use more energy.

• According to manufacturer literature, the cooling capacity for a nominal 800 CFM fan coil unit is about 2 tons.

• Fan coil unit fan motors can be shaded pole, a single phase AC motor with offset start winding and no capacitor; PSC, 

a single phase AC motor with offset start winding with capacitor; or ECM, an AC electronically commutated 

permanent magnet DC motor. PSC motors are currently the most common motor type in FCUs, but most 

manufacturers offer ECM as an option. This analysis examines only the fan energy of the CAV system.

• Fan coil units have higher maintenance costs than central air systems due to the distributed nature of the system. For 

each unit the filters must be changed and drain systems must be flushed periodically.

• ASHRAE Standard 90.1, which is used as a basis for most state energy codes, limits the fan power (brake HP or 

nameplate HP). The 2007 version of Standard 90.1 was used to represent the 2011 minimum efficiency level (state 

energy codes typically refer to older versions of Standard 90.1 due to code revision cycles).

• Fan energy is affected by several factors, including: fan type configuration, filter and coil pressure drops, and motor 

efficiency. 
Final

102

Appendix A

Data Sources

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1200 19th Street, NW, Suite 700

Washington, D.C. 20036

And

SAIC

8301 Greensboro Drive

McLean, VA 22102
Final

A-1

Data Sources » Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (60 Watts)

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011 2014* 2020**

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High

60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W

Lamp Wattage

2008 EIA Reference Case

Product Catalogs

EISA 2007;

NCI, 2012 EISA, 2007

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) Calculated

Lamp Price Distributor Websites

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Product Catalogs

CRI
Final

A-2

Data Sources » Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (75 Watts)

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011 2013* 2020**

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High

75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W

Lamp Wattage

2008 EIA Reference Case

Product Catalogs

EISA 2007;

NCI, 2012 EISA, 2007

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) Calculated

Lamp Price Distributor Websites

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Product Catalogs

CRI
Final

A-3

Data Sources » Residential Reflector Lamps

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical

Typical Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

2008 EIA Reference Case

Product Catalogs

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) Calculated

Lamp Price Distributor Websites

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Product Catalogs

CRI
Final

A-4

Data Sources » Residential Reflector Lamps

DATA SOURCES

2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

NCI, 2012

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Price

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

CRI
Final

A-5

Data Sources » Residential Compact Fluorescent Lamps

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Energy Star Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W

Lamp Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

Product 

Catalogs Product Catalogs

NCI, 2012

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) Calculated Calculated

Lamp Price Distributor Websites

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Product 

Catalogs Product Catalogs

CRI
Final

A-6

Data Sources » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8)

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Current 

Standard 

Mid-Level 

T12 High T12 Baseline T8 Mid-Level T8 High T8 

32WT8 40WT12 32WT8 40WT12 40WT12 34WT12 32WT8 32WT8 28WT8 

Lamp Wattage 

2008 EIA 

Reference 

Case

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009

Lamp Lumens 

System Wattage 

Calculated

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Price ($) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009

Ballast Price ($) DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy Conservation Standard, 2011

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009

CRI

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy Conservation Standard, 2011
Final

A-7

Data Sources » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8)

DATA SOURCES

2020 2030 2040

Typical T8 High T8 Typical T8 High T8 Typical T8 High T8 

32WT8 28WT8 32WT8 28WT8 32WT8 28WT8 

Lamp Wattage 

NCI, 2012

Lamp Lumens 

System Wattage 

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Price ($) 

Ballast Price ($) 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

CRI

Ballast Efficiency (BLE)
Final

A-8

Data Sources » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T5)

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

28WT5 28WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 

Lamp Wattage DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2009

NCI, 2012

Lamp Lumens 

System Wattage 

Calculated

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Price ($) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2009

Ballast Price ($) DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2009 CRI

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011
Final

A-9

Data Sources » Residential Torchieres

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical

Typical Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

2008 EIA Reference Case

Product Catalogs

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) Calculated

Lamp Price Distributor Websites

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Product Catalogs

CRI
Final

A-10

Data Sources » Residential Torchieres

DATA SOURCES

2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

NCI, 2012

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Price

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

CRI
Final

A-11

Data Sources » Residential Solid State Lighting (LED A19 and PAR38 Replacements)

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED LED LED LED LED LED

Typical Wattage

2008 EIA 

Reference Case

Calculated

Lumens Product Catalogs

Efficacy (lm/W) 2012 SSL MYPP

Lamp Price ($) Calculated

Cost ($/klm) 2012 SSL MYPP 2012 Energy Savings Forecast 

Model

Average Life (1000 hrs)

Product Catalogs

2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

CRI

NCI, 2012

CCT
Final

A-12

Data Sources » Commercial General Service Incandescent Lighting

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High 

Typical Typical Low Typical High 72W Inc 72W Inc

System Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

Distributor Websites; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Distributor Websites; Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

System Cost ($/klm)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Distributor Websites

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

Distributor Websites; NCI 2012; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

A-13

Data Sources » Commercial Compact Fluorescent Lamps

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

26W 26W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W

System Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

Distributor Websites; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Distributor Websites; Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

System Cost ($/klm)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Distributor Websites

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

Distributor Websites; NCI 2012; 

RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

A-14

Data Sources » Commercial Halogen Lighting (PAR 38)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

90W 

Halogen 70W HIR 90W Halogen 70W HIR 90W Halogen 70W HIR 90W Halogen 70W HIR 90W Halogen 70W HIR 90W Halogen 70W HIR

System Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

Distributor 

Websites; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Distributor 

Websites; 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

System Cost ($/klm)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Distributor 

Websites

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI 2012; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

A-15

Data Sources » Commercial Halogen Lighting (Edison)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

90W Edison 90W Halogen 90W Halogen 90W Halogen 90W Halogen 90W Halogen

System Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

Distributor 

Websites; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Distributor 

Websites; 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

System Cost ($/klm)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Distributor Websites

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI 2012; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

A-16

Data Sources » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Edison Socket Substitute)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED

Wattage

2008 EIA 

Reference Case

Calculated

Lumens Product Catalogs

Efficacy (lm/W)

Product Catalogs

2012 SSL MYPP

Cost ($/klm)

2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

Life (1000 hrs)

CRI

NCI, 2012

CCT

Total Installed Cost ($)

RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

A-17

Data Sources » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA

2003 2007 2011

Installed Base Baseline High 

Efficiency 

HE w/ Occ. 

Sensor 

HE w/ Spec. 

Reflector 

HE w/ OS & 

Spec. Ref. 

32WT8 32WT8 32WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8

System Wattage 

2008 EIA 

Reference 

Case

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009; DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast 

Energy Conservation Standard, 2011; Product Catalogs; Calculated System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009; Distributor Websites; RSMeans

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy Conservation Standard, 2011
Final

A-18

Data Sources » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)

DATA

2020 2030 2040

Base HE HE w/ 

OS 

HE w/ 

SR 

HE 

Max Base HE HE w/ OS 

HE w/ 

SR 

HE 

Max Base HE HE w/ OS 

HE w/ 

SR 

HE 

Max 

32WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 32WT8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F32T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8

System Wattage 

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life (1000 

hrs) 

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE)
Final

A-19

Data Sources » Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

28WT5 28WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 

System Wattage 

2008 EIA 

Reference 

Case

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; DOE 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011; 

Product Catalogs; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; 

Distributor Websites; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE)

DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast 

Energy Conservation Standard, 

2011
Final

A-20

Data Sources » Commercial Solid State Lighting (4-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting Substitute)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8

Wattage

2008 EIA 

Reference Case

Calculated

Lumens Product Catalogs

Efficacy (lm/W)

Product Catalogs

2012 SSL MYPP

Cost ($/klm)

2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

Life (1000 hrs)

CRI

NCI, 2012

CCT

Total Installed Cost ($)

RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

A-21

Data Sources » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA SOURCES 

2003 2007

Installed Base 

75WT12 60WT12 59WT8 59WT8 HE 75WT12 60WT12 59WT8 55WT8

System Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 

2009; DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011; Product Catalogs; 

Calculated

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 

2009

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 

2009; Distributor Websites; RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE)

DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2011
Final

A-22

Data Sources » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)

DATA SOURCES

2011 2020 2030 2040

Magnetic

HE Typical High Efficiency Typical HE Typical HE Typical HE

60WT12 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8

System Wattage DOE Energy Conservation Standards, 

2009 and 2011; Product Catalogs; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W)

Cost ($/klm)

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life (1000 

hrs) DOE Energy Conservation Standards, 

2009

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

DOE Energy Conservation Standards, 

2009; Distributor Websites; RSMeans 2007; 

Calculated Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Final

A-23

Data Sources » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Output)

DATA SOURCES 

2011 2020 2030 2040

Magnetic 

HE Typical High Efficiency Typical HE Typical HE Typical HE 

60WT12 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8

System Wattage 

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; DOE 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011; Product 

Catalogs; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009 CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; 

Distributor Websites; RSMeans 2007; 

Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) DOE Ballast Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2011
Final

A-24

Data Sources » Commercial Low Bay HID Lighting (Metal Halide)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

175W

MV

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

System Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Product Catalogs; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Calculated

System Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Cost ($/klm)

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs)

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010

CRI Product Catalogs

Total Installed Cost 

($) DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Distributor 

Websites; RSMeans 2007; 

Calculated Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Final

A-25

Data Sources » Commercial Low Bay HID Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

175W MV 70W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS

System Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Product Catalogs; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Calculated

System Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Cost ($/klm)

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs)

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010

CRI Product Catalogs

Total Installed Cost 

($) DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Distributor 

Websites; RSMeans 2007; 

Calculated Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Final

A-26

Data Sources » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Low Bay Applications)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base HPS HPS HPS HPS

LED LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED

Typical Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

Calculated

Lumens Product Catalogs

Efficacy (lm/W) 

Product Catalogs

2012 SSL MYPP

Cost ($/klm) 

2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

CRI

NCI, 2012

CCT

Total Installed Cost ($)

RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

A-27

Data Sources » Commercial High Bay HID Lighting (Metal Halide)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

400W MV 250W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH

System Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010 and 2011; Product 

Catalogs; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Calculated

System Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Cost ($/klm)

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs)

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010 and 2011

CRI Product Catalogs

Total Installed Cost 

($) DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010 and 2011; 

Distributor Websites; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Final

A-28

Data Sources » Commercial High Bay HID Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

400W MV 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS

System Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Product Catalogs; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Calculated

System Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Cost ($/klm)

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs)

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010

CRI Product Catalogs

Total Installed Cost 

($) DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Distributor 

Websites; RSMeans 2007; 

Calculated Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Final

A-29

Data Sources » Commercial T5 HO Lighting (High Bay Applications)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

54WT5HO 54WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO

System Wattage 

2008 EIA 

Reference 

Case

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; DOE 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011; 

Product Catalogs; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009 CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; 

Distributor Websites; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) DOE Ballast Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2011
Final

A-30

Data Sources » Commercial Solid State Lighting (High Bay Applications)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base HPS HPS HPS HPS

LED LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED

Typical Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

Calculated

Lumens Product Catalogs

Efficacy (lm/W) 

Product Catalogs

2012 SSL MYPP

Cost ($/klm) 

2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

CRI

NCI, 2012

CCT

Total Installed Cost ($)

RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Supermarket Display Cases

A-31

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr)

DOE, 2007 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI, 2009 NCI Analysis, 2012

DOE, 2009 / DOE, 2011 /

FMI, 2012 / NCI Analysis 2012

Median Store Size (ft3) Food Marketing Institute (FMI), 2012

Energy Use (kWh/yr)

DOE, 2007 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI, 2009 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2012

DOE, 2011

Average Life (yrs)

NCI, 2009

Retail Equipment Cost

Total Installed Cost

Annual Maintenance 

Cost
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Compressor Rack Systems

A-32

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Total Capacity 

(MBtu/hr) ADL, 1996

NCI, 2009 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012

NCI, 2009 / NCI Analysis, 2012 / ADL, 1996

Power Input (kW) Copeland, 2008

Energy Use (MWh/yr) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Average Life (yrs) Kysor-Warren, 2008

Total Installed Cost 

($1000)

NCI, 2009 /

NCI Analysis, 2012

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($1000)

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

ADL, 1996 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2012
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Condensers

A-33

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Total Capacity 

(MBtu/hr)

NCI Analysis, 2008 / 

Heatcraft, 2008 / ADL, 

1996

NCI, 2009

NCI, 2009 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Power Input (kW)

NCI Analysis, 2008 / 

Heatcraft, 2008 / ADL, 

1996

Energy Use (MWh/yr) NCI Analysis, 2008 / 

ADL, 1996

Average Life (yrs) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Total Installed Cost 

($1000)

NCI Analysis, 2008 / 

Heatcraft, 2008 / RS 

Means, 2007

Annual Maintenance 

Cost NCI Analysis, 2008 NCI Analysis, 

2012
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

A-34

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr) ADL, 1996 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI, 2009

DOE, 2011 DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Size (ft2) 

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)

ADL, 1996 / 

PG&E, 2004 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

Insulated Box 

Average Life (yrs) ADL, 1996 / 

PG&E, 2004

Compressor 

Average Life (yrs)

Retail Equipment 

Cost

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor 

Web Sites / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008 Total Installed Cost

Annual 

Maintenance Cost

ADL, 1996 / 

FMI, 2005 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

DOE, 2011 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Walk-In Freezers

A-35

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr) ADL, 1996 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI, 2009

DOE, 2011 DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Size (ft2) 

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)

ADL, 1996 / 

PG&E, 2004 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

Insulated Box 

Average Life (yrs) ADL, 1996 / 

PG&E, 2004

Compressor 

Average Life (yrs)

Retail Equipment 

Cost

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor 

Web Sites / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008 Total Installed Cost

Annual 

Maintenance Cost

ADL, 1996 / 

FMI, 2005 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

DOE, 2011 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators

A-36

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr)

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

NCI, 2009 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012

NCI Analysis, 2012

DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Size (ft3) 

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor Web 

Sites

DOE, 2011

Energy Use (kWh/yr) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

DOE, 2011 / ENERGY STAR, 

2012 / EPACT, 2005

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr/ft3)

NCI Analysis, 2012 NCI Analysis, 2012

Average Life (yrs) ACEEE, 2002

DOE, 2011

Retail Equipment Cost 

ADL, 1996/ 

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Total Installed Cost

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Annual Maintenance 

Cost NCI Analysis, 2008 NCI Analysis, 2012
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Reach-In Freezers

A-37

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr)

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

NCI, 2009 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012

NCI Analysis, 2012

DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Size (ft3) 

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor Web 

Sites

DOE, 2011

Energy Use (kWh/yr) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

DOE, 2011 / ENERGY STAR, 

2012 / EPACT, 2005

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr/ft3)

NCI Analysis, 2012 NCI Analysis, 2012

Average Life (yrs) ACEEE, 2002

DOE, 2011

Retail Equipment Cost 

ADL, 1996/ 

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Total Installed Cost

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Annual Maintenance 

Cost NCI Analysis, 2008 NCI Analysis, 2012
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Ice Machines

A-38

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Output (lbs/day) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

NCI, 2009 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012

NCI Analysis, 2012

DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Water Use (gal/100 

lbs)

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor Web 

Sites

DOE, 2011

Energy Use 

(kWh/100 lbs)

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

DOE, 2011 / ENERGY 

STAR, 2012 / EPACT, 2005

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)

ACEEE, 2002 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012

DOE, 2011 /

NCI Analysis, 2012

Average Life (yrs)

ADL, 1996/ 

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Retail Equipment 

Cost 

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Total Installed Cost 

(with Bin)

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI Analysis, 

2012

Annual 

Maintenance Cost

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008 NCI, 2009 NCI Analysis, 2012 DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Beverage Merchandisers

A-39

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr)

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

NCI, 2009

NCI Analysis, 2012

DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Size (ft3) 

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor Web 

Sites

DOE, 2011

Energy Use (kWh/yr) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

DOE, 2011 / ENERGY 

STAR, 2012 / EPACT, 2005

Average Life (yrs) ACEEE, 2002

DOE, 2011

Retail Equipment Cost 

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor Web 

Sites

Total Installed Cost

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Annual Maintenance 

Cost

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI Analysis, 

2012
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines

A-40

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr) 

DOE, 2008 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

NCI, 2009 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012

DOE, 2009

DOE, 2009 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Can Capacity

CEC, 2005 / 

NREL, 2003 / 

FEMP, 2004

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)

ADL, 1996 / CEC, 

2008 / NREL, 

2003

DOE, 2009 / ENERGY 

STAR, 2012

Average Life (yrs) DOE, 2008

DOE, 2009

Retail Equipment 

Cost 

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008 / 

DOE, 2008

Total Installed Cost

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008 / 

DOE, 2008

Annual 

Maintenance Cost DOE, 2008
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation

A-41

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) Assumed based on average 15,000 square foot commercial building (CBECS 2003 and BED 2007)

System Fan Power (kW)

eQUEST/DOE-2

ASHRA

E 90.1-

2007

SAIC & Mfrs

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM)

Annual Fan Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)1 Calculated – see note 1

Average Life (yrs) 2011 ASHRAE Handbook: HVAC Applications

Total Installed Cost ($)2 RS Means 2012

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) Jones Lang LaSalle

1Based on 3800 effective full load hours per year (operating 3800 hours per year at constant load) (ADL, 1999).

2Total installed cost of 15,000 CFM CAV AHU and hypothetical supply ductwork layout. 

3Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 91% 

motor efficiency.
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation

A-42

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) Assumed based on average 15,000 square foot commercial building (CBECS 2003 and BED 2007)

System Fan Power (kW)

eQUEST/DOE-2

ASHRA

E 90.1-

2007

SAIC & Mfrs

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM)

Annual Fan Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)1 Calculated – see note 1

Average Life (yrs) 2011 ASHRAE Handbook: HVAC Applications

Total Installed Cost ($)2 RS Means 2012

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) Jones Lang LaSalle

1Based on 887 effective full load hours (power-based) per year (operating 3800 hours per year at variable load).

2Total installed cost of 15,000 CFM VAV AHU, VFD, (10) VAV boxes, and hypothetical supply ductwork layout. 

3Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 91% 

motor efficiency.
Final

Data Sources » Commercial Fan Coil Unit

A-43

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) 800 CFM is typical for a 2-ton fan coil unit

System Fan Power (kW)

ADL 1999, NCI 2008

ASHRA

E 90.1-

2007

SAIC & Mfrs

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM)

Annual Fan Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)1 Calculated – see note 1

Average Life (yrs) 2011 ASHRAE Handbook: HVAC Applications

Total Installed Cost ($)2 RS Means 2012

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) ASHRAE 2000, NCI 2008

1Based on 2250 effective full load hours per year (operating 2250 hours per year at constant load) (ADL, 1999).

2Total installed cost of 2-ton horizontal 2-pipe fan coil unit, housing and controls. 

3Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 60% 

motor efficiency.
Final

146

Appendix B

References

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1200 19th Street, NW, Suite 700

Washington, D.C. 20036

And

SAIC

8301 Greensboro Drive

McLean, VA 22102
Final

• ACEEE. (2007). Top Rated Energy-Efficient Appliances. American Council for an EnergyEfficient Economy.

• AHAM - ACEEE. (2010). Agreement on Minimum Federal Efficiency Standards, Smart 

Appliances, Federal Incentives and Related Matters for Specified Appliances.

• AHAM. (n.d.). AHAM Directory of Certified Products. Retrieved September 2010, from 

http://www.ahamdir.com/dirsvc/aham.nsf/fraRAC?OpenFrameset&pgm=Room%20Air

%20Conditioners

• AHRI. (n.d.). Certification Directory. Retrieved September 2010, from Directory of 

Certified Product Performance: 

http://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx

• Appliance Magazine. (2010). Appliance Market Research Report - U.S. Appliance Industry: 

Market Share, Life Expectancy & Replacement Market, and Saturation Levels. Appliance 

Magazine.

• Appliance Magazine. (2005). Portrait of the U.S. Appliance Industry. Appliance Magazine.

• Arthur D. Little. (1996). Energy Savings Potential for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment.

• Arthur D. Little. (1997). Massachusetts Market Transformation Scoping Study; Final Report.

Massachusetts Gas DSM / Market Transformation Collaborative.

147

References

B-1
Final

• ASHRAE. (2003). 2003 ASHRAE Handbook - HVAC Applications. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (2007). ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (1999). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (2004). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004. ASHRAE, Inc.

• Building Services Research and Information Association & Ducker Research Company. 

(1997, 1998). U.S. Market for Central Plant Air Conditioning; Market for Ducted Warm Air 

Central Heating; U.S. Market for Hydronic Heating and Burners; U.S. Water Heating Market; 

U.S. Unitary and Close Control Air Conditioning.

• California Energy Commission. (n.d.). Retrieved September 2010, from Appliance 

Efficiency Database: http://www.appliances.energy.ca.gov/AdvancedSearch.aspx

• DEER. (2008, June). Database for Energy Efficiency Resources. Retrieved September 2010, 

from California Energy Commission: www.energy.ca.gov/deer

• Distributors. (n.d.). NCI discussions with distributors and online research (i.e. Grainger, 

Home Depot, Lowes, Sears, and others).

B148 -2

References
Final

• EERE. Preliminary Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Consumer 

Products: Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers.

• EERE. (2000). Clothes Washers Technical Support Document, Final Rule Technical Support 

Document: Energy Efficiency Standards for Consumer Products: Clothes Washers.

• EERE. (2001). Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Central Air Conditioners 

and Heat Pumps Energy Conservation Standards; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2004). Joint Stakeholders Comments on Standards for Commercial Package Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps.

• EERE. (2005). Draft Technical Analysis for Refrigerators, Analysis of Amended Energy 

Conservation Standards for Residential Refrigerators-Freezers.

• EERE. (2005). Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and 

Industrial Equipment: Commercial Unitary Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps.

• EERE. (2006). Technical Analysis for Residential Furnaces and Boilers, Energy Conservation 

Program for Residential Furnaces and Boilers; Proposed Rule.

• EERE. (2006). Technical Analysis for Rulemaking Framework for 

Dishwashers/Cooktops/Ovens, Rulemaking Framework for Commercial Clothes Washers and 

Residential Dishwashers, Dehumidifiers, and Cooking Products.

B149 -3

References
Final

• EERE. (2006). Buildings Energy Data Book.

• EERE. (2006). DOE Appliance Standards Framework, Rulemaking Framework for Residential 

Water Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment and Pool Heaters.

• EERE. (2009). Commercial Heating, Air Conditioning and Water Heating Equipment (i.e. 

ASHRAE Equipment).

• EERE. (2007). Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Energy Conservation 

Standards for Residential Furnaces and Boilers; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2009). Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Certain 

Consumer Products and for Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2009). Final Rule Technical Support Document: Residential Dishwashers, 

Dehumidifiers, Cooking Products, and Commercial Clothes Washers.

• EERE. (2009). Commercial Refrigeration Equipment; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2009). Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines; Final Rule Technical Support 

Document.

B150 -4

References
Final

• EERE. (2010). Energy Conservation Program for Appliance Standards: Residential Central Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps.

• EERE. (2010). Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential 

Water Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment, and Pool Heaters; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2010). Residential Clothes Dryers and Room Air Conditioners Preliminary Technical 

Support Document.

• EERE. (2010). Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In Freezers; Preliminary Analysis Technical Support 

Document.

• EERE. (2011). Commercial Refrigeration Equipment; Preliminary Analysis Technical Support 

Document.

• EERE. (2012). Automatic Commercial Ice Makers; Preliminary Analysis Technical Support 

Document.

B151 -5

References
Final

• ENERGY STAR. (n.d.). Retrieved May 2012, from ENERGY STAR Products: 

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=products.pr_find_es_products

• Federal Standard. (1975). National energy conservation standards authorized under the 

Energy and Policy Conservation Act of 2007 (EPCA 1975).

• Federal Standard. (2005). National energy conservation standards authorized under the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005).

• Federal Standard. (2007). National energy conservation standards authorized under the 

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007).

• Food Marketing Institute. (n.d.). Retrieved May 2012, from FMI Supermarket Facts: 

http://www.fmi.org/research-resources/supermarket-facts/median-total-store-sizesquare-feet

• GeoExchange. GeoExchange Heating and Cooling Systems: Fascinating Facts.

B152 -6

References
Final

• GHPC. (n.d.). Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium. Retrieved 2007, from 

www.geoexchange.org

• IGSPHA. (n.d.). International Ground Source Heat Pump Association. Retrieved 2007, from 

www.igshpa.okstate.edu

• LBNL. (2003). Commercial Unitary Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps - Life Cycle Cost 

Analysis: Inputs and Results. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

• Max Neubauer, A. d. (2009). Ka-BOOM! The Power of Appliance Standards. ACEEE, ASAP.

• Navigant Consulting, Inc. (n.d.). In House Expertise.

• Navigant Consulting, Inc. (2009). Energy Savings Potential and R&D Opportunities for 

Commercial Refrigeration.

• Navien America Inc. (n.d.). Navien Condensing 98%. Retrieved September 2010, from 

http://www.navienamerica.com/PDS/ftp/NavienCondensingTankless/DownLoad_Broc

hure_Manual/NavienCodensing98_Brochure.pdf

• Product Literature. (n.d.). Literature from manufacturers and experts on specific products.

B153 -7

References
Final

• RS Means Mechanical Cost Data. (2007). Means Construction Information Network.

• RS Means Mechanical Cost Data. (2010). Means Construction Information Network.

• SAIC. (n.d.). In House Expertise.

• Technology Cost and Performance File for Commercial Model for AEO2010. (2009). (E. 

Boedecker, Compiler)

B154 -8

References
Final : For Review Only

149

• GHPC. (n.d.). Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium. Retrieved 2007, from www.geoexchange.org

• IGSPHA. (n.d.). International Ground Source Heat Pump Association. Retrieved 2007, from 

www.igshpa.okstate.edu

• LBNL. (2003). Commercial Unitary Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps - Life Cycle Cost Analysis: 

Inputs and Results. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

• Max Neubauer, A. d. (2009). Ka-BOOM! The Power of Appliance Standards. ACEEE, ASAP.

• Navigant Consulting, Inc. (n.d.). In House Expertise.

• Navien America Inc. (n.d.). Navien Condensing 98%. Retrieved September 2010, from 

http://www.navienamerica.com/PDS/ftp/NavienCondensingTankless/DownLoad_Brochure_

Manual/NavienCodensing98_Brochure.pdf

• Product Literature. (n.d.). Literature from manufacturers and experts on specific products.

• RS Means Mechanical Cost Data. (2007). Means Construction Information Network.

• RS Means Mechanical Cost Data. (2010). Means Construction Information Network.

• SAIC. (n.d.). In House Expertise.

• Technology Cost and Performance File for Commercial Model for AEO2010. (2009). (E. 

Boedecker, Compiler)

References

B-6
June 2013

U.S. Energy Information Administration | Buildings Appliance and Equipment Costs and Efficiency 5

APPENDIX D
EIA - Technology Forecast Updates –

Residential and Commercial Building 

Technologies – Advanced Case

Presented to:

U.S. Energy Information Administration

Prepared by: 

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1200 19th Street, NW, Suite 700

Washington, D.C. 20036

And

SAIC

8301 Greensboro Drive

McLean, VA 22102

December 19, 2012 Confidential and Proprietary, 

©2012 Navigant Consulting, Inc.

Do not distribute or copy
Advanced Case Final

DISCLAIMER

This presentation was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States 

Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their 

employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, 

express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or 

usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use 

would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, 

process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily 

constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government 

or any agency, contractor or subcontractor thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed 

herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency 

thereof. 

December 2012

1
Advanced Case Final

2

Objective 3

Methodology 4

Definitions 5

Calculations 6

Market Transformation 7

Residential General Service Incandescent Lighting 8

Residential Reflector Lighting 11

Residential Compact Fluorescent Lighting 14

Residential Linear Fluorescent Lighting 16

Residential Torchieres 23

Residential Solid State Lighting 26

Commercial General Service Incandescent Lighting 29

Commercial Compact Fluorescent Lighting 31

Commercial Halogen Lighting – PAR 38 and Edison 33

Commercial Solid State Lighting 36

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – T8 and 

T12 (Less Than/Equal To Four Foot) 40

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – T5 44

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – T8 and 

T12 (Greater Than Four Foot) 47

Commercial High Intensity Discharge –

Low Bay Lighting 54

Page Page

Table of Contents

Commercial High Intensity Discharge –

High Bay Lighting 62

Commercial Supermarket Display Cases 73

Commercial Compressor Rack Systems 75

Commercial Condensers 77

Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators 79

Commercial Walk-In Freezers 82

Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators 85

Commercial Reach-In Freezers 87

Commercial Ice Machines 89

Commercial Beverage Merchandisers 92

Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines 94

Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation 96

Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation 98

Commercial Fan Coil Units 100

Data Sources A-1

References B-1
Advanced Case Final

3

The objective of this study is to develop baseline and projected performance/cost 

characteristics for residential and commercial 

end-use equipment, assuming an accelerated adoption of technology.

• 2003/2007 (commercial) and 2005/2009 (residential) baselines, as well as today’s (2011)

— Review of literature, standards, installed base, contractor, and manufacturer information.

— Provide a relative comparison and characterization of the cost/efficiency of a generic product.

• Forecast of technology improvements that are projected to be available through 2040

— Review of trends in standards, product enhancements, and Research and Development (R&D).

— Projected impact of product improvements and enhancement to technology.

Objective

The performance/cost characterization of end-use equipment developed in this study 

will assist EIA in projecting national primary energy consumption.
Advanced Case Final

4

Input from industry, including government, R&D organizations, and manufacturers, 

was used to project product enhancements concerning equipment performance and cost 

attributes.

• Technology forecasting involves many uncertainties.

• Technology developments impact performance and cost forecasts.

• Varied sources ensure a balanced view of technology progress and the probable timing of 

commercial availability.

• All cost forecasts are shown in 2011 dollars.

Methodology
Advanced Case Final

5

The following tables represent the current and projected efficiencies for residential and 

commercial building equipment ranging from the installed base in 2003 and 2007 (for 

commercial products) and 2005 and 2009 (for residential) to the highest efficiency 

equipment that is expected to be commercially available by 2040, assuming advanced

adoption. Below are definitions for the terms used in characterizing the status of each 

technology.

• Advanced Adoption Case: the projected end-use characteristics if an outside force (i.e., fuel price 

increase, deregulation) or industry adoption of energy-efficient technology takes place.

• 2003/2007; 2005/2009 Installed Base: the installed and “in use” equipment for that year. Represents 

the installed stock of equipment, but does NOT represent sales.

• 2011 Current Standard: the minimum efficiency (or maximum energy use) required (allowed) by 

current DOE standards, when applicable.

• Typical: the average, or “typical,” product being sold in the particular timeframe.

• ENERGY STAR: the minimum efficiency required (or maximum energy use allowed) to meet the 

ENERGY STAR criteria, when applicable.

• Mid-Level: middle tier higher-efficiency product available in the particular timeframe.

• High: the product with the highest efficiency available in the particular timeframe.

• Lumens: All reported lumens are mean lumens, not initial lumens.

• CCT: The correlated color temperature (CCT) is a specification of the color appearance of the light 

emitted by a lamp.

Definitions
Advanced Case Final

6

The following metrics are commonly referred to throughout the tables to follow. Below 

are the calculations for each metric.

• System Wattage = (Lamp Wattage * Ballast Factor) / Ballast Efficiency

• System Lumens = Lamp Lumens * Ballast Factor

• Lamp Efficacy = Lamp Lumens / Lamp Wattage

• System Efficacy = System Lumens / System Wattage

• Lamp Cost ($/klm) = Lamp Cost / (Lamp Lumens / 1000)

• Total Equipment Cost = Lamp Cost + Fixture (including ballast) Cost

• System Cost ($/klm) = Total Equipment Cost / (System Lumens / 1000)

• Total Installed Cost = Total Equipment Cost + Labor Installation Cost

• BLE = A/(1+B*Avg Total Lamp Arc Power^(-C)) 

Calculations
Advanced Case Final

7

Market Transformation

The market for the reviewed products has changed since the analysis was performed in 

2008. These changes are noted and reflected in the efficiency and cost characteristics.

• EPACT 2005 established standards for certain types of self-contained Commercial Refrigeration 

Equipment and batch Automatic Ice Makers which went into effect in 2010.

• EISA 2007 set several requirements for Walk-in Coolers and Freezers which went into effect in 2009.

• DOE issued Federal minimum efficiency standards that have or will soon go into effect for General 

Service Fluorescent Lamps (July 2012 effective date), Incandescent Reflector Lamps (July 2012), 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts (2014), Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines (Aug. 2012), and certain 

Commercial Refrigeration Equipment (Jan. 2012) not covered by the EPACT 2005 standards.
Advanced Case Final

8

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (60 Watts)

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2014120202

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High

60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W

Lamp Wattage

60 60 60 60 60 43 43 N/A N/A

Lamp Lumens 

850 850 830 860 870 750 750 N/A N/A

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

14.2 14.2 13.8 14.3 14.5 17.4 17.4 N/A N/A

Lamp Price

$0.25 $0.25 $0.31 $0.34 $0.37 $4.57 $4.57 N/A N/A

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$0.29 $0.29 $0.37 $0.40 $0.43 $6.09 $6.09 N/A N/A

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

1 1 2 1 1 3 3 N/A N/A

CRI

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A N/A

1 The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 prescribes standards for current 60 watt incandescent lamps as of January 1, 2014. 

Starting in 2014, we assume 60 watt incandescents will be replaced by halogen infrared incandescents. 

2

In 2020, EISA 2007 sets a minimum efficacy for general service lamps of 45 lm/W. These standards can not be met with existing

commercialized incandescent lamp technologies and current trends in industry lead us to believe they will not be met.
Advanced Case Final

9

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (75 Watts)

1 The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 prescribes standards for current 75 watt incandescent lamps as of January 1, 2013. 

Starting in 2014, we assume 75 watt incandescents will be replaced by halogen infrared incandescents. 

2

In 2020, EISA 2007 sets a minimum efficacy for general service lamps of 45 lm/W. These standards can not be met with existing

commercialized incandescent lamp technologies and current trends in industry lead us to believe they will not be met.

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2013120202

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High

75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W

Lamp Wattage

75 75 75 75 75 53 53 N/A N/A

Lamp Lumens 

1170 1170 1060 1170 1190 1050 1050 N/A N/A

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

15.6 15.6 14.1 15.6 15.9 19.8 19.8 N/A N/A

Lamp Price

$0.36 $0.37 $0.35 $0.40 $0.49 $4.69 $4.69 N/A N/A

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$0.32 $0.32 $0.33 $0.34 $0.41 $4.47 $4.47 N/A N/A

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

1 1 2 1 1 3 3 N/A N/A

CRI

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A N/A
Advanced Case Final

10

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (60 and 75 Watts)

• The residential incandescent lighting characterized in this report is a 60 watt and a 75 watt medium 

screw based incandescent lamp.

• A standard 60 watt incandescent lamp produces approximately 860 lumens. A standard 75 watt 

incandescent lamp produces approximately 1170 lumens (GE, 2012; OSRAM, 2012; Philips, 2012; 

Sylvania, 2012). There is little variation in light output between products. Therefore, there is little 

variation in lamp efficacy.

• The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) established standards for 60W lamps 

effective in 2014 and 75W lamps effective in 2013. These standards can be achieved if incandescent 

bulbs use halogen infrared technologies. 

• EISA 2007 also established a requirement that DOE establish standards for general service lamps that 

are equal to or greater than 45 lm/W by 2020. These standards can not be achieved by any 

incandescent technology currently on the market and given current and projected trends in industry 

it is not likely they will be met. It is currently assumed that industry will increase their investment in 

LED technology at the expense of incandescent technology. 

• California’s Appliance Efficiency Regulations include efficiency regulations for general service 

incandescent lamps with certain bases. California is currently undergoing a rulemaking to reduce 

indoor residential lighting by not less than 50% of 2007 levels over the next 10 years in accordance 

with Assembly Bill 1109. They are going to regulate general purpose lighting (incandescent lamps) 

and portable lighting fixtures. 

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (60 and 75 Watts)
Advanced Case Final

11

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Reflector Lighting

DATA

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical

Typical Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

65 65 50 16 65 50 15

Lamp Lumens 

620 620 660 750 630 630 720

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

9.5 9.5 13.2 46.9 9.7 12.6 48.0

Lamp Price

$1.36 $1.37 $4.19 $5.87 $3.38 $6.12 $6.36

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$2.20 $2.21 $6.35 $7.82 $5.36 $9.72 $8.83 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

2.0 2.0 3.0 8.0 1.8 3.0 8.0

CRI

100 100 100 82 100 100 82
Advanced Case Final

12

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Reflector Lighting

DATA

2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

65 50 15 65 50 15 65 50 15

Lamp Lumens 

636 662 756 643 695 794 649 729 833

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

9.8 13.2 50.4 9.9 13.9 52.9 10.0 14.6 55.6

Lamp Price

$3.30 $5.97 $6.20 $3.21 $5.82 $6.05 $3.13 $5.67 $5.89

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$5.18 $9.02 $8.20 $5.00 $8.38 $7.62 $4.83 $7.78 $7.07 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

1.9 3.2 8.3 2.1 3.5 8.5 2.2 3.7 8.8

CRI

100 100 82 100 100 82 100 100 82
Advanced Case Final

13

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Reflector Lighting

• The residential reflector lamps characterized in this report is a 65W BR30 incandescent, a 50W PAR30 

halogen, and a 16W BR30 Reflector compact fluorescent.

• EPACT92 established minimum performance standards for some reflector lamps and provided 

exemptions for certain specialty applications (e.g., ER/BR, vibration service, more than 5% 

neodymium oxide, impact resistant, infrared heat, colored). EPACT92 effectively phased-out Rshaped tungsten filament incandescent reflector lamps at certain wattages and bulb diameters, 

replacing them with more efficient and cost effective tungsten-halogen parabolic aluminized 

reflector (PAR) lamps. EISA 2007 took away certain exemptions from EPACT 1992, requiring certain 

previously exempted lamps to meet EPACT92 minimum performance standards by January 1, 2008. 

The 65W BR30, a large majority of the incandescent reflector lamp market is still exempted.

• The following future improvements for the system were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: 

— Incandescents: Efficacy +3%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

— Halogen: Efficacy +15%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

— CFL: Efficacy +15%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

• These improvements can be made by improved filament design and placement, higher pressure 

capsules, or higher efficiency reflector coatings.

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

Residential Reflector Lamps
Advanced Case Final

14

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Compact Fluorescent Lighting

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Energy 

Star Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W

Lamp Wattage

13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13

Lamp Lumens 

825 825 715 825 875 900 919 945 965 992 1013 1042

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

63.5 63.5 55.0 63.5 67.2 69.2 70.7 72.7 74.2 76.3 77.9 80.1

Lamp Price

$3.14 $2.15 N/A $1.57 $2.38 $3.33 $2.32 $3.25 $2.26 $3.17 $2.21 $3.09

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$4.22 $2.61 N/A $1.90 $2.72 $3.70 $2.53 $3.44 $2.35 $3.19 $2.18 $2.96 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

10.0 10.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 10.0 10.3 10.3 10.7 10.7 11.0 11.0

CRI

82 82 80 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82
Advanced Case Final

15

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Compact Fluorescent Lighting

• The residential compact fluorescent lamp characterized in this report is a 13 watt compact 

fluorescent lamp.

• Compact Fluorescents contain mercury and therefore require appropriate disposal. In addition, 

because the color rendering index of compact fluorescents is lower than that incandescent lamps (82 

compared to 100), the quality of the light of a compact fluorescent falls short of incandescent lamps.

• EPACT 2005 sets performance for medium based compact fluorescent lamps. It adopts Energy Star 

performance requirements (August 6, 2001 version) for efficacy, lumen maintenance, lamp life, rapid 

cycle stress test, CRI, etc. The standard is effective for lamps manufactured on or after January 1, 

2006. The Secretary may revise these requirements by rule or establish other requirements at a later 

date. [Note: EPACT 2005 standards do not apply to CFL lamps with screw bases other than medium (e.g., pin 

based)]

• Energy Star® and the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) offer voluntary specifications for CFL 

lamps.

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: Efficacy +15%, Life 

+7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012).

— Improvements in efficacy can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors in compact 

fluorescent lamps. Lifetime improvements can be made by improving the electrodes. 

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

Residential Compact Florescent Lamps
Advanced Case Final

16

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8)

DATA

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Current 

Standard 

Mid-Level 

T12 High T12 Baseline T8 

Mid-Level 

T8 High T8 

32WT8 40WT12 32WT8 40WT12 40WT12 34WT12 32WT8 32WT8 28WT8 

Lamp Wattage 64 80 64 80 80 68 64 64 56

Lamp Lumens 5040 5720 5040 5720 6500 5580 5040 5420 5120

System Wattage 65 70 65 70 70 60 65 65 57

System Lumens 4435 3890 4435 3890 4420 3794 4435 4770 4506

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 78.8 71.5 78.8 71.5 81.3 82.1 78.8 84.7 91.4

System Efficacy (lm/W) 68.7 55.6 68.7 55.6 63.1 63.8 68.7 73.8 79.7

Lamp Price ($) $3.35 $1.85 $1.71 $1.85 $5.91 $5.79 $1.71 $2.67 $2.88 

Ballast Price ($) $15.71 $11.22 $9.94 $11.22 $11.22 $11.22 $9.94 $9.94 $9.94 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $0.66 $0.32 $0.34 $0.32 $0.91 $1.04 $0.34 $0.49 $0.56 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 20 15 20 15 24 24 20 20 18

CRI 75 70 75 70 85 85 75 82 82

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 83.0% 77.7% 87.2% 77.7% 77.7% 77.7% 87.2% 87.2% 87.2%

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

17

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8)

DATA

2020 2030 2040

Typical T8 High T8 Typical T8 High T8 Typical T8 High T8

32WT8 28WT8 32WT8 28WT8 32WT8 28WT8

Lamp Wattage 64 56 64 56 64 56

Lamp Lumens 5740 5274 5785 5444 5830 5615

System Wattage 65 57 65 57 65 57

System Lumens 5052 4641 5091 4791 5130 4941

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 89.7 94.2 90.4 97.2 91.1 100.3

System Efficacy (lm/W) 78.2 82.1 78.8 84.8 79.4 87.4

Lamp Price ($) $2.72 $2.79 $2.62 $2.70 $2.53 $2.60 

Ballast Price ($) $9.64 $9.64 $9.31 $9.31 $8.98 $8.98 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $0.47 $0.53 $0.45 $0.50 $0.43 $0.46 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 25 19 26 19 26 20

CRI 85 82 85 82 85 82

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 87.2% 87.2% 87.2% 87.2% 87.2% 87.2%

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

Residential Linear Fluorescent Lighting (T12/T8)

• This report assumes that T12 and T8 residential linear fluorescent lamps provide the same utility to 

consumers. Each characterized technology is a two-lamp, one-ballast system that emits 

approximately 4,500 system lumens.

• In a change from the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report characterizes a range of efficacies for T12 

and T8 lamps and does not use T5 lamps for direct comparison because T5 lamps are almost never 

used as residential replacement options.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Low efficiency and mid-range efficiency T12s: 2 F40T12 lamps with a residential low power 

factor electronic ballast (ballast factor =0.68, ballast luminous efficiency (BLE)= 77.7%)

— High efficiency T12: 2 F34T12 lamps with a residential low power factor electronic ballast 

(ballast factor =0.68, BLE =77.7%)

— Baseline and mid-range efficiency T8s: 2 F32T8 lamps with instant start electronic ballast 

(ballast factor=0.88, BLE=87.2%)

— High efficiency T8: 2 F28T8 lamps with instant start electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, 

BLE=87.2%)

• Since 1995, DOE standards have required that the lamps characterized by this report have a 

minimum efficacy of 75 lm/W and a minimum CRI of 69 for >35W lamps or 45 for <35W lamps.

• In 2005, DOE standards raised the minimum ballast efficacy factor (BEF) of the ballasts paired with 

the characterized lamps, effectively promoting the use of T8 lamp and ballast systems. Residential 

ballasts were originally exempted from regulation.

18

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8)
Advanced Case Final

Residential Linear Fluorescent Lighting (T12/T8)

• Beginning July 14, 2012 (or July 14, 2014 for T8 700-series phosphor lamps), DOE fluorescent lamp 

standards will require a minimum efficacy of 89 lm/W. While the amended performance-based 

standards do not explicitly prohibit T12 lamps, no T12 lamps met the standard at the time of its 

announcement. Since then, however, T12 lamps meeting the standard have entered the market.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized residential ballasts 

have a minimum BLE = 0.993 / (1 + 0.41 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). Residential ballasts 

also must have a minimum power factor of 0.5.

• California's Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• ENERGY STAR residential fixtures require ≥ 65 lm/W per lamp-ballast platform before September 

1, 2013 and ≥ 70 lm/W per lamp-ballast platform thereafter.

• Fluorescent technologies are approaching maximum technologically feasible levels. Therefore, they 

are assumed to be improving gradually compared to SSL lighting and ceramic metal halide 

technologies. While improvements can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors, additional 

energy savings are most likely to be captured through the use of dimming ballasts and occupancy 

sensors.

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

19

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8) (cont.’d)
Advanced Case Final

20

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T5)

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

28WT5 28WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 

Lamp Wattage 56 56 56 52 56 52 56 52 56 52

Lamp Lumens 5320 5320 5320 5320 5468 5480 5632 5657 5796 5834

System Wattage 63 63 63 59 61 57 61 57 61 57

System Lumens 5320 5320 5320 5320 5468 5480 5632 5657 5796 5834

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 95.0 95.0 95.0 102.3 97.6 105.4 100.6 108.8 103.5 112.2

System Efficacy (lm/W) 84.3 84.3 84.3 90.7 89.8 96.9 92.5 100.1 95.2 103.2

Lamp Price ($) $3.56 $3.18 $3.18 $3.97 $3.08 $3.85 $2.98 $3.72 $2.87 $3.59 

Ballast Price ($) $20.94 $20.94 $20.94 $20.94 $26.31 $26.31 $25.41 $25.41 $24.50 $24.50 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $0.67 $0.60 $0.60 $0.75 $0.56 $0.70 $0.53 $0.66 $0.50 $0.62 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 20 20 20 25 21 26 21 27 22 27

CRI 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 88.7% 88.7% 88.7% 88.7% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0%

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

Residential Linear Fluorescent Lighting (T5)

• The residential T5 lamps characterized in this report are part of a two-lamp, one-ballast systems that 

emit approximately 5,300 system lumens. 

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report characterizes a range of efficacies within the 

T5 family and does not use T12 and T8 lamps for direct comparison because of a distinct utility for 

T5 lamps. Notably, T5 systems are very rarely used in the residential sector.

• T5 lamps are approximately 40% narrower than T8 lamps and almost 60% narrower than T12 lamps. 

This allows T5 lamps to be coated with higher quality, more efficient phosphor blends than larger 

diameter lamps, resulting in a more efficacious lamp. The compact size of T5 lamps also permits 

greater flexibility in lighting design and construction.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical: 2 F28T5 lamps with a programmed start electronic ballast (ballast factor =1, 

BLE=88.7%)

— Best available: 2 F26T5 lamps with a programmed start electronic ballast (ballast factor =1, 

BLE=88.7%)

21

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T5)
Advanced Case Final

Residential Linear Fluorescent Lighting (T5)

• Currently no federal standards exist for the T5 lamps or their corresponding ballasts.

• Beginning July 14, 2012, DOE fluorescent lamp standards will require a minimum efficacy of 86 

lm/W.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE = 0.993 / (1 + 0.51 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)).

• California's Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• Fluorescent technologies are approaching maximum technologically feasible levels. Therefore, they 

are assumed to be improving gradually compared to SSL lighting and ceramic metal halide 

technologies. While improvements can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors, additional 

energy savings are most likely to be captured through the use of dimming ballasts and occupancy 

sensors.

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

22

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T5) (Cont.’d)
Advanced Case Final

23

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Torchieres

DATA

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical

Typical Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

253 150 154 37 150 150 40

Lamp Lumens 

4300 2670 2670 2670 2733 2650 2666

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

17.0 17.8 17.3 72.7 18.2 17.7 66.6

Lamp Price

$4.15 $2.27 $1.10 $12.71 $2.87 $3.88 $12.33

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$0.97 $0.85 $0.42 $4.76 $1.05 $1.46 $4.63 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

2.1 1.0 1.8 10.0 0.8 3.0 9.5

CRI 98 100 100 82 100 100 82
Advanced Case Final

24

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Torchieres

DATA

2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage 150 150 40 150 150 40 150 150 40

Lamp Lumens 2760 2783 2799 2788 2922 2939 2816 3068 3086

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 18.4 18.6 70.0 18.6 19.5 73.5 18.8 20.5 77.1

Lamp Price $2.80 $3.78 $12.02 $2.73 $3.69 $11.72 $2.66 $3.60 $11.43

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $1.01 $1.36 $4.30 $0.98 $1.26 $3.99 $0.94 $1.17 $3.70 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

0.8 3.2 9.8 0.9 3.5 10.1 0.9 3.7 10.5

CRI 100 100 82 100 100 82 100 100 82
Advanced Case Final

25

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Torchieres

• The residential torchiere characterized in this report emits approximately 2,683 lumens. The typical 

characteristics are a weighted average of a halogen, incandescent, and CFL torchieres based. The 

2005 typical wattage is based on 2003 installed base data. The 2009 typical wattage is based on 

EPACT standards.

• Energy Star® and the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) offer voluntary specifications for 

torchieres.

• The following future improvements for the system were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: 

— Incandescents: Efficacy +3%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

— Halogen: Efficacy +15%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

— CFL: Efficacy +15%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). 

• Fixture prices, installation costs, and maintenance costs are not included for the residential sector.

Residential Torchieres
Advanced Case Final

26

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Solid State Lighting (LED A19 Replacement)

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED A19 LED A19 LED A19 LED A19 LED A19 LED

Typical Wattage 36 18 13 3.8 3.6 3.5

Lumens 630 800 800 800 800 800

Efficacy (lm/W) 17.3 44.0 60.0 210.0 224.0 230.0

Lamp Price ($) $189.82 $68.00 $26.40 $2.16 $1.12 $0.80 

Cost ($/klm) $301.00 $85.00 $33.00 $2.70 $1.40 $1.40 

Average Life (1000 hrs) 50 20 25 90 100 100

CRI 92 80 90 92 92 92

CCT 2700 3000 2700 2700 2700 2700

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, longer life, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

27

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Solid State Lighting (LED PAR38 Replacement)

DATA

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED PAR38 LED PAR38 LED PAR38 LED PAR38 LED PAR38 LED

Typical Wattage 36 28 20 4.8 4.5 4.3

Lumens 630 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000

Efficacy (lm/W) 17.3 36.0 50.0 210.0 224.0 230.0

Lamp Price ($) $189.82 $164.00 $51.00 $2.70 $1.40 $1.00 

Cost ($/klm) $301.00 $164.00 $51.00 $2.70 $1.40 $1.00 

Average Life (1000 hrs) 50 20 25 90 100 100

CRI 92 80 90 92 92 92

CCT 2700 3000 2700 2700 2700 2700

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, longer life, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

28

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Residential Solid-State Lighting (LED A19 and PAR38 Replacements)

Residential Solid-State Lighting

• The residential solid-state lighting characterized in this report are replacements for a 60W A19 lamp 

and a 75W PAR38 lamp. These represent the most common uses of LED technology in the residential 

sector.

• This report characterizes two distinct applications for LEDs in the residential sector rather than one, 

as was done in the 2008 EIA Reference Case. Because of rapid LED technology development, the 

market is best characterized by the state of the technology at a given time rather than a range of 

performance at any one time. 

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 60W A19 equivalent: 13W LED emitting 800 lumens

— 75W PAR38 equivalent: 20W LED emitting 1000 lumens

• No federal standards exist for solid-state lighting.

• In the advanced case, projections are based on 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model’s ‘high 

improvement’ case, a scenario analyzed in the “Energy Savings Potential of Solid-State Lighting in 

General Illumination Applications” report, and assume LED technology advances faster than 

anticipated by the DOE SSL Multi-Year Program Plan.
Advanced Case Final

29

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial General Service Incandescent Lighting

1 The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 prescribes standards for current 100 watt incandescent lamps as of January 1, 2012. Starting in 

2012, 100-watt incandescents will be replaced by halogen infrared incandescents. 

2

In 2020, EISA 2007 sets a minimum efficacy for general service lamps of 45 lm/W. These standards can not be met with existing commercialized 

incandescent lamp technologies and current trends in industry lead us to believe they will not be met.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2012120202

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical Typical 

Typical Typical Low Typical High 72W Inc 72W Inc

System Wattage 

100 100 100 100 100 72 N/A

System Lumens 

997 997 903 965 1003 879 N/A

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

16.9 16.9 15.3 16.2 17.0 20.7 N/A

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

10.0 10.0 9.0 9.6 10.0 12.2 N/A

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $0.23 $0.19 $0.40 $0.35 $0.39 $3.09 N/A

System Cost ($/klm) $17.07 $13.97 $20.46 $21.29 $22.59 $19.14 N/A

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

1 1 2 1 1 3 N/A

CRI

100 100 100 100 100 100 N/A

Total Installed Cost ($) $89.76 $73.45 $85.40 $85.35 $85.39 $71.00 N/A

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $3.58 $3.58 $3.58 $3.58 $3.58 $0.86 N/A
Advanced Case Final

30

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial General Service Incandescent Lighting

• The Commercial incandescent lighting characterized in this report is a 100 watt medium screw based 

incandescent lamp (NCI, 2002) in an open down light recessed can fixture (~$20) with a fixture 

efficiency of 59% (DOE, 2008).

• A The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) established standards for 100W 

lamps effective in 2012. These standards can be achieved if incandescent bulbs use halogen infrared 

technologies. 

• EISA 2007 also established a requirement that DOE establish standards for general service lamps that 

are equal to or greater than 45 lm/W by 2020. These standards can not be achieved by any 

incandescent technology currently on the market and given current and projected trends in industry 

it is not likely they will be met. It is currently assumed that industry will increase their investment in 

LED technology at the expense of incandescent technology. 

• California’s Appliance Efficiency Regulations include efficiency regulations for general service 

incandescent lamps with certain bases. California’s Appliance Efficiency Regulations include 

efficiency regulations for general service incandescent lamps with certain bases. California is 

currently undergoing a rulemaking to reduce commercial lighting by not less than 25% of 2007 levels 

over the next 10 years in accordance with Assembly Bill 1109. They are going to regulate general 

purpose lighting (incandescent lamps).

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the fluorescent and incandescent energy conservation standard advanced notice of 

proposed rulemaking (lamps ANOPR). Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,376 

operating hours per year. (lamps ANOPR)

Commercial General Service Incandescent Lighting
Advanced Case Final

31

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Compact Fluorescent Lamps

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

26W 26W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W

System Wattage 

26 26 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23

System Lumens 

1068 1068 976 976 1010 1025 1060 1076 1113 1130 1169

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

67.3 67.3 69.6 69.6 72.0 73.0 75.6 76.7 79.3 80.5 83.3

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

41.1 41.1 42.4 42.4 43.9 44.6 46.1 46.8 48.4 49.1 50.8

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$4.01 $3.28 $1.56 $1.56 $1.73 $1.52 $1.69 $1.49 $1.65 $1.45 $1.61 

System Cost ($/klm)

$22.14 $18.12 $23.05 $23.05 $22.65 $22.48 $22.09 $21.92 $21.54 $21.37 $21.00 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

10.0 10.0 10.0 12.0 12.0 12.4 12.4 12.8 12.8 13.2 13.2

CRI

82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82

Total Installed Cost ($)

$96.56 $79.02 $80.00 $80.00 $80.00 $78.00 $78.00 $76.05 $76.05 $74.15 $74.15 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 $0.39 
Advanced Case Final

32

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Compact Fluorescent Lamps

• The commercial compact fluorescent lamp characterized in this report is a 23 watt screw-base 

compact fluorescent lamp in an open down light recessed can fixture (~$20) with a fixture 

efficiency of 61%.

• EPACT 2005 sets performance for medium based compact fluorescent lamps. It adopts 

Energy Star performance requirements (August 6, 2001 version) for efficacy, lumen 

maintenance, lamp life, rapid cycle stress test, CRI, etc. The standard is effective for lamps 

manufactured on or after January 1, 2006. The Secretary may revise these requirements by 

rule or establish other requirements at a later date. [Note: EPACT 2005 standards do not apply to 

CFL lamps with screw bases other than medium (e.g., pin based)]

• Energy Star® and the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) offer voluntary specifications 

for CFL lamps.

• California’s Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires 

(including fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005)

• The following future improvements were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: Efficacy 

+15%, Life +7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). Improvements in efficacy can be made by 

using more rare-earth phosphors in compact fluorescent lamps. Lifetime improvements can 

be made by improving the compact fluorescent lamp electrodes.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment 

from RS Means and the lamps ANOPR. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,650 

operating hours per year. 

Commercial Compact Fluorescent Lamps
Advanced Case Final

33

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Halogen Lighting (PAR 38)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

90W PAR 

38 70W HIR 90W PAR 38 70W HIR 90W PAR 38 70W HIR 90W PAR 38 70W HIR 90W PAR 38 70W HIR 90W PAR 38 70W HIR

System Wattage 

90 70 90 70 90 70 90 70 90 70 90 70

System Lumens 

1218 1172 1218 1172 1230 1306 1291 1372 1355 1441 1423 1513

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

14.6 18.0 14.6 18.0 14.7 20.1 15.4 21.1 16.2 22.1 17.0 23.2

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

13.5 16.7 13.5 16.7 13.7 18.7 14.3 19.6 15.1 20.6 15.8 21.6

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$4.98 $6.76 $4.07 $5.53 $2.87 $11.19 $2.80 $10.91 $2.73 $10.64 $2.66 $10.37 

System Cost ($/klm)

$19.01 $21.46 $15.56 $17.56 $19.35 $27.34 $18.87 $26.65 $18.39 $25.99 $17.93 $25.34 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

2.5 3.0 2.5 3.0 2.4 3.6 2.6 3.9 2.8 4.2 3.0 4.5

CRI

100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Total Installed Cost ($)

$96.56 $97.92 $79.02 $80.13 $81.00 $93.00 $80.19 $92.07 $79.39 $91.15 $78.59 $90.24 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$1.47 $1.22 $1.47 $1.22 $1.47 $1.22 $1.47 $1.22 $1.47 $1.22 $1.47 $1.22 

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, longer life, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

34

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Halogen Lighting (Edison)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

90W Edison 90W Edison 90W Edison 90W Edison 90W Edison 90W Edison

System Wattage 

90 90 72 72 72 72

System Lumens 

1218 1218 1395 1465 1538 1615

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

14.6 14.6 20.8 21.9 23.0 24.1

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

13.5 13.5 19.4 20.3 21.4 22.4

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

$4.98 $4.07 $1.33 $1.30 $1.26 $1.23 

System Cost ($/klm)

$19.01 $15.56 $15.76 $15.37 $14.99 $14.61 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

2.5 2.5 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2

CRI

100 100 100 100 100 100

Total Installed Cost ($)

$96.56 $79.02 $80.00 $78.00 $76.05 $74.15 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$1.92 $1.57 $1.41 $1.41 $1.41 $1.41 

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, longer life, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

35

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Halogen Lighting (Par 38 and Edison)

• The commercial halogen lighting characterized in this report is a lamp that emits approximately 1200-1400 lumens in 

an open down light recessed can fixture (~$20) with a fixture efficiency of 93% (DOE, 2008).

• Multiple types of halogen lamps were analyzed, including:

— Typical efficiency unit: 90W halogen PAR38 

— High efficiency unit: 70W halogen infrared reflector PAR38 

— Typical efficiency unit: 72 W halogen Edison A-line lamp

• Halogen infrared reflector (HIR) lamps contain a tungsten halogen capsule with a film coating on the inside of the 

capsule. The coating reflects infrared radiation back into the lamp filament, which forces the filament to burn at a 

higher temperature. This increases the efficacy of the lamp, without reducing operating life. 

• EPACT92 established minimum performance standards for some reflector lamps and provided exemptions for 

certain specialty applications (e.g., ER/BR, vibration service, more than 5% neodymium oxide, impact resistant, 

infrared heat, colored). EPACT92 effectively phased-out R-shaped tungsten filament incandescent reflector lamps at 

certain wattages and bulb diameters, replacing them with more efficient and cost effective tungsten-halogen parabolic 

aluminized reflector (PAR) lamps. EISA2007 took away certain exemptions from EPACT 1992, requiring certain 

previously exempted lamps to meet EPACT92 minimum performance standards by January 1, 2008.

• The following future improvements for the system were assumed to occur over a 30 year period: Efficacy +15%, Life 

+7.5%, and Price -7.5% (NCI, 2012). These improvements can be made by improved filament design and placement, 

higher pressure capsules, or higher efficiency reflector coatings.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and installation costs are 

calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS Means and the lamps ANOPR. 

Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,450 operating hours per year. (lamps ANOPR)

Commercial Halogen Lighting
Advanced Case Final

36

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Edison Socket Substitute)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED

Wattage

36 13 11 3.1 2.9 2.8

Lumens 548 650 650 650 650 650

Efficacy (lm/W) 15.1 51.0 60.0 210.0 224.0 230.0

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $392.68 $205.00 $80.00 $10.00 $5.30 $3.60

Life (1000 hrs) 50 25 50 100 100 100

CRI

92 85 90 92 92 92

CCT

2700 3000 2700 2700 2700 2700

Total Installed Cost ($) $270.44 $186.77 $105.52 $60.02 $56.96 $55.86

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, longer life, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

37

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Edison Socket Substitute)

Commercial Solid-State Lighting (Edison Socket Substitute)

• The commercial solid-state lighting characterized is a replacement for a 65W BR30 lamp. This 

represents the most common use of LED technology in Edison sockets in the commercial sector.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 65W BR30 equivalent: 11W LED emitting 650 lumens in a downlight fixture

• No federal standards exist for solid-state lighting.

• In the advanced case, projections are based on 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model’s ‘high 

improvement’ case, a scenario analyzed in the “Energy Savings Potential of Solid-State Lighting in 

General Illumination Applications” report, and assume LED technology advances faster than 

anticipated by the DOE SSL Multi-Year Program Plan.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 lamps rulemaking. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,376 

operating hours per year. (DOE, 2009)
Advanced Case Final

38

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA

2003 2007 2011

Installed Base Baseline High 

Efficiency 

HE w/ Occ. 

Sensor 

HE w/ Spec. 

Reflector 

HE w/ OS & 

Spec. Ref. 

32WT8 32WT8 32WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8

System Wattage 65 65 65 57 57 57 57

System Lumens 3282 3282 3282 3334 3334 3942 3942

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 78.8 78.8 78.8 91.4 91.4 91.4 91.4

System Efficacy (lm/W) 50.1 50.1 50.1 58.2 58.2 68.8 68.8

Cost ($/klm) $0.38 $0.38 $0.38 $0.63 $0.63 $0.63 $0.63 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $13.81 $13.81 $13.81 $14.38 $15.29 $17.64 $18.40 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 20 20 20 18 9 18 9

CRI 75 75 75 82 82 82 82

Total Installed Cost ($) $74.00 $74.00 $74.00 $76.63 $79.64 $98.20 $101.21 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $3.03 $3.03 $3.03 $3.16 $4.41 $3.16 $4.41 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 86.0% 86.0% 86.0% 86.0% 86.0% 86.0% 86.0%

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

39

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)

DATA

2020 2030 2040

Base HE HE w/ 

OS 

HE w/ 

SR HE Max Base HE HE w/ OS 

HE w/ 

SR 

HE 

Max Base HE HE w/ OS 

HE w/ 

SR 

HE 

Max 

32WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 32WT8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F32T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8

System Wattage 62 54 54 54 54 62 54 54 54 54 62 54 54 54 54

System Lumens 3738 3434 3434 4061 4061 3767 3545 3545 4192 4192 3796 3656 3656 4323 4323

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 89.7 94.2 94.2 94.2 94.2 90.4 97.2 97.2 97.2 97.2 91.1 100.3 100.3 100.3 100.3

System Efficacy (lm/W) 60.5 63.5 63.5 75.1 75.1 60.9 65.5 65.5 77.5 77.5 61.4 67.6 67.6 79.9 79.9

Cost ($/klm) $0.53 $0.59 $0.59 $0.59 $0.59 $0.51 $0.56 $0.56 $0.56 $0.56 $0.49 $0.52 $0.52 $0.52 $0.52 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $12.40 $13.55 $14.40 $16.61 $17.33 $11.88 $12.67 $13.47 $15.53 $16.21 $11.37 $11.85 $12.59 $14.53 $15.16 

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs) 25 19 9 19 9 26 19 10 19 10 26 20 10 20 10

CRI 85 82 82 82 82 85 82 82 82 82 85 82 82 82 82

Total Installed Cost ($) $75.01 $75.19 $78.11 $96.11 $99.04 $73.42 $73.59 $76.42 $93.79 $96.62 $71.83 $71.99 $74.72 $91.47 $94.20 

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($) $3.03 $3.16 $4.41 $3.16 $4.41 $3.03 $3.16 $4.41 $3.16 $4.41 $3.03 $3.16 $4.41 $3.16 $4.41 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1% 91.1%

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – ≤ 4 ft. T8/T12

• The commercial linear fluorescent lighting (≤ 4 ft.) characterized in this report is a two-lamp system (one ballast and 

one fixture) that emits approximately 4,000 system lumens. 

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report excludes F34T12 lamps and F32T8 HE magnetic systems. T12 

lamps have largely disappeared from the market, and F32T8 HE magnetic systems are a niche product for sensitive 

applications that do not represent any significant portion of the market. This report also assumes that the high 

efficiency T8 lamp has a reduced wattage of 28W rather than 32W.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Baseline F32T8: 2 32W T8 lamps with instant start electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, BLE=86%), fixture 

efficiency = 74%

— F32T8 HE unit: 2 28W T8 lamps with instant start electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, BLE=86%), fixture 

efficiency = 74%

— F32T8 HE unit w/ occupancy sensor: 2 28W T8 lamps with a electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, BLE=86%) and 

occupancy sensor (designed for 1,000 sq. ft. or ~25 two lamp systems), fixture efficiency = 74%. Note that 

occupancy sensor is assumed to be associated with a 50% reduction in lamp lifetime.

— F32T8 HE unit w/ specular reflector: 2 28W T8 lamps with instant start electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, 

BLE=86%), fixture efficiency = 88%

— F32T8 HE unit w/ OS and SR: 2 28W T8 lamps with electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, BLE=86%) and 

occupancy sensor (designed for 1,000 sq. ft. or ~25 two lamp systems), fixture efficiency = 88%. Note that 

occupancy sensor is assumed to be associated with a 50% reduction in lamp lifetime.

• Since 1995, DOE standards have required that the lamps characterized by this report have a minimum efficacy of 75 

lm/W and a minimum CRI of 45 for <35W lamps.

• In 2005, DOE standards raised the minimum BEF of the ballasts paired with the characterized lamps, effectively 

promoting the use of T8 lamp and ballast systems.

40

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – ≤ 4 ft. T8/T12

• Beginning July 14, 2012 (or July 14, 2014 for T8 700-series phosphor lamps), DOE fluorescent lamp 

standards will require a minimum efficacy of 89 lm/W. While the amended performance-based 

standards do not explicitly prohibit T12 lamps, no T12 lamps met the standard at the time of its 

announcement. Since then, however, T12 lamps meeting the standard have entered the market.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE = 0.993 / (1 + 0.27 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). 

• California's Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• Though system watts for the F32T8 HE with the occupancy sensor are the same as the F32T8 HE, 

occupancy sensors can result in 17% to 60% energy savings due to reduced operating hours. (LRC) 

Savings potential is highly dependent on the time-delay programmed into the sensor, which ranges 

from 5-30 minutes and room type. Shorter time delays save more energy, but possibly at expense of 

lamp life. Occupancy sensors can reduce fluorescent lamp lifetime by as much as 50%. (Lutron) This 

decrease in lifetime results in higher overall maintenance costs. 

• Fluorescent technologies are approaching maximum technologically feasible levels. Therefore, they 

are assumed to be improving gradually compared to SSL lighting and ceramic metal halide 

technologies. While improvements can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors, additional 

energy savings are most likely to be captured through the use of dimming ballasts and occupancy 

sensors.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,435 operating hours per year. (DOE, 2009)

41

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting (cont.’d)
Advanced Case Final

42

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

28WT5 28WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 

System Wattage 66 63 63 59 61 57 61 57 61 57

System Lumens 4698 4698 4698 4698 4783 4838 4973 4995 5118 5152

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 95.0 95.0 95.0 102.3 96.7 105.4 100.6 108.8 103.5 112.2

System Efficacy (lm/W) 71.2 74.4 74.4 80.1 78.6 85.6 81.7 88.4 84.1 91.1

Cost ($/klm) $1.53 $0.67 $0.67 $0.84 $0.64 $0.79 $0.59 $0.74 $0.56 $0.69 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $28.68 $28.46 $28.46 $28.84 $27.12 $27.16 $25.18 $25.41 $23.60 $23.76 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 20 20 20 25 21 26 21 27 22 27

CRI

85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85

Total Installed Cost ($)

$164.95 $161.39 $161.39 $163.17 $157.38 $159.10 $152.92 $154.59 $148.46 $150.07 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$2.81 $2.93 $2.93 $2.71 $2.93 $2.71 $2.93 $2.71 $2.93 $2.71 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE)

88.7% 88.7% 88.7% 88.7% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0% 92.0%

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

• The commercial T5 linear fluorescent lighting characterized in this report is a two-lamp system (one 

ballast and one 88.3% efficient fixture) that emits approximately 4,700 system lumens.

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report assumes that the high efficiency T5 lamp has 

a reduced wattage of 26 W rather than 28 W.

• T5 lamps are approximately 40% narrower than T8 lamps and almost 60% narrower than T12 lamps. 

This allows T5 lamps to be coated with higher quality, more efficient phosphor blends than larger 

diameter lamps, resulting in a more efficacious lamp. The compact size of T5 lamps also permits 

greater flexibility in lighting design and construction.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical: 2 F28T5 lamps with a programmed start electronic ballast (ballast factor =1, 

BLE=88.7%)

— Best available: 2 F26T5 lamps with a programmed start electronic ballast (ballast factor =1, 

BLE=88.7%)

• Currently no federal standards exist for the T5 lamps or corresponding ballasts characterized in this 

report.

43

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting
Advanced Case Final

Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

• Beginning July 14, 2012, DOE fluorescent lamp standards will require a minimum efficacy of 86 

lm/W for standard output T5 lamps.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE = 0.993 / (1 + 0.51 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). 

• California's Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• Fluorescent technologies are approaching maximum technologically feasible levels. Therefore, they 

are assumed to be improving gradually compared to SSL lighting and ceramic metal halide 

technologies. While improvements can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors, additional 

energy savings are most likely to be captured through the use of dimming ballasts and occupancy 

sensors.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and 2009 lamps rulemaking. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,435 operating 

hours per year. (DOE, 2009)

44

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)
Advanced Case Final

45

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (4-ft Linear Fluorescent 

Lighting Substitute)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base T8 T8 T8 T8

LED LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8

Typical Wattage 36.4 80.0 55.4 24.0 22.5 21.9

Lumens 548 5040 5040 5040 5040 5040

Efficacy (lm/W) 15.1 63.0 91.0 210.0 224.0 230.0

Cost ($/klm) $392.68 $301.00 $110.00 $10.00 $5.30 $3.60

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 50 25 50 100 100 100

CRI 92 70 80 85 85 85

CCT 2700 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500

Total Installed Cost ($) $270.44 $1,570.56 $607.92 $103.92 $80.23 $71.66

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

46

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (4-ft Linear Fluorescent 

Lighting Substitute)

Commercial Solid-State Lighting (4-ft Linear Fluorescent Substitute)

• The commercial solid-state lighting characterized is a replacement for 2 4-ft 32W T8 lamps in a 

troffer fixture. This represents the most common use of LED technology in the 4-ft linear fluorescent 

lighting market.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 2 F32T8 lamps equivalent: 56W LED emitting 5040 lumens

• No federal standards exist for solid-state lighting.

• In the advanced case, projections are based on 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model’s ‘high 

improvement’ case, a scenario analyzed in the “Energy Savings Potential of Solid-State Lighting in 

General Illumination Applications” report, and assume LED technology advances faster than 

anticipated by the DOE SSL Multi-Year Program Plan.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 lamps rulemaking. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,376 

operating hours per year. (DOE, 2009)
Advanced Case Final

47

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA

2003 2007

Installed Base 

75WT12 60WT12 59WT8 59WT8 HE 75WT12 60WT12 59WT8 55WT8

System Wattage 158 126 113 100 148 119 113 106

System Lumens 10208 7546 8300 8311 9376 7404 8379 8844

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 78.7 77.7 86.9 98.2 78.7 77.7 86.9 98.5

System Efficacy (lm/W) 64.6 59.9 73.5 83.1 63.1 62.3 73.9 83.7

Cost ($/klm) $0.99 $0.73 $0.80 $1.23 $0.52 $0.38 $0.42 $0.51 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $5.31 $6.54 $6.36 $7.09 $4.41 $4.41 $6.35 $9.26 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 12 12 15 18 12 12 15 24

CRI 70 62 75 85 62 62 75 78

Total Installed Cost ($) $106.42 $102.16 $105.35 $111.74 $83.44 $83.44 $103.93 $162.76 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $4.64 $4.64 $4.39 $4.22 $4.66 $4.66 $4.40 $4.55 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 88.9% 88.9% 88.9% 88.9% 88.9% 88.9% 91.6% 91.7%

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

48

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)

DATA

2011 2020 2030 2040

Electronic 

HE Typical High Efficiency Typical HE Typical HE Typical HE 

60WT12 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8

System Wattage 119 113 106 112 104 112 104 112 104

System Lumens 7404 8379 8844 9051 9110 9258 9404 9465 9699

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 77.7 86.9 98.5 93.9 101.4 96.1 104.7 98.2 108.0

System Efficacy (lm/W) 62.3 73.9 83.7 81.0 87.4 82.8 90.3 84.7 93.1

Cost ($/klm) $0.38 $0.42 $0.59 $0.58 $0.55 $0.54 $0.52 $0.51 $0.48 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $4.41 $6.35 $6.48 $6.19 $6.10 $5.84 $5.71 $5.51 $5.34 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 12 15 18 15 19 16 19 16 20

CRI 62 75 82 82 82 82 82 82 82

Total Installed Cost ($) $83.44 $103.93 $108.05 $106.76 $106.33 $104.84 $104.42 $102.91 $102.51 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $4.66 $4.40 $4.23 $4.40 $4.23 $4.40 $4.23 $4.40 $4.23 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 88.9% 91.6% 91.6% 92.9% 92.9% 92.9% 92.9% 92.9% 92.9%

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

49

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – 8 ft. T8/T12

• The commercial linear fluorescent lighting (> 4 ft.) characterized in this report is a two-lamp system 

(one ballast and one fixture) that emits approximately 8,000 system lumens.

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report:

— Assumes that the high efficiency 8 ft. T8 lamp has a reduced wattage of 55 W rather than 59 

W. 

— Continues to includes 75W T12 lamps only in the installed base

— Characterizes the 60W T12 lamps with an electronic ballast rather than a magnetic ballast 

because of the inability to meet current ballast standards with magnetic ballasts

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 2 F96T12 lamps (60W each) with electronic ballast (ballast factor =0.88, BLE=88.9%), fixture 

efficiency= 90.2%

— 2 F96T8 lamps (59W each) with electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88, BLE=91.6%), fixture 

efficiency= 92.8%

— 2 high efficiency F96T8 lamps (55W each) with electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.88,

BLE=91.6%), fixture efficiency= 92.8.%

• Since 1994, DOE standards have required that the lamps characterized by this report have a 

minimum efficacy of 80 lm/W and a minimum CRI of 69 for >35W lamps.

• In 2005, DOE standards raised the minimum BEF of the ballasts paired with the characterized 

lamps, effectively promoting the use of T8 lamp and ballast systems. 
Advanced Case Final

50

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – 8 ft. T8/T12

• Beginning July 14, 2012 (or July 14, 2014 for T8 700-series phosphor lamps), DOE fluorescent lamp 

standards will require a minimum efficacy of 97 lm/W. While the amended performance-based 

standards do not explicitly prohibit T12 lamps, no T12 lamps met the standard at the time of its 

announcement. Since then, however, T12 lamps meeting the standard have entered the market.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE = 0.993 / (1 + 0.27 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)).

• Fluorescent technologies are approaching maximum technologically feasible levels. Therefore, they 

are assumed to be improving gradually compared to SSL lighting and ceramic metal halide 

technologies. While improvements can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors, additional 

energy savings are most likely to be captured through the use of dimming ballasts and occupancy 

sensors.

• California’s Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 lamps rulemaking. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,435 

operating hours per year. (NCI, 2009)
Advanced Case Final

51

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Output)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO 86WT8HO

System Wattage 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165 165

System Lumens 11488 11596 11596 12740 11951 13122 12345 13546 12740 13971

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 82.6 82.6 82.6 90.7 85.1 93.4 87.9 96.4 90.7 99.5

System Efficacy (lm/W) 69.6 70.3 70.3 77.2 72.4 79.5 74.8 82.1 77.2 84.6

Cost ($/klm) $0.99 $0.51 $0.51 $0.58 $0.45 $0.51 $0.45 $0.51 $0.42 $0.47 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $9.29 $9.26 $9.26 $8.69 $8.15 $7.66 $8.15 $7.66 $7.62 $7.16 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 24 24 24 18 26 19 26 19 26 20

CRI 78 78 78 86 78 86 78 86 78 86

Total Installed Cost ($) $163.88 $162.76 $162.76 $166.10 $155.96 $159.09 $155.96 $159.09 $152.38 $155.40 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $4.64 $4.55 $4.55 $4.83 $4.55 $4.83 $4.55 $4.83 $4.55 $4.83 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 88.9% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7% 91.7%

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

52

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Output)

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – 8 ft. T8/T12 High Output

• The high output commercial linear fluorescent lighting (> 4 ft.) characterized in this report is a twolamp system (one ballast and one 92.8% efficient fixture) that emits approximately 10,000 system 

lumens.

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report characterizes a best available unit in addition 

to the typical unit.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical: 2 F96T8HO lamps (86W each) with electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.78, BLE=91.7%)

— Best available: 2 F96T8HO lamps (86W each) with electronic ballast (ballast factor=0.78, 

BLE=91.7%) and emitting additional lumens

• Since 1994, DOE standards have required that the lamps characterized by this report have a 

minimum efficacy of 80 lm/W and a minimum CRI of 69 for >35W lamps.

• In 2005, DOE standards raised the minimum BEF of the ballasts paired with the characterized lamps, 

effectively promoting the use of T8 lamp and ballast systems. 
Advanced Case Final

53

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Output) (Cont.’d)

Commercial Linear Fluorescent Lighting – 8 ft. T8/T12 High Output

• Beginning July 14, 2012 (or July 14, 2014 for T8 700-series phosphor lamps), DOE fluorescent lamp 

standards will require a minimum efficacy of 92 lm/W. While the amended performance-based 

standards do not explicitly prohibit T12 lamps, no T12 lamps met the standard at the time of its 

announcement. Since then, however, T12 lamps meeting the standard have entered the market.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE of 0.993 / (1 + 0.38 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). 

• Fluorescent technologies are approaching maximum technologically feasible levels. Therefore, they 

are assumed to be improving gradually compared to SSL lighting and ceramic metal halide 

technologies. While improvements can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors, additional 

energy savings are most likely to be captured through the use of dimming ballasts and occupancy 

sensors.

• California’s Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high-efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher (CEC, 2005).

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 lamps rule. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,435 operating hours 

per year. (DOE, 2009)
Advanced Case Final

54

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Low Bay HID Lighting (Metal Halide)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

175W

MV

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

System Wattage 208 210 211 199 170 199 170 199 170 199 170

System Lumens 5176 6669 7171 10186 11409 10645 11922 11154 12493 11663 13063

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W) 39.0 50.3 50.3 71.4 93.3 74.6 97.5 78.2 102.2 81.8 106.9

System Efficacy 

(lm/W) 24.9 31.8 34.0 51.2 67.2 53.5 70.3 56.1 73.6 58.7 77.0

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $2.19 $2.75 $5.81 $5.67 $5.06 $5.26 $4.70 $4.85 $4.33 $4.47 $4.00 

System Cost ($/klm) $35.80 $26.17 $44.58 $39.92 $35.64 $37.06 $33.09 $34.15 $30.49 $31.49 $28.12 

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs) 24.0 10.0 10.0 15.0 15.0 15.7 15.7 16.4 16.4 17.2 17.2

CRI 15 65 67 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69

Total Installed Cost 

($) $328.83 $318.18 $771.67 $858.59 $858.59 $846.39 $846.39 $832.84 $832.84 $819.28 $819.28 

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($) $3.93 $4.81 $4.83 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 $4.32 

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, longer life, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

55

Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

• The commercial metal halide low bay lighting characterized in this report is a one-lamp and oneballast system in a low bay fixture with 81.5% efficiency that emits approximately 10,000 system 

lumens. 

• Low bay lighting is defined as “interior lighting where the roof trusses or ceiling height is less than 

25ft. above the floor.” (IESNA, 2000)

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report:

— Characterizes a best available unit in addition to the typical unit.

— Increases the ballast efficiency to increase system efficiency for the high efficiency unit rather than 

increase the lamp efficacy due to the existence of more data on ballast efficiency than lamp 

efficacy at this time. 

— Characterizes metal halide lamps separately from high pressure sodium lamps because of their 

separate utilities. Metal halide lamps provide an intense white light and are typically used in retail 

applications; high pressure sodium lamps provide a yellow light and are typically used in 

warehouses and distribution centers.

• A 175W mercury vapor lamp with a magnetic ballast is included in the 2003 reference case for 

comparison, but EPACT 2005 prohibited the manufacture and import of mercury vapor lamp ballasts 

after January 1, 2008, causing mercury vapor lamp sales to decline until ultimately disappearing after 

the failure of all existing mercury vapor lamp ballasts.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical efficiency unit: 175W metal halide lamp with pulse start magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=88%)

— High efficiency unit: 175W metal halide lamp with pulse start magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=88.4%)
Advanced Case Final

56

Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (Metal Halide) (Cont.’d)

• In 2010, DOE published a determination that energy conservation standards for HID lamps would be 

technologically feasible and economically justified. The rulemaking to establish standards for these 

lamps is ongoing and is expected to be completed by June 2014. No current standards exist for HID 

lamps.

• EISA 2007 established efficiency standards for probe start magnetic ballasts (94%) and pulse start 

magnetic or electronic ballasts (88%) for ballasts that operate metal halide lamps between 150 and 400 

watts, effective January 1, 2009. The 94% efficiency requirement effectively banned probe start 

magnetic ballasts.

• A DOE rulemaking is ongoing to establish new and amended energy conservation standards for metal 

halide lamp fixtures as directed by EISA 2007. This rulemaking is expected to be completed by June 

2014.

• In the advanced case, assumed improvements could be made using improved ceramic arc tubes and 

better electrodes (and double arc tubes for lifetime improvement).

• Utilities in MA, NY, OR, TX, VT, WA, WI, FL and CA offer non-regulatory incentive programs to 

promote energy efficient HID lighting. 

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs and is based on the ongoing DOE metal 

halide lamp fixtures rulemaking. Annual maintenance costs are calculated using labor rate and labor 

time to install/replace equipment from RS Means and the 2009 lamps rule. Maintenance costs include 

labor only based on 3,650 operating hours per year.
Advanced Case Final

57

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Low Bay HID Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

175W MV 70W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS

System Wattage 208 93 130 130 122 130 122 130 122 130 122

System Lumens 5176 4130 7213 7213 7213 7213 7213 7213 7213 7213 7213

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W) 39.0 77.9 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5 94.5

System Efficacy 

(lm/W) 24.9 44.4 55.5 55.5 59.1 55.5 59.1 55.5 59.1 55.5 59.1

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $2.19 $3.11 $5.37 $5.37 $5.37 $5.29 $5.29 $5.20 $5.20 $5.11 $5.11 

System Cost ($/klm) $35.80 $41.15 $43.68 $43.68 $45.58 $43.03 $44.89 $42.30 $44.13 $41.57 $43.37 

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs) 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24

CRI 15 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22

Total Installed Cost 

($) $328.83 $312.86 $767.01 $767.01 $780.68 $762.29 $775.74 $757.04 $770.27 $751.78 $764.79 

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($) $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $4.04 $3.93 $4.04 $3.93 $4.04 $3.93 $4.04 

No change from reference case.
Advanced Case Final

58

Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

• The commercial high pressure sodium low bay lighting characterized in this report is a one-lamp and 

one-ballast system in a low bay fixture with 76.3% efficiency that emits approximately 7,000 system 

lumens. 

• Low bay lighting is defined as “interior lighting where the roof trusses or ceiling height is less than 

25ft. above the floor.” (IESNA, 2000)

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report:

— Characterizes a best available unit in addition to the typical unit. 

— Increases the ballast efficiency to increase system efficiency rather than increase the lamp efficacy 

due to the existence of more data on ballast efficiency than lamp efficacy at this time. 

— Analyzes a 100W unit rather than a 70W unit as the typical low bay unit.

— Characterizes high pressure sodium lamps separately from metal halide lamps because of their 

separate utilities. Metal halide lamps provide an intense white light and are typically used in retail 

applications; high pressure sodium lamps provide a yellow light and are typically used in 

warehouses and distribution centers.

• A 175W mercury vapor lamp with a magnetic ballast is included in the 2003 reference case for 

comparison, but EPACT 2005 prohibited the manufacture and import of mercury vapor lamp ballasts 

after January 1, 2008, causing mercury vapor lamp sales to decline until ultimately disappearing after 

the failure of all existing mercury vapor lamp ballasts.
Advanced Case Final

59

Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID Low Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium) (Cont.’d)

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical efficiency unit: 100W high pressure sodium lamp with magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=76.9%)

— High efficiency unit: 100W high pressure sodium lamp with magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=82%)

• In 2010, DOE published a determination that energy conservation standards for HID lamps would be 

technologically feasible and economically justified. The rulemaking to establish standards for these 

lamps is ongoing and is expected to be completed by June 2014. No current standards exist for HID 

lamps.

• The market is moving away from HPS technology with relatively little investment going into its 

development. Therefore, even in an advanced case, efficacy, price and lifetime are not expected to 

improve faster than the reference case. 

• Utilities in MA, NY, OR, TX, VT, WA, WI, FL and CA offer non-regulatory incentive programs to 

promote energy efficient HID lighting. Incentive programs favor efficient T5 high output lamps or T8 

lamps for low bay applications.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs and is based on the ongoing DOE metal 

halide lamp fixtures rulemaking. Annual maintenance costs are calculated using labor rate and labor 

time to install/replace equipment from RS Means and the 2009 lamps rule. Maintenance costs include 

labor only based on 3,650 operating hours per year.
Advanced Case Final

60

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Low Bay Applications)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base HPS HPS HPS HPS

LED LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED

Typical Wattage 36 11 100 34 32 31

Lumens 548 630 7200 7200 7200 7200

Efficacy (lm/W) 15.1 55.3 72.0 210.0 224.0 230.0

Cost ($/klm) $392.68 $160.00 $112.00 $10.00 $5.30 $3.60

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 50 50 50 100 100 100

CRI 92 92 80 80 80 80

CCT 2700 2700 5500 5500 5500 5500

Total Installed Cost ($) $270.44 $154.32 $859.92 $125.52 $91.68 $79.44

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, longer life, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

61

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Low Bay Applications)

Commercial Solid-State Lighting (Low Bay Applications)

• The commercial solid-state lighting technology characterized in this report is a replacement for a 

100W high pressure sodium lamp. This represents the most common use of LED technology in the 

low bay market.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 100W HPS lamp equivalent: 100W LED emitting 7,200 lumens

• No federal standards exist for solid-state lighting.

• In the advanced case, projections are based on 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model’s ‘high 

improvement’ case, a scenario analyzed in the “Energy Savings Potential of Solid-State Lighting in 

General Illumination Applications” report, and assume LED technology advances faster than 

anticipated by the DOE SSL Multi-Year Program Plan.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 Lamps Rule. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,376 operating 

hours per year. (DOE, 2009)
Advanced Case Final

62

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial High Bay HID Lighting (Metal Halide)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

400W MV 250W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH

System Wattage 453 293 465 480 423 455 423 455 423 455 423

System Lumens 13061 12245 20607 21261 23551 22218 24610 23281 25788 24344 26965

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 36.0 54.0 63.0 65.0 72.0 67.9 75.2 71.2 78.8 74.4 82.4

System Efficacy (lm/W) 28.8 41.8 44.3 44.3 55.6 48.9 58.1 51.2 60.9 53.6 63.7

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $1.16 $1.31 $2.38 $3.55 $3.21 $3.30 $2.98 $3.04 $2.74 $2.80 $2.53 

System Cost ($/klm) $11.06 $12.83 $21.54 $16.19 $22.14 $15.03 $20.55 $13.85 $18.94 $12.77 $17.47 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 24.0 10.0 20.0 18.4 18.4 19.2 19.2 20.1 20.1 21.0 21.0

CRI 50 65 68 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66

Total Installed Cost ($) $287.32 $300.09 $926.65 $827.03 $1,004.28 $816.71 $988.63 $805.24 $971.25 $793.76 $953.87 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $3.93 $4.81 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 $4.13 

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, longer life, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

63

Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

• The commercial metal halide high bay lighting characterized in this report is a one-lamp and oneballast system in a high bay fixture with 81.8% efficiency that emits approximately 24,000 system 

lumens. 

• High bay lighting is defined as “interior lighting where the roof trusses or ceiling height is greater than 

25ft. above the floor.” (IESNA, 2000)

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report:

— Characterizes a best available unit in addition to the typical unit. 

— Increases the ballast efficiency to increase system efficiency rather than increase the lamp efficacy 

due to the existence of more data on ballast efficiency than lamp efficacy at this time. 

— Analyzes a 400W unit rather than a 250W unit as the typical high bay unit.

— Characterizes metal halide lamps separately from high pressure sodium lamps because of their 

separate utilities. Metal halide lamps provide an intense white light and are typically used in retail 

applications; high pressure sodium lamps provide a yellow light and are typically used in 

warehouses and distribution centers.

• A 400W mercury vapor lamp with a magnetic ballast is included in the 2003 reference case for 

comparison, but EPACT 2005 prohibited the manufacture and import of mercury vapor lamp ballasts 

after January 1, 2008, causing mercury vapor lamp sales to decline until ultimately disappearing after 

the failure of all existing mercury vapor lamp ballasts.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical efficiency unit: 400W metal halide lamp with pulse start magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=88%)

— High efficiency unit: 400W metal halide lamp with pulse start magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=94.5%)
Advanced Case Final

64

Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (Metal Halide)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (Metal Halide) (Cont.’d)

• In 2010, DOE published a determination that energy conservation standards for HID lamps would be 

technologically feasible and economically justified. The rulemaking to establish standards for these 

lamps is ongoing and is expected to be completed by June 2014. No current standards exist for HID 

lamps.

• EISA 2007 established efficiency standards for probe start magnetic ballasts (94%) and pulse start 

magnetic or electronic ballasts (88%) for ballasts that operate metal halide lamps between 150 and 400 

watts, effective January 1, 2009. The 94% efficiency requirement effectively banned probe start 

magnetic ballasts.

• A DOE rulemaking is ongoing to establish new and amended energy conservation standards for metal 

halide lamp fixtures as directed by EISA 2007. This rulemaking is expected to be completed by June 

2014.

• In the advanced case , assumed improvements could be made using improved ceramic arc tubes and 

better electrodes (and double arc tubes for lifetime improvement).

• Utilities in MA, NY, OR, TX, VT, WA, WI, FL and CA offer non-regulatory incentive programs to 

promote energy efficient HID lighting. 

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs and is based on the ongoing DOE metal 

halide lamp fixtures rulemaking. Annual maintenance costs are calculated using labor rate and labor 

time to install/replace equipment from RS Means and the 2009 lamps rule. Maintenance costs include 

labor only based on 3,650 operating hours per year.
Advanced Case Final

65

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial High Bay HID Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

400W MV 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS

System Wattage 453 190 190 190 171 190 171 190 171 190 171

System Lumens 13061 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754 10754

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W) 36.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0

System Efficacy 

(lm/W) 28.8 56.6 56.6 56.6 62.9 56.6 62.9 56.6 62.9 56.6 62.9

Lamp Cost ($/klm) $1.16 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.65 $4.51 $4.51 $4.36 $4.36 $4.20 $4.20 

System Cost ($/klm) $11.06 $30.96 $30.96 $30.96 $31.79 $30.03 $30.83 $29.00 $29.77 $27.97 $28.72 

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs) 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24

CRI 50 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22

Total Installed Cost 

($) $287.32 $815.84 $815.84 $815.84 $824.72 $805.85 $814.47 $794.75 $803.07 $783.65 $791.68 

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($) $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 $3.93 

No change from reference case.
Advanced Case Final

66

Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

• The commercial high pressure sodium high bay lighting characterized in this report is a one-lamp and 

one-ballast system in a fixture with 79.7% efficiency that emits approximately 11,000 system lumens. 

• High bay lighting is defined as “interior lighting where the roof trusses or ceiling height is greater than 

25ft. above the floor.” (IESNA, 2000)

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report:

— Characterizes a best available unit in addition to the typical unit. 

— Increases the ballast efficiency to increase system efficiency rather than increase the lamp efficacy 

due to the existence of more data on ballast efficiency than lamp efficacy at this time. 

— Characterizes high pressure sodium lamps separately from metal halide lamps because of their 

separate utilities. Metal halide lamps provide an intense white light and are typically used in retail 

applications; high pressure sodium lamps provide a yellow light and are typically used in 

warehouses and distribution centers.

• A 400W mercury vapor lamp with a magnetic ballast is included in the 2003 reference case for 

comparison, but EPACT 2005 prohibited the manufacture and import of mercury vapor lamp ballasts 

after January 1, 2008, causing mercury vapor lamp sales to decline until ultimately disappearing after 

the failure of all existing mercury vapor lamp ballasts.
Advanced Case Final

67

Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial HID High Bay Lighting (High Pressure Sodium) (Cont.’d)

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical efficiency unit: 150W high pressure sodium lamp with magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=78.9%)

— High efficiency unit: 150W high pressure sodium lamp with magnetic ballast (ballast 

efficiency=87.7%)

• In 2010, DOE published a determination that energy conservation standards for HID lamps would be 

technologically feasible and economically justified. The rulemaking to establish standards for these 

lamps is ongoing and is expected to be completed by June 2014. No current standards exist for HID 

lamps.

• The market is moving away from HPS technology with relatively little investment going into its 

development. Therefore, even in an advanced case, efficacy, price and lifetime are not expected to 

improve faster than the reference case. 

• Utilities in MA, NY, OR, TX, VT, WA, WI, FL and CA offer non-regulatory incentive programs to 

promote energy efficient HID lighting. Incentive programs favor efficient T5 high output lamps or T8 

lamps for low bay applications.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs and is based on the ongoing DOE metal 

halide lamp fixtures rulemaking. Annual maintenance costs are calculated using labor rate and labor 

time to install/replace equipment from RS Means and the 2009 lamps rule. Maintenance costs include 

labor only based on 3,650 operating hours per year.
Advanced Case Final

68

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial T5 HO Lighting (High Bay Applications)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

54WT5HO 54WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO

System Wattage 240 234 234 221 231 218 231 218 231 218

System Lumens 18060 17646 17646 17646 18175 18175 18763 18763 19351 19351

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 88.0 85.2 85.2 90.2 87.7 92.9 90.6 95.9 93.4 98.9

System Efficacy (lm/W) 75.2 75.5 75.5 79.9 78.6 83.3 81.2 86.0 83.7 88.7

Cost ($/klm) $1.06 $0.26 $0.26 $0.38 $0.24 $0.36 $0.23 $0.34 $0.21 $0.32 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) $8.50 $8.30 $8.30 $8.82 $7.82 $8.30 $7.31 $7.77 $6.84 $7.26 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 21 22 22

CRI 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85 85

Total Installed Cost ($) $184.10 $174.12 $174.12 $183.24 $169.72 $178.58 $164.84 $173.39 $159.96 $168.20 

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $2.81 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 $2.93 

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) 92.4% 92.4% 92.4% 92.4% 93.5% 93.5% 93.5% 93.5% 93.5% 93.5%

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

Commercial T5 HO Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Bay Applications)

• The commercial T5 HO linear fluorescent lighting characterized in this report is a four-lamp 

system (one ballast and one 95.9% efficient fixture) that emits approximately 17,000 system lumens.

• Compared to the 2008 EIA Reference Case, this report characterizes a best available unit in 

addition to the typical unit and assumes that the high efficiency T5 HO lamp has a reduced 

wattage of 51 W rather than 54 W.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— Typical: 4 54W T5 high output lamps with electronic ballast (ballast factor=1, BLE=92.4%)

— Best available: 4 51W T5 lamps with electronic ballast (ballast factor =1, BLE=92.4%)

• Currently no federal standards exist for the T5 lamps or corresponding ballasts characterized in 

this report.

69

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial T5 HO Lighting (High Bay Applications)
Advanced Case Final

Commercial T5 HO Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Bay Applications)

• Beginning July 14, 2012, DOE fluorescent lamp standards will require a minimum efficacy of 76 lm/W.

• Beginning November 14, 2014, DOE standards will require that the characterized ballasts have a 

minimum BLE of 0.993 / (1 + 0.51 * Avg Total Lamp Arc power ^ (- 0.25)). 

• Many utilities offer rebates for T5 high output fixtures, generally to replace HID high bay fixtures. The 

programs include new construction incentives, customized programs, retrofit and upgrade incentives.

• California's Title 24 mandates the use of electronic ballasts with high efficacy luminaires (including 

fluorescent) of 13 W or higher. (CEC, 2005)

• Fluorescent technologies are approaching maximum technologically feasible levels. Therefore, they are 

assumed to be improving gradually compared to SSL lighting and ceramic metal halide technologies. 

While improvements can be made by using more rare-earth phosphors, additional energy savings are 

most likely to be captured through the use of dimming ballasts and occupancy sensors.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and 2009 lamps rulemaking. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,435 operating 

hours per year. (DOE, 2009)

70

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial T5 HO Lighting (High Bay Applications) (Cont.’d)
Advanced Case Final

71

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (High Bay Applications)

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base HPS HPS HPS HPS

LED LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED

Typical Wattage 36 11 125 51 48 47

Lumens 548 630 10700 10700 10700 10700

Efficacy (lm/W) 15.1 55.3 85.4 210.0 224.0 230.0

Cost ($/klm) $392.68 $160.00 $63.00 $10.00 $5.30 $3.60

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 50 50 50 100 100 100

CRI 92 92 80 80 80 80

CCT 2700 2700 5500 5500 5500 5500

Total Installed Cost ($) $270.44 $154.32 $727.62 $160.52 $110.23 $92.04

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07

Assumes increased rate of technology advancement (higher efficacy, longer life, lower price).
Advanced Case Final

72

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Solid State Lighting (High Bay Applications)

Commercial Solid-State Lighting (High Bay Applications)

• The commercial solid-state lighting technology characterized is a replacement for a 150W high 

pressure sodium lamp. This represents the most common use of LED technology in the high bay 

market.

• Assumptions for 2011:

— 150W HPS lamp equivalent: 125W LED emitting 10,700 lumens

• No federal standards exist for solid-state lighting.

• In the advanced case, projections are based on 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model’s ‘high 

improvement’ case, a scenario analyzed in the “Energy Savings Potential of Solid-State Lighting in 

General Illumination Applications” report, and assume LED technology advances faster than 

anticipated by the DOE SSL Multi-Year Program Plan.

• Total installed cost includes equipment and installation costs. Annual maintenance costs and 

installation costs are calculated using labor rate and labor time to install/replace equipment from RS 

Means and the 2009 Lamps Rule. Maintenance costs include labor only based on 3,376 operating 

hours per year. (DOE, 2009)
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Supermarket Display Cases

73

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Supermarket Display Cases

1 DOE’s Federal energy standards for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment (CRE) went into effect on January 1, 2012. The 2020 Typical values are 

based on this standard.

2 The annual energy use for the display case includes the energy from the supermarket compressors and condensers necessary to cool the display 

case. This energy is also partially calculated in the commercial compressor rack and condenser annual energy consumption values.

3 Maintenance cost includes preventative maintenance costs such as cleaning evaporator coils, drain pans, fans, and intake screens as well as lamp 

replacements and other lighting maintenance activities.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical1 High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 20,000 20,730 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000

Median Store Size (ft3) 44,000 47,500 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000 46,000

Energy Use (kWh/yr)221,000 23,117 21,134 18,440 17,002 16,566 15,333 15,694 14,526 14,823 13,719

Average Life (yrs) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Retail Equipment Cost $4,371 $10,094 $7,425 $7,600 $8,173 $8,763 $7,803 $8,763 $7,803 $8,763 $7,803 

Total Installed Cost $6,452 $12,176 $9,603 $9,777 $10,351 $10,937 $9,981 $10,937 $9,981 $10,937 $9,981 

Annual Maintenance Cost3$283 $337 $376 $376 $376 $376 $376 $376 $376 $376 $376 

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use)
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Supermarket Display Cases

74

• DOE set Federal energy efficiency standards for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment (CRE). These standards set 

maximum daily energy consumption levels, in kWh/day, for display cases manufactured and/or sold in the United 

States on or after January 1, 2012. The daily energy consumption is based on the total display area of the display case 

(TDA).

— Vertical, open, medium temperature, remote condensing display case (VOP.RC.M) ≤ 0.82*TDA + 4.07

• The Food Marketing Institute reported the median total supermarket size in 2003 was 44,000 sq. ft., in 2007 it was 

47,500 sq. ft., and in 2010, the last year that was reported by the study, it was 46,000 sq. ft. (FMI, 2012)

• The unit used to estimate energy use and installed cost is a vertical, open, medium temperature, remote condensing 

display case 12 ft. in length with a total display area of 53 sq. ft.

• Commercial central refrigeration systems consist of refrigerated display cases, condensing units, and centralized 

compressor racks.

• Approximately 20 percent of the total annual electricity consumption for a typical supermarket is directly attributable 

to display cases (this does not include the energy consumed by compressors and condensers necessary to cool the 

display cases). (NCI, 2009)

• As part of DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking, DOE estimates 177,000 display cases were shipped in 2005. Of those 

display cases 38,743 were vertical, open, medium temperature, remote condensing display cases (VOP.RC.M), which 

represented the most common type of remote condensing display case shipped in 2005.

• A typical commercial supermarket display case contains T8 electronic lighting, evaporators, evaporator fans, piping, 

insulation, valves, and controls.

• The energy use decreases in the advanced case due to the use of more efficient technologies including improved 

evaporator coils, larger evaporators, higher efficiency evaporator fan blades, high efficiency doors, LED lighting, 

thicker insulation, and improved insulation.

• Assuming the use of more efficient technologies, the energy use will decrease by 5% in 2020, 10% in 2030, and 15% in 

2040 in the advanced case. Equipment costs will stay the same as the reference case assuming constant market 

volumes.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Supermarket Display Cases
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Compressor Rack Systems

75

1 The total capacity represents the capacity required for the entire refrigeration system of a typical supermarket. This usually includes two 

low temperature racks and two medium temperature racks. For 2007 and beyond a 1,077 MBtu/hr total cooling capacity is the sum of

769 MBtu/hr for the medium temperature racks and 308 MBtu/hr for the low temperature racks.

2 The total installed cost is based on the entire supermarket compressor rack system (two medium temperature racks and two low 

temperature racks). The equipment purchase price and the installation cost of a typical rack is approximately $208,130 and $20,813 per 

rack respectively. Therefore the total installed cost for a typical supermarket compressor rack system is approximately $913,691.

3 Maintenance cost includes oil changes, bearing lubrication, filter replacement, and system functionality checks.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Total Capacity (MBtu/hr)11,050 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077 1,077

Power Input (kW) 180 184 162 146 159 143 156 140 152 137

Energy Use (MWh/yr) 1,000 1,023 900 810 882 794 864 778 846 761

Average Life (yrs) 20 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Total Installed Cost ($1000)2$630 $630 $630 $693 $630 $693 $630 $693 $630 $693 

Annual Maintenance Cost 

($1000)3 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 $33 

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use and power input)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Compressor Rack Systems
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Compressor Rack Systems

76

• Commercial compressor rack systems that serve commercial supermarket display cases and walk-ins consist of a 

number of parallel-connected compressors located in a separate machine room. By modulating compressor 

capacity, these integrated systems provide higher efficiency and mechanical longevity.

• Rack integrators generally supply a packaged compressor rack for which much of the necessary piping, 

insulation, components, and controls are pre-assembled. 

• A typical supermarket will have 10 to 20 compressors mounted in racks in the 3-hp to 15-hp size range. Usually 

there are 3 to 5 compressors per rack serving a series of loads with nearly identical evaporator temperature.

• The duty cycle for compressors is usually in the range 60% to 70%.

• The typical supermarket uses a reciprocating compressor system that has two medium temperature compressor 

racks with an overall capacity of 769 MBtu/hr and two low temperature compressor racks with an overall capacity 

of 308 MBtu/hr. (NCI, 2009)

• Approximately 34 percent of the total annual electricity consumption for a typical supermarket is attributable to 

compressors. (NCI, 2009)

• There are an estimated 140,000 compressor rack systems installed in supermarkets across the U.S. as of 2008. (NCI, 

2009)

• The energy use and power input decreases in the advanced case due to the use of more efficient technologies 

including higher efficiency compressors, improved compressor configurations, and improved controls.

• Assuming the use of more efficient technologies, the energy use and power input will decrease by 2% in 2020, 4% 

in 2030, and 6% in 2040 in the advanced case. Equipment costs will stay the same as the reference case assuming 

constant market volumes.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Compressor Rack Systems
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Condensers

77

1 Total capacity is the total heat rejected (THR) of condensers comprised of two low temperature condensers (THRL = 240 MBtu/hr each, 

suction temperature = -25°F, condensing temperature 110 F) and two medium temperature (THRM = 520 MBtu/hr each, suction 

temperature = 15°F, condensing temperature = 115°F) condensers; ambient temperature = 95°F. (NCI, 2009)

2 Maintenance cost includes coil cleaning, leak checking, belt replacement as necessary, and system functionality checks.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Total Capacity (MBtu/hr)1

1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520 1,520

Power Input (kW) 25 25 22 20 21 19 20 18 19 17

Energy Use (MWh/yr) 138 138 120 108 114 103 108 97 102 92

Average Life (yrs) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Total Installed Cost ($1000) $47 $54 $54 $60 $54 $60 $54 $60 $54 $60 

Annual Maintenance Cost2 $817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use and power input)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Condensers
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Condensers

78

• Condensers are designed with multiple methods of cooling: air-cooled, water-cooled, and evaporative. These units 

can be single-circuit or a multiple circuit.

• Commercial condensers are remotely located, typically installed on the roof of a supermarket. 

• For use with parallel compressors in supermarkets, air-cooled units are the most commonly used condensers. This 

analysis is based on multiple air-cooled condensers connected to a supermarket refrigeration system comprised of 

two low temperature condensers and two medium temperature condensers, using R-404A refrigerant. 

• Each compressor rack has a dedicated condenser or a separate circuit of a single common condenser. Condenser 

temperatures of multiple racks are often different. 

• The duty cycle for condensers is usually in the range 50 - 70%.

• Approximately 5 percent of the total annual electricity consumption for a typical supermarket is attributable to 

condensers. (NCI, 2009)

• There are an estimated 140,000 condensers installed in supermarkets across the U.S. as of 2008. (NCI, 2009)

• The energy use and power input decreases in the advanced case due to the use of more efficient fan motors. 

• Assuming the use of more efficient technologies, the energy use and power input will decrease by 5% in 2020, 10% 

in 2030, and 15% in 2040 in the advanced case. Equipment costs will stay the same as the reference case assuming 

constant market volumes.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Condensers
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

79

1 EISA 2007 includes prescriptive standards for walk-in refrigerators that went into effect in 2009. All units for 2011 and beyond include these 

prescriptive standards.

2 The size for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which states the typical footprint of a walk-in refrigerator is 240 sq. ft. The 

size for 2011 and beyond is based on the NOPR analysis shipment data from DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking which states the typical 

footprint of a walk-in refrigerator is 96 sq. ft.

3

Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 are based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assume a cost of $4,163 and $4,891 respectively. Installation 

cost for 2011 and beyond is based on DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking which assumes installation cost scales based on the cooling capacity 

(which for a cooling capacity of 18,000 Btu/hr is $1,054).

4 Maintenance cost includes checking and maintaining refrigerant charge levels, checking settings, and cleaning heat exchanger coils.

DATA

2003 2007 201112020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 44,970 44,970 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000

Size (ft2)

2

240 240 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 96

Energy Use (kWh/yr) 42,300 42,182 12,337 6,329 4,822 6,013 4,581 5,696 4,339 5,380 4,098

Insulated Box Average Life 

(yrs) 18 18 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Compressor Average Life 

(yrs) 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

Retail Equipment Cost $19,252 $33,821 $13,026 $15,087 $18,821 $15,087 $18,821 $15,087 $18,821 $15,087 $18,821 

Total Installed Cost3$23,415 $38,712 $14,080 $16,141 $19,875 $16,141 $19,875 $16,141 $19,875 $16,141 $19,875 

Annual Maintenance Cost4 $817 -

$1,090

$817 -

$1,090 $2,755 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

80

• The commercial walk-in refrigerator characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond, which is the typical unit 

according to DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking, is a small non-display cooler with a footprint of 96 sq. ft. and 

includes a floor and a single door. The typical size of 240 sq. ft. was used for 2003 and 2007 because that was the 

typical size reported in the ADL, 1996 and NCI, 2009 reports respectively.

• A typical walk-in refrigerator includes: insulated floor and wall panels, merchandising doors, shelving, lighting (not 

included in cost estimate), semi-hermetic reciprocating compressor, refrigerant (R404A), condenser, and evaporator.

• The high efficiency unit is based on the energy savings potential and cost premiums of several advanced refrigeration 

technologies identified in the preliminary analysis of DOE’s ongoing Walk-In rulemaking. These include: 

- ECM (electronically commutated motor) evaporator and condenser fan motors

- floating heat pressure

- ambient sub-cooling

- evaporator fan shutdown

• The installation cost consists of freight and delivery costs in addition to on-site assembly.

• DOE is currently working on a Federal energy consumption standard for commercial walk-in refrigerators. The 

estimated effective date is 2016.

• As part of DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking, DOE estimates 85,333 walk-in coolers will be shipped in 2015. Of 

those walk-in coolers, 41,403 will be small non-display coolers, which represents the most common type of walk-in 

cooler estimated to ship in 2015.

• The energy use decreases in the advanced case due to the use of more efficient technologies including higher 

efficiency fan motors, lighting, evaporators, condensers, compressors, insulation, and controls.

• Assuming the use of more efficient technologies, the energy use will decrease by 5% in 2020, 10% in 2030, and 15% in 

2040 in the advanced case. Equipment costs will stay the same as the reference case assuming constant market 

volumes.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

81

• The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 included prescriptive standards for walk-in refrigerators 

(coolers) that went into effect in 2009. These prescriptive standards, which are included in all units for 2011 and 

beyond, state that all walk-in refrigerators manufactured after January 1, 2009 must:

— have automatic door closers 

— have strip doors, spring hinged doors, or other method of minimizing infiltration when doors are open

— contain wall, ceiling, and door insulation of at least R–25, except for glazed portions of doors and structural 

members

— use electronically commutated motors or 3-phase motors (for evaporator fan motors of under 1 horsepower and 

less than 460 volts)

— use electronically commutated motors, permanent split capacitor-type motors, or 3-phase motors (for condenser 

fan motors of under 1 horsepower)

— use light sources with an efficacy of 40 lumens per watt or more, including ballast losses (if any), except that 

light sources with an efficacy of 40 lumens per watt or less, including ballast losses (if any), may be used in 

conjunction with a timer or device that turns off the lights within 15 minutes of when the walk-in refrigerator is 

not occupied by people.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Walk-In Freezers

82

1 EISA 2007 includes prescriptive standards for walk-in freezers that went into effect in 2009. All units for 2011 and beyond include these 

prescriptive standards.

2 The size for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which states the typical footprint of a walk-in freezer is 80 sq. ft. The size for 

2011 and beyond is based on the NOPR analysis shipment data from DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking which states the typical footprint of a 

walk-in freezer is 64 sq. ft.

3

Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 are based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assume a cost of $1,040. Installation cost for 2011 and 

beyond is based on DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking which assumes installation cost scales based on the cooling capacity (which for a cooling 

capacity of 9,000 Btu/hr is $852).

4 Maintenance cost includes checking and maintaining refrigerant charge levels, checking settings, and cleaning heat exchanger coils.

DATA

2003 2007 201112020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 4,929 4,929 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000 9,000

Size (ft2)

2

80 80 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64

Energy Use (kWh/yr) 15,600 15,524 28,455 13,844 12,319 13,637 12,134 13,429 11,949 13,152 11,703

Insulated Box Average Life 

(yrs) 18 18 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Compressor Average Life 

(yrs) 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

Retail Equipment Cost $7,597 $13,008 $12,068 $14,070 $20,637 $14,070 $20,637 $14,070 $20,637 $14,070 $20,637 

Total Installed Cost3$8,637 $14,049 $12,920 $14,921 $21,489 $14,921 $21,489 $14,921 $21,489 $14,921 $21,489 

Annual Maintenance Cost4$545 $545 $2,755 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 $2,970 

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Freezers
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Walk-In Freezers

83

• The commercial walk-in freezer characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond, which is the typical unit 

according to DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking, is a small non-display freezer with a footprint of 64 sq. ft. and 

includes a floor and a single door. The typical size of 80 sq. ft. was used for 2003 and 2007 because that was the 

typical size reported in the ADL, 1996 and NCI, 2009 reports respectively.

• A typical walk-in freezer includes: insulated floor, door, and wall panels, semi-hermetic reciprocating compressor, 

refrigerant (R404A), condenser, and evaporator.

• The high efficiency unit is based on the energy savings potential and cost premiums of several advanced 

refrigeration technologies determined by the preliminary analysis from DOE’s ongoing Walk-In standard 

rulemaking. These include: 

- ECM (electronically commutated motor) evaporator and condenser fan motors

- external heat rejection

- hot gas defrost

- evaporator fan shutdown

• DOE is currently working on a Federal energy consumption standard for commercial walk-in freezers. The 

estimated effective date is 2016.

• As part of DOE’s on-going Walk-In rulemaking, DOE estimates 34,985 walk-in freezers will be shipped in 2015. Of 

those walk-in freezers, 17,291 will be small non-display freezers, which represents the most common type of walkin freezers estimated to ship in 2015.

• The energy use decreases in the advanced case due to the use of more efficient technologies including higher 

efficiency fan motors, lighting, evaporators, condensers, compressors, insulation, defrost, and controls.

• Assuming the use of more efficient technologies, the energy use will decrease by 1.5% in 2020, 3% in 2030, and 5% 

in 2040 in the advanced case. Equipment costs will stay the same as the reference case assuming constant market 

volumes.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Freezers
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Walk-In Freezers

84

• EISA 2007 included prescriptive standards for walk-in freezers that went into effect in 2009. These prescriptive 

standards, which are included in all units for 2011 and beyond, state that all walk-in freezers manufactured after 

January 1, 2009 must:

— have automatic door closers 

— have strip doors, spring hinged doors, or other method of minimizing infiltration when doors are open

— contain wall, ceiling, and door insulation of at least R–32, except for glazed portions of doors and structural 

members

— contain floor insulation of at least R–28

— use electronically commutated motors or 3-phase motors (for evaporator fan motors of under 1 horsepower and 

less than 460 volts)

— use electronically commutated motors, permanent split capacitor-type motors, or 3-phase motors (for condenser 

fan motors of under 1 horsepower)

— use light sources with an efficacy of 40 lumens per watt or more, including ballast losses (if any), except that 

light sources with an efficacy of 40 lumens per watt or less, including ballast losses (if any), may be used in 

conjunction with a timer or device that turns off the lights within 15 minutes of when the walk-in freezer is not 

occupied by people.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Walk-In Freezers
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators

85

1 EPACT 2005 energy standards went into effect in 2010. The 2011 Low values are based on this standard.

2 ENERGY STAR® set energy consumption levels for solid door commercial refrigerators, including reach-in refrigerators, that went into effect in 

2010. The 2011 Typical values are based on this energy consumption level.

3 Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assumes a cost of $156. Installation cost for 2011 and beyond is 

based on DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking which assumes a cost of $817.

4 Maintenance is only performed if there is a problem with the equipment.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low1 Typical2 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 3,000 2,700 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000

Size (ft3) 48 48 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49

Energy Use (kWh/yr) 3,800 2,477 2,533 1,598 993 1,439 894 1,359 844 1,279 794

Energy Use (kWh/yr/ft3) 79 52 52 33 20 29 18 28 17 26 16

Average Life (yrs) 8 9 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost $2,810 $2,988 $3,131 $3,146 $3,191 $3,146 $3,191 $3,146 $3,191 $3,146 $3,191 

Total Installed Cost3$2,966 $3,144 $3,948 $3,963 $4,008 $3,963 $4,008 $3,963 $4,008 $3,963 $4,008

Annual Maintenance Cost4 Negligible Negligible $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators

86

• The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005) set maximum daily energy consumption levels, in kWh/day, for 

commercial reach-in refrigerators that went into effect on January 1, 2010. The daily energy consumption is based 

on the volume of the unit (V).

— Refrigerators with solid doors ≤ 0.10*V + 2.04

— Refrigerators with transparent doors ≤ 0.12*V + 3.34

• Energy Star® also set maximum daily energy consumption levels, in KWh/day, for commercial reach-in 

refrigerators that went into effect on April 1, 2009 for glass and mixed door models and on January 1, 2010 for solid 

door models. These efficiency levels are also based on the volume of the unit (V).

• The commercial reach-in refrigerator characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond, which is the typical unit 

according to DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking, is a 49 cubic ft. solid two-door unit with a cooling capacity of 1,000 

Btu/hr. The typical size of 48 cubic ft. solid two-door unit with a cooling capacity of 3,000 Btu/hr and 2,700 Btu/hr 

was used for 2003 and 2007 because that was the typical size and capacity reported in the ADL, 1996 and NCI, 2009 

reports respectively.

• Annual shipments of reach-in refrigerators in the U.S. in 2008 are estimated to be 263,000 with an estimated 

installed base of 1,556,000. (NCI, 2009)

• The energy use decreases in the advanced case due to the use of more efficient technologies including higher 

efficiency fan motors, lighting, evaporators, condensers, compressors, insulation, and controls..

• Assuming the use of more efficient technologies, the energy use will decrease by 10% in 2020, 15% in 2030, and 20% 

in 2040 in the advanced case. Equipment costs will stay the same as the reference case assuming constant market 

volumes.

Reach-In Refrigerator Size 0 < V < 15 15 ≤ V < 30 30 ≤ V < 50 50 ≤ V

Solid Door ≤ 0.089*V + 1.411 ≤ 0.037*V + 2.200 ≤ 0.056*V + 1.635 ≤ 0.060*V + 1.416

Glass Door ≤ 0.118*V + 1.382 ≤ 0.140*V + 1.050 ≤ 0.088*V + 2.625 ≤ 0.110*V + 1.500

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Reach-In Freezers

87

1 EPACT 2005 energy standards went into effect in 2010. The 2011 Low values are based on this standard.

2 ENERGY STAR® set energy consumption levels for solid door commercial freezers, including reach-in freezers, that went into effect in 2010. The 

2011 Typical values are based on this energy consumption level.

3 Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assumes a cost of $156. Installation cost for 2011 and beyond is 

based on DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking which assumes a cost of $816.

4 Maintenance is only performed if there is a problem with the equipment.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low1 Typical2 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 2,200 2,200 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800

Size (ft3) 24 24 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49

Energy Use (kWh/yr) 4,600 3,960 7,658 5,151 3,037 4,636 2,733 4,378 2,581 4,121 2,429

Energy Use (kWh/yr/ft3) 192 165 156 105 62 95 56 89 53 84 50

Average Life (yrs) 8 9 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15

Retail Equipment Cost $2,498 $2,905 $3,277 $3,290 $3,353 $3,290 $3,353 $3,290 $3,353 $3,290 $3,353 

Total Installed Cost3$2,654 $3,061 $4,093 $4,107 $4,170 $4,107 $4,170 $4,107 $4,170 $4,107 $4,170

Annual Maintenance Cost4 Negligible Negligible $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reach-In Freezers
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Reach-In Freezers

88

• EPACT 2005 set maximum daily energy consumption levels, in kWh/day, for commercial reach-in freezers that 

went into effect on January 1, 2010. The daily energy consumption is based on the volume of the unit (V). 

— Freezers with solid doors ≤ 0.40*V + 1.38

— Freezers with transparent doors ≤ 0.75*V + 4.10

• Energy Star® also set maximum daily energy consumption levels, in KWh/day, for commercial reach-in freezers 

that went into effect on April 1, 2009 for glass and mixed door models and on January 1, 2010 for solid door models. 

These efficiency levels are also based on the volume of the unit (V).

• The commercial reach-in freezer characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond, which is the typical unit 

according to DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking, is a 49 cubic ft. solid two-door unit with a cooling capacity of 1,800 

Btu/hr. The typical size of 24 cubit ft. solid one-door unit with a cooling capacity of 2,200 Btu/hr was used for 2003 

and 2007 because that was the typical size and capacity reported in the ADL, 1996 and NCI, 2009 reports 

respectively.

• Annual shipments of reach-in freezers in the U.S. in 2008 are estimated to be 52,000 with an estimated installed 

base of 1,156,000. (NCI, 2009)

• The energy use decreases in the advanced case due to the use of more efficient technologies including higher 

efficiency fan motors, lighting, evaporators, condensers, compressors, insulation, defrost, and controls.

• Assuming the use of more efficient technologies, the energy use will decrease by 10% in 2020, 15% in 2030, and 20% 

in 2040 in the advanced case. Equipment costs will stay the same as the reference case assuming constant market 

volumes.

Reach-In Freezer Size 0 < V < 15 15 ≤ V < 30 30 ≤ V < 50 50 ≤ V

Solid Door ≤ 0.250*V + 1.250 ≤ 0.400*V - 1.000 ≤ 0.163*V + 6.125 ≤ 0.158*V + 6.333

Glass Door ≤ 0.607*V + 0.893 ≤ 0.733*V – 1.000 ≤ 0.250*V + 13.500 ≤ 0.450*V + 3.500

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Reach-In Freezers
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Ice Machines

89

1 EPACT 2005 energy standards went into effect in 2010. The 2011 Low values are based on this standard.

2 ENERGY STAR® set energy consumption levels for ice makers that went into effect in 2008. The 2011 Typical values are based on this energy 

consumption level.

3 The output for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which states the typical ice output is 500 lbs/day. The output for 2011 and 

beyond is based on the preliminary analysis shipment data from DOE’s on-going Automatic Ice Maker rulemaking which states the typical ice 

output is 300 lbs/day.

4 The annual energy use is based on assuming 4,380 hours per year of use, which is a utilization rate of 50%.

5

Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assumes a cost of $209 and $521 respectively. Installation cost 

for 2011 and beyond is based on DOE’s on-going Automatic Ice Maker rulemaking which assumes a cost of $372.

5 Maintenance cost includes cleaning and maintaining refrigerant levels, replacing filters, checking water distribution lines for leaks, cleaning, 

sanitizing, and descaling the bin and water system. Maintenance cost decreases as the size of the ice machine (i.e. output) decreases.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low1 Typical2 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Output (lbs/day)3

500 500 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

Water Use (gal/100 lbs) 24.0 27.5 22.0 19.8 17.6 19.6 17.4 19.4 17.3 19.2 17.2

Energy Use (kWh/100 lbs) 7.0 5.5 7.7 6.9 6.1 6.7 6.0 6.6 5.8 6.4 5.7

Energy Use (kWh/yr)4

6,388 5,019 4,249 3,833 3,408 3,719 3,307 3,643 3,239 3,529 3,139

Average Life (yrs) 8.0 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5

Retail Equipment Cost $2,289 $3,954 $4,059 $4,077 $4,152 $4,077 $4,152 $4,077 $4,152 $4,077 $4,152 

Total Installed Cost (with 

Bin)5 $2,498 $4,475 $4,431 $4,449 $4,524 $4,449 $4,524 $4,449 $4,524 $4,449 $4,524 

Annual Maintenance Cost6

$218 - $327 $218 - $327 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use and water use)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Ice Machines
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Ice Machines

90

• The commercial ice machine characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond is an air-cooled, ice maker head unit 

with an approximate output of 300 lbs/day. Commercial ice machines are typically integrated with an insulated ice 

storage bin or mounted on top of a separate storage bin. The retail equipment cost includes the ice making head and 

the integrated storage bin.

• Commercial ice machine condensers are either air-cooled or water-cooled. Approximately 90% of all units are the aircooled type.

• ENERGY STAR® set maximum energy consumption levels, in KWh/100 lbs ice, for air cooled ice machines that went 

into effect on January 1, 2008. These efficiency levels are based on the harvest rate, in lbs/24 hrs. (H).

• Commercial ice machine maintenance includes periodic cleaning (every 2 to 6 weeks) to remove lime and scale, and 

sanitizing to kill bacteria. Some ice machines are self-cleaning/sanitizing.

• As part of DOE’s on-going Automatic Ice Makers rulemaking, DOE estimates 263,552 ice machines will be shipped in 

2016. Of those ice-machines 71,357 will be air cooled, ice making head units with a harvest capacity rate between 50 

lbs/24 hr. and 450 lbs/24 hrs., which represents the most common type of ice maker estimated to ship in 2016.

• The energy use and water use decreases in the advanced case due to the use of more efficient technologies including 

higher efficiency fan motors, evaporators, condensers, compressors, insulation, water circulation pumps, and 

controls.

• Assuming the use of more efficient technologies, the energy use will decrease by 3% in 2020, 5% in 2030, and 8% in 

2040 in the advanced case. Equipment costs will stay the same as the reference case assuming constant market 

volumes.

Equipment Type Harvest Rate Energy Use Potable Water Use Limit

Ice Maker Head

< 450 9.23 – 0.0077*H ≤ 25

≥ 450 6.20 – 0.0010*H ≤ 25

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Ice Machines
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Ice Machines: EPACT 2005

91

• EPACT 2005 issued standard levels for commercial ice machines with capacities between 50 and 2500 pounds per 

24-hour period that are manufactured and/or sold in the United States on or after January 1, 2010. The energy 

consumption is based on the harvest rate in pounds per 24 hours (H).

Water use is for the condenser only and does not include potable water used to make ice.

Equipment Type

Type of

Cooling

Harvest Rate

(lbs ice/24 hrs)

Maximum Energy Use

(kWh/100 lbs ice)

Maximum Condenser Water

Use (gal/100 lbs ice)

Ice Making Head

Water

<500 7.80-0.0055 H 200-0.022 H

≥500 and <1436 5.58-0.0011 H 200-0.022 H

≥1436 4.0 200-0.022 H

Air

<450 10.26-0.0086 H Not Applicable

≥450 6.89-0.0011 H Not Applicable

Remote Condensing

(but not remote compressor)

Air

<1000 8.85-0.0038 H Not Applicable

≥1000 5.10 Not Applicable

Remote Condensing

and Remote Compressor

Air

<934 8.85-0.0038 H Not Applicable

≥934 5.3 Not Applicable

Self Contained

Water

<200 11.40-0.019 H 191-0.0315 H

≥200 7.60 191-0.0315 H

Air

<175 18.0-0.0469 H Not Applicable

≥175 9.80 Not Applicable

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Ice Machines
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Beverage Merchandisers

92

1 EPACT 2005 energy standards went into effect in 2010. The 2011 Low values are based on this standard.

2 ENERGY STAR® set energy consumption levels for glass door beverage merchandisers that went into effect in 2009. The 2011 Typical values are 

based on this energy consumption level.

3 Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assumes a cost of $156. Installation cost for 2011 and beyond is 

based on DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking which assumes a cost of $817.

4 Maintenance is only performed if there is a problem with the equipment.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low1 Typical2 High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 1,200 2,500 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100

Size (ft3) 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27

Energy Use (kWh/yr) 3,900 2,527 2,523 1,763 996 1,587 897 1,499 847 1,410 797

Average Life (yrs) 8.0 8.5 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0

Retail Equipment Cost $1,457 $2,706 $2,662 $2,810 $2,935 $2,810 $2,935 $2,810 $2,935 $2,810 $2,935 

Total Installed Cost3$1,613 $2,862 $3,479 $3,626 $3,752 $3,626 $3,752 $3,626 $3,752 $3,626 $3,752 

Annual Maintenance Cost4 Negligible Negligible $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 $36 

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Beverage Merchandisers
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Beverage Merchandisers

93

• EPACT 2005 sets maximum daily energy consumption levels, in kWh/day, for commercial refrigerators with a selfcontained condensing unit designed for pull-down temperature applications and transparent doors (i.e., beverage 

merchandisers) that went into effect on January 1, 2010. The daily energy consumption is based on the volume of 

the unit (V).

— Beverage merchandisers with transparent doors ≤ 0.126*V + 3.51

• Energy Star® also set maximum daily energy consumption levels, in KWh/day, for beverage merchandisers that 

went into effect on April 1, 2009 for glass and mixed door models. These efficiency levels are also based on the 

volume of the unit (V).

• The beverage merchandiser characterized in this report from 2011 and beyond, which is the typical unit according 

to DOE’s on-going CRE rulemaking, is a 27 cubic foot cooler with a single hinged, transparent door, bright 

lighting, and shelving with a cooling capacity of 2,100 Btu/hr. A similar beverage merchandiser with a cooling 

capacity of 1,200 Btu/hr and 2,500 Btu/hr was used for 2003 and 2007 because that was the typical capacity 

reported in the ADL, 1996 and NCI, 2009 reports respectively.

• Beverage merchandisers have an estimated installed base of 920,000 units in 2008. Of those beverage 

merchandisers 460,000 are one-door units, which represents the most common type of beverage merchandiser.

• The energy use decreases in the advanced case due to the use of more efficient technologies including higher 

efficiency fan motors, lighting, evaporators, condensers, compressors, insulation, and controls.

• Assuming the use of more efficient technologies, the energy use will decrease by 10% in 2020, 15% in 2030, and 

20% in 2040 in the advanced case. Equipment costs will stay the same as the reference case assuming constant 

market volumes.

Beverage Merchandiser Size 0 < V < 15 15 ≤ V < 30 30 ≤ V < 50 50 ≤ V

Glass Door ≤ 0.118*V + 1.382 ≤ 0.140*V + 1.050 ≤ 0.088*V + 2.625 ≤ 0.110*V + 1.500

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Beverage Merchandisers
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines

94

1 DOE’s Federal energy standards for Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines will go into effect on August 31, 2012. The 2020 Typical values are 

based on this standard.

2 Energy use is based on a zone-cooled machine tested in 75°F steady state ambient conditions.

3 Installation cost for 2003 and 2007 is based on ADL, 1996 & NCI, 2009 reports which assumes a cost of $75 and $104 respectively. Installation cost 

for 2011 and beyond is based on DOE’s Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machine rulemaking which assumes a cost of $84.

4 Maintenance cost includes preventative maintenance costs such as checking and maintaining refrigerant charge levels, cleaning heat exchanger 

coils and also includes an annualized cost for refurbishments/remanufacturing. 

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical1 High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity (Btu/hr) 700 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400 2,400

Can Capacity 500 650 650 650 650 650 650 650 650 650 650

Energy Use (kWh/yr)2

3,000 2,913 2,383 2,029 1,821 1,653 1,487 1,566 1,409 1,479 1,331

Average Life (yrs) 14 14 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Retail Equipment Cost $1,769 $1,907 $1,742 $2,046 $2,096 $2,137 $2,632 $2,137 $2,632 $2,137 $2,632 

Total Installed Cost3

$1,844 $2,011 $1,826 $2,130 $2,180 $2,221 $2,716 $2,221 $2,716 $2,221 $2,716 

Annual Maintenance Cost4

$180 $177 $159 $159 $159 $159 $159 $159 $159 $159 $159 

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use)

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines

95

• DOE set Federal energy efficiency standards for refrigerated vending machines. These standards set maximum daily 

energy consumption levels, in kWh/day, for commercial refrigerated vending machines manufactured and/or sold in 

the United States on or after August 31, 2012. The daily energy consumption is based on the volume of the unit (V).

— Refrigerated Vending Machines that are fully-cooled (Type A) ≤ 0.055*V + 2.56

— Refrigerated Vending Machines that are zone-cooled (Type B) ≤ 0.073*V + 3.16

• Energy Star® also set maximum daily energy consumption efficiency levels, also in KWh/day, for refrigerated 

vending machines that went into effect on July 1, 2007. These efficiency levels are based on vendible capacity (C).

— Refrigerated Vending Machines ≤ 0.45*(8.66 + 0.009*C)

• The annual maintenance cost is consists of preventive maintenance including checking and maintaining refrigerant 

charge levels, cleaning heat exchanger coils, and replacement of lighting and the annualized value of a single 

refurbishment at approximately the mid-point of the machine’s useful life. The preventative annual maintenance cost 

is approximately $98 and the annualize value of a one-time refurbishment cost of $599 over the lifetime of the 

machine is $61. Therefore, the annual maintenance cost is $159 for refrigerated vending machines.

• As part of DOE’s Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machine rulemaking, DOE estimates 190,200 refrigerated vending 

machines will be shipped in 2012. Of those refrigerated vending machines 63,700 will be zone-cooled, medium size 

units, which represents the most common type of refrigerated vending machine estimated to ship in 2012.

• The energy use decreases in the advanced case due to the use of more efficient technologies including higher 

efficiency fan motors, lighting, evaporators, condensers, compressors, insulation, and controls.

• Assuming the use of more efficient technologies, the energy use will decrease by 5% in 2020, 10% in 2030, and 15% in 

2040 in the advanced case. Equipment costs will stay the same as the reference case assuming constant market 

volumes.

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation

96

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation

1 Based on 3800 effective full load hours per year (operating 3800 hours per year at constant load) (ADL, 1999).

2 Total installed cost of 15,000 CFM CAV AHU and hypothetical supply ductwork layout. 

3 Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 91% motor efficiency.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Survey 

Base

Survey 

Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) 

15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000

System Fan Power (kW) 

11.75 11.55 10.82 10.28 9.20 9.74 8.66 9.20 8.12 8.66 7.57

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM) 

0.783 0.770 0.721 0.685 0.613 0.649 0.577 0.613 0.541 0.577 0.505 

Annual Fan Energy Use (kWh/yr)1 

44,631 43,890 41,120 39,064 34,952 37,008 32,896 34,952 30,840 32,896 28,784

Average Life (yrs) 

20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Total Installed Cost ($)2 

$73,500 $73,500 $73,500 $73,500 $80,000 $73,500 $80,000 $73,500 $80,000 $73,500 $80,000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use)
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation

97

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation

• Constant air volume (CAV) ventilation systems are common, inexpensive, and straightforward air-side HVAC 

systems. These systems provide a constant flow rate of air (typically a mix of recirculated and outside air) and adjust 

the supply temperature of that air in order to maintain space temperature setpoint. These systems are most 

applicable to single zone applications in order to ensure adequate temperature control. Many existing buildings 

utilize CAV systems that serve multiple zones where individual zone space temperatures are maintained by reheating 

air delivered to that zone after it is cooled by the central cooling coil; this is prohibited by most current energy codes. 

New building CAV systems are common for single zone applications. This analysis examines only the fan energy of 

the CAV system.

• The unit characterized in this report is a 15,000 CFM CAV system. The average commercial building is approximately 

15,000 square feet (CBECS 2003 and BED 2007). Assuming 1 CFM is needed per square foot of floor area results in a 

15,000 CFM air handling unit.

• A 15,000 CFM CAV packaged indoor air handling unit with cooling and heating coils can be installed for 

approximately $56,500 (RS Means 2012). Ductwork would cost approximately $17,000 additional ($73,500 total).

• ASHRAE Standard 90.1, which is used as a basis for most state energy codes, limits the fan power (brake HP or 

nameplate HP) for CAV systems. The 2007 version of Standard 90.1 was used to represent the 2011 minimum 

efficiency level (state energy codes typically refer to older versions of Standard 90.1 due to code revision cycles).

• Fan energy is affected by several factors, including: fan type (e.g., centrifugal, axial), fan blade shape (e.g., forwardcurved, backward-curved, backward-inclined, airfoil), drive type (belt or direct), configuration (plenum or housed 

centrifugal), system effects, duct design, filter and coil pressure drops, and motor efficiency.
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation

98

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation

1Based on 887 effective full load hours (power-based) per year (operating 3800 hours per year at variable load).

2Total installed cost of 15,000 CFM VAV AHU, VFD, (10) VAV boxes, and hypothetical supply ductwork layout. 

3Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 91% motor efficiency.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Survey 

Base

Survey 

Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) 

15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000

System Fan Power (kW) 

16.35 15.00 14.76 14.03 12.55 13.29 11.81 12.55 11.07 11.81 10.33

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM) 

1.090 1.000 0.984 0.935 0.837 0.886 0.787 0.837 0.738 0.787 0.689 

Annual Fan Energy Use (kWh/yr)1 

14,502 13,305 13,096 12,441 11,131 11,786 10,477 11,131 9,822 10,477 9,167

Average Life (yrs) 

20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Total Installed Cost ($)2 

$91,000 $91,000 $91,000 $91,000 $100,000 $91,000 $100,000 $91,000 $100,000 $91,000 $100,000

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use)
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation

99

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation

• Variable air volume (VAV) ventilation systems are the most common multi-zone system type specified today for 

conditioning commercial buildings. These systems provide conditioned air to multiple zone terminal units (VAV 

boxes) that use dampers to modulate the amount of cool air to each zone. An individual zone thermostat controls the 

VAV box damper to allow more or less cooling. If a zone requires heating then the VAV box provides the minimum 

flow rate and typically includes a reheat coil to meet space temperature setpoint. As VAV box dampers close in the 

system, a variable frequency drive reduces fan speed and flow continuously to meet current requirements.

• This analysis examines only the fan energy of the VAV system. VAV systems vary fan speeds between about 30-100% 

speed (and flow); most hours of operation being much lower than full speed. Since fan power varies with the cube of 

fan speed according to fan affinity laws, SAIC estimated the fan-power equivalent full load hours (EFLH) of 887 

hours given an annual runtime of 3800 hours and a typical VAV operating profile. The unit characterized in this 

report is a 15,000 CFM VAV system. 

• A 15,000 CFM VAV packaged indoor air handling unit with cooling and heating coils can be installed for 

approximately $59,000 (RS Means 2012). Ductwork, (10) VAV boxes with reheat, and a VFD would cost 

approximately $32,000 additional ($91,000 total).

• ASHRAE Standard 90.1, which is used as a basis for most state energy codes, limits the fan power for VAV systems 

(brake HP or nameplate HP). The 2007 version of Standard 90.1 was used to represent the 2011 minimum efficiency 

level (state energy codes typically refer to older versions of Standard 90.1 due to code revision cycles).

• Fan energy is affected by several factors, including: fan type (e.g., centrifugal, axial), fan blade shape (e.g., forwardcurved, backward-curved, backward-inclined, airfoil), drive type (belt or direct), configuration (plenum or housed 

centrifugal), system effects, duct design, filter and coil pressure drops, and motor VFD efficiency.
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Fan Coil Unit

100

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Fan Coil Unit

1 Based on 2250 effective full load hours per year (operating 2250 hours per year at constant load) (ADL, 1999).

2 Total installed cost of 2-ton horizontal 2-pipe fan coil unit, housing and controls. 

3 Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 60% 

motor efficiency.

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Survey 

Base

Survey 

Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) 

800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800

System Fan Power (W) 

315 304 875 241 148 232 143 223 136 215 130

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM) 

0.394 0.380 1.094 0.302 0.185 0.290 0.178 0.279 0.171 0.268 0.163 

Annual Fan Energy Use (kWh/yr)1 

709 684 1,969 543 333 522 321 502 307 483 293

Average Life (yrs) 

20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20

Total Installed Cost ($)2 

$2,400 $2,400 $2,400 $2,400 $2,600 $2,400 $2,600 $2,400 $2,600 $2,400 $2,600

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

$50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 $50-100 

Assumes increased rate of technology 

advancement (lower energy use)
Advanced Case Final

Commercial Fan Coil Unit

101

Performance/Cost Characteristics » Commercial Fan Coil Unit

• Commercial fan coil units (FCUs) are self‐contained, mass‐produced assemblies that provide cooling, heating, or 

cooling and heating, but do not include the source of cooling or heating. The unit characterized in this report is a 

cooling only (2-pipe), horizontal unit with housing and controls. Fan coil units are typically installed in or adjacent to 

the space being served and have no (or very limited) ductwork.

• Four‐pipe units have separate circuits for heating and cooling. Two‐pipe units with electric heat are a low‐cost 

alternative to four‐pipe units but may use more energy.

• According to manufacturer literature, the cooling capacity for a nominal 800 CFM fan coil unit is about 2 tons.

• Fan coil unit fan motors can be shaded pole, a single phase AC motor with offset start winding and no capacitor; PSC, 

a single phase AC motor with offset start winding with capacitor; or ECM, an AC electronically commutated 

permanent magnet DC motor. PSC motors are currently the most common motor type in FCUs, but most 

manufacturers offer ECM as an option. This analysis examines only the fan energy of the CAV system.

• Fan coil units have higher maintenance costs than central air systems due to the distributed nature of the system. For 

each unit the filters must be changed and drain systems must be flushed periodically.

• ASHRAE Standard 90.1, which is used as a basis for most state energy codes, limits the fan power (brake HP or 

nameplate HP). The 2007 version of Standard 90.1 was used to represent the 2011 minimum efficiency level (state 

energy codes typically refer to older versions of Standard 90.1 due to code revision cycles).

• Fan energy is affected by several factors, including: fan type configuration, filter and coil pressure drops, and motor 

efficiency.
Advanced Case Final

102

Appendix A

Data Sources

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1200 19th Street, NW, Suite 700

Washington, D.C. 20036

And

SAIC

8301 Greensboro Drive

McLean, VA 22102
Advanced Case Final

A-1

Data Sources » Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (60 Watts)

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011 2014* 2020**

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High

60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W 60W

Lamp Wattage

2008 EIA Reference Case

Product Catalogs

EISA 2007;

NCI, 2012 EISA, 2007

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) Calculated

Lamp Price Distributor Websites

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Product Catalogs

CRI
Advanced Case Final

A-2

Data Sources » Residential General Service Incandescent Lamps (75 Watts)

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011 2013* 2020**

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High

75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W 75W

Lamp Wattage

2008 EIA Reference Case

Product Catalogs

EISA 2007;

NCI, 2012 EISA, 2007

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) Calculated

Lamp Price Distributor Websites

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Product Catalogs

CRI
Advanced Case Final

A-3

Data Sources » Residential Reflector Lamps

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical

Typical Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

2008 EIA Reference Case

Product Catalogs

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) Calculated

Lamp Price Distributor Websites

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Product Catalogs

CRI
Advanced Case Final

A-4

Data Sources » Residential Reflector Lamps

DATA SOURCES

2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

NCI, 2012

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Price

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

CRI
Advanced Case Final

A-5

Data Sources » Residential Compact Fluorescent Lamps

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Energy Star Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W 13W

Lamp Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

Product 

Catalogs Product Catalogs

NCI, 2012

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) Calculated Calculated

Lamp Price Distributor Websites

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Product 

Catalogs Product Catalogs

CRI
Advanced Case Final

A-6

Data Sources » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8)

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Current 

Standard 

Mid-Level 

T12 High T12 Baseline T8 Mid-Level T8 High T8 

32WT8 40WT12 32WT8 40WT12 40WT12 34WT12 32WT8 32WT8 28WT8 

Lamp Wattage 

2008 EIA 

Reference 

Case

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009

Lamp Lumens 

System Wattage 

Calculated

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Price ($) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009

Ballast Price ($) DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy Conservation Standard, 2011

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009

CRI

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy Conservation Standard, 2011
Advanced Case Final

A-7

Data Sources » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T12 and T8)

DATA SOURCES

2020 2030 2040

Typical T8 High T8 Typical T8 High T8 Typical T8 High T8 

32WT8 28WT8 32WT8 28WT8 32WT8 28WT8 

Lamp Wattage 

NCI, 2012

Lamp Lumens 

System Wattage 

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Price ($) 

Ballast Price ($) 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

CRI

Ballast Efficiency (BLE)
Advanced Case Final

A-8

Data Sources » Residential Linear Fluorescent Lamps (T5)

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

28WT5 28WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 

Lamp Wattage DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2009

NCI, 2012

Lamp Lumens 

System Wattage 

Calculated

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Price ($) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2009

Ballast Price ($) DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2009 CRI

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011
Advanced Case Final

A-9

Data Sources » Residential Torchieres

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical

Typical Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

2008 EIA Reference Case

Product Catalogs

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) Calculated

Lamp Price Distributor Websites

Lamp Cost ($/klm) Calculated

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Product Catalogs

CRI
Advanced Case Final

A-10

Data Sources » Residential Torchieres

DATA SOURCES

2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL Inc. Hal. CFL

Lamp Wattage

NCI, 2012

Lamp Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Price

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

CRI
Advanced Case Final

A-11

Data Sources » Residential Solid State Lighting (LED A19 and PAR38 Replacements)

DATA SOURCES

2005 2009 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED LED LED LED LED LED

Typical Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

Calculated

Lumens Product Catalogs

Efficacy (lm/W) 2012 SSL MYPP

Lamp Price ($) Calculated

Cost ($/klm) 2012 SSL MYPP 2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

Average Life (1000 hrs)

Product Catalogs

2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

CRI

NCI, 2012

CCT
Advanced Case Final

A-12

Data Sources » Commercial General Service Incandescent Lighting

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High 

Typical Typical Low Typical High 72W Inc 72W Inc

System Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

Distributor Websites; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Distributor Websites; Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

System Cost ($/klm)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Distributor Websites

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

Distributor Websites; NCI 2012; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-13

Data Sources » Commercial Compact Fluorescent Lamps

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

26W 26W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W 23W

System Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

Distributor Websites; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Distributor Websites; Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

System Cost ($/klm)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Distributor Websites

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

Distributor Websites; NCI 2012; 

RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-14

Data Sources » Commercial Halogen Lighting (PAR 38)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical Typical 

90W 

Halogen 70W HIR 90W Halogen 70W HIR 90W Halogen 70W HIR 90W Halogen 70W HIR 90W Halogen 70W HIR 90W Halogen 70W HIR

System Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

Distributor 

Websites; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Distributor 

Websites; 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

System Cost ($/klm)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Distributor 

Websites

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI 2012; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-15

Data Sources » Commercial Halogen Lighting (Edison)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

90W Edison 90W Halogen 90W Halogen 90W Halogen 90W Halogen 90W Halogen

System Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

Distributor 

Websites; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Distributor 

Websites; 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Lamp Cost ($/klm) 

System Cost ($/klm)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

Distributor Websites

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($) NCI 2012; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-16

Data Sources » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Edison Socket Substitute)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED BR30 LED

Wattage

2008 EIA 

Reference Case

Calculated

Lumens Product Catalogs

Efficacy (lm/W)

Product Catalogs

2012 SSL MYPP

Cost ($/klm)

2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

Life (1000 hrs)

CRI

NCI, 2012

CCT

Total Installed Cost ($)

RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-17

Data Sources » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA

2003 2007 2011

Installed Base Baseline High 

Efficiency 

HE w/ Occ. 

Sensor 

HE w/ Spec. 

Reflector 

HE w/ OS & 

Spec. Ref. 

32WT8 32WT8 32WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8

System Wattage 

2008 EIA 

Reference 

Case

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009; DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast 

Energy Conservation Standard, 2011; Product Catalogs; Calculated System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 2009; Distributor Websites; RSMeans

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy Conservation Standard, 2011
Advanced Case Final

A-18

Data Sources » Commercial 4-ft T8 Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)

DATA

2020 2030 2040

Base HE HE w/ 

OS 

HE w/ 

SR 

HE 

Max Base HE HE w/ OS 

HE w/ 

SR 

HE 

Max Base HE HE w/ OS 

HE w/ 

SR 

HE 

Max 

32WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 28WT8 32WT8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F32T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8 F28T8

System Wattage 

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life (1000 

hrs) 

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE)
Advanced Case Final

A-19

Data Sources » Commercial 4-ft T5 Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

28WT5 28WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 28WT5 26WT5 

System Wattage 

2008 EIA 

Reference 

Case

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; DOE 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011; 

Product Catalogs; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; 

Distributor Websites; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE)

DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast 

Energy Conservation Standard, 

2011
Advanced Case Final

A-20

Data Sources » Commercial Solid State Lighting (4-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting Substitute)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical Typical Typical Typical 

LED LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8 LED 32W T8

Wattage

2008 EIA 

Reference Case

Calculated

Lumens Product Catalogs

Efficacy (lm/W)

Product Catalogs

2012 SSL MYPP

Cost ($/klm)

2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

Life (1000 hrs)

CRI

NCI, 2012

CCT

Total Installed Cost ($)

RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-21

Data Sources » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting

DATA SOURCES 

2003 2007

Installed Base 

75WT12 60WT12 59WT8 59WT8 HE 75WT12 60WT12 59WT8 55WT8

System Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 

2009; DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011; Product Catalogs; 

Calculated

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 

2009

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy Conservation Standard, 

2009; Distributor Websites; RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE)

DOE Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2011
Advanced Case Final

A-22

Data Sources » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (Cont.’d)

DATA SOURCES

2011 2020 2030 2040

Magnetic

HE Typical High Efficiency Typical HE Typical HE Typical HE

60WT12 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8

System Wattage DOE Energy Conservation Standards, 

2009 and 2011; Product Catalogs; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W)

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W)

Cost ($/klm)

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life (1000 

hrs) DOE Energy Conservation Standards, 

2009

CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

DOE Energy Conservation Standards, 

2009; Distributor Websites; RSMeans 2007; 

Calculated Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-23

Data Sources » Commercial 8-ft Linear Fluorescent Lighting (High Output)

DATA SOURCES 

2011 2020 2030 2040

Magnetic 

HE Typical High Efficiency Typical HE Typical HE Typical HE 

60WT12 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8 59WT8 55WT8

System Wattage 

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; DOE 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011; Product 

Catalogs; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009 CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; 

Distributor Websites; RSMeans 2007; 

Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) DOE Ballast Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2011
Advanced Case Final

A-24

Data Sources » Commercial Low Bay HID Lighting (Metal Halide)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

175W

MV

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

175W

MH

System Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Product Catalogs; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Calculated

System Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Cost ($/klm)

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs)

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010

CRI Product Catalogs

Total Installed Cost 

($) DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Distributor 

Websites; RSMeans 2007; 

Calculated Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-25

Data Sources » Commercial Low Bay HID Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

175W MV 70W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS 100W HPS

System Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Product Catalogs; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Calculated

System Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Cost ($/klm)

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs)

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010

CRI Product Catalogs

Total Installed Cost 

($) DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Distributor 

Websites; RSMeans 2007; 

Calculated Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-26

Data Sources » Commercial Solid State Lighting (Low Bay Applications)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base HPS HPS HPS HPS

LED LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED 100W HPS LED

Typical Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

Calculated

Lumens Product Catalogs

Efficacy (lm/W) 

Product Catalogs

2012 SSL MYPP

Cost ($/klm) 

2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

CRI

NCI, 2012

CCT

Total Installed Cost ($)

RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-27

Data Sources » Commercial High Bay HID Lighting (Metal Halide)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

400W MV 250W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH 400W MH

System Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010 and 2011; Product 

Catalogs; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Calculated

System Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Cost ($/klm)

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs)

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010 and 2011

CRI Product Catalogs

Total Installed Cost 

($) DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010 and 2011; 

Distributor Websites; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-28

Data Sources » Commercial High Bay HID Lighting (High Pressure Sodium)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

400W MV 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS 150W HPS

System Wattage

2008 EIA Reference 

Case

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Product Catalogs; 

Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens

Lamp Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Calculated

System Efficacy 

(lm/W)

Cost ($/klm)

Cost ($/klm l/b/f)

Average Lamp Life 

(1000 hrs)

DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010

CRI Product Catalogs

Total Installed Cost 

($) DOE Energy Conservation

Standards, 2010; Distributor 

Websites; RSMeans 2007; 

Calculated Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

A-29

Data Sources » Commercial T5 HO Lighting (High Bay Applications)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High 

54WT5HO 54WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO 54WT5HO 51WT5HO

System Wattage 

2008 EIA 

Reference 

Case

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; DOE 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballast Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2011; 

Product Catalogs; Calculated

NCI, 2012

System Lumens 

Lamp Efficacy (lm/W) 

Calculated

System Efficacy (lm/W) 

Cost ($/klm) 

Cost ($/klm l/b/f) 

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009 CRI

Total Installed Cost ($)

DOE GSFL and IRL Energy 

Conservation Standard, 2009; 

Distributor Websites; RSMeans 

2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)

Ballast Efficiency (BLE) DOE Ballast Energy Conservation 

Standard, 2011
Advanced Case Final

A-30

Data Sources » Commercial Solid State Lighting (High Bay Applications)

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base HPS HPS HPS HPS

LED LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED 150W HPS LED

Typical Wattage 

2008 EIA Reference Case

Calculated

Lumens Product Catalogs

Efficacy (lm/W) 

Product Catalogs

2012 SSL MYPP

Cost ($/klm) 

2012 Energy Savings Forecast Model

Average Lamp Life (1000 hrs) 

CRI

NCI, 2012

CCT

Total Installed Cost ($)

RSMeans 2007; Calculated

Annual Maintenance Cost ($)
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Supermarket Display Cases

A-31

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr)

DOE, 2007 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI, 2009 NCI Analysis, 2012

DOE, 2009 / DOE, 2011 /

FMI, 2012 / NCI Analysis 2012

Median Store Size (ft3) Food Marketing Institute (FMI), 2012

Energy Use (kWh/yr)

DOE, 2007 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI, 2009 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2012

DOE, 2011

Average Life (yrs)

NCI, 2009

Retail Equipment Cost

Total Installed Cost

Annual Maintenance 

Cost
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Compressor Rack Systems

A-32

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Total Capacity 

(MBtu/hr) ADL, 1996

NCI, 2009 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012 NCI, 2009 / NCI Analysis, 2012 / ADL, 1996

Power Input (kW) Copeland, 2008

Energy Use (MWh/yr) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Average Life (yrs) Kysor-Warren, 2008

Total Installed Cost 

($1000)

NCI, 2009 /

NCI Analysis, 2012

Annual Maintenance 

Cost ($1000)

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2012
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Condensers

A-33

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Total Capacity 

(MBtu/hr)

NCI Analysis, 2008 / 

Heatcraft, 2008 / ADL, 

1996

NCI, 2009

NCI, 2009 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Power Input (kW)

NCI Analysis, 2008 / 

Heatcraft, 2008 / ADL, 

1996

Energy Use (MWh/yr) NCI Analysis, 2008 / 

ADL, 1996

Average Life (yrs) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Total Installed Cost 

($1000)

NCI Analysis, 2008 / 

Heatcraft, 2008 / RS 

Means, 2007

Annual Maintenance 

Cost NCI Analysis, 2008 NCI Analysis, 

2012
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Walk-In Refrigerators

A-34

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr) ADL, 1996 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI, 2009

DOE, 2011 DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Size (ft2) 

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)

ADL, 1996 / 

PG&E, 2004 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

Insulated Box 

Average Life (yrs) ADL, 1996 / 

PG&E, 2004

Compressor 

Average Life (yrs)

Retail Equipment 

Cost

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor 

Web Sites / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008 Total Installed Cost

Annual 

Maintenance Cost

ADL, 1996 / 

FMI, 2005 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

DOE, 2011 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Walk-In Freezers

A-35

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr) ADL, 1996 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI, 2009

DOE, 2011 DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Size (ft2) 

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)

ADL, 1996 / 

PG&E, 2004 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

Insulated Box 

Average Life (yrs) ADL, 1996 / 

PG&E, 2004

Compressor 

Average Life (yrs)

Retail Equipment 

Cost

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor 

Web Sites / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008 Total Installed Cost

Annual 

Maintenance Cost

ADL, 1996 / 

FMI, 2005 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2008

DOE, 2011 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Reach-In Refrigerators

A-36

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr)

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

NCI, 2009 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012

NCI Analysis, 2012

DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Size (ft3) 

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor Web 

Sites

DOE, 2011

Energy Use (kWh/yr) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

DOE, 2011 / ENERGY STAR, 

2012 / EPACT, 2005

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr/ft3)

NCI Analysis, 2012 NCI Analysis, 2012

Average Life (yrs) ACEEE, 2002

DOE, 2011

Retail Equipment Cost 

ADL, 1996/ 

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Total Installed Cost

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Annual Maintenance 

Cost NCI Analysis, 2008 NCI Analysis, 2012
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Reach-In Freezers

A-37

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr)

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

NCI, 2009 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2012

NCI Analysis, 2012

DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Size (ft3) 

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor Web 

Sites

DOE, 2011

Energy Use (kWh/yr) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

DOE, 2011 / ENERGY STAR, 

2012 / EPACT, 2005

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr/ft3)

NCI Analysis, 2012 NCI Analysis, 2012

Average Life (yrs) ACEEE, 2002

DOE, 2011

Retail Equipment Cost 

ADL, 1996/ 

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Total Installed Cost

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Annual Maintenance 

Cost NCI Analysis, 2008 NCI Analysis, 2012
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Ice Machines

A-38

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Output (lbs/day) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

NCI, 2009 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012

NCI Analysis, 2012

DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Water Use (gal/100 

lbs)

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor Web 

Sites

DOE, 2011

Energy Use 

(kWh/100 lbs)

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

DOE, 2011 / ENERGY 

STAR, 2012 / EPACT, 2005

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)

ACEEE, 2002 /

NCI Analysis, 

2012

DOE, 2011 /

NCI Analysis, 2012

Average Life (yrs)

ADL, 1996/ 

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Retail Equipment 

Cost 

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Total Installed Cost 

(with Bin)

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI Analysis, 

2012

Annual 

Maintenance Cost

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008 NCI, 2009 NCI Analysis, 2012 DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Beverage Merchandisers

A-39

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr)

ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

NCI, 2009

NCI Analysis, 2012

DOE, 2011 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Size (ft3) 

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor Web 

Sites

DOE, 2011

Energy Use (kWh/yr) ADL, 1996 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

DOE, 2011 / ENERGY 

STAR, 2012 / EPACT, 2005

Average Life (yrs) ACEEE, 2002

DOE, 2011

Retail Equipment Cost 

ADL, 1996 / 

Distributor Web 

Sites

Total Installed Cost

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

Annual Maintenance 

Cost

NCI Analysis, 

2008

NCI Analysis, 

2012
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Refrigerated Vending Machines

A-40

DATA SOURCES

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Typical Typical Low Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

Cooling Capacity 

(Btu/hr) 

DOE, 2008 / NCI 

Analysis, 2008

NCI, 2009 / 

NCI Analysis, 

2012

DOE, 2009

DOE, 2009 / NCI Analysis, 2012

Can Capacity

CEC, 2005 / 

NREL, 2003 / 

FEMP, 2004

Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)

ADL, 1996 / CEC, 

2008 / NREL, 

2003

DOE, 2009 / ENERGY 

STAR, 2012

Average Life (yrs) DOE, 2008

DOE, 2009

Retail Equipment 

Cost 

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008 / 

DOE, 2008

Total Installed Cost

Distributor Web 

Sites / NCI 

Analysis, 2008 / 

DOE, 2008

Annual 

Maintenance Cost DOE, 2008
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Constant Air Volume Ventilation

A-41

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) Assumed based on average 15,000 square foot commercial building (CBECS 2003 and BED 2007)

System Fan Power (kW)

eQUEST/DOE-2

ASHRA

E 90.1-

2007

SAIC & Mfrs

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM)

Annual Fan Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)1 Calculated – see note 1

Average Life (yrs) 2011 ASHRAE Handbook: HVAC Applications

Total Installed Cost ($)2 RS Means 2012

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) Jones Lang LaSalle

1 Based on 3800 effective full load hours per year (operating 3800 hours per year at constant load) (ADL, 1999).

2 Total installed cost of 15,000 CFM CAV AHU and hypothetical supply ductwork layout. 

3 Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 91% 

motor efficiency.
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Variable Air Volume Ventilation

A-42

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) Assumed based on average 15,000 square foot commercial building (CBECS 2003 and BED 2007)

System Fan Power (kW)

eQUEST/DOE-2

ASHRA

E 90.1-

2007

SAIC & Mfrs

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM)

Annual Fan Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)1 Calculated – see note 1

Average Life (yrs) 2011 ASHRAE Handbook: HVAC Applications

Total Installed Cost ($)2 RS Means 2012

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) Jones Lang LaSalle

1 Based on 887 effective full load hours (power-based) per year (operating 3800 hours per year at variable load).

2 Total installed cost of 15,000 CFM VAV AHU, VFD, (10) VAV boxes, and hypothetical supply ductwork layout. 

3 Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 91% 

motor efficiency.
Advanced Case Final

Data Sources » Commercial Fan Coil Unit

A-43

DATA

2003 2007 2011 2020 2030 2040

Installed Base Minimum3 Typical High Typical High Typical High Typical High

System Airflow (CFM) 800 CFM is typical for a 2-ton fan coil unit

System Fan Power (kW)

ADL 1999, NCI 2008

ASHRA

E 90.1-

2007

SAIC & Mfrs

Specific Fan Power (W/CFM)

Annual Fan Energy Use 

(kWh/yr)1 Calculated – see note 1

Average Life (yrs) 2011 ASHRAE Handbook: HVAC Applications

Total Installed Cost ($)2 RS Means 2012

Annual Maintenance Cost ($) ASHRAE 2000, NCI 2008

1 Based on 2250 effective full load hours per year (operating 2250 hours per year at constant load) (ADL, 1999).

2 Total installed cost of 2-ton horizontal 2-pipe fan coil unit, housing and controls. 

3 Based on ASHRAE 90.1-2007 fan power limit (Table 6.5.3.1.1A) with no pressure drop adjustment. Assumed 80% motor load and 60% 

motor efficiency.
Advanced Case Final

146

Appendix B

References

Navigant Consulting, Inc.

1200 19th Street, NW, Suite 700

Washington, D.C. 20036

And

SAIC

8301 Greensboro Drive

McLean, VA 22102
Advanced Case Final

• ACEEE. (2007). Top Rated Energy-Efficient Appliances. American Council for an EnergyEfficient Economy.

• AHAM - ACEEE. (2010). Agreement on Minimum Federal Efficiency Standards, Smart 

Appliances, Federal Incentives and Related Matters for Specified Appliances.

• AHAM. (n.d.). AHAM Directory of Certified Products. Retrieved September 2010, from 

http://www.ahamdir.com/dirsvc/aham.nsf/fraRAC?OpenFrameset&pgm=Room%20Air

%20Conditioners

• AHRI. (n.d.). Certification Directory. Retrieved September 2010, from Directory of 

Certified Product Performance: 

http://www.ahridirectory.org/ahridirectory/pages/home.aspx

• Appliance Magazine. (2010). Appliance Market Research Report - U.S. Appliance Industry: 

Market Share, Life Expectancy & Replacement Market, and Saturation Levels. Appliance 

Magazine.

• Appliance Magazine. (2005). Portrait of the U.S. Appliance Industry. Appliance Magazine.

• Arthur D. Little. (1996). Energy Savings Potential for Commercial Refrigeration Equipment.

• Arthur D. Little. (1997). Massachusetts Market Transformation Scoping Study; Final Report.

Massachusetts Gas DSM / Market Transformation Collaborative.

147

References

B-1
Advanced Case Final

• ASHRAE. (2003). 2003 ASHRAE Handbook - HVAC Applications. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (2007). ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-2007. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (1999). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999. ASHRAE, Inc.

• ASHRAE. (2004). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004. ASHRAE, Inc.

• Building Services Research and Information Association & Ducker Research Company. 

(1997, 1998). U.S. Market for Central Plant Air Conditioning; Market for Ducted Warm Air 

Central Heating; U.S. Market for Hydronic Heating and Burners; U.S. Water Heating Market; 

U.S. Unitary and Close Control Air Conditioning.

• California Energy Commission. (n.d.). Retrieved September 2010, from Appliance 

Efficiency Database: http://www.appliances.energy.ca.gov/AdvancedSearch.aspx

• DEER. (2008, June). Database for Energy Efficiency Resources. Retrieved September 2010, 

from California Energy Commission: www.energy.ca.gov/deer

• Distributors. (n.d.). NCI discussions with distributors and online research (i.e. Grainger, 

Home Depot, Lowes, Sears, and others).

148

References

B-2
Advanced Case Final

• EERE. Preliminary Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Consumer 

Products: Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers.

• EERE. (2000). Clothes Washers Technical Support Document, Final Rule Technical Support 

Document: Energy Efficiency Standards for Consumer Products: Clothes Washers.

• EERE. (2001). Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Central Air Conditioners 

and Heat Pumps Energy Conservation Standards; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2004). Joint Stakeholders Comments on Standards for Commercial Package Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps.

• EERE. (2005). Draft Technical Analysis for Refrigerators, Analysis of Amended Energy 

Conservation Standards for Residential Refrigerators-Freezers.

• EERE. (2005). Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Commercial and 

Industrial Equipment: Commercial Unitary Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps.

• EERE. (2006). Technical Analysis for Residential Furnaces and Boilers, Energy Conservation 

Program for Residential Furnaces and Boilers; Proposed Rule.

• EERE. (2006). Technical Analysis for Rulemaking Framework for 

Dishwashers/Cooktops/Ovens, Rulemaking Framework for Commercial Clothes Washers and 

Residential Dishwashers, Dehumidifiers, and Cooking Products.

149

References

B-3
Advanced Case Final

• EERE. (2006). Buildings Energy Data Book.

• EERE. (2006). DOE Appliance Standards Framework, Rulemaking Framework for Residential 

Water Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment and Pool Heaters.

• EERE. (2009). Commercial Heating, Air Conditioning and Water Heating Equipment (i.e. 

ASHRAE Equipment).

• EERE. (2007). Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Energy Conservation 

Standards for Residential Furnaces and Boilers; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2009). Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Certain 

Consumer Products and for Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2009). Final Rule Technical Support Document: Residential Dishwashers, 

Dehumidifiers, Cooking Products, and Commercial Clothes Washers.

• EERE. (2009). Commercial Refrigeration Equipment; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2009). Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines; Final Rule Technical Support 

Document.

150

References

B-4
Advanced Case Final

• EERE. (2010). Energy Conservation Program for Appliance Standards: Residential Central Air 

Conditioners and Heat Pumps.

• EERE. (2010). Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential 

Water Heaters, Direct Heating Equipment, and Pool Heaters; Final Rule.

• EERE. (2010). Residential Clothes Dryers and Room Air Conditioners Preliminary Technical 

Support Document.

• EERE. (2010). Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In Freezers; Preliminary Analysis Technical Support 

Document.

• EERE. (2011). Commercial Refrigeration Equipment; Preliminary Analysis Technical Support 

Document.

• EERE. (2012). Automatic Commercial Ice Makers; Preliminary Analysis Technical Support 

Document.

151

References

B-5
Advanced Case Final

• ENERGY STAR. (n.d.). Retrieved May 2012, from ENERGY STAR Products: 

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=products.pr_find_es_products

• Federal Standard. (1975). National energy conservation standards authorized under the 

Energy and Policy Conservation Act of 2007 (EPCA 1975).

• Federal Standard. (2005). National energy conservation standards authorized under the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005).

• Federal Standard. (2007). National energy conservation standards authorized under the 

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007).

• Food Marketing Institute. (n.d.). Retrieved May 2012, from FMI Supermarket Facts: 

http://www.fmi.org/research-resources/supermarket-facts/median-total-store-sizesquare-feet

• GeoExchange. GeoExchange Heating and Cooling Systems: Fascinating Facts.

152

References

B-6
Advanced Case Final

• GHPC. (n.d.). Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium. Retrieved 2007, from 

www.geoexchange.org

• IGSPHA. (n.d.). International Ground Source Heat Pump Association. Retrieved 2007, from 

www.igshpa.okstate.edu

• LBNL. (2003). Commercial Unitary Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps - Life Cycle Cost 

Analysis: Inputs and Results. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

• Max Neubauer, A. d. (2009). Ka-BOOM! The Power of Appliance Standards. ACEEE, ASAP.

• Navigant Consulting, Inc. (n.d.). In House Expertise.

• Navigant Consulting, Inc. (2009). Energy Savings Potential and R&D Opportunities for 

Commercial Refrigeration.

• Navien America Inc. (n.d.). Navien Condensing 98%. Retrieved September 2010, from 

http://www.navienamerica.com/PDS/ftp/NavienCondensingTankless/DownLoad_Broc

hure_Manual/NavienCodensing98_Brochure.pdf

• Product Literature. (n.d.). Literature from manufacturers and experts on specific products.

153

References

B-7
Advanced Case Final

• RS Means Mechanical Cost Data. (2007). Means Construction Information Network.

• RS Means Mechanical Cost Data. (2010). Means Construction Information Network.

• SAIC. (n.d.). In House Expertise.

• Technology Cost and Performance File for Commercial Model for AEO2010. (2009). (E. 

Boedecker, Compiler)

154

References

B-8