Embed
Email

Deemed Measure Review LED Holiday Lights

Document Sample

Shared by: qinmei liao
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
10/31/2011
language:
English
pages:
14
Deemed Measure Reviews:

1.) LED Holiday Lights,

2.) Multifamily Low-Rise New Construction, and

3.) Room Air Conditioners





March 1st, 2011

Regional Technical Forum

1.) LED Holiday Lights

• RTF Decision on July 8, 2002

– Excerpt from Meeting Minutes:

• “Keating went through the residential assumptions used in Eckman's

analysis of this measure, as well as some estimated savings data

compared to other holiday light sets (W2 bulbs, C7 bulbs and 10W C

bulbs). Eckman noted that, given the fact that the legitimate incremental

cost of these lights is $3-$4, this isn't necessarily the most cost-effective

energy savings measure. However, after a brief discussion, the RTF

recommended that this item be added to the deemed measures list, at a

credit of $1 per string, despite the relatively small savings associated with

this item.”

– Deemed Energy Savings

• 100 light LED holiday light string: 5.4 kWh/year









1.) LED Holiday Lights 2

Summary of Methodology and Sources for Unit Energy Savings Estimate



Measure Classification and Properties

Market Sector Residential

Market Segment Lighting

Measure Category LED Holiday Lights

Measure Description Efficiency upgrade of new holiday light

string to LED.

Sunset Criteria none given

Primary Workbook LEDHolidayLightsFY07v1_0.xls

Linked Workbooks none

Number of Measures, 1 light string upgrade measures each

and UES Components modeled using a single UES component



Measure Identifiers

Identifier Possible Values Further Explanation and Sources

Measure Type (See Upgrade - LED holiday light string (100 light

UES Table Below) string)



Constant Parameters

Parameter Possible Values Further Explanation and Sources

Run Time 180 hours per year Analyst's assumptions. Assumes 6

hours per day for 30 days per year.

(source undocumented)

Length of string 100 lights Analyst's assumption (source

undocumented)

Space Heat Interaction 16% Source not documented







Unit Energy Savings (UES) Estimation Method, Parameters and Sources

Measure Type UES Component Analysis approach Primary Parameter Baseline Efficient Case Baseline Efficient

/ Adjustment Factor Description Description Source Case Source

Upgrade - LED holiday One Component Delta watts times Watts per light 0.4 watts/light 0.04 watts/light Analyst's assumption

light string (100 light hours, minus space (source undocumented)

string) heat interaction.





1.) LED Holiday Lights 3

Checklist: Guidelines for the Development and Maintenance of RTF-Approved Measure Savings Estimates

2. Deemed Unit Energy Savings

Guideline Yes/No/? Notes

Measure Identifiers Yes 1 measure: 100 light LED string

2.1 Measure Savings Baseline Yes Upgrade New

Specification Implementation Standards Yes rebate

Product Standards Yes LED. 100 light string.

Input Parameters No Supporting data undocumented

2.2 UES Model Calibration ? Applies to interaction factor only. Could probably be generated using calibrated model.



Estimation UES Components Yes One UES component is appropriate.

Procedure Interactions between Measures Yes (measure interaction doesn't apply)

Heating/Cooling Interactions Yes

Reliable Baseline Data No Hours, watts, and 1-for-1 mini-to-LED ratio are assumptions/undocumented.

2.3 Required Reliable Efficient-case Data No Hours and watts are assumptions/undocumented.

Quality of Model Calibration - Baseline No Hours not calibrated to real-world energy use.

Savings Estimate Model Calibration - Efficient-Case No Hours not calibrated to real-world energy use.

Sound Analyses Used Yes Delta watts times hours is a reasonable approach.





2.3.3 Standard for Reliability

Did RTF determine savings were reliable? ?

Did RTF comment on pilot UES estimate? ?

Did RTF comment on small saver UES estimate? ?





2.4 Development and Maintenance Process

Sunset Criteria (explain) none given, yet.



Development/Maintenance Stage Under Review

Summary Sheet Completed? No

Measure Classification and Properties

Measure Identifiers

Constant Parameters

Estimation Method, Parameters and Sources

Measure Effective Useful Life (years) 7





1.) LED Holiday Lights 4

(Some) Measure Status Options

Staff Recommendation

• Out-of-Compliance

– To avoid de-activation after one year, the RTF would need to

review and approve a plan to bring the measure into compliance

with a valid deemed UES development stage.

• This effort would need a proponent(/volunteer)





• Deactivated

– Deactivation would get this measure off the RTF’s books today,

rather than waiting a year. (If there is no interest in this

measure, choosing this option could save RTF resources.)



• Small Savers

– This effort would need a proponent(/volunteer)



1.) LED Holiday Lights 5

2.) Multifamily Low-Rise New Construction

• RTF Decision on December 12, 2005

– Excerpts from Meeting Minutes:

• …Lack of Energy Star for multifamily new construction – Long-term Super Good Cents (LTSGC)

for single family is being phased out in favor of Energy Star…

• …Eckman noted that Hadley is proposing to retain the R-49 advance-framed ceiling standard, at

least at this time. The only problem I see with that is that, if R-49 ceilings don’t meet the B/C

ratio, that breaks the precedent, Himlie observed. Yes, it does, Eckman replied. And to me, that

may not be the best measure to use in this instance, Stephens said. After considerable debate,

the sense of the discussion was that R-38 is the cost-effective ceiling standard.

• The group devoted a few minutes of discussion to Hadley’s proposed multifamily technical

specs and savings estimates, offering a series of clarifying questions and comments. Ultimately,

Stephens moved that Hadley’s proposal be endorsed by the RTF, with the exception that the

ceiling standard reverts to R-38 flat and R-30 (vault). This motion was seconded and

unanimously approved.

– Deemed Measure Savings (Updated in 2007)

• Low-Rise (3-stories or less) Multifamily Building with Electric Heat built to

RTF’s specifications

– Heating Zone 1: 239 kWh/year per unit

– Heating Zone 2: 355 kWh/year per unit

– Heating Zone 3: 438 kWh/year per unit









2.) Multifamily Low-Rise New Construction 6

Summary of Methodology and Sources for Unit Energy Savings Estimate

Measure Classification and Properties

Market Sector Residential

Market Segment New Construction

Measure Category Multifamily Low-Rise

Measure Description Efficiency upgrade of new multifamily low-rise (3-stories or less)

buildings with electric heat built to the RTF's Mulitfamiy Low-Rise

specs.

Sunset Criteria none given

Primary Workbook New_MFFY07v1_4.xls

Linked Workbooks none

Number of Measures, 3 building shell upgrade measures with one UES component each.

and UES Components



Measure Identifiers

Identifier Possible Values Further Explanation and Sources

Measure Type (See New Construction Upgrade - Multifamily Low-Rise Building with

UES Table Below) Electric Heat

Climate Zone Heating zones 1, 2, & 3



Constant Parameters

Parameter Possible Values Further Explanation and Sources

Insulation Levels Attic: R38 std Based on "Baseline Characteristics of

Vault: R30 std Multifamily Sector Buildings in Oregon

Door: R5 and Washington" 2000 for NEEA.

Infiltration: 0.35 ACH

Heating System Type, Electric FAF - 89 to 90% efficiency - 9% Weighting FAF and HP takes into account duct

Efficiency, and Heat Pump - 187 to 251% efficiency - 42% Weighting efficiency and "real HSPF" (modeled

Weighting Zonal - 100% efficiency - 49% Weighting for RTF by Ecotope for SF work).



Unit Energy Savings (UES) Estimation Method, Parameters and Sources

Measure Type UES Analysis approach Primary Parameter Baseline Efficient Case Baseline Source Efficient

Component / Adjustment Factor Description Description Case Source

New Construction One Heating energy requirements for baseline and efficient Window u-value and Window: Window: Based on "Baseline Requirement

Upgrade - Multifamily Component case determined based on UA lookup of SUNDAY run floor/slab and wall Class 35 Class 30 Characteristics of of

Low-Rise Building with results for two prototypes. Energy consumption insulation levels Multifamily Sector specification.

Electric Heat calculated based on heating system type. Resultant Floor: R-25 Floor: R-30 Buildings in Oregon

savings is based on weighted average of prototype and Slab: R10-4ft Slab: R15-4ft and Washington"

heating system mix. 2000 for NEEA.

Wall: R-19 std. Wall: R-21 int.





2.) Multifamily Low-Rise New Construction 7

Measure Compared to Current Codes and Energy Star

Component Existing RTF Current Codes Energy Star

Deemed Multifamily Oregon Washington OR Zonal OR non-zonal

Savings Low-Rise

Baseline Spec

Inputs

Ceiling R-38 std R-38 std R-38 R-49 (38

R-38 adv. R-38

(R-30 vault) (R-30 vault) vault)

Walls (above grade) R-19 std R-21 Inter. R-21 R-13 + R-6 R-21 + R7.5 R-21

sheathing (z1); sheathing

Walls (below grade) n/a R-21 (w/R5 R-15 R-21 + R-5 R-19 R-19

tb) sheathing (z2)

Floors R-25 R-30 R-30 R-30 R-30 R-30

Slab R-10 4' R-15 R-15 R-10 R-15 4' perim. R-15 4' perim.

perimeter perimeter perimeter perimeter

Doors U-0.20 U-0.19 U-0.20 U-0.40 U-0.20 U-0.20

Windows U-0.40 U-0.30 U-0.35 U-0.32 U-0.30 U-0.32

Additional Specs n/a water choose an water heater, water heater,

heater spec option showerhead, lighting, htg

lighting, ACH equip, ACH





2.) Multifamily Low-Rise New Construction 8

Checklist: Guidelines for the Development and Maintenance of RTF-Approved Measure Savings Estimates

2. Deemed Unit Energy Savings

Guideline Yes/No/? Notes

Measure Identifiers Yes

2.1 Measure Savings Baseline Yes Upgrade New

Specification Implementation Standards Yes Must meet RTF Multifamily Low-Rise New Construction specifications

Product Standards Yes Must meet RTF Multifamily Low-Rise New Construction specifications

Input Parameters No Baseline data do not match current standard practice.

2.2 UES Model Calibration No SUNDAY runs calibrated? Heating system efficiency calibration?

Estimation UES Components ? May want separate cooling UES.

Procedure Interactions between Measures ? Internal gains assumptions unclear; efficient lighting and appliances assumed?

Heating/Cooling Interactions Yes n/a

Reliable Baseline Data No Baseline out of date with respect to new codes.

2.3 Required Reliable Efficient-case Data No Calibration needed.

Quality of Model Calibration - Baseline No No calibration documented.

Savings Estimate Model Calibration - Efficient-Case No No calibration documented.

Sound Analyses Used ? Should RTF require more than SUNDAY?





2.3.3 Standard for Reliability

Did RTF determine savings were reliable? ?

Did RTF comment on pilot UES estimate? ?

Did RTF comment on small saver UES estimate? ?





2.4 Development and Maintenance Process

Sunset Criteria (explain) none provided



Development/Maintenance Stage Under Review

Summary Sheet Completed?

Measure Classification and Properties

Measure Identifiers

Constant Parameters

Estimation Method, Parameters and Sources

Measure Effective Useful Life (years) 70





2.) Multifamily Low-Rise New Construction 9

Conclusions and Recommendations

• Baseline is out of date with respect to current codes.

• Not much of a measure left anymore.

– Measure specification could be re-defined (Energy Star

would be a good option)





• Staff recommends to change deemed measure status

to “Deactivated”









2.) Multifamily Low-Rise New Construction 10

3.) Room Air Conditioners

• RTF Decision on May 8, 2001.

– Excerpts from Meeting Minutes:

• “Eckman then presented updates for room Site Savings (kWh/year)

air conditioners and solar domestic water Capacity Cooling Zone

heating. The room air conditioner measure (btu/hr) 3 2 1

table was updated to reflect the revisions in 20,000 223 129 72

the minimum federal efficiency standards 19,000 181 105 59

18,000 172 100 55

and the subsequent change in the "Energy 17,000 162 94 52

Star" specifications.” 16,000 153 89 49

• The RTF adopted the … revised measure 15,000 143 83 46

14,000 134 77 43

savings estimates for room air

13,000 122 71 39

conditioners...” 12,000 112 65 36

– Deemed Measure Savings 11,000 103 60 33

10,000 94 54 30

• Energy Star Room AC    9,000 84 49 27

8,000 75 43 24

7,000 67 39 22

6,000 57 33 18

5,000 48 28 15



3.) Room Air Conditioners 11

Summary of Methodology and Sources for Unit Energy Savings Estimate



Measure Classification and Properties

Market Sector Residential

Market Segment Residential

Measure Category Room Air Conditioner

Measure Description Efficiency upgrade of new window air

conditioner pruchases to Energy Star.

Unit must replace an existing unit.

Sunset Criteria none given

Primary Workbook EStarRoomACFY08v1_0.xls

Linked Workbooks none

Number of Measures, 48 Room AC upgrade measures each

and UES Components modeled using a single UES component



Measure Identifiers

Identifier Possible Values Further Explanation and Sources

Measure Type (See Upgrade - Energy Star Room Air Conditoner

UES Table Below)

Climate Zone Cooling zones 1, 2, & 3





Constant Parameters

Parameter Possible Values Further Explanation and Sources

Cooling Degree Hours Cooling Zone 1: 320 hours Computed from hourly temperatures using

Cooling Zone 2: 574 hours SUNCODE & TMY2 Weather Files

Cooling Zone 3: 990 hours



Unit Energy Savings (UES) Estimation Method, Parameters and Sources

Measure Type UES Component Analysis approach Primary Parameter Baseline Description Efficient Case Baseline Source Efficient

/ Adjustment Factor Description Case Source

Upgrade - Energy Star One Component Energy use for EER 9.7 ( 20k Btu/hr) 9.4 (> 20k Btu/hry) 1, 2000.

cooling hours for each

climate zone.









3.) Room Air Conditioners 12

Checklist: Guidelines for the Development and Maintenance of RTF-Approved Measure Savings Estimates

2. Deemed Unit Energy Savings

Guideline Yes/No/? Notes

Measure Identifiers Yes

2.1 Measure Savings Baseline Yes Upgrade New

Specification Implementation Standards Yes Must replace existing

Product Standards Yes Must be Energy Star

Input Parameters No Documented, but not reliable.

2.2 UES Model Calibration No Cooling hours not calibrated to actual energy use.

Estimation UES Components Yes

Procedure Interactions between Measures ? Unclear how cooling hours were modeled.

Heating/Cooling Interactions ? Unclear how cooling hours were modeled.

Reliable Baseline Data No Energy Star market share in 2006 w as about 21%. Baseline currently assumes 0%.

2.3 Required Reliable Efficient-case Data No Doesn't take into account units exceeding Energy Star efficiency specs.

Quality of Model Calibration - Baseline No Cooling hours not calibrated to actual energy use.

Savings Estimate Model Calibration - Efficient-Case No Cooling hours not calibrated to actual energy use.

Sound Analyses Used ? Cooling hours not well documented.





2.3.3 Standard for Reliability

Did RTF determine savings were reliable? ?

Did RTF comment on pilot UES estimate? ?

Did RTF comment on small saver UES estimate? ?





2.4 Development and Maintenance Process

Sunset Criteria (explain) None provided.



Development/Maintenance Stage Under Review

Summary Sheet Completed? Yes

Measure Classification and Properties

Measure Identifiers

Constant Parameters

Estimation Method, Parameters and Sources

Measure Effective Useful Life (years) 9 years





3.) Room Air Conditioners 13

Conclusions and Recommendations

• Savings estimates do not meet RTF guidelines.

– Calibrating the model to real-world data would be challenging given

RAC users’ widely varying habits.





• Staff recommends changing deemed measure status to “Out-

of-Compliance”









3.) Room Air Conditioners 14



Related docs
Other docs by qinmei liao
Q CMA ExperienceRequirement
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Lipid Learning Activity
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
MATERIAL SAFETY AND DATA SHEETS
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
Financial Planning The Ties That Bind
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Inflammatory Pain
Views: 4  |  Downloads: 0
Group goal setting workshop
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
MEETINGS REPORT ACTION SHEET
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
LYMPHOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!