From: Robert Berman [mailto:bermaneconomics@gmail.com]  

Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 2:20 PM

To: Meyers, Aaron

Cc: Christopher Bolduc; Richard Parker; <rick.anderson@faypwc.com>; <tballo@earthjustice.org>;

<ScottB@lvmetals.com>; <john.caskey@nema.org>; Corkran, Jerry L; <john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov>;

<adelaski@standardsasap.org>; <Teckman@nwcouncil.org>; <gbf1@pge.com>;

<carlos.gaytan@ge.com>; <rgreeson@federalpacific.com>; <bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com>;

<jhodge@howard.com>; <mhyland@appanet.org>; <dave.millure@metglas.com>;

<snadel@aceee.org>; <wes.patterson@us.abb.com>; <Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com>;

<Raymond.Polinski@atimetals.com>; <artrosenfeld@gmail.com>; <srosenstock@eei.org>;

<rroy@nrdc.org>; <robert.saint@nreca.coop>; <chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com>;

<BermanEconomics@gmail.com>; <Daniel.Cohen@hq.doe.gov>; <greg.coulter405@gmail.com>;

<Jim.creevy@nema.org>; <ahofmann@publicpower.org>; <pkumar@publicpower.org>;

<jmauer@standardsasap.org>; <jrossetti@mlgw.org>; <Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com>;

<jerry.schoen@aksteel.com>; <bsmith@federalpacific.com>; <mwaltner@nrdc.org>;

<kwinder@mleainc.com>; Brian Coffey; <kcoughlin@lbl.gov>; <brenda.edwards@ee.doe.gov>;

<jeremiah.freeman@ee.doe.gov>; Caitlin Johnson; Zhimei Luo; <emily.marchetti@ee.doe.gov>; Michael

Rivest; <gjrosenquist@lbl.gov>; <charlied@uus.org>; <phopkinson@hvolt.com>;

<James.Lass@cleco.com>; <maheshsampat@bellsouth.net>; <DYoung@energy‐solution.com>;

<chad.kennedy@us.schneider‐electric.com>; <eduardorobles@eaton.com>;

<vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com>; <thomas.patzner@us.schneider‐electric.com>;

<carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com>; Raba, Jim; Meyers,Aaron

Subject: Re: MV Liquid‐immersed LCC and NIA Results

In addition to the pricing scenarios requested, it would be most helpful if you could also (1) run some

scenarios based on historic variability, and/or multiples of historic variability; and (2) show the various

scenarios against actual historic relative prices.

Regards,

  

Robert A. Berman, Principal

Berman Economics

1915 Grand Court

Vienna, VA 22182
703.281.0490

703.655.8398 (cell)

Berman.Economics@gmail.com

www.BermanEconomics.com

  

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 3, 2011, at 11:34 AM, "Meyers, Aaron" <Aaron.Meyers@CooperIndustries.com> wrote:

> Chris,

> As we discussed on the phone last week, regarding the sensitivity  

> analysis and specifically how wide to cast the net in terms of  

> amorphous cost, I would recommend using the AK Steel presentation as guidance.

> The reason I'm recommending this is because it was based on actual  

> analysis rather than just being arbitrarily chosen.  So in considering  

> dTSL1, the cost of amorphous is shown to be approximately $2000/ton  

> greater for M3 than for amorphous, thus $1/lb would seem appropriate.

> For evaluating dTSL2, M3 has a $5000/ton disadvantage, so $2.50/lb  

> would be appropriate.  For dTSL3 and beyond, you're going to have to  

> extrapolate, but it will not be a small or inconsequential amount.

>  

> Best Regards,

> Aaron

>  

> ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 
> From: Christopher Bolduc [mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov]

> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 9:23 PM

> To: Richard Parker

> Cc: rick.anderson@faypwc.com; tballo@earthjustice.org;  

> ScottB@lvmetals.com; john.caskey@nema.org; Corkran, Jerry L;  

> john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov; adelaski@standardsasap.org;  

> Teckman@nwcouncil.org; gbf1@pge.com; carlos.gaytan@ge.com;  

> rgreeson@federalpacific.com; bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com;  

> jhodge@howard.com; mhyland@appanet.org; dave.millure@metglas.com;  

> snadel@aceee.org; wes.patterson@us.abb.com; Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com;  

> Raymond.Polinski@atimetals.com; artrosenfeld@gmail.com;  

> srosenstock@eei.org; rroy@nrdc.org; robert.saint@nreca.coop;  

> chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com; BermanEconomics@gmail.com;  

> Daniel.Cohen@hq.doe.gov; greg.coulter405@gmail.com;  

> Jim.creevy@nema.org; ahofmann@publicpower.org; pkumar@publicpower.org;  

> jmauer@standardsasap.org; Meyers, Aaron; jrossetti@mlgw.org;  

> Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com;  

> bsmith@federalpacific.com; mwaltner@nrdc.org; kwinder@mleainc.com;  

> cabolduc@lbl.gov; brian.coffey@navigant.com; kcoughlin@lbl.gov;  

> brenda.edwards@ee.doe.gov; jeremiah.freeman@ee.doe.gov;  

> caitlin.johnson@navigant.com; zhimei.luo@navigant.com;  

> emily.marchetti@ee.doe.gov; mrivest@navigant.com;  

> gjrosenquist@lbl.gov; charlied@uus.org; phopkinson@hvolt.com;  

> James.Lass@cleco.com; maheshsampat@bellsouth.net;  

> DYoung@energy‐solution.com; chad.kennedy@us.schneider‐electric.com;  
> eduardorobles@eaton.com; vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com;  

> thomas.patzner@us.schneider‐electric.com;

> carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com; Raba, Jim

> Subject: MV Liquid‐immersed LCC and NIA Results

>  

> Dear Committee Members,

>  

> Please find the draft LCC and NIA results for liquid‐immersed  

> medium‐voltage transformers (design lines 1 ‐ 5) attached.

>  

> A summary of changes and additional sensitivities will be distributed  

> before next week's meeting.

>  

> Thank you,

> ‐‐ Chris Bolduc

>  

> ‐‐‐‐ 

> Chris Bolduc

> Energy Efficiency Standards Group

> Environmental Energy Technologies Division Lawrence Berkeley National  

> Laboratory t. 416‐535‐7546 c. 647‐832‐4021