20100316DSM 2009 Supplement 2.pdf

An !DACORP
Boise, Idaho
.-y'-I
This document printed on recycled paper.
Idaho Power Company Supplement 2: Evaluation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents............................................ ........................................................................................ i
List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... i
Evaluation.............. ........... ............ .... ... ...... ......... ......... ... ............ ......... ...... ....... ......... ..... ....................... 1
Memorandum of Understanding........................................ .....................................................................3
Evaluation Plan.....................................................................................................................................14
Energy Efficiency Advisory Group Minutes........ ........... ........ ....... ..... ....... ...... ............. ....... ...... ............15
NEEA Market Effects Evaluations..... ................. .................. ......... ............... ............... ............. ............30
Research and Evaluations................................................................................................................... ... .31
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.
Table 2.
NEEA Market Effects Evaluations. ..... ... ....... ...... ....... .... ...... ....... ....... ...... ......................30
Research and Evaluations .. .... ........ ..... ...... ............ ..... ..... ...... ....... ...... ...... ......................31
Demand-Side Management 2009 Annual Report Page i
Idaho Power Company Supplement 2: Evaluation
EVALUATION
Program evaluation is an important facet of Idaho Power's demand-side management (DSM) operational
activities. The company relies on evaluation by third-part contractors, internal analyses, and regional
studies to ensure the ongoing cost effectiveness of programs through validation of energy savings and
demand reduction, and the efficient management of its programs. Idaho Power considers research
studies, cost-effectiveness analyses, surveys, market potential assessments, impact evaluations, process
evaluations, and market effects evaluations important tools to improve DSM activities by testing
program assumptions and results. The results of Idaho Power's evaluation efforts are used to enhance
or initiate program changes.
Idaho Power uses industr standard protocols for its internal and external evaluation efforts.
The resources for these protocols and standards include the National Action Planfor Energy
Effciency-Model Energy Effciency Program Impact Evaluation Guide, the California Evaluation
Framework, the International Performance Measurement and Verifcation Protocol, and the Regional
Technical Forum's (RTF) evaluation protocols. Idaho Power attends RTF meetings, participates in the
Northwest Research Group, the Pacific Northwest Demand Response Project, and joins with several
regional entities to evaluate energy efficiency technologies and advancements.
Internal studies and analyses are managed by Idaho Power's Research and Analysis Team within
the Customer Relations and Energy Effciency departent. Evaluations are specifically coordinated by
the company's energy effciency evaluator while surveys are performed in consultation with the
customer research coordinator. Third-part studies and evaluations are generally implemented through
a competitive bidding process and managed by the Research and Analysis Team.
On January 25, 2010 Idaho Power joined with the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (IPUC) staff and
other Idaho investor owned utilities to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) in IPUC Case
No. IPC-E-09-09. The MOU reflects how Idaho Power intends to manage, plan, evaluate, and report its
DSM activities. The MOU includes specific requirements for timing and reporting of evaluation on the
Idaho Power's energy effciency and demand response programs. Within the MOU the IPUC staffhas
agreed to provide reasonable and necessary leeway for the implementation of the guidelines described in
this MOU for the Demand-Side Management 2009 Annual Report.
The MOU requires that in Idaho Power's demand-side management annual reports the evaluation
section includes a list of all evaluations completed, a table showing the schedule for evaluations,
and copies of each evaluation. The evaluation schedule table provides an outline of the currently planned
evaluations. Although the evaluation plan is expected to be used for scheduling evaluations, the timing
of specific program evaluations wil be based on considerations of program needs, evaluation timing,
and other relevant regional studies.
In future reports Idaho Power plans to provide the names of primary outside evaluators and the titles of
internal evaluators for each evaluation listed. The company also plans to report the total cost of
evaluating its programs. Idaho Power has not separately tracked all internal evaluation overhead
expenses in the past.
In 2009, Idaho Power developed a comprehensive evaluation plan for its energy efficiency programs and
commenced evaluations for several programs and measures. These included evaluations of Building
Demand-Side Management 2009 Annual Report Page 1
Supplement 2: Evaluation Idaho Power Company
Effciency, Easy Upgrades, ENERGY STAR(ß Homes Northwest, AlC Cool Credit, Irrgation Peak
Rewards, and the Home Improvement pilot. Several programs are scheduled for process evaluations in
2010 including: Building Efficiency, Easy Upgrdes, Custom Efficiency, Irrgation Effciency Rewards,
Home Products, Rebate Advantage, and Energy House Calls.
As part of its evaluation efforts, Idaho Power is actively participating in several local and regional
studies to identify and promote emerging technologies that may further enhance opportnities for new
program deployment. Idaho Power contracted with Nexant, Inc. to provide a DSM potential study to
identify cost-effective energy savings opportnities in the company's service area. Other examples
include an energy use index and a study to investigate right-sizing of commercial rooftop HVAC
systems developed for Idaho Power by the Idaho Integrated Design Lab (IDL). Some examples of
regional studies include I) the Distrbution Efficiency Initiative, which was a study managed by NEEA
to determine effcient ways to design and operate distrbution feeders through voltage regulators,
2) a regional study to evaluate the energy-savings potential of ductless heat pumps, and 3) measurement
of the impacts of light-emitting diode lighting. Other regional analyses in which Idaho Power actively
participated included the Commercial Building Stock Assessment and market progress evaluations.
Included in this Supplement are copies of all evaluations, research studies, and customer surveys
performed in 2008 and 2009. Also attached is a CD containing NEEA Market Effects Evaluations.
Page 2 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
Idaho Power Company Supplement 2: Evaluation
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
The MOU entered on December 21, 2009 between Idaho Power, A vista Utilities, PacifiCorp, and the
IPUC staff that details the prudency determination ofDSM expenditures.
Demand-Side Management 2009 Annual Report Page 3
MEMORANPUM OF UNDERSTANDING
FOR PRUDENCY DETERMINATION OF DSM EXPENDITURES
This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is entered into on.this 21st day of
December 2009 between Idaho Power Company ("Idaho Power") , Avista Utilties,
PacifCorp (d/b/a Rocky Mountain Power) (collecively "the Utilties" and individually as
"the utilty"), and the Staff of the Idaho Public Utilties Commission ("Staff'). All of the
above-named entities are hereinafter sometimes referred to collectively as "Parties" or
individually as "Part."
WIESSETH:
A. The Parties agree that there exists a need for the Utilities and Staff to
develop a common understanding of the basis upon which prudency of demand-side
management ("DSM") expenditures can be determined for purposes of cost recovery.
B. The Parties attended a workshop on October 5, 2009, to discuss the
contents of a more comprehensive utilit annual DSM report that would demonstrate a
commitment to, and accomplishment of, objective and transparent evaluation of DSM
effort. The agreed-upon principles ("guidelines") stemming from that workshop are set
out below.
C. A copy of Staffs expectations for DSM prudency review is included as
Attachment No.1. Although Utilties wil make a good fait effort to address Staffs
expectations in following these guidelines, Staff expectations are informational and the
Utilties wil not be bound by them in the context of this . Memorandum of Understanding.
D. The Parties recognize that implementation of the DSM prudency
guidelines and evaluation framework described below wil not automatically result in
MEI\0RANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - 1
DSM prudency findings. Instead, even with their implementation, future DSM prudency
findings wil require the preparation of a formal filng with the Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the parties agree as
follows:
Utilty DSM Annual Report Requirements
1. Template. Idaho Powets 2008 Demand-Side Management Annual
Report wil be used as a starting point template for enhanced reports beginning with
reports for 2009 DSM operations and results. Elements like those found in Idaho
Power's 2008 report wil be included in each Utilty's annual report for Idaho programs
that reporting year, clearly identifying Idaho-specific data and narratives. The DSM
annual reports may be filed as stand-alone documents or as a combination of
documents (e.g., combined with a DSM business plan) that together fulfll the
agreements in this MOU.
2. Table of Contents. Each annual DSM report wil contain a table of
contents that references all items specrfed below, including the appendix where the
Cost-Effectiveness and Evaluation Table can be found.
3. Highlights or Introduction Section. Each annual DSM Report wil include
an initial overview of:
a. Process evaluations begun or completed during the previous year,
modifications to DSM processes that resulted from those evaluations, and planned
process evaluations and modifications for the coming year.
b. Impact evaluations begun or completed during the previous year,
modifications to DSM programs that resulted from those evaluations, and planned
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - 2
impact evaluations for the coming year. This section wil also highlight updates of
assumptions or reference reports used in assessing cost-effectiveness during the past
year and those expected to be reviewed in the coming year.
4. Cost-Effectiveness Section. Each DSM annual report wil include a Cost-
Effectiveness section and table listing individual programs/measures and the basis for
estimates of their cost-effectiveness, i.e., formulas, data inputs and assumptions, and
source/rationale for each datum and assumption, including the date of the source.
5. Evaluation Secton. Each DSM annual report wil include an Evaluation
section and table showing the schedule for evaluations, including impact assessment,
assumptions, source review, the schedule for field impact measurement, and
completion date. If this schedule is not included, a reasonable explanation for why such
a schedule, in whole or in part, is not necessary wil be included.
a. It is anticipated that over a reasonable frequency cycle (e.g., 2 to 3
years), all substantial programs wil have undergone process and impact evaluations.
However, Staff agrees that the initial evaluation cycles may be longer for 2008 and 2009
programs until these guidelines are fully implemented.
b. A copy of each DSM evaluation completed since filing the previous
DSM annual report will be included as an appendix to the annual DSM report, as well as
any confidential cost information that are not included. .The utilty wil supplement its
DSM report with any confidential cost information once the Staff has signed a protective
ag reement with the utilit.
6. Program Specific Secton. Program-specifc sections of the annual DSM
Report wil be reported by sector or by customer class, with a description of each
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ~ 3
individual program offered in the sector or customer class, and wil include a list of
measures within each program.
a. Process Evaluation. Each program-specifc section will have a
process evaluation description that includes:
i. Program implementation modifications undertaken during
the course of the year and the rationale behind the change(s).
ii. Other process issues identified during the course of the year.
iii. Any formal process evaluation undertken during the year.
iv. Total process evaluation cost, inclusive of both utilty-
provided and contract-provided services, and names of primary outside evaluators
conducting process evaluations and titles of internal evaluators. The DSM Report wil
indicate which cost information is considered confidential; each utilty wil supplement its
DSM report with any program evaluations containing confidential proprietary information
once the Staff has signed a protective agreement with the utilty.
v. Process changes completed or planned during the upcoming
year, if any.
b. Impact and Cost-effectiveness Evaluation. Each program-specific
section wil include an impact and cost-effectiveness evaluation description including:
i. Primary assumptions and source (with year source was
produced) used in the initial determination of cost-effectiveness.
ii. Primary assumptions and source (with year source was
produced) used to determine postimplementation impact and cost-effectiveness.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - 4
iii. Any changes from initial determination (or last evaluation)
used for current cost-effectiveness evaluation and the reason for the change (such as
updated assumptions, source or field measurement).
iv. Planned cycle for reassessment of cost-effectiveness
assumptions or measurement.
v . Total impact evaluation cost, inclusive of both utilty-provided
and contract-provided services, and names of primary outside evaluators and titles of
inside evaluators. The DSM Report wil indicate which cost information is considered
confidential; each utilty wil supplement its DSM report with any program evaluations
containing confidential proprietary information once the Staff has signed a protective
agreement wit the utilit.
vi. Changes in program due to evaluation results.
c. Market Effects Evaluations. Each program-specific secton wil
describe any market effects evaluations that have been planned or completed by or for
the utilty, including those planned or completed by the Northwest Energy Effciency
Allance that are pertinent to any programs for which the utilit is claiming electricity
savings or other impact.
7. Expenses Without Direct Energy Savings. As discussed in the October 5
workshop. the ~tilties have expenses associated with DSM-related activties for which
they do not claim energy savings. Expenses associated with non-quantifiable energy
saving programs and initiatives, including but not limited to, infrastructure, education,
outreach, and research, wil be identified in the DSM annual reports and may be
considered reasonable and necsary expenses for a broad based DSM portolio.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - 5
Reasonable evaluations of such programs and efforts, commensurate with their costs,
wil be accomplished and reported. The Utilities wil include these expenses in the
calculations which determine a cost-effective DSM portolio.
Prudency Determination
8. A utility may request a DSM prudency review at any time.
9. The Parties recognize that planning, implementing, and evaluating DSM
programs are not a precise science; they require the application of judgment and
experience. Utilties are encouraged to continually review these programs and make
appropriate program improvements.
10. Within that context, review of utilty demand-side management expenses
for prudency shall take into consideration utilty compliance with the planning,
evaluation, and reporting guidelines listed above. A showing by the utility that it made a
good faith effort to reasonably perform within these guidelines wil constitute prima facie
evidence that the utilty's DSM expenses were prudently incurred for cost recovery
purposes. By its performing within these guidelines, assuming there is no, evidence of
imprudent actions or expenses, the utility can reasonably expect that in the ordinary
course of business Staff wil support full cost recovery of its DSM program expenses.
Treatment of 2008 and 2009 Expenditures
11. Recognizing that their 2008 DSM reports have already been filed, the
Utilties need not amend those reports, but instead wil combine evaluation reporting for
2008 with 2009 in their 2009 reports to be filed in 2010. Because it is not possible to
comply exactly with the requirements listed above for the historical expenses of 2008
and 2009, Parties agree to include as many components as possible in the 2010 Annual
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - 6
DSM Report. Staff agrees to provide resonable and necessry leeway for the
implementation of the guidelines descbed in this MOU for the .201 0 t)SM report..
12. Staff agrees tha.t Avista utilties may re-file. its 2008 DSM prudency
requests that. were deferrd in. AVU-E;"9-Q1 a.nd AVU-GQ-Q1 as full-year prudency
requests that Will notbeoppòSè .by Sta.
Commission. Not Bound by this Memorandum of UnderstandÎng
1ä' The paities to .this. Memorandum of Understatidm9..acknowledge that the
Commission Staff binds only ltelf and. has no explicit or Implicit authodty to bind. the
Idaho PUblic Utilities commission.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, th Parts hereto have caused this Memorandum to
be exected in their respective names on the dates set.ort beloW.
Dated this ÃsJ 'day of Seeeffàèr 2009.~~::ID IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES
COMM'SSION STAfF
'It!
Dated this ii~y of December 2009.
By~J/.~
Reprentitl the Idaho Public
utUlies Commission Staff
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
, rJ
Dated this.2 day of December 2009.AVISTA UTILIIES
Bylfl/-. rn~r\r .
epresenting Avista Utilties
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - 7
Dated this 2? day of December 2009.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - 8
ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER
ATTACHMENT NO.1
Staff Expectations for Cost-Effectiveness Tests, Methods and Evaluations
1. Cost Effectiveness Measurements. As stated at the October 5, 2009,
DSM evaluation workshop, Staff believes that prudent DSM management requires that
cost-effectiveness be analyzed from a wide variety of perspectives, including the
ratepayer impact perspective, and that all programs and individual measures should
have the goal of cost-effectiveness from the total resource, utilty, and participant
perspectives. (See IPUC Order No. 22299 issued January 27, 1989, and Order No.
28894 issued November 21, 2001.) If a partcular measure or program is pursued in
spite of the expectation that it wil not, itself, be cost-effctive from each of those three
perspectives, then the annual DSM report should explain why the measure or program
was implemented or continued.
2. Net-to-Gross Adjustments. , The net-to-gross issue was also discussed at
the evaluation workshop. Some of the references that the utilties assert that they use,
such as the California Standard Practice Manual, actually require that all tests be done
on a net savings basis. Staff continues to assert that most programs and measures
have a signifcant number of participants who would have installed the measure or
changed their behavior in the absence of the utilty program. Absent new evaluation
research to provide a basis for the net-to-gross adjustments used by each utilty, the
utilit has the burden of explaining the source of its net savings adjustments or lack
thereof. Staff wil continue to assess whether utilty cost-effectiveness estimates
sufficiently and prudently include net-to-gross adjustments.
3. Third-Part Evaluators. Independence of evaluators from program and
portolio management is another important issue that was discussed at the evaluation
workshop. While it was generally agreed that not all evaluations need to be penormed
by third-part evaluators, Staff believes such evaluations tend to be perceived as being
more objective and transparent, and thus more credible, than evaluations penormed by
utilty staff, all other factors being equal. While Staff wil review all evaluations and may
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - 9
review any evaluation in depth, utilities should expect that their self-evaluations may be
scrutinized more closely than third-part evaluations, as may the programs themselves.
4. Estimating Non-Energy Benefits. Non-energy benefits are important and
prudent factors to assess in analyzing cost-effectiveness and determining incentive
levels, but Staff cautions against cre~ting confusion by subtracting the estimated value
of non-energy benefits from program and measure costs when reporting DSM costs on
a cents per kWh basis.
5. Contractor Costs. After DSM reports are filed in 2010, Staff may
reconsider whether to require inclusion of specific contract amounts paid to contractors
in subsequent DSM reports.
6. Suggested Resources. In addition to the several evaluation,
measurement, and cost-effectiveness manuals that were discussed at the workshop,
Staff suggests it may be useful for utilties to generally follow the guidelines in the
National Action Plan for Energy Effciency's Model Energy Effciency Program Impact
Evaluation Guide, released November 2007. Another of NAPEE's reports titled
Understanding Cost-Effectiveness of Energy Effciency Programs: Best Practices,
Technical Methods, and Emerging Issues for Polícy-Makers may also be usefuL.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING - 10
Supplement 2: Evaluation Idaho Power Company
EVALUATION PLAN
Idaho Pow Compny
CUstomer Retions and Ene Efficiey
Resech aid Evallin Pln, as of Mah 2010, su. to eli
Yea 200 201 202
Mah 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 91011 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 t
ReB ErJusSu
Pr ram Pr amT Eviiatn Sel
llftProcCos.Effív
11iKX1ProCastÆfl1rrProcCos.Effi¥1rr
PrcxC06.Effe_1lfProc
Cos,Effív1rrPro
cos-Effív1lf1ProcCas-Effív1rrProCos-Effi¥1rr
ProcC06-Effi¥1rrProcC06.Eff_1rrProC06.El"'i¥
AJ COO Crad! Dannd Res
Ductles Hea P'rr Pil Enegy EIfm:
Enegy EfficlJir Eneg( Effic
Enegy HO\ Cals Enegy Eff
ENERGY STAR Hoo Ncihwoo Enegy Eff
Hoing 1\ Coong Eftiaei Progam Enegy Eff
Hem I~ri Prog Energy Eff
Hem Prods Progam Enegy Effic
Rebe .A¡¡ Eneg( Effic
See Ya Laer RerigalOl Erig( Effic
Resia Ene Eff EdUio Enegy Eff
In¡Hat~'l
BUlng Effency EnergyEffíc 1rrProcCoo-Effivllft
ProcCos-Effív1rrPro
C06-Effeci¥1rrProcCoo-Eff_1lf
Precs
Cos-Effeciv
Eas Upg Energ/EfIy
Irrf'
Coo-Effecivllft
ProcsCos.Effeciv
FIePea Mar Der Res
Page 14 Demand-Side Management Annual Report 2008
HdiOOUgliir Erig( Effic
Custm E1"iiy Enegy Effic
lrngtio ElW Rewarm EnegyEffíc
irrigio Peak Rewarm Der Res
Idaho Power Company Supplement 2: Evaluation
ENERGY EFFICIENCY ADVISORY GROUP MINUTES
The following pages include minutes from EEAG meetings held on February 19,2009, June 6, 2009,
and October 20,2009.
Demand-Side Management 2009 Annual Report Page 15
Energy Effciency Advisory Group (EEAG)
Minutes dated February 19th, 2009
Present:
Celeste Becia*-Idaho Power Co. Nancy Hirsh-Northwest Energy Coalition
Catherine Chertdi-City of Boise, Public Works Dept Ken Eklund-Office of Energy Resources
Lyn Anderson-Idaho Public Utilities Commssion Lyn Young-AARP
Mike Youngblood*-Idaho Power Co. Theresa Paige-Paige Mechanical Group
Tom Eckman-Northwest Power & Conservation Council
Ken Robinette-South Central Community Action Partership
Don Sturevant-Simplot
Not Present:
Dean Stevenson-Idaho Irrigation Pumpers Assoc
Lyn Kittleson-Oregon Public Utilties Commission
Robin Thomgren-Healthwise
Guests and Presenters*:
Pete Pengily*-Idaho Power Co.
Mike Darrngton-Idao Power Co
Patti Best-Idaho Power Co
Warren Kline-Idaho Power Co
Andrea Simmonsen-Idaho Power Co
Ron Whitney-Northwest Energy Coalition
Donn English-IPUC
Danielle Gidding-Idaho Power Co.
Cory Read-Idaho Power Co.
Theresa Drae-Idao Power Co.
Cheryl Paoli-Idaho Power Co.
Shelley Martin-Idaho Power Co.
Ken Miler -Snake River Allance
Matt Elam-IPUC
Recording Secretary: Shawn Lovewell-Idaho Power Co with Mike Darrngton-Idaho Power Co.
Meeting convened at 9:40 am
9:40- Celeste Becia welcomed the group. Attendees and guest briefly introduced themselves. The previous
meeting minutes were reviewed and acknowledged by the members. No changes were indicated for the minutes.
9:45 - 2008 Review, 2009 Preview *(please refer to the presentation slides along with the minutes.)
Before Celeste presented the slides to the group, she informed the group that one of the department's goals of
creating program handbooks was realized. Each of the program specialists created a handbook for their individual
programs. One of these was passed around for review. The ACEEE State Energy Efficiency Scorecard slide was
highlighted. Idaho Power increased program energy savings by 30% from 2006 to 2007 and was ranked 13th
overall. Celeste gave highlights and previews for each of the energy effciency programs.
Easy Upgrades-The actual savings for 2008 include the Vending Miser promotion. The 2009 goals for
this program are more conservative due to the economy. Results as of February 9th 2009 show a savings
of more than 5,000,000 kWh and a load reduction of more than 900 kW from roughly 140 final
applications.
Custom Effciency- This program partners with Idaho Design Lab frequently, therefore the contract with
them was increased for 2009. They are instrumental in helping customers with planning and
implementing their energy efficiency projects.
Building Effciency-The 2008 target was far exceeded due in part to a large number of schools
participating in this program as well as a 60 day application deadline that was implemented in February
2008.
Commercial Demand Response- This will be a demand response program available to customers taking
service under Rate Schedule 9 and 19. There was some discussion by the group regarding the length of
an event as well as whether or not we wil be fiing in Idaho and Oregon. . Theresa Drake let the group
know that we wil be filing a tariff in both Idaho and Oregon.
Residential Energy Effciency-Idaho Power participates in many community events to raise the level of
awareness in residential energy effciency. They are also looking to larger corporate events in order it
educate more people. Idaho Power is also doing weekly radio spots on the Home Fix Radio Show. Idaho
Power has 20 events scheduled from now until mid July. Idaho Power wil is also in the process of
translating our book, 30 Simple Things You Can Do To Save Energy into the Spanish language.
Weatherization Solutions for Eligible Customers-Idaho Power is targeting 45-60 homes in the Twin
Falls area that are just above the low income threshold.
AlC Cool Credit-Through a partnership with the Idaho Food Bank Idaho Power provided $20 to the
Food Bank for each new enrolled participant in the Program. Through January we have received 2,392
new signups. The target goal in 2009 for this program is 12,000 new enrolled participants. This year, the
Program wil be expanded to the Twin Falls and Pocatello regions. This Program is one of our main
focuses at all of the community events. One member asked ifthere was an opportnity to include other
customer groups in this Program. Celeste informed the group that we are planning to offer a similar
Program for small commercial customers, but the cost-effectiveness for this expansion has been diffcult
to confirm. Based on the Company's research, the expected load reduction per participant varies widely.
In addition, Honeywell has increased the price for installations on commercial customers. Andrea
Simmonsen also added that the thermostat might be a more attractive option for the small commercial
customer, but they are more expensive to install. One member commented that she found it hard to
imagine that a program that targets peak demand is not cost effective. It was decided that Idaho Power
would conduct a pilot program this sumer for commercial customers to test actual demand reduction at
their facilities.
Heating and Cooling Program-It has been determned that keeping the tune-up measure as well as
incenting the air conditioners is not cost effective and Idaho Power has decided at this time to remove
them from the program. More explanation of this program follows in the cost~effectiveness presentation.
ENERGY STAR(I Homes-One of the Home Pedormance Specialist has signed Hubble Homes as an
ENERGY STAR builder. They have an aggressive marketing plan in place with a planned 400-500
housing starts this year. One member wanted to know what percentage of the homes would be ENERGY
STAR. The group was told that it would be 100%. There was discussion surounding what Idaho
Power's plans are in regards to this program with the real estate market in the decline. Celeste informed
the group that Idaho Power's objective with this progrm is to increase the market share of ENERGY
STAR homes and position the Program for when the market rebounds.
Insulation Pilot-The name of this pilot was changed to Home Improvement program. It is expected that
other measures wil eventually be included in this program. Contractor trainings wil begin this spring.
There was some discussion on whether Idaho Power wil be including duct sealing into this program. The
Company is investigating duct sealing as a potential measure to offer in the Program.
Rebate Advantage program-This program has been affected by the housing downtur which in tu has
caused the actual numbers to be quite lower than the target.
Energy House CaUs- This program offers a free service to manufactured home owners. This program
has recently experienced a lower than expected participation rate and it has been challenging to reach
customers in the Pocatello and Twin Falls area. A short survey is being sent out to try and identify some
of the reasons why customers do not participate in the Program. One of the members pointed out that the
majority of manufactured home owners are seniors and historically they are more skeptical of "getting
something for nothing" which could be a barrer. There was discussion on what is the best way to get
access to some of these homes. One member stated that he found with this group, word of mouth is the
best form of advertising.
Home Products Program- This program is averaging 35 applications per day.
ENERGY STAR Lighting- This program is stil seeing the most savings from the residential sector. The
feedback that was received from a telephone surey showed that about half of Idaho Power's customers
have, on average, 10 CFL's in their homes.
Refrigerator Recycling-This program is slated to launch May 1st. Idaho Power wil be using a third
part, JACO, on recommendation ofEEAG. JACO says Idaho Power can expect about 1 % of customers
to participate.
Irrigation Peak Rewards- With the new dispatchable program being implemented, Idaho Power
anticipates a large demand reduction this year. The applications are being sent out to the customers.
Idaho Power has received approval for this program from the IPUC, and approval from the Oregon PUC
is expected soon.
11:00 Break
11:10 Cost-Effectiveness Methodology-Pete Pengily
Idaho Power's methodology for cost-effectiveness was presented. The Heating and Cooling Efficiency Progrm
was used as an example case. Slide #11 was discussed, which presented the analysis at the measure leveL. The
slide shows that measures for new SEER 13, 14, and 15 units are not cost-effective based on the total resource
cost (TRC). In addition, the measure for air conditioner and heat pump tune-ups are also not cost-effective.
Based on energy savings estimates from third-part consultants, the conclusion is that the energy savings and
demand reduction potential for air conditioning measures beyond code do not result in a high enough avoided cost
benefit to be cost-effective once all costs ofthe Program are included from the TRC perspective. Slide #12, titled:
'Program Level on 2008 Actuals', demonstrates that even when costs are weighted by measure, these same
measures are stil not cost-effective. The evaporative coolers wil stay in the program.
It was explained that the admnistrative costs were distrbuted among measures based on an allocation of the time
and resources, i.e. contractor training, associated with each measure. One member also asked why there was no
participation cost for the evaporative coolers. Pete answered that there is no code and that evaporative coolers are
cheaper than the SEER 13 air conditioners which are code; therefore, there is zero incremental cost to the
customer Idaho Power is considering co-marketing these with the Home Products program since they are usually
purchased in retail stores and self-installed.
Celeste sumarized by saying that we are moving forward with these changes to the program and the contractors
are being made aware of the changes. Idaho Power wil continue to evaluate this progrm going forward. One
member expressed their appreciation for explaining the evaluation process.
11 :45 Consumer Electronics Buy-down Opportnity-Celeste Becia
NEEA has developed a proposition for utilities to opt in to buy down the cost of a high efficiency
television. The long term strategy of this is to support a platform across the Northwest that is capable of
delivering key energy effcient consumer products for all major categories, including lighting and white Goods
and small electronics. It wil be structued similar to the CFL program. The consumer would get a lower price at
the point of purchase instead of requesting a rebate. The admnistrative cost would be very low for Idaho Power.
The savings opportity in 2009 would be limited because products are already manufactued and being shipped.
Getting involved now allows Idaho Power to have an influence in the incremental market share or in-store sales of
the Tier 2 TVs for 2009, and to begin influencing the 2010 and 2011 products.
Idaho Power would like to get feedback on this opportnity from the members ofEEAG. One member expressed
concern of giving money to retailers to produce new TV s that encourage disposal which in tur puts the burden on
the municipalities for disposal costs, and felt that the manufactuers should be responsible for bearing the brut of
disposal fees. The intent of this program is to influence the manufactuer to produce higher efficiency units.
The consumer needs to be made aware of what they are buying and the impact they can have by making smarter
purchases. One member stated that this is a growing area for energy efficiency and that leveraging with NEEA
makes sense. Overall, the EEAG supported the initiative. Celeste told the group that Idaho Power would look at
this as a pilot. Collaboration may be the best way for us to break into the plug load market, due to low per unit
energy savings.
12:15 Lunch
1:08 NEEA 2010-14 Funding Cycle - Celeste Becia
Celeste gave the history of NEE A and explained the fuding cycles. Idaho Power proposes a number of
reductions in the scope and cost of future NEEA activities. Idaho Power feels that these reductions are warranted
due to the expanded role of utilities in delivering energy efficiency savings to the region, the increase in fuding
for energy efficiency by the federal governent, the curent economic situation, and our regulatory environment.
Idaho Power supports three areas of focus over the next five years: regional research, regional trining and
education, and alliances and partnerships with national energy efficiency organizations and businesses. There
were some areas that Idaho Power believes should not be part ofNEEA's role in the Northwest. These areas
include program implementation and associated activities such as marketing, measurement, and potential impacts
of programs. NEEA is proposing programs whose savings rely on behavioral standards and changes, rather than
measures such as replacing inefficient equipment, where savings are more easily verified. Idaho Power feels it
has a lot of potential within its customer base to actually change out the equipment, which puts the company in a
different place than the rest of the region.
One member felt that tripling the ratepayer contribution to NEEA could be problematic. Another member
brought out that this is the lowest cost energy savings that Idaho Power is going to get and being able to leverage
that is the best investment for the rate payer in Idaho. Another member voiced concern that even though NEEA
has been involved in the past with the industrial programs, he feels that they have pulled back. He is not against
NEEA, but he doesn't feel that tripling contributions and then having them pull away from the industrial sector is
advantageous. One member felt that the contrbutions, being in a community pool, are in the end, all ratepayer
money. That being said, Idaho Power is participating in the same activities as other utilties and at different points
in time, all doing the same thing. Idaho Power should be careful that NEEA coordinates with the direction the
company is going, but to not pull out altogether.
Celeste informed the group that the purpose of this discussion was to bring forth some of the Company's
concerns. The proposed contributions that would be made over the next funding cycle would be equal to our
curent entire rider budget for one year. Idaho Power does not want to give the impression that they are pulling
out of NEE A. One member brought out that for the last year the Power Council and BPA convened stakeholders
in the region to look at the question of do we need to do more in the way of energy efficiency efforts. The
number one recommendation that came from that was that expanding the role of NEE A and to make sure that we
are using the regional entities. She also asked if the percentage of contributions to NEEA has gone up.
Celeste said that Idaho Power's percentage has increased; BPA's has decreased which is being picked up by some
of the larger IOU's in the region. Not only has Idaho Power's slice of the pie has increased, but the pie is now
larger, which has led to the proposed tripling of our contribution. NEEA' s path going forward is to get board
approval in ApriL. There is continued talk as to what wil be in the proposal. One of the outcomes could be the
tripling of these contributions. Idaho Power wanted to make the group to know that this could be a signficant
change in how much is received from the customer. One member asked if Idaho Power's local target of energy
savings wil be going up since NEEA's target wil go up. Another member felt that mixed signals were being
given from NEEA. He felt that they are wanting more money but wiling to deliver less. If contrbutions are
going up then he felt that they should be increasing the deliverables.
One member expressed her appreciation for this discussion and was glad that it was included in the meeting.
1:51 Energy Effciency and Integrated Resource Plan - Pete Pengily
Pete provided an overview of the relationship for energy efficiency program planning and development and the
Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). There was one question on the gas cost for the DSM alternative cost. Pete
explained that the DSM alternative variable costs are based on the Company's gas forecast from a variety of
sources. Pete also discussed how the energy savings and demand response forecasts are included in the IRP for
resource planning.
2:25 2008 Preliminary Financial & Energy Savings Report - Pete Pengily
Pete provided an overview of the preliminary appendices that will be included in the 2008 DSM Annual Report to
be completed on March 13,2009. These appendices show Energy Effciency Rider Expenses and program
performance. One member asked what the differences were between the total utility cost and the total resource
cost. Pete explained that the utilty cost is administrtion and labor and the total resource cost is the same without
the incentive calculated in.
2:45 Regulatory Issues - Mike Youngblood
Mike presented and explained some of the curent regulatory issues facing Idaho Power. These include the
Company's General Rate Case, Energy Affordability Workshops, S02 Emission Proceeds, Energy Efficiency
Rider, Automated Metering Infrastrctue, and the Federal Stimulus Package. There were some questions
regarding the Energy Effciency Rider. Mike indicated that it was important for the Company to obtain a
prudency recommendation from the IPUC regarding DSM expenditues. Mike discussed the challenges of
adequately funding new DSM Programs under the curent Energy Efficiency Rider.
3:00 Schedule next meeting
Celeste asked the group to think about possible dates for the next EEAG Meeting. Also, Idaho Power would be
open to any ideas from the group about future discussions. The group wil be discussing the annuàl report that
wil be coming out in March and everyone should be getting a copy of that.
3:04 Adjourn
Energy Effciency Advisory Group (EEAG)
Minutes dated June 11t\ 2009
Present:
Catherine Chertdi-eity of Boise, Public Works Dept
Lynn Young-AARP
Nancy Hirsh-Northwest Energy Coalition
Robin Thorngren-Healthwise
Tim Tatum*-Idaho Power
Don Stuevant -Simplot
Matt Elam- Idaho Public Utilities Commission
Pete Pengily*-Idaho Power
Sue Siefert-Office of Energy Resources
Not Present:
Dean Stevenson - Idaho Irrgation Pumpers Association
Ken Eklund - Offce of Energy Resources
Ken Robinette - South Central Community Action Partnership
Theresa Gibney - Oregon Public Utilities Commission
Tom Eckman - Northwest Power & Conservation Council
Guests and Presenters*:
Andrea Simmonsen-Idaho Power
Celeste Becia*-Idaho Power
Dave Thornton-Idaho Power
Jim Jauregui-Idaho Power
Mike Darrngton-Idaho Power
Quentin Nesbitt-Idaho Power
Shelley Martin-Idaho Power
Todd Schultz-Idaho Power
Bilie McWinn-Idaho Power
Cory Read-Idaho Power
Dennis Merrck-Idaho Power
Kathy Yi-Idaho Power
Mindi Shodeen-Idaho Power
Ron Whitney-Northwest Energy Coalition
Theresa Drake-Idaho Power
Recording Secretary: Shawn Lovewell-Idaho Power with Mike Darrngton-Idaho Power.
Meeting convened at 9:34 am
9:34 Pete welcomes the group. Kathy Yi and Todd Schultz were introduced to the group in their new
positions. The minutes were reviewed by the group and no changes were recommended.
9:40 2008 DSM Report-Pete Pengily
Copies of the annual report were passed out to the group. The structue of the Annual Report has changed
from previous years (see slide). For every program Idaho Power included the previous years along with
the current year. An appendix was added to include program history. One of the members asked how the
Northwest Energy Effciency Alliance (NEEA) comes up with their preliminary numbers. It was
explained that NEEA takes potential savings numbers from the region and subtracts estimated natually
occurrng energy savings from our programs. The regional numbers are allocated to Idaho Power as a
percentage of energy sales. NEEA made some adjustments to those numbers and allocated the adjusted
numbers back to Idaho Power according to its share of regional sales. Idaho Power is working with
NEEA and the Council to explore alternative methods for allocating regional energy savings to NEEA
members.
There was an error on the Demand response peak reduction slide (#9). The number on 2008 should be 58
not 54. One member suggested that Idaho Power sumarize totals within sector as average MW instead
of kWh. This same member liked the 'lessons learned' portion of the report.
10:03 Stimulus project with Boise City-Celeste Becia
Prior to the presentation, Celeste updated the group that Idaho Power has launched two residential
programs: The Home Improvement Program and See Ya Later Refrgerator progrm. One member asked
if Idaho Power was partnering with Intermountain Gas on the Home Improvement Program. Celeste
stated that Intermountain Gas Company has no energy effciency funding mechanism in place at this time
and that their energy efficiency efforts are limited to education.
In regards to the stimulus fuding, Idaho Power has partered with the City of Boise to submit a proposal
for residential home audits and direct measure install. At this time the City Council has approved the
proposal and the next step wil be submitting this proposal to DOE. The City of Boise is requesting
$400,000 and has identified Idaho Power as the sub-grantee in their proposaL. The proposal slides were
explained. There was discussion among the group on how to identify customers and the age of the homes
being audited. Celeste said Idaho Power would explore these ideas and discuss with the City to develop a
successful approach to identify paricipants. Durng the presentation of the home visit slide there was a
discussion among the group about the different measures that wil be offered. A few suggestions from the
group that were given included adding weather strpping and installing low flow shower heads. A
question was raised about whether or not Home Pedormance Specialists wil be part of this program.
Celeste is counting on them to be part of this and the Office of Energy Resources has been contacted to
find out if this would be something they could participate in.
10:33 Break
10:53 Demand Response Summer Preview-Celeste Becia
Energy use and peak demand are increasing but peak demand is increasing at a faster rate.
The Flex Peak program was discussed. Idaho Power hired a third par aggregator. The customers
eligible for this program are large commercial and industriaL. The program management aspects were
discussed with the group.
The AIC Cool Credit program updates were given. As of the date of the EEAG meeting, the program
now has over 28,000 participants. The program has expanded to other areas of the service terrtory.
Pocatello has seen about a 5-6% response rate. The program expects to participate in co-marketing with
the Food Bank again in the future. Celeste passed around the Seed Paper and marketing brochure that
was used in a direct mailing to customers. One of the members asked if Idaho Power has looked at the
load shifting of this program. Are customers overcooling their homes prior to a cycling event. Celeste
indicated that Idaho Power is doing some end use metering and temperature monitoring this summer, and
results should be available at a later date. An importnt part of this program is customer comfort, so
Idaho Power tries not to call events more than three days in a row.
(Question about the information of highlighted area)
The AlC Cool Credit Commercial pilot slide was discussed. Idaho Power is waiting for commission
approvaL. The goal is to have 200 customers enrolled. The Field Reps have been out talking to
customers. There are stil many variables which is why Idaho Power would like to do this pilot to assess
the peak load reduction potential available.
The Irrigation Peak Rewards program cycling season wil be starting in a week. Idaho Power wil be
reporting back to the group at the fall meeting with the results of these programs.
One of the members asked if Idaho Power has a typical model customer in mind for the Commercial
Demand Response programs. Celeste stated that Idaho Power is looking at measures that wil be most
cost effective for customers that use chunks of energy such as national chain stores, box stores. The third
part aggregator that is being used is experienced at finding potential in these types of customers.
11:50 Lunch and rooftop tour ofldaho Power solar PV systems with Scott Gates.
1:18 Meeting Reconvened
1:25 Regulatory Update-Tim Tatum
Slides were shown to the group. When the Fixed Cost Adjustment slide was shown, there was a question
from the group on how the cost for Automated Metering Infrastructure (AMI) investment was to be
allocated among the customer classes. It was explained that the overall increase of i .83% would apply to
all customer classes receiving AMI meters. There was also a request from one of the members to explain
the Energy Efficiency piece of AMI. It was explained that these meters can provide a wide variety of
customer information which could aid Idaho Power in helping design programs to fit the needs of the
customer as well as enabling the company to offer pricing that wil encourage customers to make energy
efficient choices. When the Annual Power Cost Update (APCU) slide was shown, one member asked if
Idaho Power had seasonal rates. Tim explained that Idaho Power has tiered rates in both sumer and
winter, and as early as 2010 we could see time of use pricing for a broader customer base. The Schedule
9 customers are the only ones that do not have tiered rates or time variant pricing. As smart meter
installation is completed, time variant pricing wil be pursued through the regulatory process as an option.
2:191st Quarter Financial & Savings Report-Pete Pengily
A handout was passed out to the group.
In the last couple years Idaho Power has been working on the data reporting and retreval systems. The
financial reporting has been by month and quarter and the energy savings were outlined. . One member
commented on the first slide that shows Idaho Power's top programs for the first quarer, that if this pace
was projected for the year, Idaho Power wil have a baner year once again. Celeste said that the Easy
Upgrades progrm has seen a huge increase in lighting projects and that it is the first time that this
program has outperformed the Custom Effciency Program. It has been a relatively easy program for
customers to participate in. One member commented that it provides a nice model for other utilities for
follow. One member had a question in regards to the Total Resource Cost (TRC) and ifIdaho Power
looked at cutting anything in relation to the Heating and Cooling Effciency Program. It was explained
that Idaho Power has dropped several measures. Some of those measures were due to changes that have
been made in regard to the building code. Idaho Power is always evaluating and pursuing cost effective
programs. The Heating and Cooling Efficiency progrm is a perfect example of a program that didn't
meet expectations of cost effectiveness but has been modified as new information became available.
One of the members congratulated Idaho Power for partnering with the Idaho Food Bank in marketing the
AlC Cool Credit program. This member also would like to get all of his employees engaged in energy
efficiency efforts and offered to pass on information to them from Idaho Power.
2:50 The date and time for the next meeting was discussed. The group agreed that an October meeting
time would work for most. An email wil be sent to the members with potential dates and a decision wil
be made from the feedback that is received.
2:55 Meeting adjourned.
Energy Efficiency Advisory Group (EEAG)
Minutes dated October 20th, 2009
Present:
Catherine Chertudi-City of Boise, Public Works Dept
Ken Robinette-South Central Comm. Action Partnership
Nancy Hirsh-Northwest Energy Coalition
Sid Erwin-Idaho Irrigation Pumpers Assoc.
Mike Youngblood-Idaho Power
Tom Eckman-Northwest Power &Conservation Council
Not Present:
Brady Peeks-Oregon Dept. of Energy
Theresa Gibney-Oregon Public Utilities Commission
Guests and Presenters*:
Pete Pengily*-Idaho Power
Lynn Anderson-Idaho Public Utilities Commission
Sheree Willhite-Idaho Power
Quentin Nesbit-Idaho Power
Dennis Merrick-Idaho Power
Theresa Drake-Idaho Power
Ryan Hartnett-Idaho Power
Andrea Simmonsen-Idaho Power
Barb Jensen-Idaho Power
Don Sturtevant -Simplot
Matt Elam-Idaho Public Utilities Commission
Lynn Young-AARP
Ken Eklund - Office of Energy Resources
Jim Coles-Design West Architects
Celeste Becia*-Idaho Power
Tim Tatum*-Idaho Power
Rochelle Jensen-Idaho Power
Mike Darrington-Idaho Power
Kathy Yi-Idaho Power
Todd Schultz-Idaho Power
Cory Read-Idaho Power
Dave Thornton-Idaho Power
Shelley Martin-Idaho Power
Warren Kline-Idaho Power
Recording Secretary: Shawn Lovewell-Idaho Power with Mike Darrington-Idaho Power.
Meeting convened at l1:ooam
11:00-Celeste welcomed the group. Guests and new employees were introduced to the group and the
minutes from 06/11/09 were reviewed.
Before the first presentation was started, one member asked if the EEAG group could have a discussion
of the Evaluation, Measurement and Verification (EM&V) at the next scheduled meeting.
11:10 2nd Quarter Financial & Savings Report-Pete Pengily
Pete presented the Progress Report slide to the group. So far Idaho Power has reached 96% of its energy
saving targets this year. The targets are for the entire year, and reaching them doesn't indicate that
energy savings stops. These numbers do not show anything that is in the pipeline, only what has been
paid to date. One of the members commended Idaho Power in continuing to show an excellent trend of
exceeding targets set. A question was asked that, since targets are exceeded, does it seem that the
targets are too conservative, and that maybe some adjustments need to be made. Pete brought out
that these targets are for employees and managers and are used as a gauge only.
(1)
Celeste pointed out that some of the residential program savings are lower due to when the program
started, and Holiday Lighting is lower since it doesn't start until mid to end of the year. Pete showed the
Appendix 1 slide to the group that displayed the total expenditures for the year up to the 3rd quarter.
One of the members asked if the monitoring and evaluation will be included here, and how much of the
total expenditures are dedicated to EM&V. Pete explained that EM&V costs are assigned to the
applicable program's work orders and that it is an expense of the individual program. Currently,
approximately 1 Yi percent of the budget is dedicated to EM&V.
The next slide shown was of the Idaho Rider/Oregon Rider/BPA and NEEA funding balances. One
member asked if Idaho Power accrues interest on funds it pays out when the rider funding is in deficit.
It was brought out that the IPUC has authorized Idaho Power 2% interest. One member stated that it
would be helpful to see the cost effectiveness of the programs on this slide and asked if that could be
added in the future. Pete mentioned that it is published in Appendix 4 in the DSM Annual Report.
Appendix 3 gives the levelized cost for each program, but a levelized cost snapshot could be provided at
either the winter or spring meeting.
11:40 Demand Response Summer Results-Pete Pengily
Pete informed the group that the numbers presented in the slide are not finaL. These numbers will be
finalized in the DSM Annual Report as well as the Irrigation Report. As it turned out, 2009 was a great
summer for learning how to use the demand response programs. The Company had significant demand
response resources available, but due to relatively mild weather conditions the Company took
advantage of the opportunity to develop strategies for initiating demand response events more
efficiently. Members inquired whether or not the system peak demand was being shifted and if the
Company was experiencing snap-back effects from demand response. It was explained that much
depends on the load forecast and the daily weather. The Company can dispatch events in a manner that
ramps load reduction up and down to reduce impacts on the system load.
Other discussion was based on how the demand response was valued. It was explained that the value of
demand response to the Company is not dependent on the market price of electricity, but is valued at
the avoided capacity cost of a peaker plant as part of the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) process.
Another question was asked on the status of commercial air conditioning cycling. Celeste responded
that due to the uncertainty of load reduction capability of commercial air conditioners this program was
not approved by the IPUC last summer. The Company does offer the FlexPeak Management Program to
large commercial customers to participate in a demand response program.
12:10 IRP Energy Efficiency Forecast-Pete Pengily
Pete explained that the energy savings forecast that is used for the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) is
developed from several sources including utility program experience, the 2009 DSM potential study, and
other regional studies including the Draft Sixth Power Plan for the Northwest. Some potential new
measures from the IRP process were shown to the group. These new measures will be reviewed for
inclusion in programs.
One member asked if the CFL load reduction is reflected in the load forecast. Pete explained that the
expected reduction in energy savings from lighting code changes were included in the energy savings
forecast.
Pete also provided an Idaho Power website address, www.idahopower.com where some of the
Company's studies are available.
(2)
12:30-Lunch
1:18 Meeting reconvened
1:20-Proposed Program Changes for 2010-Celeste Becia
Celeste presented proposed new measures to the existing programs. It was pointed out that the Home
Improvement Program is very cost effective for customers. Idaho Power is looking at the cost
effectiveness of adding a heat pump water heater measure to the program. One of the issues with the
heat pump water heaters is that they have cold air waste; it could interfere with the heating load of a
home. There was some discussion in the group around studies done on the efficiency of these types of
water heaters. One member managed a study done of exhaust air heat pumps. It was found that there
wasn't much appreciable heating loads on these buildings if they are set up for the heat pump to grab
the exhaust air and return it to the heat pump.
The Ductless Heat Pump Pilot will continue into 2010. The criteria changed this year for the program. It
is no longer a requirement to declare residency in the home after installation. Going forward, forced air
furnaces would be disallowed and peripheral gas usage would be allowed. One member asked why
customers with forced air furnaces could not participate in the program. Shelley informed the group
that it is hard to isolate the actual energy savings when a forced air furnace is present. Customers would
still need to run a furnace to keep the rest of the home heated.
The Irrigation Programs have a few proposed changes. Quentin Nesbitt explained to the group that
currently the Green Motors program pays an incentive to have pump motors re-wound to NEEA
standards. If the customer uses a participating shop that is qualified, the customer gets an incentive. As
it stands right now, this is not a well known option for irrigation customers. Idaho Power wants to
include this in the program material as a way of advertising this option to customers.
Regarding the hardware measures in the Irrigation Efficiency Rewards program, the Company is
participating in the Regional Technical Forum's review of the 'deemed measures' which might help to
identify needs for evaluation. All of the menu items are repair items that are related to leaky systems.
It is estimated that more than half of incentives are paid out on the menu program.
Quentin handed out a slide to the members on the Peak Rewards Program that was not on the Power
Point presentation. He explained to the group that Idaho Power would like to extend the end date from
July 31st to August 15th. Idaho Power would also like to change the cycling times from 2-8pm to 1-8pm,
and also add Saturday. This would not extend the hour limits, but just give Idaho Power more flexibility
within the new time frame. These proposals wil be filed with the Idaho Public Utilities Commissions
within the next month. One member expressed that this program is well received by the irrigation
customers and that the new changes seem appropriate and should not be difficult to add.
2:45 NEEA Contract-Celeste Becia
Celeste updated the group from the last EEAG Meeting regarding NEEA and the function they serve and
reminded them of the significant jump in contributions Idaho Power is being asked to commit.
Currently, Idaho Power is still in negotiations with NEEA for the renewal of the contract with them.
One member asked if funding for this would come out of the existing rider balance, and if so would that
mean that this would be a reduction in program incentives. Celeste replied that every budgeted item
keeps you from doing some other budgeted item. Idaho Power is determining how those savings occur
(3)
and making sure that all expenditures are prudent. (On October 30th, Celeste sent an email to the EEAG
members clarifying her answer. A copy of her email is attached.)
Idaho Power would like to have more accountabilty from NEEA and have the energy savings more
10cal.One member continues to struggle with the increase in contributions and everything that NEEA
does. He asked that during the next meeting if Idaho Power would explain their function so that he
would be more informed before he votes in favor of increasing the contribution amounts.
2:49 DSM Incentive Workshop-Tim Tatum
Tim informed the members that the Idaho Offce of Energy Resources and Idaho Power had convened a
series of workshops. The purpose of the workshops is to explore performance-based DSM incentive
mechanisms that would make sense for Idaho Power. There are a several approaches from other utilties
that are being reviewed including capitalization of energy efficiency investment, shared savings, and
fixed percentage of targets. It is expected that the workshops will be completed by the end of 2009, or
early 2010.
3:00 Meeting adjourned
(4)
From: Becia, Celeste
sent: Friday, October 30,20093:18 PM
To: 'Catherine Chertudi'; 'Don Sturtevant'; Jim Coles ücoles(Qdesignwestid.com); 'Ken Eklund'; 'Ken
Robinette'; 'Lynn Anderson'; 'Lynn Young'; 'Nancy Hirsh'; Theresa Gibney; 'Tom Eckman'; Youngblood,
Mike; Brady Peeks (R.BRADY.PeeksCWstte.or.us); Sid Erwin (erwinjICWhughes.net)
Cc: Drake, Theresa; Pengily, Pete; Tatum, Tim
Subjec: EEAG meeting notes clarification
Hello all;
After reviewing notes from the recent EEAG meeting, I wanted to clarify my response to Nancy
Hirsch's question regarding the impact of increased NEEA funding on the Rider funding mechanism,
and the Rider's ability to meet program needs.
As i said at the time, NEEA funding does come from the Rider, and there are many program demands
on this funding source. However, the Rider funding level does not drive the Company's decisions
regarding the level of energy efficiency program activity it pursues. Idaho Power is committed to
pursuing all cost-effective energy efficiency opportunities and will endeavor to secure a level of
funding that is adequate to support that goal. This philosophy is ilustrated by the almost $10 millon
deficit in the Rider at this time, and our continual commitment to new programs and measures as
presented during our meeting. I hope this clears up any misconceptions that may have occurred.
Have a good weekend,
Celeste
(5)
Su
p
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

2
:

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y
EA

M
A
R
K
E
T

E
V
A
L
U
A
T
I
O
N
Ta
b
l
e

1
.
NE
E
A

M
a
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
s
St
u
d
y
St
u
d
y
/
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
o
r
t

T
i
t
l
e
Ye
a
r
Pr
o
g
r
a
m

o
r

S
e
c
t
o
r
An
a
l
y
s
i
s

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
e
d

b
y
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Ty
p
e
Dis
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8
Al
l

S
e
c
t
o
r
s
Gl
o
b
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
,

L
L
C
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
NE
E
A

C
o
d
e
s

a
n
d

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

S
u
p
p
o
r
t

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8
Al
l

S
e
c
t
o
r
s
Qu
a
n
t
e
c
,

L
L
C
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R
'
I

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r

P
r
o
d
u
c
t
s

L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8
En
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
t

L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
KE
M
A
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
20
0
8
-
2
0
0
9

C
F
L

T
r
a
c
k
i
n
g

S
t
u
d
y

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
20
0
9
En
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
t

L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
KE
M
A
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R

H
o
m
e
s

N
o
r
t
h
w
e
s
t

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R

H
o
m
e
s

N
o
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
EC
O
N
o
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R

H
o
m
e
s

N
o
r
t
h
w
e
s
t

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
9
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R

H
o
m
e
s

N
o
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
EC
O
N
o
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
20
0
2
-
2
0
0
4

B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e

C
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s

o
f

t
h
e

N
o
n
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
e
c
t
o
r
20
0
8
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Ec
o
t
o
p
e
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Lo
n
g

T
e
r
m

M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g

a
n
d

T
r
a
c
k
i
n
g

R
e
p
o
r
t

o
n

2
0
0
8

A
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
20
0
8
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I

n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Su
m
m
i
t

B
l
u
e

C
o
n
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
,

L
L
C
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
No
n
-
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
r
o
m

N
W

E
n
e
r
g
y

C
o
d
e

C
h
a
n
g
e
s

2
0
0
5
-
2
0
0
8
20
0
8
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I

n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
NE
E
A
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Be
t
t
e
r
B
r
i
c
k
s

D
e
s
i
g
n

a
n
d

C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
PW
P
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Be
t
t
e
r
B
r
i
c
k
s

G
r
o
c
e
r
y

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Re
s
e
a
r
c
h

I
n
t
o

A
c
t
i
o
n
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Be
t
t
e
r
B
r
i
c
k
s

H
o
s
p
i
t
a
l

a
n
d

H
e
a
l
t
h
c
a
r
e

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
20
0
8
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Re
s
e
a
r
c
h

I
n
t
o

A
c
t
i
o
n
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Be
t
t
e
r
B
r
i
c
k
s

O
f
f
i
c
e

R
e
a
l

E
s
t
a
t
e

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Re
s
e
a
r
c
h

I
n
t
o

A
c
t
i
o
n
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Be
t
t
e
r
B
r
i
c
k
s

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
l
l
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Te
c
M
a
r
k
e
t

W
o
r
k
s
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

A
l
l
a
n
c
e

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Ca
d
m
u
s

G
r
o
u
p
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

S
t
o
c
k

A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
20
0
9
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Ca
d
m
u
s

G
r
o
u
p
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
20
0
8

B
e
t
t
e
r
B
r
i
c
k
s

O
v
e
r
a
l
l

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
9
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I

n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Re
s
e
a
r
c
h

I
n
t
o

A
c
t
i
o
n
,

I
n
c
.
,

e
t

a
l
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

A
l
l
a
n
c
e

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
9
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Ca
d
m
u
s

G
r
o
u
p
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Fo
r

N
E
E
A

r
e
p
o
r
t
s
,

s
e
e

t
h
e

C
D

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d

a
t

t
h
e

b
a
c
k

o
f

th
i
s

s
u
p
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
.
Pa
g
e

3
0
De
m
a
n
d
-
S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

A
n
n
u
a
l

R
e
p
o
r
t

2
0
0
8
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y
Su
p
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

2
:

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
EV
A
L
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
Ta
b
l
e

2
.

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
p
o
r
t

T
i
t
l
e
Ap
p
l
i
a
n
c
e

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s

A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

D
e
m
a
n
d
-
S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

D
e
m
a
n
d
-
S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y
,

A
p
p
e
n
d
i
c
e
s
Al
C

C
o
o
l

C
r
e
d
i
t

S
u
r
v
e
y
De
m
a
n
d

R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s

R
e
p
o
r
t
Du
c
t
l
e
s
s

H
e
a
t

P
u
m
p

M
a
r
k
e
t

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
20
0
8

C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r

E
n
e
r
g
y

H
o
u
s
e

C
a
l
l
s

S
u
r
v
e
y
20
0
9

C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r

E
n
e
r
g
y

H
o
u
s
e

C
a
l
l
s

N
o
n
-
P
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
n
t

S
u
r
v
e
y
20
0
9

S
u
m
m
a
r
y

Q
u
a
l
i
t
y

A
s
s
u
r
a
n
c
e

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8

H
e
a
t
i
n
g

&

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r

S
u
r
v
e
y
20
0
8

H
e
a
t
i
n
g

&

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r

S
u
r
v
e
y
20
0
8

H
e
a
t

P
u
m
p

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
a
v
i
n
g
s
20
0
9

H
e
a
t
i
n
g

&

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r

S
u
r
v
e
y
20
0
9

H
e
a
t
i
n
g

&

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r

S
u
r
v
e
y
20
0
9

H
e
a
t

P
u
m
p

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
a
v
i
n
g
s
At
t
c

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

I
m
p
a
c
t
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r

R
e
b
a
t
e

A
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e

S
u
r
v
e
y
De
a
l
e
r

R
e
b
a
t
e

A
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e

S
u
r
v
e
y
20
0
8

W
e
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

f
o
r

Q
u
a
l
i
f
i
e
d

C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s

(
W
A
Q
C
)

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

&

G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
B
u
i
l
d

S
m
a
r
t
20
0
8

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

&

G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
G
r
e
e
n
i
n
g

Y
o
u
r

H
o
m
e
20
0
8

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

&

G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
G
r
o
w
i
n
g

A
s
s
e
t
s
20
0
8

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

&

G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
N
o

E
a
s
y

A
n
s
w
e
r
s
20
0
8

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

&

G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
S
i
m
p
l
e

C
h
a
n
g
e
s
20
0
9

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

&

G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
C
o
n
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
s

o
f

a

G
r
e
e
n

G
e
e
k
20
0
9

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

&

G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
C
o
o
k
i
n
g

u
p

S
a
v
i
n
g
s
20
0
9

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

&

G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
G
e
t

Y
o
u
r

D
u
c
t
s

i
n

a

R
o
w
20
0
9

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

&
G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
I

H
a
t
e

M
y

B
o
n
u
s

R
o
o
m
St
u
d
y
St
u
d
y
/
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
Ye
a
r
Pr
o
g
r
a
m

o
r

S
e
c
t
o
r
An
a
l
y
s
i
s

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
e
d

b
y
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Ty
p
e
20
0
8
Al
l

S
e
c
t
o
r
s
Qu
a
n
t
e
c
,

L
L
C
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Re
s
e
a
r
c
h
/
I
m
p
a
c
t
20
0
9
Al
l

S
e
c
t
o
r
s
Ne
x
a
n
t
,

I
n
c
.
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
20
0
9
Al
l

S
e
c
t
o
r
s
Ne
x
a
n
t
,

I
n
c
.
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Po
t
e
n
t
a
i
l
20
0
8
Al
C

C
o
o
l

C
r
e
d
i
t
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
Al
C

C
o
o
l

C
r
e
d
i
t
Pa
r
a
g
o
n

C
o
n
s
u
l
t
i
n
g

S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Im
p
a
c
t
20
0
8
Du
c
t
l
e
s
s

H
e
a
t

P
u
m
p

P
i
l
o
t
NA
H
B

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

C
e
n
t
e
r
NE
E
A
Re
s
e
a
r
c
h
20
0
8
En
e
r
g
y

H
o
u
s
e

C
a
l
l
s
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
En
e
r
g
y

H
o
u
s
e

C
a
l
l
s
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
En
e
r
g
y

H
o
u
s
e

C
a
l
l
s
EC
O
S

C
o
n
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
8
He
a
t
i
n
g

a
n
d

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

Po
w
e
r

Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
8
He
a
t
i
n
g

a
n
d

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
8
He
a
t
i
n
g

a
n
d

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Ec
o
t
o
p
e
,

I
n
c
.
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Im
p
a
c
t
20
0
9
He
a
t
i
n
g

a
n
d

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
He
a
t
i
n
g

a
n
d

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
He
a
t
i
n
g

a
n
d

C
o
o
l
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Ec
o
t
o
p
e
,

I
n
c
.
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Im
p
a
c
t
20
0
8
Ho
m
e

I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
Ec
o
t
o
p
e
,

I
n
c
.
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Im
p
a
c
t
20
0
8
Re
b
a
t
e

A
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
8
Re
b
a
t
e

A
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
8
WA
Q
C
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Im
p
a
c
t
/
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
8
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
8
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
8
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
8
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
8
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
9
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
9
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
9
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
9
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

Po
w
e
r

Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
Pa
g
e

3
1
De
m
a
n
d
-
S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

2
0
0
9

A
n
n
u
a
l

R
e
p
o
r
t
Su
p
p
l
e
m
e
n
t

2
:

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y
Ta
b
l
e

2
.
Re
s
e
a
r
c
h

a
n
d

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
s

(
C
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Re
p
o
r
t

T
i
t
l
e
St
u
d
y
St
u
d
y
/
E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
Ye
a
r
Pr
o
g
r
a
m

o
r

S
e
c
t
o
r
An
a
l
y
s
i
s

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
e
d

b
y
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Ty
p
e
20
0
9
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
9
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
20
0
9
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
l
l
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Ca
d
m
u
s

G
r
o
u
p
,

I
n
c
.
NE
E
A
Im
p
a
c
t
20
0
9
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Id
a
h
o

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

D
e
s
i
g
n

L
a
b
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Re
s
e
a
r
c
h
/
I
m
p
a
c
t
20
0
9
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Id
a
h
o

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

D
e
s
i
g
n

L
a
b
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Re
s
e
a
r
c
h
/
I
m
p
a
c
t
20
0
9
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Ca
d
m
u
s

G
r
o
u
p
,

I
n
c
.
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
20
0
9
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
l
l
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Bo
i
s
e

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
Bo
i
s
e

S
t
a
t
e
Ma
r
k
e
t

E
f
f
e
c
t
s
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
20
0
9
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
/
I

n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Id
a
h
o

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

D
e
s
i
g
n

L
a
b
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

D
e
s
i
g
n

L
a
b
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Im
p
a
c
t
20
0
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

D
e
s
i
g
n

L
a
b
Id
a
h
o

Po
w
e
r

Im
p
a
c
t
20
0
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

D
e
s
i
g
n

L
a
b
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Im
p
a
c
t
20
0
9
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
Id
a
h
o

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

D
e
s
i
g
n

L
a
b
Id
a
h
o

Po
w
e
r

Im
p
a
c
t
20
0
8
Ea
s
y

U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
Ea
s
y

U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
Ea
s
y

U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
Fl
e
x
P
e
a
k

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

Po
w
e
r

Im
p
a
c
t
20
0
8
Ir
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

P
e
a
k

R
e
w
a
r
d
s
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Im
p
a
c
t
/
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
Ir
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

P
e
a
k

R
e
w
a
r
d
s
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

Po
w
e
r

Im
p
a
c
t
/
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9
Ir
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

P
e
a
k

R
e
w
a
r
d
s
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
20
0
9

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

&

G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
S
i
m
p
l
e

C
h
a
n
g
e
s

M
a
k
e

C
e
n
t
s
20
0
9

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

&

G
r
e
e
n

L
i
v
i
n
g

S
e
r
i
e
s
-
S
m
a
r
t

G
r
i
d

1
0
1
Be
t
t
e
r
B
r
i
c
k
s

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
a
v
i
n
g
s
Ri
g
h
t
s
i
z
i
n
g

o
f

R
o
o
f
t
o
p

H
V
A
C

S
y
s
t
e
m
s
En
e
r
g
y

U
s
e

I
n
d
e
x
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

S
t
o
c
k

A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t

-

I
d
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r
Gr
e
e
n

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

i
n

t
h
e

N
o
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
Po
s
t
-
O
c
c
u
p
a
n
c
y

E
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
Me
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t

&

V
e
r
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
a
y
l
i
g
h
t

P
h
o
t
o

C
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
Me
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t

&

V
e
r
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

E
n
e
r
g
y

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

S
y
s
t
e
m
s
Me
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t

&

V
e
r
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

A
i
r

S
i
d
e

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r
s
Me
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t

&

V
e
r
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
e
m
a
n
d

C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
d

V
e
n
t
i
a
t
i
o
n
20
0
8

E
a
s
y

U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s

C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r

S
u
r
v
e
y
20
0
9

E
a
s
y

U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s

C
u
s
t
o
m
e
r

S
u
r
v
e
y
20
0
9

E
a
s
y

U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s

T
r
a
d
e

A
l
l
y

S
u
r
v
e
y
20
0
9

F
l
e
x
P
e
a
k

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
r
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
8

I
r
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

P
e
a
k

R
e
w
a
r
d
s

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
9

I
r
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

P
e
a
k

R
e
w
a
r
d
s

R
e
p
o
r
t
20
0
9

I
r
r
i
g
a
t
i
o
n

P
e
a
k

R
e
w
a
r
d
s

S
u
r
v
e
y
Pa
g
e

3
2
De
m
a
n
d
-
S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

A
n
n
u
a
l

R
e
p
o
r
t

2
0
0
8
Final Report
Idaho P01Ner Company
Appliance Standards
Assessment
Prepared for:
Idaho Power Company
January 9, 2008
Prepared by:
Hossein Haeri
Allen Lee
Doug Bruchs
Ross Notebaart
Quantec, LLC
Charlie Stephens
Adjuvant Consulting
\\quantecllc.com\FsrvRoot$\Common$\2007 Projects\2007-147 (IPC) Appliance Standards Evaluation\Reporting\IPC Appliance
Standards_Final Report_010807.doc
Quantec Offices
720 SW Washington, Suite 400
Portland, OR 97205
[phone]; [phone] faxww.quantecllc.com
*recycled paper.
1722 14th St., Suite 210
Boulder, CO 80302
(303) 998.Q102; [phone] fax
Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary ................................................................................... 3
2. Purpose and Methodology ....... ................................................................ 7
Purpose and Context ...................................... .................................. ....................................7
Methodology. ....................................... ............. ................................................................... 7
Work Plan.............................................. ..............................................................................8
Review and Selection of Standards for Consideration ........................................................8
Data Collection ..................................................................................................................12
Energy and Demand Savings Analysis..................... ..................... ................................... .13
Implementation Costs and Process ....................................................................................13
3. Appliance Assessments .......................................................................... 14
Oregon Appliance Standards ................................. ....................................................... .....14
Automatic Commercial Ice Makers and Commercial Refrgerator-Freezers............. 15
Metal Halide Fixtures ................... ..............................................................................16
Incandescent Reflector Lamps....................................................................................17
External Power Supplies.............................................................................................18
Water Coolers .............................................................................................................19
Hot Food Holding Cabinet..........................................................................................20
Commercial Walk-in Refrgerator-Freezers...............................................................21
Compact Audio Products.......................... ......... ................... ...... .... ........... ................ .22
DVD Players ...............................................................................................................23
Portable Hot Tubs ........................... ............................................................................24
Additional Appliance Standards ........................................................................................24
Residential Furnace Fans............................................................................................25
Other Standards ............... ..... ......................................................................................25
4. Energy and Demand Savings and Incremental Costs ......................... 26
Energy.and Demand Savings Potential..............................................................................26
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment
Projected Savings and Costs ............................... ...............................................................27
5. Processes and Policy Context............................................................... 31
Development of Appliance Standards in Western States ..................................................31
Oregon ........................................................................................................................31
California ....................................................................................................................32
Administrative versus Legislative Process ............................................................... ..33
The Idaho Situation....... ........................................................ .................................... ..34
The Special Case of Gas Furnace Standards ....... .......................................................34
Realization of Estimated Savings ................................... ... ......... ... ................... .................36
Field Performance.......................................................................................................36
Compliance and Enforcement.....................................................................................36
Collaboration......................................................................................................................38
National and Regional Collaborative Efforts .............................................................38
Opportnities for IPC ............................ .............................................. ............... ........39
6. Recommendations ..................................................................................... .40
Appliance Standards for Consideration ............... ................................................ ..............40
Research Needs............... .... ....... ...... ................. ..... ............. ................................... ............41
Capacity, Infrastructure, and Policy...................................................................................42
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment ii
1. Executive Summary
The Idaho Power Company (IPC) contracted with Quantec, LLC, to conduct a study of the
potential savings and costs associated with enacting appliance energy-efficiency standards in
Idaho similar to those recently enacted in Oregon. IPC's Request for Proposals (RFP)
specifically stated:
"This Evaluation should provide information regarding the costs and potential
for energy savings that would occur if the appliance standards enacted by the
State of Oregon were applicable in the State of Idaho. Additionally, the
Evaluation should provide information for opportnities to promote new or
additional appliance standards in Idaho."
To determine the potential savings and costs, Quantec first reviewed the two most recent Oregon
appliance standards, House Bil 3363 passed in 2005 and Senate Bil 375 passed in 2007, and
supplemented that research with a review of the most recent federal appliance standards and
other standards programs around the countr. Based on this review, a subset of appliance
standards was identified as meriting further investigation for consideration in Idaho based on the
following general criteria:
· Potential energy and/or demand savings
· Lack of impending federal legislation
· Prevention of low-efficiency appliances, that state standards would prohibit in
neighboring states, from being sent to Idaho
The ten appliances selected for analysis and detailed in this report are provided in Table ES 1.
The case of residential fuace fans is unique because neighboring states do not have a standard
for this product, but it is worth examination for several reasons discussed in detail in the report.
Table ESt. Potential Appliance Standards
Appliance Sector Oregon Neighboring States
Enacted Effective WA CA
Metal halide lamps/fixtures C 2005 2008 Enacted Enacted
Incandescent reflector lamps C 2005 2007 Enacted Enacted
Extemal power supplies C/R 2005 2007 Enacted Enacted
Bottle-type water dispensers C 2007 2009 Enacted
Hot food holding cabinets C 2007 2009 Enacted
Walk-in refrigerators and freezers C 2007 2009 Enacted
Compact audio products (CD players)R 2007 2009 Enacted
DVD players and recorders R 2007 2009 Enacted
Portable electric spas/hot tubs R 2007 2009 Enacted
Residential furnace fans R
Note: C indicates commercial sector; R indicates residential sector.
Once identified, research was conducted on each appliance to estimate the stock or sales of
affected appliances in Idaho, the natural occurrng market penetrtion of energy-effcient models,
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 3
the incremental cost of the more efficient appliances, and the annual energy and demand savings
associated with enacting an appliance standard. This information was then synthesized and
applied to data provided by IPC to determine the impact of each appliance standard upon the
utility. Tables containing this information for each appliance are provided throughout the report
and collectively in the report's technical appendix.
Table ES2 summarizes the potential energy and demand savings for each appliance. As evident
in the table, residential furnace fans represent the greatest opportnity to generate savings. The
information provided in ES2 is aggregated by sector in Table ES3.
Table ES2. Total Savings Potential for Existing Appliance Stock
Per Unit
Eligible Units kWhlYr Total kWhlYr Per Unit kW Total kW
Appliance Sector in Idaho Savings Savings*Savings Savings*
Metal Halide Fixtures COM 132,588 307 45,141,258 0.0703 10,534
Reflector Lights RES 154,000 61 10,417,946 0.0110 1,907
External Power Supplies RES 3,402,000 4 15,468,554 0.0005 1,803
Water Coolers COM 2,832 266 836,836 0.0395 126
Hot Food Holding Cabinets COM 1,539 1,815 3,097,753 0.2691 468
Walk-in Refrigerators-Freezers COM 860 8,220 7,839,743 1.2669 1,231
Compact Audio Products RES 662,966 53 38,967,153 0.0061 4,542
DVD Players RES 307,395 11 3,749,912 0.0013 437
Hot Tubs RES 13,120 250 3,637,520 0.0280 416
Residential Furnace Fans RES 225,280 599 149,651,476 0.0872 22,192
*T otal energy and demand savings adjusted to account for losses based on IPC system distrbution secondary loss factors
Table ES3. Total Savings Potential of Existing Stock by Sector
Total Estimated Energy Total Estimaed
Sector Savings (kWhlYr)Demand Savings (kW)
Commercial 56,915,590 12,359
Residential 221,892,560 31,297
Overall 278,808,151 43,657
However, since the estimates shown in the preceding tables do not take into account the rate at
which appliances are replaced, new appliance sales, or the effects of federal standards, additional
analysis was necessary. Figures ES 1 and ES2, respectively, provide energy and demand
estimates through 2020 reflecting:
· Effective useful lives to account for replacement of existing appliance stocks
· Utility system energy and demand losses
· Anticipated customer growth (based on approximately 1.7% annual growth).
Note that both figures show the results with and without a furnace fan standard.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 4
Figure ESt. Estimated Energy Savings (MWh) from Standards Adoption (2009- 2020)
250,000
200,000
IICIc:150,000.:;
II
UJ~
3:100,000:E
ii:ic:c:c(50,000
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
!-+Totai -+ Total-Furnace Fan I
Figure ES2. Estimated Demand Savings (MW) from Standards Adoption (2009- 2020)
35
5
30
25inClC
.S;
Cl
UJ
~
20
15
10
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
I..Total-+ Totl-Furnace Fan I
Based on these findings, Quantec recommends considering the development and adoption of
Idaho appliance standards for the first nine appliances listed in Table ES.l. In addition, specific
alternatives should be investigated for the possibility of increasing the effciency of furnace fans.
Idaho should also examine the options and monitor progress in setting standards for general
service incandescents and metal halide fixtures.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 5
To support the development of efficiency standards, IPC and other entities in Idaho should
identify priorities for conducting research and developing the data needed for such efforts.
Expanding current collaborations and developing additional ones would minimize the resources
required and would leverage existing resources.
At the state level, Idaho could invest in the capability required to research and adopt standards
for the appliances analyzed here. In addition, the State of Idaho could investigate the option of
developing a regulatory framework, similar to California's, that would recognize utilities' efforts
dedicated to efficiency standards in a way similar to how utility energy-efficiency acquisition
programs are treated.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 6
2. Purpose and Methodology
Purpose and Context
The Idaho Power Company (IPC) contracted with Quantec, LLC, to conduct a study of the
potential savings and costs associated with enacting appliance energy-effciency standards in
Idaho similar to those recently enacted in Oregon. IPC' s Request for Proposals (RFP)
specifically stated:
"This Evaluation should provide information regarding the costs and potential
for energy savings that would occur if the appliance standards enacted by the
State of Oregon were applicable in the State of Idaho. Additionally, the
Evaluation should provide information for opportnities to promote new or
additional appliance standards in Idaho."
IPC staff provided more context information and details about the research purpose during the
project initiation meeting in August 2007. IPC implements several energy-efficiency programs
for its customers and prepares an Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) every two years. Through these
processes and interactions with its advisory groups, interested parties, and the Idaho Public
Utilities Commission (IPUC), IPC decided to initiate a study of the effects if Idaho adopted
appliance efficiency standards. Energy-effciency standards, both for appliances and buildings,
have the potential to save significant amounts of energy by eliminating ineffcient products and
buildings in the market. In addition, the costs of programs to implement standards can be
relatively low compared to the costs of achieving the same energy savings through energy-
effciency acquisition programs.
Oregon's appliance standards are especially relevant because they apply in a state adjoining
Idaho. In fact, since IPC serves several cities in Oregon, some of its customers already benefit
from Oregon's appliance standards. Furthermore, the three West Coast states have adopted
similar appliance standards so adoption in Idaho would expand the region covered by consistent
standards. Another potential benefit to Idaho's residents is that there is the possibility that
manufacturers or distrbutors would shift their no longer legal, less-efficient products to Idaho
when the Oregon standards go into effect.
This report presents the results of the analyses of the costs and potential energy and demand
savings if Idaho adopted the Oregon appliance efficiency standards. IPC clarified during the
project initiation meeting that the study should focus on statewide cost and energy impacts and
that the cost impacts of primary interest were incremental consumer costs for more efficient
appliances. The remainder of this chapter describes the methodology Quantec applied.
Methodology
To determine the potential savings and costs, Quantec first reviewed the two most recent Oregon
appliance standards, House Bil 3363 passed in 2005 and Senate Bil 375 passed in 2007, and
supplemented that research with a review of the most recent federal appliance standards and
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 7
other standards programs around the countr. Based on this review, a subset of appliance
standards was identified as meriting further investigation for implementation in Idaho based on
the following general criteria:
· Potential energy and/or demand savings
. Lack of impending federal legislation
· Prevention of low-efficiency appliances prohibited in neighboring states with standards
being sent to Idaho by appliance distrbutors
Once identified, additional research was conducted on the appliances to estimate the stock or
sales of affected appliances in Idaho, the natual occurng market penetration of energy-efficient
models, the incremental cost borne by the consumer for more efficient appliances, and the annual
energy and demand savings associated with enacting an appliance standard. This information
was then synthesized and applied to data provided by IPC to determine the impact of each
appliance standard upon the utility.
Formally, this process consisted of a series of research tasks. These are described below.
Work Plan
Quantec prepared a memorandum detailng discussions from the project initiation meeting and
finalized the agreed upon work plan, which was provided to IPC on September 19,2007.
The overall research approach documented in the work plan is represented graphically in Figure
1. Quantec also developed information requests for IPC that were needed to conduct the study.
Review and Selection of Standards for Consideration
As noted above, Quantec carefully reviewed the 2005 and 2007 Oregon appliance standards
legislation, as well as commenta regarding the legislation written by organizations such as the
Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP), the American Council for an Energy Effcient
Economy (ACEEE), and OSPIRG (Oregon's member of the federation of Public Interest
Research Groups), a significant player in the development and advocacy of the 2005 standards.
Quantec also investigated whether California and Washington had enacted legislation regarding
any of the appliances covered by Oregon law. Lastly, interviews were conducted with appliance
standards experts in several states.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 8
Figure 1. Overview of Research Approach
To maximize the usefulness of this study, several factors were considered in this analysis and the
determination of which Oregon standards to explore as part of this study; and whether standards
from other states should be addressed. These factors included:
· Type of adoption process that might be used in Idaho (administrative, legislative, or a
combination) and the time required to implement it
· The status of standards at the federal level and in states other than Oregon
· Time between enactment of standards and the effective dates of the standards
· Availability of current market data (sales by model or class, incremental costs, trends,
etc.)
· Opportnities to parter with other entities or jurisdictions
· Political climate for standards enactment
. Potential allies in the process
In assessing the standards options, states are preempted from adopting standards for appliances
for which federal standards already exist. Since Oregon had adopted several standards prior to
when the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) adopted federal standards, Oregon was not
preempted by subsequent federal action. Preemption applies to standards that DOE has adopted,
even though their effective date is in the future, so states that have not adopted standards already
are restrcted from adopting their own standards if a DOE standard has been adopted but is not
scheduled to go into effect until a future date.
1
i Personal communication from Andrew deLaski to Charlie Stephens, November 13, 2007.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 9
Based on a review of documentation available, the status of candidate standards was
summarized. Table 1 lists all the 2005 and 2007 appliance standards enacted in Oregon and other
standards that Quantec reviewed for possible adoption in Idaho. For each standard, the table
shows the sector in which it applies, its status in Washington and California, and its status
relative to federal standards. Based on the criteria described above, the following 2005 Oregon
standards were selected for consideration:
. Metal halide lamps/fixtues
· State-regulated incandescent reflector lamps
· Single, low-voltage external power supplies
Two of these standards are already in effect in Oregon (reflector lamps and external power
supplies), while the remaining one (metal halide lamps/fixture) becomes effective in 2008.
Oregon enacted two additional appliance standards (commercial refrigerators-freezers and ice
makers) that have since been included in the 2005 federal standards. Even though they are not
effective until 2010, states that do not have existing standads for them (such as Idaho) are
preempted from enacting new standards. An external power supplies standard was included in
the 2005 Energy Policy Act, but DOE has not acted to set a standard yet so it was included for
consideration. The remaining products for which standards were adopted by Oregon in 2005
were excluded because they already are or wil soon be covered by federal standards.
From Oregon's 2007 standards there are an additional six products that were selected for fuher
study:
. Bottle-type water dispensers
· Commercial hot food holding cabinets
· Walk-in refrgerators and walk-in freezers
. Compact audio products
· Digital versatile disc (DVD) players and digital versatile disc recorders
. Portable electrc spas/hot tubs
Quantec reviewed one additional item, residential furnace fans, that is not covered by current
Oregon appliance standards. The status of furnace fans is unique for several reasons, as discussed
later, and they merit further examination because of their potential energy savings.
The California standards for pool pumps and general service incandescent light bulbs were not
included for further consideration in this initial analysis. The reasons are presented later in the
report.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 10
.5"0 ~CP "0"0 ::::-U en.5
00000.... rnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnooooooooornZ Z Z Z Z ~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ~
j ~
CJC.;:o....
.!f~Z
~ ~ ~~ ~a¡ a¡ ro a¡ roc: c: c: c: c:W W W W W
"0
~a¡c:W
"0~a¡c:W
~a¡c:W
~roc:W
"0~a¡c:W
~ ~ ~a¡ a¡ a¡c: c: c:W W W
~roc:W
'""Ci.="C==..00~(j==...
Q.
~
ECP
;f
~
tš~w
8gggg~~NNNNNNN
"CtCIcW
io io io io io io io8888888NNNNNNN
oic::.ro::
ID"S0:
ioooN
r-coor-8808N N N N
io io io io8888N N N N
g gN N
io i.
8 :5N N
-=i:=~Qc.
coC)~o
...~-~=
E-
~~W
0) r- r- r- r- co r- co l: r- 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)88888888088~888:5N N N N N N N N N N N ,~ N N N N
"0tCIcW
io io io io io io io io io io r- r- r- r- r- r-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MooN
co
~
i.ooN
~
.§CPen
ü ü ü ü 0: ü ü U U ~ Ü Ü ü 0: 0: 0: 0: ü ü ü ü 0: U U ~ 0:
~c.!!ã.c.c(
~ ~~ a¡rn c:a¡ .E~ :§ ~
~ ~~13 E c:
"0_0) ~ .s e
a¡ ¡:¿.5t
æ .21 ~ Q)g- ~ .g' ~è IE w .i:-0 e ~ ~üi-wa.
l!~a¡E
~ ~E .-J!
~Q)
~~
ë5 ë5
.~ -eQ) Q)E EE Eo 0ü ü
~Q)
~.9e:
Q).21-=~
rnrn c.~ EJ!~ ..t¡ .sCñ ~a. q:
.§ ~Q) E:2 ~ë5 rn.. ~
S c:Q) ~
:: .E
~
§2l! roQ) a.
~Q) Cl ~l! ::Q) J:2.~"".ftrn.1"OrnQ)õ.. c: Q) C:o"E..Æ2i.!a¡;:OUl§:.!Q .g l! "0 ~ ~;:"Ouoe'-rnrn æ oiêi a.-g u'---c:"-o .-
~ ~ :§ .gi:g ~ ~8. Q) ~ 'C a¡ ~ (jc... '- _--
ë5 .2 Õ c: u a¡ Q)
Q)E ~ .E .:; ~ a.:Õ~ECl-êx:gõ~o~oW CD :i == ü Cl a.
l!Q)
l! EQ) .E
rn E ~rn c: J2 _fOû5 sa ~ -J! Q)eã~~_~,.. 1\ Q)
~ ~~ ~~J! "0 ~ Q)
=§ 6 ¡g"O ~= a.ro Q)=_æ~-t~~~ ~'ã Égi G Q) :: .:2.ã) æ fi ~ ~U::.. ..::
í?a¡ l!
~ l"0 Q)Q) ..a. :!- c:rn ;:rn ë5 ëia. c: .(3E .21 '-;: rn Q)a. u E
g ~ §a. I- U
rn.."'..
:E.gE
~Q)"0c:~.5
~.~
~
ë!Q)c:Q)(!
rnc:.æ
~a¡
E.a
ë5EQ)"0,j¡
&
E0':5~.E'"
"EII
-g
~
~i:
gi
g.~
§.:"0~E
~
l!II'"
~
'r.æQj.s
~
g
l!IIt
~C-
O'
gi:5~
.E'"
"E
-g
~e~.æ.coi::o.ci-..
íî
~
~0: ::o ~A C,~.§ 9:O).c EEO)-;'E:ëe~ lêi:-=~--ëõa)~~~æë5~~32 L( û)., Q)c:~p-p E(;~6ê5==ca!:gg9o:igliCl-'
OO'¡e'" °
p.ì: U) g¡ ~o o"g"E coE! a)-ö~ãl.~ 0' i: i: ~~ ~ oS !!.ã)
i i ¡ i 4..:::::::: -0ti j: I i:- ¡:l j: i:
ë1§1§1§1§~sUJ
....
ëQ)Eenen
Q)en
~
en
-eai"0i:ai
èï
Q)()i:
.!!e.a.
oc::i:aia.EoC,
~oa.o~ai
J2
I
()
.æi:ai::o
Data Collection
Once the list of appliances selected for further examination was prepared, Quantec utilized a
multitude of energy industr sources to gather critical information regarding each appliance.
Specifically, information was gathered for each appliance regarding the following:
· Market Saturation: the quantity of each appliance currently installed in Idaho buildings.
· Energy-effcient Product Penetration: the percent of the existing appliance stock that is
high-efficiency models that would already meet the Oregon standard.
· Effective Useful Life: the average operating lifetime of the appliance; this is critical for
assessing both the savings and estimating the time required to completely replace the
existing appliance stock.
· Consumer Incremental Cost: the difference between the price paid by a customer for a
model meeting the Oregon standard and the price currently paid for a comparable product
not meeting the standard.
· Energy and Demand Savings: the per-unit annual energy and demand savings from
using an appliance model meeting the adopted standard.
To obtain the data listed above, Quantec researched a wide variety of resources ranging from
residential and commercial appliance saturation studies by Pacific Northwest utilities to sales
data for specific products available through the National Electrcal Manufacturers Association
(NEMA). Since very few data were available specifically for Idaho, most of the data utilized in
this study relate to other states or utilities and was scaled to account for differences between
regions.
Among the resources utilized in this study were:
· Northwest Energy Effciency Alliance Assessment of the Commercial Building Stock
in the Northwest: provided a characterized summary of commercial building stock in the
Pacific Northwest with updated market penetrations of energy-efficient technologies and
practices.
· Northwest Energy Effciency Alliance Residential New Construction Characteristics
and Practices Study: a report that characterized single-family residential new
construction to develop a representative sample of high-effciency technology saturation
and common energy consumption for homes in Montana, Idaho, Washington and Oregon.
· California Codes and Standards Enhancement Initiative (CASE): provided technical
and economic data on several appliance standards. The CASE studies were developed by
California utilities in support of upgrades to California's Title 20 appliance standards and
submitted to the California Energy Commission.
· Appliance Standards Awareness Program 2006 Model Bill: ASAP creates model bils
for states to utilize when considering appliance standard legislation. The appliances
included in the bil are tailored based on climate zones and local appliance saturations.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 12
Energy and Demand Savings Analysis
Once data were collected and aggregated, realistic estimates of the likely aggregate energy and
demand savings were calculated for each appliance standard. Quantec used these data to estimate
the overall effects of the standards on energy usage in Idaho and effects on the electrcal system.
Specifically, demand impacts were estimated by applying measure coincidence factors derived
from end-use load shapes from the Northwest Power and Conservation Council for the climate
zone including Idaho. The fraction of the annual total demand occurrng at the peak hour was
multiplied by the annual energy (kWh) to find the anual peak hour demand impact (kW). Since
the end-use load-shapes were normalized, there should be reasonably good agreement between
these end-use load-shapes and those that apply statewide and in IPC's Idaho service area. IPC's
overall system load information was utilized to determine the system's summer peak.
Implementation Costs and Process
One ofIPC's research objectives was to estimate the incremental consumer costs of appliances/
equipment meeting the requirements of the standards investigated. As a result, Quantec culled
this information from various sources during its data collection process.
Quantec also proposed, and IPC agreed, that it would be useful to compile basic qualitative
information about the level and tye of effort required to conduct an appliance standards
development program. This information is meant to provide IPC with a general sense of the costs
of undertaking such a program and the steps required, but not detailed estimates for specific
program costs. Developing this information further would require research beyond the scope of
this study.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 13
3. Appliance Assessments
This chapter describes each of the appliance standards determined, using the criteria described
earlier, to merit further examination for possible adoption in Idaho. The discussion summarizes
the information gathered and details the reasons for and/or against adopting a standard. As noted
in Chapter 2, limited data were available regarding some of the specific saturations and/or
penetration of energy-efficient models in Idaho. Some data date back to 2004 and 2005 and may
need to be updated to obtain more accurate estimates of impacts, if needed. The data detailed in
this section - collected from utilities and states throughout the Pacific Northwest and West Coast
- have been augmented to reflect specific conditions for Idaho wherever possible. However, it is
important to note that the estimates provided relied largely on secondary sources extrapolated to
Idaho so they should be considered to be only approximations that could be refined with more
accurate Idaho-specific data.
As noted earlier, ASAP, located in Boston, Massachusetts, produces an anual "model standards
bil" for states to use in setting consistent standards. Supporting product and market data
accompany the bil, and the data are available on a state-by-state basis, with adjustments made
for climate, operating hours, and energy prices. The 2008 model bil wil be available in the first
quarter of 2008 and this could be a valuable source of more curent information for Idaho when
it becomes available. Recommendations regarding such futue research are offered in the final
chapter of this report.
To improve clarity and streamline the report, a list of all references used in this section is
provided in Table 2 and not appended to each individual table.
Table 2. Data Sources
Reference Number Source
1 Codes and Standards Enhancement Initiative (CASE) Studies
2 ASAP & ACEEE Model Bil Report. Idaho
3 Idaho Power specifc coincident factor applied to per unit energy savings value
4 Conversation with appliance coe expert (details provided when applicable)
5 ASAP & ACEEE Report Number ASAP-6/ACEEE-A062, March 2006
Oregon Appliance Standards
This section outlines current Oregon appliance standards and details the energy-effciency
criteria, estimated savings,. and incremental cost for each appliance measure analyzed for this
report. The 2005 standards discussed here (metal halide fixtues, incandescent reflector lamps,
and single voltage external power supplies) were enacted as House Bil 3363. It created Oregon
Revised Statutes (ORS) 469.229 through 469.261, where Oregon's legislated standards reside.
In 2007, the statutes were revised by HB 2565, which made some adjustments to the 2005
statutes, and by SB 375 to include new appliance standards (bottled water dispensers,
commercial hot food-holding cabinets, compact audio equipment, DVD players, portable electrc
spas, and walk-in refrgerators and freezers). The 2007 adjustments to appliances covered by HB
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 14
3363 are noted in the appropriate sections below (incandescent reflector lamps and single-
voltage power supplies).
Oregon's standards statutes define both a "sales" effective date and an "installation for
compensation" effective date. The latter allows users to install products that do not meet the
standards for some period-tyically one year-after the date when they can no longer be sold.
All of the effective dates listed below are the "sales" dates, i.e., the date beyond which only
complying units can be sold legally. Unless noted otherwise, all "installation" effective dates can
be assumed to be one year later.
Automatic Commercial Ice Makers and Commercial Refrigerator-Freezers
As noted earlier, Oregon has adopted standards for commercial ice makers and refrgerators-
freezers, but federal standards preempt Idaho from adopting similar standards, even though the
federal standards do not go into effect until 2010. These appliances are only briefly discussed
here. As defined by HB 3363, an automatic commercial ice maker is a:
" . . . factory-made assembly, not necessarily shipped in one package,
consisting of a condensing unit and ice-making section operating as an
integrated unit with means for making and harvesting ice cubes, and any
integrated components for storing or dispensing ice."
As defined by ORS 469.229, a commercial refrgerator-freezer is:
" . . . smaller than 85 cubic feet of internal volume and designed for use by
commercial or institutional facilities for the purpose of storing or
merchandising food products, beverages or ice at specified temperatures,
other than products without doors, walk-in refrgerators or freezers,
consumer products that are federally regulated pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6291
et seq. or freezers specifically designed for ice cream.
(a) Must incorporate most components involved in the vapor-compression
cycle and the refrigerated compartent in a single cabinet; and
(b) May be configured with either solid or transparent doors as a reach-in
cabinet, pass-through cabinet, roll-in cabinet or roll-through cabinet."
There is the potential risk retailers will sell low-efficiency models in Idaho that are ilegal in
neighboring states, and this is a concern for at least two reasons. First, savings for both are likely
to be highest during on-peak summer periods when temperatures are hottest, thus coinciding with
IPC's cooling load peaks. Second, the favorable ratio of annual energy savings to consumer
incremental cost provides for a relatively short payback period.
Based on the analyses conducted, the higher efficiency ice makers each save about 445
kWhyear, commercial refrigerators save 826 kWhyear, and commercial freezers save 669
kWhyear. Over the lives of these appliances, the savings foregone by installng tyical units
instead of ones meeting the Oregon standards would total about 7.4 GWh. The State of Idaho and
¡PC may want to consider taking steps to minimize the possibility that less effcient units are sent
to the state until the federal standard goes into effect.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 15
Metal Halide Fixtures
The standard for metal halide fixtures, which use a type of High
Intensity Discharge (HID) lamp, was enacted by Oregon in
2005 and effective on January 1,2008. ORS 469.229 defines a
metal halide fixture and its components as follows:
"'High-intensity discharge lamp' means a lamp in which
light is produced by the passage of an electrc current
through a vapor or gas, and in which the light-producing
arc is stabilized by bulb wall temperatue and the arc
tube has a bulb wall loading in excess of three watts per
square centimeter."
'''Probe-start metal halide lamp ballast' means a ballast used to operate
metal halide lamps that does not contain an igniter and that instead stars
metal halide lamps by using a third starting electrode probe in the arc
tube."
"Metal halide lamp fixtures designed to be operated with lamps rated
greater than or equal to 150 watts but less than or equal to 500 watts may
not contain a probe-star metal halide lamp ballast."
This commercial measure is tyically utilized in outdoor lighting, including parking lots and
walkways, and large warehouse style buildings. Metal halide lamps are available in probe-start
or pulse-start technology. The pulse-start lamps and ballasts are more energy-efficient, providing
a higher lumen to watt ratio, better lumen maintenance, longer lamp life, shorter re-strike and
warm-up times, and better color rendering. Energy savings potential related to metal halide
lamps is a result of reduced wattage lamps that offer light output greater than or equal to that of
similar higher wattage probe-start ballast HID lamps.
There is currently no pending federal standards process for metal halide luminaire fixtures.
Further, it does not appear that any federal legislation or standards wil be issued in the
foreseeable future. As a result, individual states are left to enact effciency standards for these
products. Pulse-start ballasts and lamp combinations are already making inroads into this market.
Electronically ballasted luminaires are the next step up in effciency, but they are not nearly as
prevalent in the market yet. At some point not too far in the future, it wil probably make sense
for states to upgrade this standard to require electronic ballasts, for an additional 15% savings
over the pulse-start products.
A summary of the information collected for the analysis of metal halide fixtures is provided in
Table 3.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 16
Table 3. Data Summary: Metal Halide Fixtures
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1,2 Upgrade Unitlear) 1,2 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years) 1,2
168,366 21%132,588 307 0.07 $30.00 20
Incandescent Reflector Lamps
The reflector lamp standard was enacted as part of Oregon HB 3363 in the 2005 session, with an
effective date of January 1,2007. It was enacted in Washington State at the same time. At the
time of passage in Oregon and Washington, similar standards were being deliberated in other
states. Ultimately, industry lobbyists convinced these other states to exempt more categories of
lamps (Oregon and Washington had exempted only 50-watt ER lamps). So in order to make this
standard consistent with that enacted by other states (such as California), Oregon modified its
standard as part ofHB 2565 in the 2007 session. The change involved exempting the following
additional lamps:
· Lamps rated at 50 watts or less of the following tyes: BR 30, ER 30, BR 40, and ER 40
· Lamps rated at 65 watts of the following tyes: BR 40 and ER 40
· R 20 lamps of 45 watts or less
These changes essentially exempted the most common types of BR and ER lamps from the
standard, and dramatically lowered the energy savings expected from this measure. The new
rules associated with the standard also changed the effective date to January 1,2008, for
products manufactured after July 1, 2007.
The definition of this product in ORS 469.229 is as follows:
"'State-regulated incandescent reflector lamp' means a lamp that is not
colored or designed for rough or vibrating service applications, that has an
inner reflective coating on the outer bulb to direct the light, that has an
E26 medium screw base, that has a rated voltage or voltage range that lies
at least partially within 115 to 130 volts and that falls into one of the
following categories:
( a) A bulged reflector or elliptical reflector bulb shape that has a diameter
that equals or exceeds 2.25 inches; or
(b) A reflector, parabolic aluminized reflector or similar bulb shape that
has a diameter of2.25 to 2.75 inches."
The standard specifies reflector lamp minimum average lamp effciency (lumens per watt)
dependent upon lamp wattage. This residential and commercial measure is typically found in
recessed downlight fixtures and applications where the direction of light is important. About half
the market for this type of application consists of federally regulated "R lamps," reflector lamps
that are designed to direct light output at angles less than 180 degrees. Each lamp has a metallic
or aluminized reflector applied either directly to the bulb or to the glass lens to reflect the light
outward. The standard delivers a small amount of energy savings at very little cost for the
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 17
incandescent lamps traditionally used in recessed downlight fixtures. Much larger energy savings
in such fixtures come from the use of new low wattage ceramic metal halide or compact
fluorescent lamps and their associated ballasts, but these savings also come at a much larger cost.
While the energy savings have been substatially reduced by the 2007 changes, enacting this
standard would align the Idaho market with that in the surrounding states and, more importantly,
set the stage for a more stringent standard in the near future. Such a measure is likely to be part
ofa multi-state package of measures promoted by ASAP not long from now.
A summary of the information collected for the analysis of state-regulated incandescent reflector
lamps is provided in Table 4.
Table 4. Data Summary: Incandescent Reflector Lamps
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Efficiency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1 Upgrade Unit/earp (kW/unit)3 Cost1,2 (Years)l
385,000 60%154,000 61 0.01 $1.80 5
External Power Supplies
The single-voltage external power supply standard was
enacted by Oregon in 2005 as part of HB 3363, with an
effective date of July 1, 2007. It was enacted in Washington
State at the same time. At the time of passage in Oregon and
Washington, similar standards were being deliberated in other
states, with California as the lead state. California ended up
enacting slightly different standards for different product
categories, with different effective dates. To make its
standards consistent with those enacted by California, Oregon
modified this section of the earlier bil as part of HB 2565 in the 2007 session. The changes
adjusted the power output categories and minimum effciencies slightly and, more importantly,
delayed the effective date to January 1,2008, for products manufactured after July 1,2007. In
Section 1 of HB 2565, the definition of a single-voltage external power supply is wrtten to
exclude "power supplies that are classified as devices for human use under the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.c. 360c)." This change is shown below. Section 8 ofHB 2565
also exempts single voltage AC to DC power supplies that are made available by a manufacturer
directly to a consumer or to a service or repair facility, as a service part or spare part, after and
separate from the original sale of the product requiring the power supply unless they are made
available five or more years from the effective date of the act.
As defined in ORS 469.229, a single-voltage external power supply is defined as follows:
"(15)(a) 'Single-voltage external AC to DC power supply' means a
device, other than a product with batteries or battery packs that physically
attach directly to the power supply unit, a product with a battery chemistry
or tye selector switch and indicator light or a product with a battery
chemistry or type selector switch and a state of charge meter, that:
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 18
(A) Is designed to convert line voltage alternating curent input into lower
voltage direct current output;
(B) Is able to convert to only one direct current output voltage at a time;
(C) Is sold with, or intended to be used with, a separate end-use product
that constitutes the primary power load;
(D) Is contained within a separate physical enclosure from the end-use
product;
(E) Is connected to the end-use product via a removable or hard-wired
male or female electrcal connection, cable, cord or other wiring; and
(F) Has a nameplate output power less than or equal to 250 watts.
(b) Single-voltage external AC to DC power supply does not include
power supplies that are classified as devices for human use under the
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act 21 U.S.c. 360c."
The ORS 469.233 standard specifies both the allowable maximum energy consumption without a
load and minimum energy-effciency required in active mode. It targets both the residential and
commercial sectors. External power supplies are used for various tyes of electronic devices to
convert line voltage alternating current, ranging from 100 to 240 volts AC, into a low voltage
direct current, ranging from 1 to 24 volts. There are two common types of power supply
technologies - linear and switching. Both use a transformer, but the linear power supplies are
much like magnetic ballasts - relatively bulky and ineffcient; switching power supplies are
compact and more efficient. Energy savings for individual external power supplies are small, but
the incremental cost is negligible and the numbers of units in service is very, very large and
growing so aggregate energy savings are significant.
A summary of the information for single-voltage external power supplies is provided in Table 5.
Table 5. Data Summary: External Power Supplies
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effctive
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population'.Penetration'Upgrade UnitI ear)1,2 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)1
6,300,000 54%3,402,000 4 0.0005 $0.50 8
Water Coolers
The water cooler and dispenser appliance standard was enacted by Oregon
in 2007 with an effective date of September 1,2009. ORS 469.229 defines
a commercial water cooler as follows:
"'Water dispenser' means a factory-made assembly that
mechanically cools and heats potable water and dispenses the
cooled or heated water by integral or remote means."
The effciency standard specifies that water coolers have a standby energy
consumption no greater than 1.2 kWh per day. This partcular standard was
derived from the requirements of the u.S. EPA Energy Star Program, which is also the source of
the test method for determining compliance with the standard. Water dispensers can provide cold
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 19
water only, or both hot and cold water. Each unit consists of a storage tank or tanks, insulation,
heating element, and refrgeration components. The majority of the energy savings potential
related to water coolers is the result of upgraded, high-effciency refrgeration components, and
improved insulation of the tanks. Some units have little or no insulation separating the hot and
cold water storage tanks.
These products were virtally non-existent 15 years ago, but have become ubiquitous with the
rapidly growing consumption of bottled water in the u.s. The per-unit cost of the efficiency
upgrades to meet the standard is quite small, and due to the large and growing number of units in
service, the aggregate savings are relatively large.
A summary of the information collected for the analysis of water dispensers is provided in Table
6.
Table 6. Data Summary: Water Dispensers
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration2 Upgrade Unitear)l (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)2
4,800 41%2,832 266 0.04 $12 11
Hot Food Holding Cabinet
The commercial hot food holding cabinet appliance standard was enacted by Oregon in 2007
with an effective date of September 1,2009. A commercial hot food holding cabinet is defined
by ORS 469.229 as follows:
'''Commercial hot food holding cabinet' means an appliance that is a
heated, fully enclosed compartent with one or more solid doors and is
designed to maintain the temperature of hot food that has been cooked in a
separate appliance.
'Commercial hot food holding cabinet' does not include heated glass
merchandising cabinets, drawer warmers or cook-and-hold appliances."
The standard specifies that commercial hot food holding cabinets not exceed a maximum idle
energy demand of 40 watts per cubic foot of interior volume. These products are typically used
in the commercial food service industr (hotels, schools, restaurants, business cafeterias, grocery
store delis, etc.). Most units are vertical cabinets. The major energy saving measure required by
this standard is insulation or additional insulation. When compared to an uninsulated holding
cabinet, additional insulation reduces heat radiation into the kitchen (furter reducing the cooling
load), reduces temperature stratification in the cabinet and susceptibility to ambient air, and
enables faster preheat times. This additional insulation allows each unit to operate using a lower
input wattage.
The energy savings for this standard are impressive and the equipment required to meet the
standard is already widely available at a modest increase in cost. A summary of the information
collected for the analysis of commercial hot food holding cabinets is provided in Table 7.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 20
Table 7. Data Summary: Commercial Hot Food Holding Cabinets
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Efficiency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration2 Upgrade Unitlear)1.2 (kW/unit)3 Cost1,2 (Years)2
2,700 43%1,539 1,815 0.27 $450 14
Commercial Walk-in Refrigerator-Freezers
The commercial walk-in refrigerator-freezer standard was enacted by
Oregon in 2007 with a two-stage effective date. The effective date for
the door, insulation, and refrgeration component requirements is
January 1, 2009. The effective date for the interior lighting
requirement is January 1,2010. By ORS 469.229 a commercial walk-
in refrgerator-freezer is defined as follows:
'''Walk-in refrigerator' and 'walk-in freezer' mean a space
refrigerated to temperatures, respectively, at or above and
below 32° F that can be walked into."
The ORS 469.233 standards consist ofa half-dozen specific design requirements such as
automatic door closers; wall, floor and ceiling insulation levels; and motor types. Typical walk-
ins are either low or medium temperature refrigeration units, but can also include both. Found in
commercial food operations (hotels, restaurants, grocery stores, schools, cafeterias, etc), these
units contain basic refrgeration components, including: compressors, evaporators, condensers,
heat exchangers, and refrgeration controls. High effciency walk-ins tyically save energy using
all or a combination of the following measures: automatic door closers, strp curtains, high
effciency motors and fans, automated controls, additional insulation, and hot gas defrost.
The per-unit savings for these systems are relatively large at modest cost, and there are many
such installations in a wide range of sizes in the commercial food service and sales sector. The
measure is equally appropriate in new building applications and in store or building remodel
situations.
A summary of the information collected for the analysis of walk-in refrgerators and freezers is
provided in Table 8.
Table 8. Data Summary: Commercial Walk-In Refrigerator-Freezers
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1 Upgrade Unitlear)2 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)1
4,300 20%860 8,220 1.27 $950 10
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 21
Compact Audio Products
The compact audio appliance standards were enacted by
Oregon in 2007 with an effective date of September 1,
2009. By the language in ORS 469.229, compact audio
products are defined as follows:
'''Compact audio product,' also known as a mini,
mid, micro or shelf audio system, means an
integrated audio system encased in a single
housing that includes an amplifier and radio tuner
and attached or separable speakers that can
reproduce audio from one or more of the following media:
(A) Magnetic tape;
(B) Compact disc;
(C) DVD; or
(D) Flash memory.
(b) 'Compact audio product' does not include products that can be
independently powered by internal batteries, have a powered
external satellte antenna or can provide a video output signaL."
The ORS 469.233 standard for these products is a limit on standby power consumption, with
separate requirements for systems with and without permanently iluminated clocks. Units with
permanently iluminated clock displays can use a maximum of four watts in standby. Those
without permanent clock displays must meet a standby allowance of no more than two watts.
Some examples of these products would be: stereo receivers, CD players, cassette decks,
amplifiers and tuners, and packages containing all or a number of these components. These
systems are among the many electronic devices that continue to use power even though their
main functions may be turned "off" (often referred to as "phantom loads"). Compact audio
products can save energy by using more effcient electronics and power supplies, or by entering a
low power state when turned to standby mode.
The per-unit power draw savings of these products seem small, but because there are so many of
them, and because the standby power use occurs over so many hours per year (whenever the
product is not in active use), the aggregate savings are quite large. The incremental cost of the
measures required to meet the standard is minimal; most often the change is a transformer
upgrade that costs less than a dollar.
A summary of the information collected for the analysis of compact audio products is provided
in Table 9.
Quantec ~ Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 22
Table 9. Data Summary: Compact Audio Products
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Efficiency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1 Upgrade Unitlear)2 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)1,2
1,069,300 38%662,966 53 0.01 $1.00 5
DVD Players
The DVD appliance standard was enacted by Oregon in 2007 with
an effective date of January 1,2009. ORS 469.229 defines DVD
players as follows:
'''Digital versatile disc player' or 'digital versatile disc
recorder' means a commercially available electronic product
encased in a single housing that includes an integral power
supply and for which the sole purpose is, respectively, the
decoding and the production or recording of digitized video
signal on a DVD.
(b) 'Digital versatile disc recorder' does not include models that have an
electronic programming guide function that provides an interactive, on-
screen menu of television listings and downloads program information
from the vertical blankng interval of a regular television signaL."
As in the case of compact audio equipment, the DVD player standard places a limit on standby
power consumption-no more than three watts when in passive standby mode. Once again, these
ubiquitous devices are among the many phantom loads common to most households. The
measures required to meet the standard are essentially the same as those listed for compact audio
products, with the cheapest, easiest, and most likely one a transformer upgrade at a cost less than
a dollar.
As in the case of compact audio products, a small amount of savings acquired very inexpensively
over a very large number of units in the market makes a standard for this product important. A
summary of the information collected for the analysis of DVD players and recorders is provided
in Table 10.
Table 10. Data Summary: DVD PlayerslRecorders
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Efficiency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1 Upgrade Unitlear)2 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)1
1,336,500 77%307,395 11 0.0013 $1.00 5
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 23
Portable Hot Tubs
The portable hot tub and spa standard was enacted by Oregon in
2007 with an effective date of January 1,2009. ORS 469.229
defines portable hot tubs and spas as follows:
"'Portable electric spa' means a factory-built electrc spa or
hot tub supplied with equipment for heating and circulating
water."
Portable hot tubs are pre-fabricated, movable units, as opposed to
"in-ground" units. The standard covers only electrcally heated
models using resistant heating coils. The standard limits standby
energy consumption using a formula based on the volume of the tub.
A typical unit ranges from 200 to 400 gallons, though some are manufactured larger. The basic
components are an insulated shell and cover and fitration pumping system. These are also the
major elements that affect the overall efficiency of the spa. Improved insulation in the shell and
cover, a high efficiency pump and heating system, automated controls, and low wattage LED
lights are the main ways to reduce energy consumption for portable hot tubs and spas. There is a
wide range of energy consumption among different models, and a similarly wide range of energy
savings and costs associated with this product.
The potential savings per unit are quite large (up to 1,000 kWh per year). The costs associated
with these savings can be small or large, depending on the tye of system and the measures
chosen. These products have grown steadily in popularity over the last 20 years or so, and thus
represent a sizeable target for significant savings.
A summary of the information collected for the analysis of portable hot tubs and spas is provided
in Table 11.
Table i 1. Data Summary: Portable Hot Tubs
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Ufe
Population1 Penetration2 Upgrade Unitlear)1 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)2
16,400 20%13,120 250 0.03 $100.00 8
Additional Appliance Standards
This section discusses other appliances for which standards either exist or have been considered,
but are not covered under the current Oregon legislated appliance standards.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 24
Residential Furnace Fans
The electrical use of natural gas- and oil-fired furnaces is not currently regulated by a federal
standard, even though residential furnaces are "covered products" by federal law. The majority
of the electrical use of a furnace is for the air handler fan. The motor most commonly used
historically is a permanent split capacitor (PSC) motor. Its effciency drops off significantly
when not operating at its full rated rpm. Unfortately, residential air handlers almost never
operate at their full rated rpm in the heating mode.
There is a logical and cost-effective effciency upgrade available for furnace fans. In basic terms,
it involves simply using a more efficient motor for the fan - an electronically controlled
permanent magnet DC motor. These can be specified outright, or one can use a metrc developed
under the auspices of the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (CEE) and the Gas Appliance
Manufacturers Association (GAMA). It specifies that no more than 2% of the total annual energy
use ofthe furnace (natual gas plus electricity) can be that used by the furnace fan. The annual
savings from this upgrade, not counting cooling season savings, are impressive - often over 500
kWh per year.
In setting its new furnace standard, u.s. DOE examined this measure but declined to set an
electrcal effciency requirement for furnaces. At the earliest, DOE would begin a rulemaking in
2012, but as of 2006 DOE's position was that establishing a standard was optional so a federal
standard might not be developed even then. It is not clear at this point whether or not states are
legally able to set a furnace fan efficiency standard without a federal exemption from
preemption, however Massachusetts has one in effect already. As described later in this report,
Oregon has chosen to sidestep that issue by using its residential building energy code as the
method of acquiring these savings.
A summary of the information collected for the analysis of residential furnace fans is provided in
Table 12.
Table 12. Residential Furnace Fans
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Efficiency Subject to Savings (kW Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration 5 Upgrade Unitear)1 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)2
256,000 12%225,280 599 0.09 $100.00 18
Other Standards
There are other appliances for which there are standards in neighboring states such as California
or Washington that have not been examined further for Idaho. For example, California has
enacted a state standard for pool pumps due to a significant market saturation. Based on this
initial assessment, however, Idaho's market saturation and annual operating hours are much
lower so such a standard may not be cost-effective there. Nevertheless, there are likely to be
additional standards adopted in states other than Oregon that might be worth considering in the
future.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 25
4. Energy and Demand Savings and Incremental
Costs
In this chapter, Quantec aggregates the energy and demand savings and incremental customer
costs across the assessed measures to provide a statewide perspective of the impacts of adopting
the discussed portfolio of appliance standards.
Energy and Demand Savings Potential
Table 13 provides the total estimated utility energy and demand savings based on replacing the
current stock of appliances in Idaho with ones meeting the standards discussed in Chapter 3. The
savings shown in the table are in addition to the estimated savings from units sold in the market
that are already meeting the standard (current energy-efficiency penetration shown in tables in
Chapter 3). It is important to note that the standard that would have the single largest impact is
one for furnace fans. As noted earlier, however, the ability of states to set a standard for furnace
fans is uncertain at this time, though one state has established one and Oregon is achieving
similar savings by way of its building energy-efficiency standard.
Table 13. Total Savings Potential for Existing Appliance Stock
Eligible Units Per Unit kWh Total kWhlYr PerUnitkW Total kW
Appliance Sector in Idaho Savings Savings*Savings Savings*
Metal Halide Fixtures COM 132,588 307 45,141,258 0.0703 10,534
Reflector Lights RES 154,000 61 10,417,946 0.0110 1,907
External Power Supplies RES 3,402,000 4 15,468,554 0.0005 1,803
Water Coolers COM 2,832 266 836,836 0.0395 126
Hot Food Holding Cabinets COM 1,539 1,815 3,097,753 0.2691 468
Walk.in Refrgerators-Freezers COM 860 8,220 7,839,743 1.2669 1,231
Compact Audio Products RES 662,966 53 38,967,153 0.0061 4,542
DVD Players RES 307,395 11 3,749,912 0.0013 437
HotTubs RES 13,120 250 3,637,520 0.0280 416
Residential Furnace Fans RES 225,280 599 149,651,476 0.0872 22,192
*T otal energy and demand savings adjusted to accunt for losses based on IPC system distribution secondary loss factors
Table 14 presents the same data aggregated at the sector level for the state of Idaho.
Table 14. Total Savings Potential of Existing Stock by Sector
Total Estimated Energy Total Estimated
Sector Savings (kWhlYr)Demand Savings (kW)
Commercial 56,915,590 12,359
Residential 221 ,892,560 31,297
Overall 278,808,151 43,657
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 26
Projected Savings and Costs
The estimates shown in the preceding tables do not take into account the rate at which appliances
are replaced, new appliance sales, or the effects of federal standards. The cumulative impacts of
adopting the standards discussed in Chapter 3 were estimated, including standards for furnace
fans, taking these additional factors into account. The estimated energy and demand savings are
shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3, respectively. The estimates reflect effective useful lives to
account for replacement of existing appliance stocks; the impending adoption of federal
standards for commercial ice makers and commercial refrgerators-freezers; utility system energy
and demand losses; and anticipated customer growth (based on approximately 1.7% annual
growth). Both figures show the results with and without a furnace fan standard.
Figure 2. Estimated Energy Savings (MWh) from Standards Adoption (2009- 2020)
250,000
200,000
1/01c 150,000-sIIen.i~100,000:i
ii::CCc(50,000
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
I..Tot81 -+ Total-Furnace Fan I
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 27
Figure 3. Estimated Demand Savings (MW) from Standards Adoption (2009- 2020)
35
30
Ul 25
Clc 20oS;
IIen 15
~
10
5
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
I""Totl- Total-Furnace Fan I
Adopting these standards could have a significant impact on total electrcity consumption in
Idaho. Both figues demonstrate the large impact that a furnace fan standard would have; by
2020, nearly half the energy and demand savings would be due to this standard if implemented.
The estimated cumulative incremental costs to consumers for purchasing appliances meeting
these standards are shown in Figure 4. If all the standards were in effect, consumers would spend
a little less than $30 milion through 2020 to purchase appliances meeting the standards. Based
on the savings estimates, this investment would produce a peak demand reduction of about 32
MW and energy savings of about 212,000 MWh in 2020, and cumulative energy savings
between 2009 and 2020 of about 1,600 GWh.
It is very ìmportant to note that the cost estimates provided here should be used only for relative
comparisons and not to assess cost effectiveness. This is because the cost analysis in this study
was very targeted and was subject to several conditions:
· Costs include only the incremental consumer costs for purchasing an appliance meeting
the standard rather than the typical effciency level
· No program costs-such as research needed to develop a standard or establish an
enforcement process-are included
· Future costs are not discounted
· No benefits other than the direct consumer and utility energy and demand savings are
estimated
· The analysis period ends at 2020 so no future energy savings or costs are included
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance. Standards Assessment 28
$35.0
$30.0::ll~$25.0II00..
CD $20.0E=IIc:$15.000
CD.~$10.0-Cl
'3
E $5.0=0
$-
Figure 4. Cumulative Consumer Incremental Cost
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
I.. Total -- Total-Furnace Fan I
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 29
5. Processes and Policy Context
The estimates in Chapter 4 indicate that adopting appliance effciency standards in Idaho could
provide significant statewide energy and peak demand savings. It is important to provide
information to IPC, Idaho policymakers, and stakeholders about the policy context and
implementation issues that wil have a bearing on how these savings could be realized through
the adoption of state appliance standards.
This chapter provides such information by examining the appliance standard development and
enactment process, factors affecting the degree to which predicted savings are achieved in
practice, and options for collaboration with other entities. In addition, it discusses the special
case of residential furnaces because of the large potential savings they offer.
Development of Appliance Standards in Western States
Since IPC specifically focused on Oregon as a likely place to look to as a source of standards for
Idaho, it is wort looking at Oregon's recent history that led to the standards analyzed here. But
since Oregon's work was heavily influenced by and developed in conjunction with standards
development processes in California, an overview of California's experience is also instrctive.
This is especially true since California's process is quite different from that of other states.
Oregon
The process initiated to enact Oregon's 2005 and 2007 standards was predominantly legislative.
That is, the standards for individual classes of products were specified in legislation. However,
the specifics of the administrative and enforcement provisions were assigned to the Oregon
Departent of Energy (ODOE) to be enacted through public rulemaking.
The impetus behind the standards in the 2005 legislative session came primarily from the three-
state Global Warming Initiative (GWI), a collaborative response to climate change developed at
the executive level by California, Oregon, and Washington. A separate GWI working group
focusing on appliance and equipment standards was created to investigate the feasibility of
regulating products that were primarily those not regulated by the federal governent, but for
which standards that would cost-effectively save significant amounts of energy (and water in
some cases) made sense at the time.
Much of the market and technical research needed for the process had already been generated,
either as part of the California standards process or by other parties such as the Consortium for
Energy Efficiency (CEE), the New England Energy Effciency Partership (NEEP), ASAP,
ACEEE, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and others. In California, utilities
(publicly owned, investor-owned, and water) were major contributors to the market and technical
research upon which the proposed standards were based.
The impetus for standards at the state level also came from a failure to regulate on the part of the
U.S. DOE. Some of the state-level standards were for products that DOE was supposed to
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 31
develop standards for, but had not acted. Others were seen as appropriate for a federal standard,
but for which there was no perceptible progress toward such regulations. Knowledge gained by
utilities and others (states, cities, consortia, NGOs, etc.) from running energy-efficiency
programs suggested significant savings potential for some products. The rise in energy prices
that began in 2003 helped to make such savings more economically attactive than they had been
in the decade prior.
The Oregon legislation was originated in the House of Representatives as HB 363.
Representatives from OSPIRG also worked closely with legislative staff, with technical work
provided by staff at ODOE. It was made clear early on that supportive members of the Oregon
legislatue simply wished to follow California's lead, enacting only those standards already
enacted there, or in process there concurrent with the 2005 legislative session. Washington State
was also working on the same standards, for the same reasons, concurrently. Consequently there
was much collaboration among the staff members at the California Energy Commission (CEC),
ODOE, and the Washington Departent of Community, Trade, and Economic Development
(CTED). This proved important as the processes moved along; changes occurred in the standard
levels, implementation schedules and other related elements of the complete standards package
as lobbyists, new data, technical analysis, and debate converged to shape the outcome. Most of
the proposed standards made it through the process, with certain consumer electronics products
being a notable exception.
California
In contrast to those in Oregon and Washington, California's process is administrative in nature.
The California legislatue has delegated significant authority to the CEC to conduct the public
processes required to enact and enforce appliance standards. Such standards, and those
processes, have existed for more than 30 years in California, having started in response to the
1973 energy "crisis" when the CEC was formed. California's first appliance standards went into
effect in 1975, concurrent with the 1975 federal legislation (EPCA) that created the first national
appliance standards. Since that time, the CEC has successfully maintained significant autonomy
for setting standards, having been exempted in certain ways from the preemption of its standards
where certain federal standards exist. In part this was due to the fact that it was California that
insisted on the right of states to win an exemption from federal preemption through a process
specified in the original federal standards legislation.
That process has never been fully exercised, however, though California has a curent petition
before DOE for a clothes washer water use standard. In cases where a state wishes to have a
standard that is different than an existing federal standard, such an exemption must be applied for
after the proposed standard has been set at the state level, and before such a state standard can
become effective. Products for which there are no federal standards are generally open for state
jurisdiction. There is one product, televisions, for which a federal standard was mandated in the
original EPCA legislation, but for which a standard has never been set. In spite of this being
contrary to current federal law, the consumer electronics industr would likely challenge any
state that sought to remedy this situation through a state-level standard.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 32
Administrative versus Legislative Process
In a state where there are no current appliance efficiency standards, and where no standards
development and enforcement infrastrcture exists, there wil clearly be some decisions that
must be made about the process. Each kind of standards process has advantages and
disadvantages that bear on the process effectiveness. In Oregon's case, there was no real
deliberation on this issue, as the timelines for accomplishing the goals of the three-state GWI
drove the standards process. In California, the CEC' s administrative process has been operating
very effectively for decades, and so when the GWI came along, it was a matter of adding some
new products to the rulemaking agenda and ordering up some new market and product
pedormance research.
In Oregon, by contrast, the very concept of product standards was new to a legislature that hadn't
considered such things in nearly two decades. There was no institutional knowledge of the nature
of standards enactment, and no institutional memory of the national or regional standards or
Oregon's earlier work. In addition, there was no state infrastrcture to work with for rulemaking
or compliance and enforcement.
In California, the rulemakings for the 2005 standards proceeded like any other, though the fast-
track nature of some standards meant that market and technical information was being generated
as the rulemaking proceeded. This led to some delays and reconsiderations as new information
came to the table well into the process. In general, the CEC has at least one standards-related
rulemaking on its docket at all times. Items are added at the Commissioners' discretion, tyically
on the advice of CEC staff who have been researching the particular products or equipment, or
the standards activities of utilities or other jurisdictions, especially the u.s. DOE.
The adjustments to individual regulatory classes, standards, and implementation dates caused
some diffculty for the Oregon and Washington legislatures, which were tring to match
California's work exactly. The legislative process is cumbersome enough without having to
adjust the bils repeatedly to match the concurrent work of others, especially when the others are
working within a more nimble and flexible administrative process. In the end, there were a few
minor anomalies between what came out of California's process and the Oregon and Washington
legislatures. In general, these differences were of no real consequence, and tyically involved
modifications in effective dates or a delay in the regulation of a product sub-class where data
were deemed insufficient by the time the rules were to be finalized.
In general, the following characteristics are typically positive features of administrative standards
processes:
· They can be nimble, without the fixed timetables and process restrictions tyical of a
legislative process.
· They can be responsive, with appropriate or necessary adjustments possible at any time
subsequent to the setting of the initial standards and compliance infrastrcture.
· Administrative processes tend to be run by a particular agency or department that has
overall responsibility for everything related to efficiency standards. The staff of this
entity can track relevant processes in other states and at the federal level, and wil
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 33
generally have the background knowledge to support standards and their ongoing
administrative needs.
· If properly empowered, they tend to be less subject to the influence of special interests.
This fact also tends to keep standards from being used as a trade-off against other
legislative issues or bils.
Legislative processes, on the other hand, have some useful characteristics, as well:
· Standards can often be set in a way that requires very little direct administrative support.
This can be an advantage if such infrstrctue doesn't exist.
· Ifrun fairly and openly, the process can be more public and drw more stakeholder
interest than a typical administrative process, and so make energy-efficiency more
publicly visible, particularly if the political media choose to focus on it.
· In states where no precedent exists for standards, the legislatue can create standards from
whole cloth. This can be useful where the administrative resources don't exist, or where
staff and budget restrictions prevent the work of standard-setting from taking place.
· In many cases, the legislative process can be used as a way to direct administrative
rulemakings to take place, resulting in a hybrid legislative/administrative process. This
can offer the optimal process in many cases. Such was the case in California in response
to its energy crisis in the late 1990s.
The Idaho Situation
Unlike Oregon, Idaho has no existing standards development infrastrcture. However, the
Energy Division of the Idaho Departent of Water Resources (IDWR), the logical place where
such activity might have taken place, was recently restrctued as an Executive Branch Agency
called the Idaho Offce of Energy Resources. Given this recent change, this organization might
be in a good position to take on the responsibilty of developing and implementing appliance
efficiency standards.
2
The Special Case of Gas Furnace Standards
The long-delayed process to set new federal effciency standards for natural gas fuaces and
boilers has come to a close this fall, leading to only a small increase in the effciency requirement
(from 78% AFUE to 80% AFUE). The new standard basically acknowledges the efficiency of
the equipment used for many years now by manufacturers to meet the old standard. DOE also
concluded that they do not have the authority to set electrcal efficiency standards for natural
gas- or oil-fired fuaces. In theory, this may leave this area open to state regulation, though the
manufacturers and DOE are likely to argue that fuaces are a "covered product" and therefore
cannot be regulated in any way by the states without an exemption from federal preemption.
2 Personal communication, November 2007, with Ken Eklund, a longtime Energy Division staffer and curent staff
member of the new Office of Energy Resources.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 34
But DOE did something a bit unexpected when they published the draft Final Rule. They
acknowledged that the condensing level of effciency for these products (90% AFUE and higher)
is cost-effective in the northern half of the country. As a result, they suggested that DOE would
be favorably disposed toward petitions for exemption from federal preemption of higher
standards in such states. A handful of states (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, and
Maryland) are at some stage of adopting such a standard for natural gas fuaces. Once adopted,
the resulting standards wil become the subject of a federal exemption petition to DOE. Some
time later (probably one to three years after adoption of the standards) the petitions may be
granted, or they may be denied.
As part of its 2008 Residential Energy Code update (itself a strategy element of the West Coast
Governors' Global Warming Initiative), Oregon chose to pursue a different means of achieving
near-full market penetration of high-efficiency furnaces. Due to the success oftax credits for
these products since 1998 and the ever-rising prices of natural gas, more than 80% of
replacement gas furnaces in Oregon are such high-effciency variable speed, condensing tyes.
So when consumers make the furnace decision, most have been choosing high-efficiency ones,
albeit with incentives in most cases. Despite the trend in replacement furnaces, fewer than 15%
of furnaces in new construction are high-efficiency models. The state viewed this discrepancy as
a market failure in the new constrction market.
In response, a new Oregon Residential Energy Code provision wil require the "earning" of
energy-effciency "credits" by the builders of new homes, in addition to meeting minimum
energy code requirements. The relative number of credits available for each option on the list of
approved measures (which can be expanded or adjusted over time administratively) varies by the
relative level of energy savings for each measure. One of the highest credit-earing measures is a
variable speed, condensing gas furnace. It also happens to be one of the cheapest and easiest to
implement. So there is an expectation that most builders wil use this measure to earn their
required credits, thus transforming this particular market. Note that the effect of this measure is
to include the electrcal efficiency of the furnaces, not only saving 450 to 500 kWh per year
during the winter months, but also significantly improving air conditioning effciency (typically
adding more than a point to SEER and EER ratings). Key to this code provision is the fact that
each measure is voluntary - builders can choose whatever combination of measures they prefer
to meet their credit requirements. This bypasses the need for a federal exemption from
preemption, and is expected to result in a relatively rapid implementation of this measure. While
this is not a standard, per se, it may have a marketplace effect comparable to a standard.
As these analyses show, electrcity savings from gas furnaces and their fans can be a significant
proportion of total savings possible in Idaho. As four states have already started to do, Idaho may
want to investigate the adoption of a furnace fan standard. Oregon's approach, however, offers
another alternative that should be thoroughly researched and considered in the context ofIdaho's
residential building standards.
Quantec ~ Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 35
Realization of Estimated Savings
The estimated energy savings presented in this report are based on the best available data.
However, predicted energy savings from appliance standards may not be realized for at least
three reasons:
· Estimated savings may not take into account factors in the field that affect equipment
performance
· Appliances may not actually comply with the requirements of a standard
· Verification of what is being sold and installed-eode enforcement-may not be
adequate
Field Performance
Field performance can suffer if equipment is not installed or operated properly. Historically,
underperformance has been most notable with effcient heating and cooling equipment because
of factors such as poor installation quality, improper coolant charge, or non-optimal operations.
Quantec conducted a literature search to identify any studies on the appliances considered in this
report and was unable to locate any program evaluations or studies that compared field
performance to predicted performance for these appliances. Given the natue of the majority of
appliances analyzed, the likelihood that poor installation or operation would reduce their
performance is relatively small. The main factor that might cause estimated savings to differ
significantly from actual savings would probably be operating hours. Consequently, one area that
should be researched furter is the underlying assumptions about operating hours and how
appropriate they are for Idaho and the affected end uses.
Compliance and Enforcement
The existence of a standard does not, in and of itself, guarantee energy savings. A recent study of
California's latest appliance standards showed that compliance rates varied from nearly 100% to
as low as 37% for different products, up to nine months after all products being sold were legally
required to comply.3 Many ofthese products are the same as the ones analyzed in this study. If
standards are adopted at the state level, then the state must have the capabilty to enforce them.
Once federal standards are enacted, compliance and enforcement become a federal issue, with
some enforcement (e.g., labeling) being handled by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
Compliance and enforcement tyically require at least some administrative infrastrcture. More
important might be an agency's means of enforcement. Some jurisdictions, including Idaho, have
used their revenue departents, which enforce ta laws, to enforce standards. In such cases, a
higher sales tax might be imposed on non-complying products.4 This has the dual effect of
making the failure to collect the added tax ilegal (tax code violations tend to have more serious
3 Khawaja, M.S., A. Lee, and M. Levy. May 2007. Statewide Codes and Standards Market Adoption and
Noncompliance Rates. Prepared for Southern California Edison by Quantec, LLC. SCE0224.0L.
4 Ken Eklund, Idaho Offce of Energy Resources, brought this option to our attention.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 36
consequences than many other tyes) and making the non-complying product more expensive
and less competitive in the marketplace. In almost all cases, compliance is very much monitored
by manufacturers and their distributors and retailers. Anyone selling cheaper non-compliant
product wil make the compliant ones less competitive. But if complaints are made in this regard,
the state has to have enforcement mechanisms in place to force compliance. Fines and removal
of non-compliant product from the market are typical remedies, but these have to be levied and
administered by some state offce granted these powers through legislation or administrtive
rule.
It is often possible to utilize existing compliance strctures created by other states. In California,
the CEC has been given compliance and enforcement authority. By law, manufactuers must
provide proof of compliance, in writing or through an industry association database process, in
order to legally sell covered products in California. Products so certified are listed in the CEC's
appliance databases (http://ww.energy.ca.gov/appliances/appliance). The system has built-in
mechanisms to handle testing and verification if complaints about non-compliance are brought to
the CEC. As noted earlier, however, this system had failed to ensure high compliance rates with
many new standards in 2006, largely because the CEC lacked resources to carr out intensive
enforcement activities.
In spite of the Oregon 2005 legislature making ODOE responsible for compliance and
enforcement, ODOE is only now providing for this critical aspect of the Oregon standards
program. Initial follow-up to the 2005 legislation consisted primarily of arranging for the use of
the CEC's appliance databases for the purposes of manufacturer reporting and compliance. This
was part of a multi-state effort to minimize duplication of effort, provide compliance
infrastrcture for states that had little or none at the time, and to minimize the impact of multi-
state standards on the product manufacturers. This came to be known as the Multi-State
Compliance System (M-SCS). It can be accessed at ww.appliancestandards.org. Most states
with appliance standards are using this system as part of their compliance and enforcement
program. For a modest annual operating cost contrbution, these states gain access to the
database, set up to screen for compliance with their own standards. If Idaho does adopt appliance
standards, it should investigate the option of using this existing infrastrcture, in addition to any
other enforcement/compliance approaches implemented.
Follow-up rulemakings required by Oregon's 2005 statute are in process now. Aside from
clarifying the provisions of the legislation (effective dates, location of standards in statute,
requiring product certification, etc.), the rules wil specify the product certification process,
required documentation from manufacturers, labeling, procedures in cases of non-compliance,
appeals, etc. ODOE has been granted the authority to administer the program and its rules, and
so provides the standards infrastrcture needed to run the program. Staff from ODOE also
supports the periodic updating of standards and the implementation of new standards. The
rulemaking summary can be found at http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/CONS/Rulemaking2007-
Appliances Summary.shtml.
The Oregon rules were due to be completed on December 1, 2007 and fied with the Secretary of
State by December 15,2007.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 37
Collaboration
Since 1999, ASAP, founded by ACEEE, the Allance to Save Energy (ASE), and NRDC, has
been the coordinating entity for a growing number of states engaged in setting appliance
efficiency standards. The impetus for this work was the lack of progress by the federal
governent with the backlog of standards for which a Congressional mandate already existed.
California had been successful for 25 years in using standards to significantly improve the
efficiency of its building stock and its economy. Significant industries had been established to
support this work. California utility programs were many and for the most part, very successful
as enablers of subsequent standards.
National and Regional Collaborative Efforts
Throughout the 1990s, many utilities and organizations had proven the market transformation
model, where effciency programs (most often run by utilities) serve to upgrade the effciency of
targeted products in the marketplace and standards follow along behind, with a time lag, to raise
the effciency floor. This starts a new round of the cycle. Organizations like the Consortium for
Energy Efficiency (CEE), the Northwest Energy Effciency Allance (NEEA), the New England
Energy Effciency Partnership (NEEP), the Midwest Energy Efficiency Allance (MEEA) and
the Southwest Energy Efficiency Parership (SWEEP) were established to facilitate
collaboration among utilities across the countr to increase the impact of individual programs
and speed up the transformation process. This regional and national collective approach has
accomplished two important things - it has turned the energy-efficiency community into a potent
market player on a par with entire product industres, and it has allowed the states to collectively
establish standards based on the parmeters set in the efficiency programs.
These efforts have been quite successfuL. The sudden surge in state standards activity convinced
many equipment manufacturers that a single federal standard would often be preferable to a
myriad of state standards (one of the original reasons for the establishment of federal standards
in the 1970s). As a result, they became more supportive of federal standards. Many of these
manufacturers also became more interested in working with efficiency advocacy organizations in
establishing the specifications and market interventions of effciency programs.
Collaboration among those interested in promoting energy-efficiency and among the states
interested in establishing effciency standards in the follow-up to these progrms has been very
effective. These organizations continue this work today, and the list of the successes grows each
year. Being active members in collaborative organizations has allowed several utilities and states
interested in effciency programs and standards to take advantage of the work of others in the
field, thus making their own efforts more powerfL. Utilities can play an important role by being
active members of such organizations, and states can join and participate in the ASAP-
coordinated group of states that are leading the standards efforts today.
On the west coast, the Western Climate Initiative (WCI, www.westernclimateinitiative.org) has
provided an effective collaboration. California, Oregon, Washington, Arzona, New Mexico,
Utah, British Columbia, and Manitoba are curently members. It has an efficiency standards
strategy, including building energy-effciency code upgrades, that supports efforts to promote
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 38
higher energy-efficiency and lower greenhouse gas emissions. Idaho is one of eleven observers
in this initiative now and expanded involvement could provide additional opportnities for
collaboration and leveraging.
Opportunities for IPC
Utilities can be major forces in moving ahead appliance (and building) standards within states.
The role played by utilities in California is an especially useful modeL. Originally, the CEC
conducted most of the research and spearheaded the entire standards development process.
Starting in the late 1990s, however, the utilities began to assume a proactive role in this process
for several reasons, including the fact that upgrading efficiency standards appeared to be a very
cost effective way to reduce utility loads. Over time, the CEC and the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) have acknowledged the major contributions that utilities can provide
through the standards development process. From the utilities' perspective, of course, it is
important that equitable cost recovery occur and that energy savings from the standards be
properly attributed to the utilities. The regulatory framework in California is evolving to provide
the incentives necessary to reward the utilities appropriately for their efforts.
Utilities can often contrbute in the area of market research and in the provision of data related to
their markets. Needed data include marketplace product efficiency ranges, incremental costs,
product attributes, the technical differences among products with differing efficiency levels, the
nature of product distrbution channels, etc. Because the utilities are often in a unique position to
acquire much of these data, their assistance can be invaluable. This role wil be especially
important where national data are not trly representative of markets or conditions in Idaho, or
where there are wide ranges or discrepancies in the data that need to be resolved in Idaho in
order to gain the confidence of those who have to enact particular standards. IPC can make a
significant contribution in this area. California's utilities have each developed their own program
to provide this type of information and their efforts are closely coordinated.
To be most effective, utilities could be an active participant in a wide range of efforts, whether at
the state, regional, or federal leveL. In some cases, supporting a regional or national collaborative
effort can fulfill this role. Currently, IPC is an active member of the Northwest Energy
Efficiency Allance (NEEA) and the Northwest Power Planning Council's Regional Technical
Forum (RTF).
Finally, fmdings from this analysis and those from past studies suggest that appliance effciency
standards have the potential to provide significant, cost-effective energy and demand savings. It
is possible that IPC might benefit from enhancing its IRP process to assess new appliance
standards as one tool for addressing load growth. The final chapter recommends specific steps
that IPC could take to do so.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 39
6. Recommendations
This chapter provides recommendations based on findings from this study. The first group is
targeted at specific appliance standards, either for consideration in the near term or in the future.
The second set of recommendations lays out specific research activities that would be needed to
support the adoption and implementation of new appliance standards. The final section presents
broader recommendations directed primarily at IPC, but also at other state entities, to ensure that
the policy context, analytic tools, and infrastrcture are in place to make long-term standards
development a viable and effective process.
Appliance Standards for Consideration
Table 15 summarizes the appliances standards analyzed, based on those adopted in Oregon, that
could be immediately considered in Idaho. Four apply specifically to equipment used in the
commercial building sector. One, state-regulated incandescent reflector lamps, are used in both
commercial and residential buildings. The last four are predominantly in the residential sector
(single-voltage external power supplies can apply to products used in the commercial sector too).
Table 15. Recommended Appliance Standards for Idaho
Appliance Sector
Metal Halide Fixtures Commercial
Water Coolers Commercial
Hot Food Holding Cabinets Commercial
Walk.in Refrigerators-Freezers Commercial
State-regulated Incandescent Reflector Lamps Residential/Commercial
Single-voltage External Power Supplies Residential
Compact Audio Products Residential
DVD Players Residential
Portable Hot Tubs/Spas Residential
The appliance that exhibited the largest potential for energy savings is not included in this table,
however. High-effciency natural gas residential furnace fans can save as much energy as all the
other appliances shown in the table combined. The reason they are not included is because the
best venue for increasing the effciency of this equipment is unclear. It is possible Idaho could
join other states that are adopting such standards, but because the ultimate decision whether to
allow the standard is DOE's, there is some risk the effort wil not produce a viable standard.
Oregon's approach has been to bypass the need for a standard and modify the state residential
building energy code in a way that is likely to lead to widespread installation of high-effciency
furnaces that save natual gas as well as electrcity. In Idaho's case the pros and cons of both
approaches should be considered before deciding on one. In particular, the process for
incorporating such a requirement in the state's building code needs to be examined. The
uncertainties in this process need to be weighed against the risks of going the standard adoption
route.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 40
Two other standards merit future examination. One is for general service incandescent lamps.
California has standards now for these products that provide a very modest improvement in
average effciency. Nevada has enacted standards for many of these products, effective in 2012,
that call for a 30% effciency improvement. Idaho should monitor the status of this standard and
the efforts of other states that are seeking much higher lighting efficiencies. More than one state,
for example, is considering the option of banning standard incandescent light bulbs altogether.
A second lighting standard that should be kept on the table is the one for metal halide luminaires.
In a few years, it wil be time to consider whether the current standard should be upgraded to
require the use of electronic ballasts. These have too limited a market share at present to be
considered as the basis for a standard, but their presence in the market may grow and other states
may take actions to upgrade their requirements.
Research Needs
Efforts by IPC and the State of Idaho to analyze and adopt appliance efficiency standards need to
be based on comprehensive research. This study relied on the best information available to
estimate both energy impacts and costs. However, this report pointed out limitations in the
research that need to be addressed.
Much of the information relied upon was from studies conducted for other states or regions.
Idaho-specific data are critical for estimating the potential impacts accurately. As more recent
information and new products become available, the assumptions and inputs used in this study
can be updated. For example, Idaho-specific, current estimates of the saturation of compact audio
products, residential furnaces, metal halide fixtures, and reflector lamps are essential to estimate
the overall impacts of the proposed standards.
Another key input in this analysis was the penetration of appliances in the market already
meeting the standard. Although the best sources available were used for this study, there was
little information specific to Idaho. It is possible that some of the inputs used were substantially
different from the actual conditions in Idaho.
A cost-effectiveness analysis including the conventional costs and benefits, with future costs
discounted appropriately, would require the incremental consumer costs to be estimated for
Idaho. These costs should be developed with respect to typical effciency levels in the Idaho
market. Other costs of undertaking an effort to develop and implement appliance standards
should be calculated.
A second-order data quality need is for IPC-specific end-use load shapes. This analysis used load
shapes derived from PacifiCorp data and, though they should be reasonably accurate for IPC's
service area, it would be worthwhile to analyze IPC's load shapes for the major appliance
categories.
Another source of information to monitor is the ASAP's annual "model standards bil" for states
to use in setting consistent standards. Supporting product and market data accompany the bil,
and the data are available on a state-by-state basis, with adjustments made for climate, operating
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 41
hours, and energy prices. The 2008 model bil wil be available in the first quarter of 2008 and
this could be a valuable source of more current information for Idaho when it is published.
Capacity, Infrastructure, and Policy
There is limited capacity at the Idaho state level to support the standard-setting process, develop
and staff compliance and enforcemeht activities, and engage Idaho in the national state appliance
standards network or regional activities. The new Offce of Energy Resources offers an
opportnity to initiate and conduct these activities if the state chooses to invest in developing
these capabilities.
The legislative, administrative, and a hybrid legislative/administrtive process should be assessed
to determine which would work the best for Idaho in developing and implementing appliance
standards. The steps necessary to establish the preferred infrastrcture and process should be
initiated as soon as possible to ensure that standards can be implemented in a timely way.
Utilities and state agencies should continue involvement with organizations such as CEE,
ACEEE, and NEEA in support of appliance standards. They should also be aware of the ASAP-
organized group of states that are enacting standards and supporting follow-up standards at the
federal leveL.
Finally, Idaho could work toward establishing the policies and planning procedures necessary to
leverage the capabilities and resources of utilties in the most effective way to achieve cost-
effective energy savings through new standards. The utility IRP process is one possible venue for
considering the role of effciency standards. California is developing an approach for promoting
the efforts of utilities to upgrade efficiency standards that could be an informative model for
other states.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 42
Appendix A: Technical Appendix
The following appendix provides all the tables presented in this report in a single location for
reference purposes.
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 43
.5
"C ::ai "C"C ::::-
U U).5
0000 000 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 000 000 0 ~ZZ Z ZZ Z Z~~~~~~~~~Z Z ZZZ Z ZZZ ~
JCI oc:
èñ
Cli:.C
.8.i.~~
Z
"0 "0
~ ~CO COC CW W
~
COCW
~l'i:W
"0~l'i:W
~Õl'i:W
~COCW
"0
~COi:W
~l'i:W
~Õl'i:W
~
COCW
~ ~CO l'i: i:W W
~Õl'i:W
rI"0i.="0==-fL
Ql
CJ==...-Cl
~
~ai"C
If
~
tš:!w
~8888~~,~ N N N N N N
Cli::i~
cb:;a:
l: Cl 0 po~ ~ ~ ~~~00N N
"C
t;CIi:w
8888888NNNNNNN LO8N 8888N N N N
LO LO88N N
-=...-=Ql-=
=-.-~
Ql
:e=
Eo
i:oCl
~
~
13:!w
0) po po po po Cl po Cl po po 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)8888888~~8~8~888N N N N N N N ,~ ,~ N ,~ N ,~ N N N
C'8N
Cl8N
"C
~i:w
LO LO LO LO LO LO LO LO LO LO po po po po po po88888888~8~88888N N N N N N N N ,~ N ,~ N N N N N
LO8N
..
~aiU)
ü u ü ü a: u u u u ~ ü ü ü a: a: a: a: u u ü u a: u u ~ a:
Bi:
.!2ë.a.c:
~ i~ i:l' 'E~ ;§ iß
~ ~~o E;:
~ ~ ~ ~co c: == en.. Ol ~
2i ,ñ i: 0)o 0 .~ igC: IE .. 'i¡~õ ~ .x ~üi-wc.
l!
~0)-=..~ .s.2 ~l' 0)E .Ql
~ ~-=E,'= ~~ -æ -æ
~ &~.~0) ~ ~
~ E E~ 88
~0.
lß E- ~
~ ~
!: -§~J!
~ ~
0) "E:E ~-æ ~.i ~
i ~"" .f
~ ~0) EO);: l!l!~ O).E~o. ~ ~Eig~ ~~~a ~s~igw.$"O O)õ ~ i:0)
._iß_ ~ 0) i: t "E __:: -æ ~ ..~ 0.o..5l'::8w .. A ~bo.~..tJ"O co 0)§-'6 ~ 5 e ~ 0..$ ~~~"O
~ lD C)rt o."Oi: ~:i l' l"'..i:"'o .g:E-'~è:~~ ~=§.gi=g ~~g8.~~:ê8.O).iëP~ ~Q)_æ ~-t ~~..!5"O'-ocoO) ""~=oE'
è: +¡" g i: ~ ëi:: Cl ~" ~lD ~ - ~ E 0 co .5 Ö 0) ~ .2""'':iÕ~ 0;:1:,5 lD ~~~ilS ;:UO&ü:2....:E
~..:;..
:Eg..i:
~ O)~"C ~ "'
ûi Q) c:0) m ~
~.i .5
c. :i 0)"; § (.
~ -æ - .~
0. i: .~ igE .Ql ~5.~~"êolEEigo ~ 0 0)c.i-Uø
~i:J!
~l'E.2
-æE0)"0,ñæ
EÆ
.E
en
"Em
-g~
~
C)c:ao"0m
E
,g
¡EQ)l!Q.
l!m'"
¡
tf~Q)
.5
~Õc:
l!mt::"0~Q.
ai'"Æ...g
en"Em"0c:
~
1iQ)"0JE..C)::o..I-oO
íî
~
~a: ::o 0II .!C' (.
~ .s Q:O).i E E~ ES~~
"- ii ~ "ê! gIi c: _ (1._~~~~i~.Qpõ Eìñ"§c;oii"lEci¿,"9O:~mro-'o Q) '" '" (.Èìp:J:J:ioo'"'EmecD.§~~ï.;;! ai æ æ.~
¡ ¡iii..~::::~"'lI~~Bj::t:8 == == = (ts...c....:J~
~
'EQ)
Een
¡ßen
~
en
"Eel"0i:
tË
~i:
.!!e.0.c:;:i:~
E
8
~c-o..el
32
I
2i:el::o
Table A2. Data Sources
Reference Number Source
1 Codes and Standards Enhancement Initiative (CASE) Studies
2 ASAP & ACEEE Model Bil Report - Idaho
3 Idaho Power specific coincident factor applied to per unit energy savings value
4 Conversation with appliance code expert (details provided when applicable)
5 ASAP & ACEEE Report Number ASAP-6/ACEEE-A062, March 2006
Table A3. Data Summary: Metal Halide Fixtures
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effctive
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1,2 Upgrade Unitlear) 1,2 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years) 1,2
168,366 21%132,588 307 0.07 $30.00 20
Table A4. Data Summary: Incandescent Reflector Lamps
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effctive
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1 Upgrade Unitlear)2 (kW/unit)3 Cost1,2 (Years)l
385,000 60%154,000 61 0.01 $1.80 5
Table AS. Data Summary: External Power Supplies
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effctive
Total Appliance Efficiency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1 Upgrade Unitlear)1,2 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)l
6,300,000 54%3,402,000 4 0.0005 $0.50 8
Table A6. Data Summary: Water Dispensers
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effctive
Total Appliance Efficiency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration2 Upgrade Unitlear)l (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)2
4,800 41%2,832 266 0.04 $12 11
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 45
Table A7. Data Summary: Commercial Hot Food Holding Cabinets
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Efficiency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration2 Upgrade UnitIear)1,2 (kW/unit)3 Cost1,2 (Years)2
2,700 43%1,539 1,815 0.27 $450 14
Table A8. Data Summary: Commercial Walk-In Refrigerator-Freezers
Current Energy Populaton Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1 Upgrade Unitear)2 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)1
4,300 20%860 8,220 1.27 $950 10
Table A9. Data Summary: Compact Audio Products
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1 Upgrade Unitear)2 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)1,2
1,069,300 38%662,966 53 0.01 $1.00 5
Table AIO. Data Summary: DVD PlayerslRecorders
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effctive
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration1 Upgrade Unitear)2 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)1
1,336,500 77%307,395 11 0.0013 $1.00 5
Table All. Data Summary: Portable Hot Tubs
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration2 Upgrade Unitlear)1 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)2
16,400 20%13,120 250 0.03 $100.00 8
Table A12. Residential Furnace Fans
Current Energy Population Annual Energy Peak Demand Consumer Effective
Total Appliance Effciency Subject to Savings (kWh Per Savings Incremental Useful Life
Population1 Penetration 5 Upgrade Unitlear)1 (kW/unit)3 Cost2 (Years)2
256,000 12%225,280 599 0.09 $100.00 18
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 46
Table A13. Total Savings Potential for Existing Appliance Stock
Eligible Units Per Unit kWh Total kWhlYr PerUnitkW Totl kW
Appliance Sector in Idaho Savings Savings*Savings Savings*
Metal Halide Fixtures COM 132,588 307 45,141,258 0.0703 10,534
Reflector Lights RES 154,000 61 10,417,946 0.0110 1,907
External Power Supplies RES 3,402,000 4 15,468,554 0.0005 1,803
Water Coolers COM 2,832 266 836,836 0.0395 126
Hot Food Holding Cabinets COM 1,539 1,815 3,097,753 0.2691 468
Walk-in Refrigerators-Freezers COM 860 8,220 7,839,743 1.2669 1,231
Compact Audio Products RES 662,966 53 38,967,153 0.0061 4,542
DVD Players RES 307,395 11 3,749,912 0.0013 437
HotTubs RES 13,120 250 3,637,520 0.0280 416
Residential Furnace Fans RES 225,280 599 149,651,476 0.0872 22,192
*T otal energy and demand savings adjusted to account for losses based on IPC system distribution secondary loss factors
Table Al4. Total Savings Potential of Existing Stock by Sector
Total Estimated Energy Total Estimated
Sector Savings (kWhlYr)Demand Savings (kW)
Commercial 56,915,590 12,359
Residential 221,892,560 31,297
Overall 278,808,151 43,657
Table AlS. Recommended Appliance Standards for Idaho
Appliance Sector
Metal Halide Fixtures Commercial
Water Coolers Commercial
Hot Food Holding Cabinets Commercial
Walk-in Refrigerators-Freezers Commercial
State-regulated Incandescent Reflector Lamps Residential/Commercial
Single-voltage External Power Supplies Residential
Compact Audio Products Residential
DVD Players Residential
Portable Hot T ubslSpas Residential
Quantec - Idaho Power Company Appliance Standards Assessment 47
Submitted To:
q¡
An ¡OACORP company
Demand Side Management
Potential Study - Volume i
Submitted By:
~1NexQnT
August 14, 2009
Contents
SECTION 1
Volume I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARy.........................................................................................................1-1
1.1 OVERVIEW ..............................................................................................................................................1-1
1.2 IPC BASELIN ........................................ .................. ..... ........... ....... ........................................................ 1-1
1.3 CALCULATION METHODOLOGY.................................. .............................................................................1-2
1.4 RESULTS..................................................................................................................................................1-3
1.4.1 Savings Potential...............................................................................................................................1-3
1.4.2 DSM Program Recommendations......................................................................................................1-6
1.4.3 DSM Dynamic Model.........................................................................................................................1-7
SECTION 2 CALCULATION METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 OVERVIEW OF CALULATION METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................2-1
2.1.1 Baseline Definition ............................................................................................................................2-2
2.1.2 Measure Definition ............................................................................................................................ 2-2
2.1.3 Achievable Potential Calculation ...................................................................................................... 2-3
2.2 UNCERTAINTY .........................................................................................................................................2-3'
SECTION 3 RESIDENTIAL POTENTIAL................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 SUMMARY OF RESIDENTIAL POTENTIAL.................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2 RESIDENTIA POTENTIAL MODEL ...........................................................................................................3-6
3.2.1 Overview............................................................................................................................................ 3-6
3.2.2 Baseline Energy consumption............................................................................................................ 3-6
3.2.3 Measures Screening...........................................................................................................................3-7
3.2.4 Achievable Potential.......................................................................................................................... 3-8
3.3 RESIDENTIA PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................ 3-9
3.3.1 Appliance Program............................................................................................................................ 3-9
3.3.2 Energy Star Lighting........................................................................................................................ 3-10
3.3.3 Weatherizationfor Qualifed Customers ......................................................................................... 3-10
3.3.4 Energy House Calls ......................................................................................................................... 3-10
3.3.5 Energy Star Homes .......................................................................................................................... 3-11
3.3.6 Rebate Advantage ............................................................................................................................ 3-11
3.3.7 Heating and Cooling Effciency.......................................................................................................3-12
3.3.8 Weatherization Kit and Building Shell Retrofit ............................................................................... 3-12
SECTION 4 COMMERCIAL POTENTIAL .................................................................................................4-1
4.1 SUMMARY OF COMMERCIA POTENTIAL.................................................................................................4-1
4.2 COMMERCIA POTENTIA MODEL ........................................................................................................4-10
4.2.1 Overview.......................................................................................................................................... 4-10
4.2.2 Baseline Energy Consumption.........................................................................................................4-10
4.2.3 Measure Evaluation.........................................................................................................................4-10
4.2.4 Achievable Potential........................................................................................................................4-14
4.3 COMMERCIAL PROGRA RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................................................4-14
4.3.1 Easy Upgrades................................................................................................................................. 4-14
4.3.2 Building Effciency...........................................................................................................................4-16
SECTION 5 INDUSTRIAL POTENTIAL .....................................................................................................5-1
5.1 SUMMARY OF INDUSTRIAL POTENTIAL ................................. ........ ... ....................................................... 5-1
5.2 INDUSTRIAL POTENTIAL MODEL .......... ............................................ ....................................................... 5-7
Tables and Figures
5.2.1 Overview............................................................................................................................................ 5-7
5.2.2 Baseline Energy Consumption........................................................................................................... 5-7
5.2.3 End-Use Savings Potential................................................................................................................ 5-8
5.2.4 Market Penetration............................................................................................................................5-8
5.2.5 Program Economics ........................................................................................................................ 5-10
5.3 INDUSTRIAL PROGRA RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ ............................ 5- 1 1
SECTION 6 IRRGATION POTENTIAL ....................................................................................................6-1
6.1 SUMMARY OF IRRIGATION POTENTIAL ..................................................................... ............ ................... 6- 1
SECTION 7 DEMAND RESPONSE POTENTIAL ..................................................................................~.. 7-1
7.1 SUMMARY OF DEMAN RESPONSE POTENTIA ........................................ ............. .................................. 7-1
7.2 DEMAN RESPONSE POTENTIAL MODEL................................................................................................. 7-2
7.3 DEMAN RESPONSE PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................................................7-4
7.3.1 Summary: Potential and Costs........................................................................................................... 7-4
7.3.2 AIC Cool Credit ................................................................................................................................. 7-5
7.3.3 Irrigation Peak Rewards.................................................................................................................... 7-5
7.3.4 Commercial Program ........................................................................................................................ 7-5
7.3.5 Industrial Program ............................................................................................................................ 7-6
7.3.6 Aggregators .......................................................................................................................................7-6
SECTION 8 DSM POTENTIAL SIMULATION MODEL.........................................................................8-1
8.1 MODEL SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................8-1
8.1.1 Model Outputs ...................................................................................................................................8-1
8.1.2 Model Variables.................................................................................................................................8-1
4.1NexQßT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study iii
Tables and Figures
Tables and Figures
Tables
Table 1-1 2007 DSM Program Summary
Table 3-1 2009 Residential Achievable Savings
Table 3-2 2009 Costs and Benefits Summary
Table 3-3 DEER database Net-to-Gross ratios
Table 4-1 2009 Commercial Sector Savings Summary
Table 4-2 2009 Commercial DSM Program Economics
Table 4-3 Current Measure Screening Results
Table 5-1 2009 Industral Potential Savings Summary
Table 5-2 2009 Industrial DSM Program Economics
Table 5-3 Forecasted Market Penetration Rate by Sector 2009-2019
Table 7-1. Rates Summary
Table 7-2 Cost per kW per year (in $)
Table 7-3 Costs per Customer (in $)1
Table 7-4 Demand Response Potential (MW)
Table 7-5 Levelized Costs ($/kW)
1-2
3-3
3-3
3-7
4-9
4-9
4-13
5-6
5-6
5-9
7-4
7-4
7-4
7-4
7-5
Figures
Figure 1.1 2007 IPC Electrcity Sales by Sector 1-2
Figure 1.22007 IPC Average Load by Sector 1-2
Figure 1.3 Achievable Electrcity Savings Forecast 2009-2028 1-4
Figure 1.4 Achievable Peak Demand Savings Forecast 2009-2028 1-4
Figure 1.5 2009 Achievable Potential Electrcity Savings by Sector 1-5
Figure 1.6 2009 Achievable Potential Peak Demand Savings by Sector and Program 1-5Figure 1.7 IPC DSM Supply Cure 1-6Figure 2.1 DSM Potential Calculation Process 2-1
Figure 3.1 Residential Electrcity Potential Savings Forecast 3-1
Figure 3.2 Evolution of Residential Energy Savings by Program 3-2Figure 4.1 Commercial Electricity Savings Forecast 4-2
Figure 4.2 Commercial Demand Savings Forecast 4-2
Figure 4.3 Commercial Achievable Electrcity Savings Forecast by Program 4-3
Figure 4.4 2009 Easy Upgrades Achievable Electricity Savings by Measure Category 4-4
Figure 4.52019 Easy Upgrades Achievable Electricity Savings by Measure Category 4-4
Figure 4.6 2009 Building Efficiency Achievable Electrcity Savings by Measure Category 4-5
Figure 4.7 2019 Building Efficiency Achievable Electrcity Savings by Measure Category 4-5
Figure 4.8 2009 Commercial Achievable Electrcity Savings by Sub-Sector 4-6
Figure 4.92019 Commercial Achievable Electricity Savings by Sub-Sector 4-6
Figure 4.10 2028 Easy Upgrades Non-Lighting Supply Curve 4-7
L.1Neønr Idaho Power Company. Demand Side Management Potential Study iv
Tables and Figures
Figure 4.11 2028 Easy Upgrades Lighting Supply Cure 4-7Figure 4.12 2028 Building Effciency Supply Curve 4-8
Figure 5.1 2009 Industrial Potential GWh Savings and Percent of Total Sales 5-1
Figure 5.2 2009 Industral MW Savings Potential and Percent of Total Load 5-2Figure 5.3 Industrial Achievable GWh Savings Forecast 5-3Figure 5.4 Industrial Achievable MW Savings Forecast 5-3
Figure 5.52009 Industral Achievable Potential Savings by End-use - Moderate IncentiveScenario 5-4
Figure 5.6 2019 Industral Achievable Potential Savings by End-use - Moderate IncentiveScenario 5-4
Figure 5.7 2009 Industral Achievable Potential Savings by Sector - Moderate IncentiveScenario 5-5
Figure 5.82019 Industrial Achievable Potential Savings by Sector - Moderate IncentiveScenario 5-5
Figure 5.9 2009 Custom Effciency Supply Curve - Moderate Incentive Scenario 5-6
Figure 5.10 IPC's Custom Effciency Market Penetration Cure 5-9
Figure 7.1 - Demand Response Potential 7-1
"''JNexQnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study v
Section 1 Executive Summary
1.1 OVERVIEW
In December, 2007 Idaho Power Company (IPC) retained Nexant, Inc. (Nexant) to conduct a
demand side management (DSM) potential study and create a dynamic model of the DSM
resource available in the IPC service terrtory. IPC's curent DSM program offerings extend to
the residential, commercial, industral, and irrgation sectors. This study uses the current program
offerings as a framework on which to model the DSM potential available through 2028.
This study provides an evaluation of the DSM resource available to each ofIPC's primary
sectors with a focus on both demand response (DR) and energy effciency (EE) programs. DR
programs target reduction of peak summer loads through customer curtailment of energy
intensive processes during peak hours. This report identifies the DR potential across all ofIPC's
sectors based on the continuation of existing programs and the introduction of new programs. EE
DSM programs encourage customers to install energy efficient equipment thereby saving
electricity and reducing system demand. Nexant used its DSM experience and close working-
relationship with electric companies in the Northwest to create a comprehensive, end-use
forecast ofIPC's achievable savings.
As part of its evaluation of the achievable DSM potential, Nexant reviewed IPC's current DSM
programs and built a framework on which to build realistic recommendations for future program
adaptation. Nexant used its experience with similar utility DSM programs, knowledge of the EE
market, and familiarity with appropriate code requirements to establish firm proposals for
program development and maturation.
1.2 IPC BASELINE
Incorporated in 1989, IPC has grown to provide electrc service for a significant number of
customers throughout Idaho and Oregon. In 2007 IPC provided electrc service to a total of
481,651 customers in southern Idaho and eastern Oregon. IPC sold a total of 14,151 GWh of
electrcity and averaged a firm load of 1,800 MW in 2007. Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2 show the
breakdown ofIPC's 2007 sales and load respectively by primary sector.
Secion 1 Executive Summaiy
Additional
Firm
8%Additional Loss
Firm 9%
7%Residental
34%
higation
11%
Residental
36%
h:ustral
15%
Commercal
28%
Commercial
25%
Figure 1.1 2007 IPC Electricity Sales by Sector Figure 1.2 2007 IPC Average Load by Sector
IPC has been investing in DSM programs since 2001 and has been steadily increasing its
spending on the DSM portion of its available resource. IPC currently offers a suite of DR and EE
programs across all the primary sectors. IPC's DR and EE programs have grown to account for
0.4% of total sales and 3.16% ofload in 2007. Table 1-1 shows an overview ofIPC's DSM
program offerings and savings in 2007.
Table 1.12007 DSM Program Summary
Sector Program Type Savings
Energy Effciency Demand Response MWh MW
Residential ././12,441 11.4
Commercial ./8,001 1.2
Industrial ./29,789 3.6
Irrigation ././12,304 40.8
Total:62,535 57
1.3 CALCULATION METHODOLOGY
The DSM resource for EE programs can be charcterized by the technical potential, economic
potential, and achievable potential. The technical potential describes the savings available if all
baseline equipment stock was replaced with every applicable measure. The economic potential is
a calculation of savings when all measures that are cost-effective are installed. Market
penetration rates are then developed from market research and evaluation data gathered through
the implementation of representative DSM programs, primarily in the Northwest. Applying these
market penetration rates to the economic potential yields the calculation of achievable potential
which represents the savings that IPC can expect to achieve from EE programs.
Nexant conducted the evaluation ofEE programs using a bottom-up modeling approach
following a general three (3) step process. The following core steps employed to develop a
model of IPC and its potential DSM resource are described below.
í-'1NexØnT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 1-2
Section 1 Executive Summary
.Step 1: Characterize IPC consumption. Nexant first created a baseline energy consumption
model of each primary sector. Nexant used resources available through IPC, past projects,
and other DSM studies to define the sector energy consumption by sub-sectors and end-uses.
Step 2: Define applicable measures. The breakdown of energy consumption by end-use
allowed Nexant to identify suitable measures for each sector. For each measure the savings,
cost, and lifetime were assembled and used to evaluate the measure for cost-effectiveness.
Measures that did not pass this screening were excluded from the calculation of the economic
and achievable potentiaL.
Step 3: Calculate Achievable Potential. Selected measures were applied to the IPC baseline
and the achievable potential was calculated through the application of market penetration
rates. Nexant drew from its large breadth of experience in the field ofDSM forecasting and
program implementation to develop accurate and consistent market penetration rate curves.
.
.
The evaluation of DR potential is calculated following similar steps, with a few notable
variations. First, IPC's peak load is characterized according to sector and appropriate end use.
Next, rather than evaluate the saving potential for measures, technical load impact rates for the
DR program are estimated. Technical load impact is the percent reduction in load resulting from
the program. Finally, to calculate achievable potential, program participation rates and event
participation rates are applied to determine actual load reduction during a summer peak period.
The results of the achievable potential calculation were evaluated for accuracy against the
historical results ofIPC's program implementation and Nexants observations of similar DSM
programs.
1.4 RESULTS
1.4.1 Savings Potential
Nexant calculated IPC's DSM potential through 2028 and found significant opportnity for
program growth. Total achievable savings for the 2009 program year are expected to be 100.5
GWh of electrcity and 186.8 MW ofload1,2. For a ten (10) year forecast period, achievable
electricity savings are expected to grow 71.4% to reach 172.3 GWh and demand savings wil
increase by 7.4% to account for 200.6 MW.3 Figure 1.3 and Figure 1.4 show the electrcity and
demand savings respectively, forecast through 2028. Complete forecasts through 2028 for each
sector can be found in Appendix B.
2
All savings in this document are reported at generation level, accounting for i 0.9% line losses.
The industral achievable potential savings were calculating using four (4) different incentive scenaros. The
savings reported here and in Figue 1.3 through Figure 1.6 are representative of a moderate incentive scenario
paying 50% of customer costs.
The lower growth potential for peak demand savings reflects the relative maturity of demand response programs
to date. Demand response impacts can continue to grow, but are already closer to achievable market potentiaL.
1.1 Nexanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 1-3
Section 1 Executive Summary
l
250
200
150 i: Irrgation
i: Industrial
El Commercial
. Residential100
50
~Ç) ,,"
tG tG ,,'-
tG
~
tG
,,~
tG ~
tG ~~ ~..,- tG ~tGa."tG
Year
Figure 1.3 Achievable Electricity Savings Forecast 2009.2028
200
150 i: Irrigation
;:i: Industrial:i El Commercial
100 . Residential
50
250
~~~~~~~p~~tG tG tG tG tG tG tG tG tG tG
Year
Figure 1.4 Achievable Peak Demand Savings Forecast 2009.2028
In the near term, the industrial sector provides a majority of the electricity savings, accounting
for 51 % of the total achievable potentiaL. The breakdown of electricity savings by sector in 2009
t:'NeOnT 1-4Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study
Section 1 Executive Summary
can be seen in Figure 1.5. Demand response programs are estimated to achieve a total load
reduction of 169 MW in 2009 which accounts for 90.5% of the total achievable load reduction.
Figure 1.6 shows the breakdown of peak demand savings in 2009 by sector and program type.
Industrial
51%
Irrgation
12%
Residential
13%
I~ Irrgation
I~ Residential
i: Commercial
i: Industrial
Figure 1.5 2009 Achievable Potential Electricity Savings by Sector
Commercial DR
18%
Induslòal DR
13%
Imgation EE
2%
Irgation DR
27"10
Residential DR
32%
Figure 1.6 2009 Achievable Potential Peak Demand Savings by Sector and Program
"'1 Nfanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 1-5
Section 1 Executive SummaI)
Figure 1.7 shows the aggregated supply curve for IPC's DSM resource in 2028. This figure is
based on the achievable electrcity savings for the residential, commercial, and industral sectors.
$0.100
$0.090
~
$0.080
$0.070~-$0.060II0(,
~$0.050
:¡~$0.040'tCD.~$0.030ãi:.CD..$0.020
$0.010
$-
I
~~
-'
r
o 50,000 1,000,00 1,50,00 2,00,00 2,500,000
Cumulative Achievable Potental
Figure 1.71PC DSM Supply Curve
1.4.2 DSM Program Recommendations
Nexant recommends the introduction of a number of new programs and measures to IPC's suite
of programs.
Energy Effciency Recommendations
In the residential sector Nexant sees potential benefits from the addition of a building shell and
weatherization program. Nexant anticipates that this program wil provide residential customers
with an energy audit to identify and fix issues with home weatherization. It is estimated that this
program could achieve 7.8 GWh of savings by 2019 and account for 27% of IPC' s total
residential savings.
Nexant also recommends that the current Appliance Program be expanded to include high
efficiency water heaters, EnergyStar refrgerators, and a refrgerator recycling program. These
measures wil combine to achieve a total of 1.6 GWh of savings by 2019. Finally, the EnergyStar
Lighting program should be ramped down as federal code has mandated a phase out of
incandescent bulbs.
In the commercial sector, Nexant recommends that a number of measures currently offered
through the Easy Upgrades and Building Effciency programs be removed or adjusted. IPC
should re-evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the following measures:
· Flat Panel LCD Display (Easy Upgrades - Plug Load)
'-"Neanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 1-6
Section 1 Executive SummaI)
· Plug Load Occupancy Sensors (Easy Upgrades - Plug Load)
· High-efficiency Coin-op Washers (Easy Upgrades - Plug Load)
· Multiplex Refrigeration Systems (Easy Upgrades ~ Grocery)
· Window Film (Easy Upgrades - Building Shell)
· Effciency Complex Cooling Systems (Building Efficiency - HV AC)
It is also recommended that IPC expand the Easy Upgrades program to include a number of new
measures. Nexant believes expanding the current motor measures category to include high
efficiency motors rated from 250 hp to 500 hp wil yield additional energy savings. Escalator
motors controllers would also be a cost effective addition. Additionally, it is recommended that
LED case lighting be added to the list grocery measures. The lighting program can be expanded
to include 8-lamp, T5HO fixtures, and open loop ground source heat pumps can be added to the
HVAC program. Finally, Nexant proposes that IPC introduce a new category of measures
focused on agricultural equipment. The combined savings from these measures is expected to
reach 3.8 GWh by 2019, accounting for 6.9% of the total commercial energy savings.
Technology is continuously evolving and new energy efficient technologies wil emerge in the
next years. Some promising technologies have been introduced in the market within the last few
years but a lack of implementation information is not conducive to reliable energy savings
forecasting. Emerging technologies should, however, be closely watched. They include new
solid state lighting technologies, occupancy sensors for HV AC applications, ductless heat
pumps, and home energy monitors, among others.
Demand Response Recommendations
Nexant believes that there is a considerable amount of untapped demand response potential in the
commercial and industrial sectors. Introducing a curailable rate program in the commercial and
industrial sectors could result in a significant reduction in peak demand. N exant anticipates a
peak demand reduction potential of an additional 34 MW from the commercial sector and 25
MW from the industrial sector.
1.4.3 DSM Dynamic Model
As part of this DSM potential evaluation, Nexant constrcted a dynamic DSM simulation tool
for each sector to allow IPC to make its own savings forecasts based on variable inputs. The
simulation tool is framed as a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet which Nexant believes provides IPC
with the most transparent platform.
The model has the ability to calculate the technical, economic, and achievable electricity and
demand savings by sub-sector and end-use. The tool also calculates the economics associated
with each scenario. The simulation tool provides a simple intedace which allows the user to
modify key DSM variables such as:
· Total sales and load forecasts
· Wholesale electricity price forecasts
· Line losses
i.1NeKQnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 1-7
Section 1 Executive Summary
· Discount rates
Additionally, the transparent nature of the spreadsheet model allows IPC staff to see and
manipulate all the variables and inputs that they might like to analyze into scenario DSM
forecasting.
i.1NeKan Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 1-8
Section 2 Calculation Methodology
2.1 OVERVIEW OF CALCULATION METHODOLOGY
The general process used by Nexant in the DSM potential study is shown in Figure 2.1 and
described in detail below.
The Regional Technical Forum and the Database for Energy Effcient Resources
Figure 2.1 DSM Potential Calculation Process
Section 2 Calculation Metholog
While the specific process of evaluation for each sector varied slightly, the general process for
calculating the savings potential was the same across all sectors. Nexant conducted this analysis
using three primary steps as described below.
2.1.1 Baseline Definition
N exant first characterized the baseline characteristics of IPC' s electrcity consumption and
building stock by breaking it down in sub-sectors and end-uses. Defining a baseline allowed
Nexant to calculate the expected satuation and prevalence of energy efficient measures. Nexant
drew from a large collection of sources including data provided by IPC, regional reports, and
end-use surveys.
2.1.2 Measure Definition
The second overall step in the process was to identify measures that may be applicable to IPC's
customers. First, a list of measures was built and grouped by end-use. Nexant pulled measures
from IPC's current programs, other utility DSM programs, and market research of emerging
technologies.
Once a comprehensive list of measures was assembled, a database was built defining the savings,
cost, and lifetime of each measure. Nexant used its extensive experience with implementing
DSM programs to determine much of this information. Data was also taken from.large DSM
databases such as the Regional Technical Forum (RTF) and the Database for Energy Efficient
Resources (DEER). Where appropriate, measure savings were calculated to best reflect IPC's
service terrtory.
Once measure data was assembled, the measures were screened for cost effectiveness using the
Total Resource Cost (TRC) test and the Utility Cost (UC) test. The TRC test compares energy
savings with administrative cost and incremental costs of the measure and is shown in Equation
2.1.
TRe = LlkWhx Utiliy. Avoided CostProgam Admin Cost + Measure Cot
The UC test ensures that the utility benefits of implementing the measure outweigh the utility
costs. Equation 2.2 shows the formula for the UC test.
Equation 2.1
""Neanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 2-2
Section 2 Calculation Methodology
UC = LlkWhx Utiliy Avoided CostProgam Admin Cost + Incentives Paid
To take free ridership into account, the formula is multiplied by a net-to-gross ratio that accounts
for the share of the savings due to free ridership. Net-to-gross ratio values were derived from the
values recommended by the California Public Utilities Commission. i
Equation 2.2
Measures that do not pass the TRC or UC test are screened out and not included in the
calculation of economic or achievable potentiaL.
2.1.3 Achievable Potential Calculation
The achievable potential was calculated by incorporating the cost effective measures into the
defined baseline and applying appropriate market penetration rates. The market penetration rate
is the rate of acceptance of a DSM program or measure. Nexants extensive experience with
DSM program implementation and forecasting was used to constrct market penetration rate
curves for each measure or end-use.
Nexant relied heavily on data obtained from the implementation ofPacifiCorp's Energy
FinAnswer, FinAnswer Express, and Self-Direct Credit programs to forecast market penetrtion.
These programs closely match the strcture ofIPC's Easy Upgrades and Custom Efficiency
programs, and Nexant believes that PacifiCorp's Utah service terrtory can act as an important
forecaster in determining the future of IPC' s DSM potentiaL.
2.2 UNCERTAINTY
As with any DSM analysis or forecast, the estimates presented in this study are subject to a
degree of uncertainty. While steps were taken by Nexant to minimize the uncertainty associated
with the savings estimates, measure data and savings forecasts are inherently imprecise.
As described above, a key part of developing a DSM analysis is defining the characteristics of
each measure. The diversity and variability of real-world measure applications is such that
assumptions must be made in order to best characterize each measure. When savings, costs, and
measure lives are applied to measures, they represent the best estimates for IPC's service
terrtory based on available statistics and data.
Creating a forecast of any future event or trend carres with it an inherent degree of uncertainty.
Changes in market prices, customer characteristics, emerging technologies, politics, and
numerous other factors all introduce uncertainty to the forecast. While it is diffcult to predict
In general, California's net-to-gross ratios tend to be lower than in other parts of the country-an effect
attributable to many years of aggressive program implementation and market conditioning, and an increased
level of consumer awareness due to high energy prices (relative to other geographic areas) and historical events
such as California's energy crisis in 2001. To the extent that IPC realizes higher net-to-gross ratios, it may also
achieve higher net progrm savings than estimated in this analysis.
t-1Nexønr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 2-3
Section 2 Calculation Methodology
future events, Nexant relied on its experience of both implementing and evaluating programs to
accurately forecast IPC's DSM potentiaL. Many of the forecasted variables-such as market
penetration rates and administrative costs-are built on empirical data that has been used to
develop accurate trends. The use of empirical data reduces uncertainty by minimizing subjective
estimation from the forecast methodology.
The uncertainty associated with the DSM forecast increases as the forecast timeline gets longer.
This is based on the assumption that the market charcteristics in the short term closely reflect
the current, observable market characteristics. With the addition of each year to the forecast
timeline, the potential for the introduction of unforeseen market varables (as well as emerging
technologies) increases, thus increasing the overall uncertainty.
The transparent nature of the DSM models allows for the development of forecast variables as
new data becomes available. As IPC continues to implement their DSM programs, further data
points can be added to the trend-lines used to forecast DSM potential, thereby increasing the
accuracy of the long-term forecast. Changes in available measures, code requirements, and other
market characteristics can also be modified in the model to accurately adapt the DSM forecasts.
"'''NexQnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 2-4
Section 3 Residential Potential
3.1 SUMMARY OF RESIDENTIAL POTENTIAL
The residential sector alone accounts for 40% ofIPC electricity sales with 5,272,077 MWh biled
in 2008 out ofa total volume of sales of 14,450,350 MWh. In previous years, IPC has developed
a set of seven programs aimed at capturing the large energy effciency resource of the residential
sector. Building on its experience with assessing and managing programs for various electric
utilities in the North West, Nexant has developed a thorough assessment of the curent programs
and an outline for new program developments.
Nexant believes that IPC has the potential to double its energy savings in the next five years.
Nexants DSM model forecasts a potential increase of 14 GWh, from 13 GWh of savings in
2009 to 27 GWh of savings in 2014 and 29 GWh in 2019. Figure 3.1 shows the residential
potential savings forecast through 2028. This stream of savings would come at a cost of
approximately 1.7 cents per kWh for IPC and 6.7 cents per kWh from a Total Resource
perspective. Figure 3.2 shows the evolution of each program share relative to the total energy
savings.
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
~
250,000
::- Technical Potential
200,00 - Economic Potential
- Achievable Potential
150,000
100,000
50,000
# ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ # $ ## ~## # #~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Year
Figure 3.1 Residential Electricity Potential Savings Forecast
Section 3 Residential Potential
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
.s
3:20,000::
15,000
10,000
5,000
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Year
I~ Misc Measures
I~ Building Shell Retrofit Program
El Weatherization Kit
I~ Heating and Cooling effciency
I~ Rebate Advantage
I~ Energy Star Homes
El Energy House Calls
I~ Weatherization
El Lighting
I~ Appliances
Figure 3.2 Evolution of Residential Energy Savings by Program
A number of the existing residential programs have growth potentiaL. In addition, the progressive
phase-out of incandescent bulbs wil deeply modify the shares of savings between the different
programs in the next ten years as shown on the curve above. The Appliances Program was
stared in 2007 and currently includes rebates for Energy Star refrigerators and Clothes Washers.
This program wil account for only 3% of the energy savings in 2009. Nexant recommends
adding new measures including a Refrgerator and Freezer Recycling program, an Energy Star
Program and a Water Heater High Effciency program. These additions wil help ramp up the
Appliances program to 20% of the residential sector total energy savings in 2019.
The Energy Star Lighting program should be progressively ramped down due to the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 which mandates progressive phase-out of incandescent
bulbs and phase-in of CFLs. Since this program alone has provided more than half of all energy
savings in 2007, its progressive phase-out wil have to be anticipated and substitution programs
have to be launched to make up for the large and cost effectives savings provided by the Energy
Star Lighting program. It is expected that this program wil account for less than 25% percent of
the total savings in 2014 and 10% only in 2019.
The Heating and Cooling Efficiency program, started by IPC in the fall of 2007 has considerable
room for growth. This program builds on the specificities of Idaho climate whose hot summers
and cold winters drve high heating and cooling loads. The dress of the climate also makes
evaporative coolers a very effective alternative to traditional air conditioners although
evaporative coolers also have some drawbacks, described more in details in section 3.3.7. This
t-'JNexØnT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 3-2
Section 3 Residential Potential
program alone has an energy savings potential of 4.9GWh (16% of the total savings) in 2014 and
7.3 GWh in 2019.
Nexant also recommends that IPC implement two new programs: a Weatherization Kit program
and a Building Shell Retrofit program. These programs have shown potential when implemented
by other utilities. They include measures such as wall and attic insulation, windows replacement,
electronic thermostats installation and low-flow showerheads.
The energy and peak power savings that this set of programs wil yield by 2009 are summarized
in Table 3-1.
Table 3.12009 Residential Achievable Savings
~clìevalìle Savings Savings % of total loafl
Energy Saved (MWh)12,921 0.24%
Average demand reduction (aMW)1.4 0.23%
Peak Reduction (MW)1.6 0.26%
The percentage of the load reduced by the DSM programs equals only 0.24% of the total load.
This is at the low end ofthe common range for DSM program results in the US. The usual range
is 0.1 % to 0.8% of the load saved annually. This value can reach 1 % in utilities were DSM is a
priority resource.
N exant has developed an estimate of the cost effectiveness of the current and future programs.
The different cost tests and program levelized costs are summarized below:
Table 3.2 2009 Costs and Benefits Summary
Metric east
Customer Costs ($):$3,684,929
Incentives ($):$866,044
Avoided Costs year 2009 ($)$6,717825
Total Resource Levelized Cost ($/kWh) 1 $0.067
Total Utilty Levelized Cost ($/kWh) 1 $0.017
Utility Cost Test BIC Ratio 4.42
Total Resource Cost BIC Ratio 1.54
1 Levelized costs are calculated over the life of the program.
The global set of programs passes both the Total Resource Cost and Utility Cost tests and the
levelized costs are in line with current program costs: 6.6 cents / kWh for the Total Resource
Levelized Cost, and 3.4 cents/kWh for the Utility Levelized Cost. This last number is lower than
the marginal cost of electricity production. The proposed set of energy effciency programs wil
"supply" IPC with DSM resource savings at a lower price than conventional power supplies. The
levelized costs calculated here are expressed in 2009 dollars and are levelized over the lifetime
of the impacts. The total cost of the program implementation wil reach $4.3 milion in 2009
(Total Resource Cost).
í-1NeQnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 3-3
Section 3 Residential Potential
Nexant also developed supply cures to identify the relationship between cost and magnitude of
achievable DSM resources available through implementation of energy efficiency measures. The
supply curves below are broken down into three tyes of dwellings: single family, multi family
and manufactued homes:
$0.080
$0.070
i'$0.060.l~
$0.050-Ul0(,
~$0.040i:::
'C $0.030Gl.!i $0.020..
$0.010
$-
r-
j-;..
.-.-
o 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000
Cumulative Achievable Potential (MWh)
Figure 3.5 Energy Effciency Supply Curve - Aggregate Achievable Potential
$0.080
$0.070
i' $0.060.l
¡¡
i $0.050o(,
~ $0.040
S
"i $0.030N
1 $0.020..
$0.010
$-
i-
..
o 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000
Cumulative Achievable Potential (MWh)
Figure 3.6 Energy Effciency Supply Curve - Single Family Household
""Neonr 3-4Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study
Section 3 Residential Potential
$0.045
$0.040
:è $0.035
~~$0.030-II0 $0.025(.
~;;$0.020::"GI $0.015N
:¡
~$0.010..
$0.005
$-
I
-
r
__.1
,,
5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000
Cumulative Achievable Potential (MWh)
Figure 3.7 Energy Effciency Supply Curve - Multi Family Household
$0.045
$0.040
:è $0.035
~~$0.030-II0 $0.025(.
~
S $0.020"GI $0.015.~
LGI $0.010..
$0.005
$-
-
-
iJ--
,,~
10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000
Cumulative Achievable Potential (MWh)
Figure 3.8 Energy Effciency Supply Curve - Manufactured Home
The measures corresponding to each curve step in the above graphs are detailed in Appendix B.
"'''Neonr 3-5Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study
Section 3 Residential Poential
3.2 RESIDENTIAL POTENTIAL MODEL
3.2.1 Overview
The Residential DSM Potential Model was developed in three successive steps. First, Nexant
developed a baseline of the residential sector energy consumption using a bottom-up approach
broken down by end-uses (refrgerator, air conditioner, lighting, etc.). Once the baseline was
developed and the most energy intensive end-uses identified, Nexant built a list of potential
energy effciency measures. Those measures then underwent a screening process based on a
Total Resource Cost Test and a Utility Cost Test. The last step incorporated the selected
measures into Nexants DSM modeL. The model applies program-specific market penetrations to
each measure and forecasts energy savings for the 2009-2028 period.
3.2.2 Baseline Energy consumption
In the residential sector the development of achievable potential requires using the following
methodology to disaggregate the energy use forecast and create a bottom-up model that breaks
out energy consumption by end use:
· Use population forecast data for the residential sector for the next twenty years
· Estimate end use saturations for the following end-uses:
Electrc Furnace
Electrc Room Heating
Heat Pumps (Heating)
Central AC Units
Heat Pumps (AC)
Room AC Units
Evaporative Coolers
Dishwashers
Clothes Washers
Electrc Water Heaters
First Refrgerators
Second Refrigerators
Freezers
Electrc Clothes Dryers
Televisions
Lighting
Plug Load
i.1Nexønr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 3-6
Section 3 Residential Potential
· Estimate end use Unit Energy Consumptions (UEC) for each separate end use (kWh/year for
each home).
· Use the population data, end use saturations, and end use intensities to build a bottom-up
model ofIPC's residential sector energy usage.
· Reconcile the bottom-up model with the top-down forecast provided by the utility.
Both end-use saturations and Unit Energy Consumptions are derived from the Census Bureau
American Housing Survey of 2005 and from various DSM potential studies (Pacificorp 2006
Potential DSM Study, California Statewide Appliance Saturation Survey, Colorado 2006 DSM
Market Potential Assesment).
3.2.3 Measures Screening
Once the baseline established, a list of energy efficiency measures was created using data from
the NWPCC measure database. This database includes more than 2,000 energy efficiency
measures. Information such as measure lifetime, energy savings, administrative costs, and
incremental costs was extracted from the database. Similar measures were then bundled together
and the corresponding savings and costs were averaged across the bundle of measures. Each
bundle of measures was then screened using the TRC and UC tests as described in Section 2. Net
to Gross Ratio values used for the UC test were derived from the values recommended by the
California Public Utilities Commission and are shown in Table 3-3.
Table 3-3 DEER database Net-to-Gross ratios
iPr:ogram'lr:eâíP'rogram Net.to.Gross Ratios
Appliance early retirement and replacement 0.80
Residential Audits 0.72
Refriaerator Recvclina / Freezer Recvclina 0.35/0.54
Residential Contractor Proaram 0.89
Emeraina Technoloaies 0.83
All other residential proarams 0.80
Nexant used an average administrative cost value for most measures since administrative costs
were rarely included in the NWCC database. These figures would have to be refined using IPC
real administrative costs. All others costs and savings figures used, especially energy savings and
incremental costs are derived from the NWCC database. Drawing on both their engineering
expertise and on the tyical values commonly used in DSM Potential studies, Nexant believes
those figures are reasonable.
The following measures failed the screening:
· EnergyStar dishwashers
· Ceiling fans
· lkW individual PV systems
· EnergyStar homes with heat pumps
· Heat Pump upgrade from air source to geothermal
t.1Neonr Idaho Power Company. Demand Side Management Potential Study 3-7
Section 3 Residential Potential
· Air Conditioner upgrade to higher SEER standard
Although they failed Nexants cost test, the two last measures are included in IPC energy
effciency measure portfolio. Nexant believes that this is because of a probable difference in
administrative costs or in energy savings estimates between the NWPCC database used by
Nexant and IPC's database.
Because they failed the cost tests, the measures listed above were not included in the achievable
potential calculation.
Idaho Power's composite cost of capital was 8.1% as of December 31, 2007. This value was
used in the measure screening process mentioned above. To account for possible discount rate
changes in the future and to understand how sensitive measure cost-effectiveness is to discount
rate changes, Nexant conducted a discount rate sensitivity analysis. Nexant screened the
measures again for a higher (10%) and a lower (6%) discount rate value.
When the discount rate is increased to 10%, the following measures become non cost-effective:
Single Family Measures:
· Gravity Film Heat Exchanger
· Windows replacement - Low income
· Energy Star Home
· Duct Sealing with Heat Pump - Low Income
Manufactured Homes Measures:
· Insulation
When the discount rate is dropped to 6%, no new measures become cost-effective.
It should also be noted that the measures which become non-cost effective following a discount
rate increase to 10% stil have TRC values very close to 1. For more details see the sensitivity
analysis tables in Appendix A.
3.2.4 Achievable Potential
The achievable potential is calculated based on the measures passing the cost test screening. A
market penetration is affected to each measure to account for the fact that only a given
percentage of the customers who renew their equipment a given year (or buy a new house with
new equipment installed) wil adopt a more energy effcient equipment. Market penetrations are
the main drivers in the calculation of the achievable potential savings and have been researched
and adjusted thoroughly by Nexant. For IPC's existing programs, market penetrations have been
fine-tuned with market penetration data from previous years. For all other measures, the market
penetrations are average market penetration values drawn from a large panel of DSM Potential
studies conducted for various utilities throughout the US (e.g., Pacificorp, PG&E, NYSERDA,
i.1NexanT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 3-8
Section 3 Residential Potential
Bonnevile Power Administration, Northwestern Energy, and Georgia Power) and from Nexants
staff experience managing various residential programs.
The main assumptions being used for the achievable potential calculations are described
hereafter.
Insulation measures savings and costs are expressed per square foot of insulation. Nexant used
an average value of 2,200 square foot for individual houses, 800 square foot for multi family
houses and 1,200 square foot for manufactured homes. Those values are derived from the Census
Bureau American Housing Survey of2005 and from IPC's staff inputs. Nexant analysts believe a
total windows surface of 25% of the dwelling sudace to be a reasonable estimate of the actual
area of windows in each home. This value was used for windows replacement measures. For
infitration measures, Nexant staff estimates that existing houses infiltration can be improved by
an average of 0.1 air changes per hour. For all measures restrcted to low income customers,
Nexant researched low income thresholds for different utilities in the US. PG&E threshold was
used in the study. Using data from the Census Bureau, Nexant derived the following share of
each household category that can be classified as low income: 24% of single family households,
27% of multi family households and 40% of manufactued home households. For measures
including both new constrction and retrofit, Nexant chose to use average values between new
constrction and retrofit for savings and cost figures. The DSM potential model breaks down
measures into new constrction and retrofit to account for savings and costs figures that can vary
widely between retrofit and new construction.
The next step consisted of calculating achievable potential savings for each program. A detailed
description of achievable potential savings along with program recommendations is given below.
3.3 RESIDENTIAL PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
3.3.1 Appliance Program
Stil in its infancy in 2007, the Appliance Program holds a large volume of potential energy
savings. It currently includes rebates for Energy Star qualified clothes washers, refrgerators and
ceiling fans only. While the market for those appliances will ramp up quickly in the coming
years and generate 4 GWh of savings in 2014 and 4.6 GWh in 2019, Nexant recommends adding
three other measures that wil yield close to 1 GWh of additional savings in 2014 and 1.4 GWh
in 2019. The first measure is a refrigerator and freezer recycling program which has been
successfully implemented by various utilities across the United States. The measure consists in
collecting old refrigerators and freezers that would otherwise stay connected to the grd when
homeowners buy a new refrigerator or a new freezer. Considering 700 kWh of savings for a
recycled refrigerator and 500 kWh for a recycled freezer, this measure would create 508 MWh of
energy savings in 2014 and up to 700 MWh in 2019. The measure usually includes the payment
of a small rebate. IPC cost structure currently leaves room for a $30 to $50 rebate. NY SERDA ' s
Keep Cool Progrm implemented in the state of New York has a program cost strcture as
follows: 65% incentives, 20% marketing, 15% implementation. Program evaluation studies have
shown that marketing efforts were significantly more effective when a marketing bil stuffer was
added to the mail bil or when advertising campaigns were setup with large scale newspapers. It
i."NexanT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 3-9
Section 3 Residential Potential
has also been shown in a 2005 statewide California study that shortening pick-up delays from 7
to 3 days boosts participation rates by 30%. The incentive payment is also a decisive motivating
factor. If successful, the recycling program could be extended to recycling of Room Air
Conditioners, a measure that has been successfully implemented in several parts of the United
States.
The two additional measures Nexant recommends for addition to the Appliances program are a
Water Heater High Efficiency measure and an Energy Star Freezer measure. The energy savings
ofthe combined measures could reach an estimated 449 MWh by 2019. Energy Star Freezers
have the potential to reach a market penetration of 40%. High effciency water heaters are
believed to have less potential in terms of market share but more potential in terms of energy
savings since their Unit Energy Consumption (UEC) is five times higher than the UEC of a
freezer.
3.3.2 Energy Star Lighting
The Energy Star Lighting program accounted for more than half of IPC energy savings in 2007.
This program has provided a significant stream of savings at a relatively low cost of 1.6 cents per
kWh. The savings from this program will likely start drng up in 2012 for a new federal
standard has been enacted in December 2007 through the Energy Independence and Securty Act
of 2007 that mandates progressive phase-out of incandescent bulbs and phase-in of CFLs. Even
ifNexant does not see any new energy efficient lighting technology in the next couple of years
with the potential to provide the same amount of savings the CFLs have provided in the past, it is
possible that the LED technology wil become viable and provide a modest amount of energy
savings each year. Nexant recommends that IPC monitors technological progress in lighting
technologies in the coming years.
3.3.3 Weatherization for Qualified Customers
The Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers (W AQC) program has been operating
since 1989 and has provided cost-effective weatherization measures for low-income households.
The enrollment has been fairly constant from 2001 to 2004 with around 200-300 customers.
2005 and 2006 have seen an increase to about 570 and 540 customers. 2007 has seen a decrease
to 397 customers~ WAQC has been a reliable program for years. Nexant believes there is a
marginal untapped potential for this program as shown by the customer enrollment increase in
2005 and 2007. Nexant sees a potential 20% increase from current enrollment levels in the long
term. Nexant forecasts that the program's savings wil increase from 1.6 GWh in 2009 to 2.3
GWh in 2014 and 2.6 GWh in 2019 due to both participation increase and population growth.
Nexant did not include the Low Income Insulation measure in its achievable potential calculation
because it did not pass the TRC.
3.3.4 Energy House Calls
Since its inception in 2002, the Energy House Calls program has achieved a very high market
penetration rate relative to the market size: 700 homes participated in 2007. With a measure
lifetime of 20 years, a total stock of approximately 46,000 manufactured homes, and taking into
account that only a fraction of the manufactured homes are heated with electrcal systems,
"'1NeQnT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 3-10
Section 3 Residential Potential
N exant evaluates the maximum turnover stock for the duct sealing measure in year 2009 to be
approximately 720 units. The penetration rate achieved in 2007 is not likely to be sustainable in
the long ru and Nexant believes the program wil see a decrease in participation in the coming
years. Nexant forecasts an annual stream of energy savings comprised between 400MWh and
600 MWh in the coming years if IPC decides to continue the program.
3.3.5 Energy Star Homes
The EnergyStar Homes program has seen a decrease from 439 new Energy Star Homes built in
2006 to 303 in 2007. This trend is mostly due to the real estate downturn in 2007 following the
summer mortgage crisis. Constrction figures in IPC service terrtory were reaching about
12,000 new homes per year before the crisis. They dropped to about 4,000 in 2007. This drop is
most likely temporary and constrction should reach its pre-crisis level again in the coming
years. In those conditions, the construction of Energy Star Homes could reach a market
penetration as high as 25% in the long ru. Market studies over the last decade have shown that
after 10 years of program implementation, market penetrations could be as high as 42% (2005
data for Nevada). In 2005, Texas had a 30% market penetration while California and Arzona
were reaching 20%. The Colorado High Performance Homes 100 has a target of 60%. If IPC
achieves 25% market penetration, it is expected that energy savings could reach 1.1 GWh in
2019 and represent 4% of the total savings in IPC's service terrtory that year.
The $400 incentive curently provided by IPC is a reasonable incentive leveL. Based on past
experiences, the EPA discourages payment of higher incentives. Even at higher levels, the
incentive remains negligible compared to the price of a new house. Investing in marketing
towards home builders is usually more efficient. Past best practices have included:
· Technical assistance to home-builders to better understand Energy Star requirements
· Homebuilders value marketing efforts more than cash incentives
· A common popular addition is a Lighting and Appliance Bonus (Texas implements an
additional $700 bonus for homeowners who install a package of ten Energy Star fixtures and
three Energy Star appliances)
3.3.6 Rebate Advantage
Since its first implementation in 2003, Rebate Advantage has seen its participation grow to about
120 customers in 2007. The number of Energy Star Manufactured Homes manufacturers is much
lower than the number of Energy Star Home builders. For this reason, market trends in
neighboring states have shown that marketing efforts directed towards builders and customers
have more impact than on the Energy Star Homes market. Market shares for SGC and Energy
Star Manufactured Homes typically reached 50% of the market in the past decade. A 50%
market penetration would translate into 200 customers per year on IPC service terrtory. The
energy savings yielded by the Rebate Advantage program are expected to reach close to 871
MWh in 2019.
"'''N8Xønr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 3-11
Section 3 Residential Potential
3.3.7 Heating and Cooling Effciency
Nexant believes that the Heating and Cooling Effciency program is one of the most promising
programs in IPC' s portfolio. It could provide 18% of all energy savings in 2014 and 25% in
2019. Nexant believes that three of the current measures wil provide most of this program
savings:
· Air Conditioner to Heat Pump upgrade: 2.1 GWh savings in 2014,2.7 GWh in 2019,
· Air Conditioner to Evaporative Cooler upgrade: 1.1 GWh savings in 2014, 1.4 GWh in 2019.
The potential on this market is drven by Idaho dr climate and high evaporation rates that
make evaporative coolers technology a very cost-effective alternative to air conditioners. It
should however be noted that evaporative coolers wil face higher market barrers than
conventional AC units. They are traditionally less popular among vendors, who are important
allies in delivering effective programs.. Evaporative coolers can tend to create humidity
build-up inside the home if adequate ventilation is not used or produce odors if pad
maintenance has not been performed regularly. Consumer and vendor education regarding
appropriate ventilation and equipment maintenance practices wil be key to progrm success.
· Heat Pump to higher efficiency Heat Pump upgrade: 1.6 GWh savings in 2014 and 3.3 GWh
in 2019. The room for growth on this particular measure is mostly due to the 27% market
penetration for Energy Star heat pumps and to the fact that heat pumps are one of the main
end-uses in the residential sector
3.3.8 Weatherization Kit and Building Shell Retrofit
Nexant sees a considerable untapped potential in the area of building shell retrofit and
weatherization. The total potential could reach 7.8 GWh of savings in 2019, accounting for 27%
of IPC savings that year. The program, which would build on the experience gathered with the
2008 Attic Insulation pilot program, would be IPC's biggest program once the Energy Star
Lighting has been phased out. This is due to the fact that the program targets savings on the most
energy intensive end-uses in homes: heating and cooling. Nexant believes that the Building Shell
Retrofit and the Weatherization Kit programs proposed in the DSM Model could be blended into
a single program that would bundle all retrofit and weatherization measures. It could take the
shape of individual energy audits performed by contractors hired by IPC as has been done in the
case of the Energy House Calls program. Each audit would provide a detailed examination of the
insulation characteristics, of the heating and cooling system characteristics and of the electric bil
patterns over the last years. The contractor would then make recommendations that would
include:
· Attic, walls and floor insulation
· Window replacement
· Duct sealing, infitration measures and electronic thermostat installation
· Water heater pipe insulation and gravity film exchanger installation
· Low flow showerheads and faucet aerators installation
('''Nexanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 3-12
Section 3 Residential Potential
Best practices in other parts of the US (TCHC Scattered Housing Energy Retrofit Program,
Home Base Retrofit Program - Vermont Gas Systems, Inc) have included hiring mulitple
contractors of different sizes and with complementary skils to maximize program flexibilty.
Energy effciency education directed at homeowners is also an important part of building retrofit
projects: a thermostat will not achieve any savings if the homeowner does not use it the right
way. Nexant wishes to emphasize that insulation, window replacement and other weatherization
measures have obvious interactive effects on each others. For that reason, energy savings
estimates wil have to be refined when energy savings data starts being gathered with the first
projects implementations.
I,1NeØnT Idaho Power Company. Demand Side Management Potential Study 3-13
Section 4 Commercial Potential
4.1 SUMMARY OF COMMERCIAL POTENTIAL
IPC's commercial sector consumes 28% of the total electrcity sales and accounts for a quarter of
the total demand. The commercial sector covers a large spectrm of customers and is
characterized by a high degree of variation in electricity consumption. IPC has created a set of
prescriptive DSM programs aimed at capturing the valuable DSM resource in the commercial
sector. Nexant conducted an evaluation of the current program offerings and provides
recommendations for program adjustments. The DSM potential of the commercial sector is
calculated based on the current programs with the recommended changes in place.
IPC introduced the Easy Upgrades for Simple Retrofits (Easy Upgrades) program in 2007. This
program offers prescriptive incentives for a suite of measures to be installed in existing facilities.
The program is one of the most comprehensive in the North West with incentives for lighting,
HV AC, building shell, motor, plug-load, and refrgeration measures.
The Building Effciency program was introduced in 2005 and offers prescriptive incentives for
measures installed during new constrction projects. The Building Effciency program allows
customers to receive incentives for lighting, HV AC, building shell, and building control
measures.
Nexant calculated total achievable potential energy savings to be 24 GWh in 2009 with demand
savings of 7.4 MW. It is estimated that IPC's commercial DSM resource could grow to 57 GWh
with a 16.9 MW reduction by 2019. Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2 show the achievable electrcity
and demand savings respectively, in relation to the technical and economic potential savings
though 2028.
Section 4 Commercial Potential
~
C)
1,200
1,000
800
600
- Technical Potential
- Economic Potential
- Achievable Potential
400
200
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Year
Figure 4.1 Commercial Electricity Savings Forecast
350
300
250
200 - Technical Potential
3:- Economic Potential::
150 - Achievable Potential
100
50
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Year
Figure 4.2 Commercial Demand Savings Forecast
t-1Nexnr 4-2Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study
Section 4 Commercial Potential
It is estimated that 15.9% of the total energy savings in 2009 wil be from the Building
Efficiency program, with the remainder attributable to Easy Upgrades. It is expected the savings
from the Easy Upgrades program wil increase significantly in the coming years as the program
ramps up.
In addition to tyical program growth, increases in Easy Upgrades savings may come from the
expansion of the program. N exant recommends the inclusion of a new measure category to the
existing Easy Upgrades progrm which would offer customers incentives for agrculture
measures. It is also recommended that the motor category be expanded and LED case lighting be
added to the refrgeration measure category, as well as increasing the measures in the HV AC and
Lighting programs. These additional measures account for 8.5% of the total achievable potential
savings in 2009. Figure 4.3 shows the breakdown of the achievable potential electrcity savings.
60
50
40
o New Measures.c
3:30 . Building Effciency
C)
II Current
20
10
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Year
Figure 4.3 Commercial Achievable Electricity Savings Forecast by Program
The measures evaluated for the commercial sector were aggregated into measure categories
according to the grouping used by IPC. The majority of the savings in the Easy Upgrades
program come from the lighting measures. Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.5 show the breakdown of
electricity savings by measure category with the potential measure additions included for the
Easy Upgrades program in 2009 and 2019 respectively. Equivalent repartitions for the Building
Efficiency program are shown in Figure 4.6 and Figure 4.7. The electricity savings potential
broken down by sub-sector in 2009 and 2019 is shown in Figure 4.8 and Figure 4.9 respectively.
""'NeOnT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-3
Section 4 Commercial Potential
New Motors New HVACAgriculture 5% 0%
4%
New Grocery
0%Grocery
2%
Plug Load
5%
Building Shell
4%
Figure 4.4 2009 Easy Upgrades Achievable Electricit Savings by Measure Category
Agriculture
3%
New HVAC
0% New Grocery
0%
Motors
2%
Figure 4.5 2019 Easy Upgrades Achievable Electricity Savings by Measure Category
t-1Neanr Idaho Power Company. Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-4
Section 4 Commercial Potential
Building Shel
21%
Lighting
37%
HVAC
24%
Figure 4.6 2009 Building Effciency Achievable Electcity Savings by Measure Category
Building Shell
21%
Lighting
37%
HVAC
24%
Figure 4.7 2019 Building Effciency Achievable Electricity Savings by Measure Category
t-1NexanT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-5
Section 4 Commercial Potential
Agriculture
3%
Foo Sen.ce
2%
Lodging
4%
Warehouse
7%
Food Store
4%
Figure 4.8 2009 Commercial Achievable Electricity Savings by Sub-8ector
Agrculture
3%
Foo Servce
2%
Lodging
4%
Warehouse
7%
Foo Store
4%
Figure 4.9 2019 Commercial Achievable Electricity Savings by Sub-Sector
The peak demand savings available to IPC in the commercial sector are broken down similarly to
the electricity savings. Supply curves for Easy Upgrades non-lighting measures, lighting
measures, and Building Effciency measures are shown in Figure 4.10, Figure 4.11, and Figure
4.12.
t.1Nexanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-6
Section 4 Commercial Potential
$0.100
$0.090
~
$0.080
$0.070~-$0.060In00
~$0.050:i:J $0.040i:CD.!:$0.030L
CD..$0.020
$0.010
$-
r-
r
..
T-
i--,, ~rJrfr/./i-.-.
-HVAC
-Motors
- Building Shell
-Plug Load
-Grocery
- Agriculture
o 10,000 20,00 30,00 40,000
Cumulative Acievable Potential (MWh)
50,00
Figure 4.10 2028 Easy Upgrades Non-Lighting Supply Curve
$0.040
$0.035
~ $0.030~
~ $0.025o
~ $0.020
5
i: $0.015CDN
~ $0.010
..
$0.005
$0.000
o
Lighting
rí
,r
1- Lighting I
.r~r
.J
,
100,000 200,000 300,00 400,000 50,000 600,000 700,00
Cumulative Achievable Potential (MWh)
Figure 4.11 2028 Easy Upgrades Lighting Supply Curve
(,1 Nexanr 4-7Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study
Section 4 Commercial Potential
$0.090
$0.080
:2 $0.070~-~$0.060-II00 $0.050~
:=$0.040::
"C $0.030CD.~
Gi $0.020ä)..
$0.010
$-
Building Effciency
iI..
r-J
r-f r i
1- Building Effciency I
o 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000
Cumulative Achievable Potential (MWh)
Figure 4.12 2028 Building Effciency Supply Curve
A comprehensive savings summary for the commercial sector in 2009 is shown in Table 4-1.
""'Neanr 4-8Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study
..
Section 4 Commercial Potenüal
Table 4-1 2009 Commercial Sector Savings Summary
Program Savings Potential GWhSavÎngs % of Total Peak MW io of Totallioaâ
"Sales Savings
Easy Upgrades
Technical 399.3 9.8%135.5 29.1%
Economic 386.8 9.5%130.6 28.0%
Achievable
Lighting 14.6 0.4%3.50 0.8%
Grocery 0.4 0.0%0.05 0.0%
Plug Load 1.0 0.0%0.11 0.0%
Motors 1.6 0.0%0.28 0.1%
Building Shell 0.7 0.0%0.69 0.1%
HVAC 1.2 0.0%1.05 0.2%
Agriculture 0.8 0.0%0.16 0.0%
Total Achievable:20.4 0.5%5.84 1.3%
Building Effciency
Technical 25.7 0.6%10.6 2.3%
Economic 25.7 0.6%10.6 2.3%
Achievable
Lighting 1.4 0.0%0.27 0.1%
Building Shell 0.8 0.0%0.55 0.1%
HVAC 0.9 0.0%0.71 0.2%
Control 0.7 0.0%0.00 0.0%
Total Achievable:3.9 0.1%1.59 0.3%
Total
Technical 578.1 14.2%171.1 36.7%
Economic 494.6 12.1%156.9 33.7%
Achievable 24.2 0.6%7.4 1.6%
Based on the expected energy savings potential, Nexant calculated the economics associated
with continued implementation of the Easy Upgrades and Building Effciency programs which is
shown in Table 4-2.
Table 4.2 2009 Commercial DSM Program Economics
$4,236,566
$1,536,195
$184,105
$14,380,906
$1,720,299
$4,420,671
$0.012
$0.033
TRC Benefit/Cost Ratio 3.253
1 Levelized costs are calculated over the life of the program.
$1,756,586
$1,042,902
$56,020
$3,121,109
$1,098,922
$1,812,606
$0.041
$0.068
1.722
$5,993,152
$2,579,096
$240,125
$17,502,015
$2,819,222
$6,233,271
$0.016
$0.037
2.808
c,1NeQnr 4-9Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study
Section 4 Commercial Potential
4.2 COMMERCIAL POTENTIAL MODEL
4.2.1 Overview
The commercial potential model was developed following the same general steps as the
residential modeL. First the baseline energy consumption of the IPC commercial sector was
classified by sector. Next a database of energy effcient measures was created which drew from
the measures currently offered by IPC as well as those offered by other utility companies and
emerging technologies. Like the residential sector, these measures were screened using the Total
Resource Cost Test and the Utility Cost Test. Nexant then built a model which applies the
selected measures to ¡PC's baseline data and calculates the energy savings for each measure.
4.2.2 Baseline Energy Consumption
The commercial sector's energy consumption was broken down according to the sub-sectors
tyical of DSM forecast studies. These sub-sectors are readily defined and recognized as
predominant building types for DSM forecasting. The sectors include:
· Offce · Education
.Food Service .Health
.Retail .Lodging
.Food Store .Miscellaneous
.Warehouse
Nexant calculated each sector's share ofthe total commercial electrcity consumption using EIA
data for the North West mountain region. In addition to characterizing the energy consumption
by sub-sector, EIA data was also used to develop assumptions about the building stock ofIPC's
customers. This data is used in turn to establish estimates of the equipment stock for each
measure evaluated.
4.2.3 Measure Evaluation
Nexant created a database of measures to be evaluated for the commercial potential modeL. The
database drew measures from the current IPC programs, other utility DSM programs, and studies
of emerging technologies. Once the list of measures was complete, the database was expanded to
include energy savings, demand savings, measure lifetime, and customer costs for each measure.
This information was either calculated or pulled from other measure databases. In all cases
where measure information was taken from existing databases, the data was evaluated for
appropriateness for the IPC service terrtory. Key resources included:
· California Energy Commission's Database for Energy Effcient Resources (DEER)
· Northwest Power and Conservation Council's Regional Technical Forum
· PacifiCorp' s 2008 Market Characterization Report
For the Building Effciency program, since these measures are installed as new constrction, it is
important to define the baseline equipment properly when calculating savings and costs. For
most measures the baseline is defined as code compliant equipment or practices. In this situation
t-1Nexanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-10
Seclion4 Commercial Potential
the measure data represents the incremental cost or savings difference between the measure and
the baseline. However, for add-on measures that are not necessarily installed during new
construction (like economizers) data is representative of full costs and savings.
Measure incentive levels were also defined for each measure. For measures already available
through IPC's rebate programs, the analysis is performed using the existing incentive levels. For
new measures, or measures that did not pass the UC test, incentive levels are defined differently.
The incentive level for measures offered by other utility progrms is set at the average incentive
level across the utility programs. Emerging technologies and new measures have their incentive
level defined by applying an average incentive to customer cost ratio of 0.479.
The measures were grouped based on their end-use savings. It should be noted that although the
savings from building shell measures wil be achieved at the HV AC system, they are grouped
separately for ease of program implementation. The following measure categories were used:
· Lighting
· HVAC
.Motors
.Building Shell
.Grocery
.Plug Load
.Controls
.Agriculture
.Food Service
The measures were then screened using the Total Resource Cost test (TRC) and the Utility Cost
test (UC) as described by Equation 2.1 and Equation 2.2 in Section 2. A number of measures
currently offered by IPC's DSM programs did not pass either the TRC or UC test. Closer
evaluation was given to these measures to determine an appropriate course of action.
Nexant tried to determine if modifications should be made to the curent program or if the
measures should be deemed uneconomical and removed from calculation of economic and
achievable potentiaL.
t1NeKQnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-11
Section 4 Commercial Potential
Table 4-3 shows the currently offered measures that did not pass the screening process and
Nexants recommendations. Nexants complete recommendations are described in Section 4.3.
Measures marked with 'No action' are to be maintained in the current program as Nexant
believes that they are cost effective when bundled in the measure category.
(1 Nfonr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-12
Section 4 Commercial Poential
Table 4.3 Current Measure Screening Results
Measure Measure Category Cost Effectiyeness1 ReCOmß1ll:otiøll2
:"TRC Test UCTest % ; l'
1.5 ho NEMA motor Easy Uoarades - Motors Low Hiah No action
Window shadina film Easy Uoarades - BuildinQ Shell Low Hiah Reconsider
Flat oanel LCD Display Easv Uoarades - Pluo Load Low Hiah Reconsider
Plua load occupancy sensor Easv Uoarades - PluQ Load Low Hiah Reconsider
High-effciency coin-op
washer wlo electric water Easy Upgrades - Plug Load Low High Reconsider
heatina
High-effciency coin-op
washer wI electric water Easy Upgrades - Plug Load High Low Modify
heatina
Auto-closer for medium temp Easy Upgrades - Grocery Low High No actionreach-in disolay case
Anti-sweat heater controls for Easy Upgrades - Grocery Low High No actionmedium temo cases
Air-cooled multiplex system Easv Uoarades - Grocery Low Hiah Reconsider
Evaporative cooled multiplex Easy Upgrades - Grocery Low High Reconsidersystem
Effcient complex cooling Building Effciency - HVAC High Low Modifysystems
The TRC and UC tests incorporate utility administration cots and may therefore be cost effective for the customer, even when
the test results in a ratio of less than 1.
No action - indicates that although the measure failed the scrning pross, Nexant recommends keeping the measure in
place, as it may be cost-effective when grouped with like measures.
Reconsider - Nexant recommends reconsidering the inclusion of these measures in current programs. These measures are
not included in the calculation of economic or acievable potential.
Modify - Nexant recommends modifying the currently offered incentive to make the measures cost effective.
To determine the applicable stock of measures present in IPC's service terrtory Nexant
characterized each measure by a number of factors in each sub-sector. Nexant developed each
factor by drawing from a host ofDSM studies and past evaluations. Nexant evaluated the
following factors to determine the eligible equipment stock for each measure:
· Applicabilty Factor. The applicability factor is the fraction of floor stock that is applicable
for each measure.
· Not Complete Factor. The not complete factor is the fraction of applicable floor space that
has not yet been converted to the measure.
· Feasibilty Factor. The feasibility factor is the fraction of floor space that is feasible for
conversion to the measure.
· Technology Saturation. Technology saturation describes the number of units ofmeasUle per
square foot.
i.1NexDnT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-13
Section 4 Commercial Potential
4.2.4 Achievable Potential
The achievable potential is calculated by incorporating the feasible and economic measures into
the commercial modeL. A market penetration rate is applied to the total savings to account for the
percentage of eligible customers choosing to participate in the DSM program. Nexant used a
combination ofIPC's historical data and experience with similar DSM programs to build market
penetration rate curves.
The Easy Upgrades program has only been in place since 2007 which limits the forecasting data
available for program participation. Nexant therefore used its experience with PacifiCorp's
FinAnswer Express program to develop trending data for the Easy Upgrades program. The
measures offered by the FinAnswer Express program closely match those offered in the Easy
Upgrades program making it a valuable resource for predicting future penetration rates.
The Building Efficiency program has been in place since 2005, giving it time to ramp up its
achievable savings potential and market penetration. Building Effciency savings data from past
years coupled with the new construction portion of the FinAnswer Express program was used to
develop market penetration rate curves for the Building Efficiency program.
4.3 COMMERCIAL PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
The Easy Upgrades and Building Efficiency programs have begun to capture an important piece
oflPC's DSM resource. Continuation of these programs with consideration for a number of key
aspects will allow IPC to see significant savings potential in the future.
To maximize savings potential it is important that DSM programs reflect the latest trends in
energy efficient technology. It is recommended that IPC remain informed and up to date on any
potential emerging technologies. This can be achieved through market research and fuher
studies as well as observation of measures being submitted through the Custom Effciency
program. Some examples of emerging technologies include:
· Solid state lighting
· Smart strips
· Hotel key card sensors
In addition to emerging technologies, it is also important that IPC have the latest information
about code requirements or other regulations that may pertain to EE measures. These general
guidelines, coupled with the recommendations made below wil allow IPC to maximize its
savings potentiaL.
4.3.1 Easy Upgrades
As a prescriptive program, it is important that the Easy Upgrades program remain up to date with
trends in equipment and code requirements. Nexant recommends a number of updates to the
current program that wil help increase savings potential as well as ensure that IPC is achieving
its expected savings.
t-1NeQnT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-14
Section 4 Commercial Potential
Current Measure Changes
A number of currently offered measures did not pass the TRC or UC test and should be carefully
evaluated by IPC to determine the best course of action. Nexant recommends that the following
measures be reconsidered for inclusion in the current progrms:
· Window shading film
· Flat panel LCD display
· Plug load occupancy sensor
· High-efficiency coin-op washer wlo electrc water heating
· Air-cooled multiplex system
· Evaporative cooled multiplex system
Nexant has found that these measures are either marginally cost effective or not cost effective at
this time. Nexant recommends that IPC continue to evaluate their cost effectiveness in the future
as changes in market forces may result in the measures becoming cost effective. As energy
savings of multiplex systems can be highly variable, it is recommended that IPC accept this
measure in its Custom Efficiency program to gather fuher data.
Nexant recommends that the incentive for high-effciency coin-op washers wI electrc heating be
lowered to $100 per unit, which is more in line with the incremental cost.
The Easy Upgrades program uses the Consortium for Energy Effciency's (CEE) specifications
as its minimum eligibility requirement for high effciency air conditioners and heat pumps. As of
2008 the federal minimum effciency requirement for air conditioners and heat pumps under five
(5) tons has increased to 13 SEER as mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act.
As a result of this change CEE increased the minimum efficiency requirement of air conditioners
and heat pumps under 5 tons to reflect increases in federal code requirements. Since the Easy
Upgrades program simply lists CEE specification as the minimum eligibility requirement, IPC
can be sure that customers wil stil install above-code units. However, IPC should make sure
that its expected energy savings are calculated using an updated baseline SEER value of 13.
The Easy Upgrades program currently offers incentives for qualifying EnergyStar residential
sized dishwashers. The specification listed on the incentive worksheet states that dishwashers
much achieve an energy factor of 0.58 or higher. EnergyStar has since updated the requirement
for qualifying products to 0.65 or higher. IPC should update this requirement and ensure that
savings expectations reflect the current specification.
Measure Additions
Nexant has identified a number of measures to be included into the current Easy Upgrades
program which wil increase the achievable savings potential by giving customers more options
for upgrades. Detailed descriptions of all new measures are included in Appendix A.
The National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) has expanded its Premium
Effciency rating to include motors sized from 250 hp to 500 hp. Nexant recommends that the
'"'' Nexnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-15
Section 4 Commercial Potential
Easy Upgrades motor measures category be expanded to include motors in this size range.
Additionally, it is recommended that escalator motor controllers be added to the motor program.
Total achievable savings from the addition of these measures could reach 1.7 GWh by 2019.
Nexant recommends that LED case lighting be added to the Easy Upgrades grocery measure
category. LED lighting can save significant energy over standard fluorescent lighting. Inclusion
of this measure in the Easy Upgrades program wil result in energy savings of 40 MWh by 2019.
Roughly 5% ofIPC's commercial electrcity sales are going to dairy farms. While dairy farms
may be eligible for a small number of the currently offered measures, there are many agrculture
specific measures which can boost the total achievable potentiaL. Nexant recommends the
following measures be added to the Easy Upgrades program:
· High-efficiency stock tanks
· Automatic milker take-offs
· Block heater timers
· High efficiency circulating fans
· High-effciency ventilation systems
· Programmable ventilation controllers
· Variable speed drives on dairy vacuum pumps
For complete agrculture measure descriptions please see Appendix A. It is estimated that these
measures can achieve a total savings of 1.7 GWh by 2019.
It is recommended that open-loop ground source heat pumps be added too the HV AC measure
category, and 8-lamp T5HO fixtures be added to the lighting program. These measures wil save
27.8 MWh and 266.6 MWh by 2019 respectively.
It was found that a small number of food service measures passed the TRC test include ice
makers, ventilation hoods, and hot food holding cabinets. However, lacking a substantial group
of measures with which to combine them into a program, these measures are not recommended
at this time. IPC should monitor these measures through the Custom Effciency program, and
reevaluate them in the future.
4.3.2 Building Effciency
The Building Effciency program has been successfully providing IPC with energy savings since
2005. The measures offered through this program a defined in general terms to allow for
maximum flexibility of constrction and measure implementation. The measure eligibility for
lighting and HV AC systems is defined in relation to code requirements. This means that savings
can be achieved even when code baselines are increased. It is important therefore, that IPC
remain up to date on current code requirements.
As mentioned above, the current code requirement for air conditioners and heat pumps with a
cooling capacity smaller than five (5) tons has recently been increased to 13 SEER. IPC should
i,1Nexanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-16
Section 4 Commercial Potential
update its expected savings for Premium Effciency HV AC Units to reflect this increased
baseline. At this time Nexant has no recommendations for the addition of any measures to this
program.
Finally, Nexant recommends that the incentive for effcient complex cooling systems be reduced
to $75 per ton per point of COP above code. Taking this action wil make this measure cost
effective and allow IPC to continue to benefit from the energy savings of this measure.
i.'JNeanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 4-17
Section 5 Industrial Potential
5.1 SUMMARY OF INDUSTRIAL POTENTIAL
The industral sector comprises a total of 17% ofIPC's electricity sales and 15% ofthe total
load. While the industrial sector includes a minimal number of customers, the energy intensive
processes and high biled demand of each customer allow for a significant amount of DSM
potentiaL. At the forefront of electricity consumption is the food processing sector which
consumes just over half of the industrial electrcity sales. General manufacturing and the
electronics industr make up an additional quarter of industral sales, while the remainder of
consumption goes to large commercial customers.
IPC has developed and implemented the Custom Effciency program for the industral sector.
This program pays customers incentives proportional to the electrcity savings from each project.
Nexant believes that this type of program is effective in capturing the energy savings from
industrial measures which are often to complex or variable to be streamlined into a prescriptive
incentive program.
The industral DSM achievable potential is highly dependant on customer adoption rates which
vary directly with the utility incentive offering. Nexant has developed four (4) incentive
scenarios to calculate the industral achievable potentiaL. The scenarios calculate the potential
savings from offering a low, moderate, aggressive, or maximum incentive, which represent
payment of 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% of customer costs respectively. Industral achievable
potential energy savings in 2009 range from 33 GWh under a low incentive scenario to 57 GWh
with the maximum incentive scenario. Figure 5.1 shows the four achievable potential scenarios
relative to the technical and economic potentials calculated for the industral sector.
50
12.0%30
250 10.0%
200 8.0%
.c
~ 150
C)
:
¡;60% II. õ
~
100 4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
Tech Potential Eco Potenial Ach Potential. Low Ach Potential. Mod Ach Potential. Agg Ach Potenial. Max
Figure 5.1 2009 Industrial Potential GWh Savings and Percent of Total Sales
The achievable peak demand savings available to IPC in the industral sector are also calculated
based on the incentive offering. Estimates for peak demand savings in 2009 range from 3.5 MW
Section 5 Industrial Potential
for a low incentive scenario to 6.1 MW for a maximum incentive scenario. Figure 5.2 shows the
potential industral demand savings for 2009.
35.0 12.0%
10.8%
30.0 10.0%
25.0
8.0%
20.0 'tto
~0
6.0%..::Õ
15.0 ~0
4.0%
10.0
2.0%5.0
0.0%
Tech Potential Eco Potential Ach Potential - Lo Ach Potenial - Mod Ach Potential - Agg Ach Potental- Max
Figure 5.2 2009 Industrial MW Savings Potential and Percent of Total Load
Based on the trends in the savings achieved by IPC in previous years, and Nexants experience
with similar DSM programs, Nexant forecasted the industral potential through 2028. On a five
year timeline it is estimated that IPC could increase its achievable potential to 43 GWh for a low
incentive scenario and up to 76 GWh for the maximum incentive scenario. On a 2019 timeline
the numbers climb up to 49 GWh and 85 GWh respectively. Figure 5.3 shows the achievable
industral energy saving forecast through 2028.
t-"NexaÐT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 5-2
Section 5 Industrial Potential
120
100
80
:2$-Ach-Low
Q.-Ach-ModUl60Ol-Ach-Aggi:os;
-Ach-Maxti(f
40
20
2009 2013 2017 2021 2025
Year
Figure 5.3 Industrial Achievable GWh Savings Forecast
By 2014 is it estimated that peak demand savings wil grow to 4.5 MW and 7.9 MW for low and
maximum incentive scenarios respectively. By 2019 they wil grow to 5.1 MW and 8.9 MW for
low and maximum incentive scenarios respectively Figure 5.4 shows a comprehensive savings
forecast for the industral sector.
12,000
10,000
8.000
-Ach-Low
~6,000 -Ach-Mod
-Ach-Agg
-Ach-Max
4,000
2,000
2009 2013 2017 2021 2025
Year
Figure 5.4 Industrial Achievable MW Savings Forecast
1,1 Nexanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 5.3
Section 5 Industrial Potential
Based on a moderate incentive scenario the savings potential was calculated by sector and end-
use. Figure 5.5 and Figure 5.6 show the breakdown of the total potential electricity savings by
end-use in 2009 and 2019 respectively. The breakdown of electrcity savings by sector for 2009
and 2019 is shown in Figure 5.7 and Figure 5.8 respectively.
Coprssed Air Coing4% 1%
Ughting
13%Refgetion
29%
Motor
13%
HVAC
32%
Figure 5.5 2009 Industrial Achievable Potential Savings by End-use - Moderate Incentive Scenario
Compressed Air Coing5% 1%
Motors
13%
Refgeration
29%
HVAC
31%
Figure 5.6 2019 Industrial Achievable Potential Savings by End-use - Moderate Incentive Scenario
i.'JNexønr Idaho Power Company. Demand Side Management Potential Study 5-4
Section 5 Industrial Potential
Food Processing
52%
Offce
11%
/Data Center
ýEducation
..Health
-Lodging
Manufacturing
-Public Assembly
'\ Public Order and
\ SafetyWater Process
Figure 5.7 2009 Industrial Achievable Potential Savings by Sector - Moderate Incentive Scenario
Foo Processing
53%
Electronics
26%
Data Center
V
Education
__Health
-Lodging
-Manufacturing
~PUbliC Assembly
'\ Public Order and
\. Safety
, "' Warehousel
\ StorageWater Process
Figure 5.8 2019 Industrial Achievable Potential Savings by Sector - Moderate Incentive Scenario
The peak demand savings available to IPC in the industrial sector are broken down similarly to
the electrcity savings. Figure 5.9 shows a supply curve for the Custom Effciency program.
i.1NexQnr Idaho Power Company. Demand Side Management Potential Study 5.5
Section 5 Industrial Potential
$0.035
$0.030
~$0.025~-II0 $0.020()
~ii $0.015::'t
CD
.!:
L $0.010
CD..
$0.005
$-
0
1- Custom EffCiencyl,.
J
I
200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000
Cumulative Achievable Potential (MWh)
Figure 5.9 2009 Custom Effciency Supply Curve - Moderate Incentive Scenario
A comprehensive savings summary for the industral sector in 2009 is shown in Table 5-1.
Table 5-1 2009 Industrial Potential Savings Summary
Metric ieclínical economic Achievable
!.ow Moderate Aggressive "Muimliltll "~0"
GWh SavinQs 285 262 33 51 55 59
Percent of Sales 11.6%10.7%1.3%2.1%2.2%2.4%
Peak MW SavinQs 30.4 28.0 3.5 5.3 5.7 6.1
Percent of Load 10.8%9.9%1.2%1.9%2.0%2.2%
Based on the expected energy savings potential, Nexant calculated the economics associated
with continued implementation of the Custom Efficiency program which are shown in Table 5-2.
Table 5.2 2009 Industrial DSM Program Economics
$6,520,853 $10,070,922 $10,823,493 $11,576,064
$1,630,213 $5,035,461 $8,117,620 $11,576,064
$220,025 $338,841 $363,814 $388,788
$19,667,502 $30,326,626 $32,575,549 $34,824,473
$1,850,238 $5,374,302 $8,481,434 $11,964,851
$6,740,878 $10,409,764 $11,187,307 $11,964,851
$0.009 $0.016 $0.024 $0.032
$0.032 $0.032 $0.032 $0.032
2.918 2.913 2.912 2.911
"" NeKønr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 5-6
Section 5 Industrial Potential
1 Levelized costs are calculated over the life of the program.
5.2 INDUSTRIAL POTENTIAL MODEL
5.2.1 Overview
The Industrial DSM Potential Model was developed using a bottom-up approach closely
matching the residential and commercial sectors. Baseline energy consumption was calculated
according to sector (food processing, manufacturing, electronics, etc.) and end-use (motors,
HVAC, lighting, etc.) to best captue the character ofIPC's industral electrcity usage. As the
industrial DSM program is based on custom measures, overall savings potentials were calculated
for each end-use. Nexant applied the savings potentials to the baseline energy consumption and
incorporated sector market penetration rates to calculate the overall achievable potentiaL.
5.2.2 Baseline Energy Consumption
IPC's total industrial consumption is split between 18 different functions as described by IPC.
Nexant aggregated the customers into the following set of 12 commonly recognized sectors:
· Data Center · Manufacturing
· Electronics · Offce
· Education · Public Assembly
· Food Processing · Public Order and Safety
· Health · Warehouse/Storage
· Lodging · Water Process
IPC provided the electricity usage and function for all its industrial customers. This data was
used to calculate each sector's share of total industrial consumption. Nexant then identified seven
(7) end-uses common to industral and large commercial facilities. The following end-uses were
identified for each sector:
.Refrigeration
.Process Heating
.HVAC
.Motors
.Lighting
.Compressed Air
.Cooking
The breakdown of electricity consumption by end-use for each sector was determined using data
from the US Departent of Energy's Energy Information Administration, the California Energy
Commission's Commercial End-use Surey, and other sector specific end-use reports. The end-
use breakdown percentages were applied to the sector shares to determine the baseline
consumption by sector and end-use.
i.1Nexanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 5-7
Section 5 Industrial Potential
5.2.3 End-Use Savings Potential
Savings potential for the industral sector was calculated by end-use, rather than specific measure
as was the case for the residential and commercial sectors. This was deemed an appropriate
method due to the scope and variability of effcient measures that can be employed in the
industrial sector.
Electricity Savings
IPC provided the results from a number of audits performed on some of its largest industral
customers. The data from these audits provided a starting point in developing the estimated
energy savings percents for each end-use. Data from other industrial DSM studies supplemented
the audits to provide lists of potential industral measures for each end-use. Final end-use savings
estimates were calculated by aggregating the measures based on their deemed applicabilty.
Average 'measure lifetimes' were also determined for each end-use.
The end-use savings are generally consistent though the sectors as the measures are typically
applicable across the board. Variation of savings estimates between sectors occurred in the
motor end-use. The food processing, manufacturing, and electronics sectors all involve motor
processes that make them eligible for additional motor measures.
As the industral model is based on the Custom Effciency program, no specific measures were
screened for cost effectiveness. The cost effectiveness of any given measure will be variable
across the industral sector, which is why an aggregated savings percentage was calculated. To
calculate economic potential, the ratio of economic potential to technical potential was averaged
across a number of industral potential studies.
Demand Savings
To calculate potential demand savings Nexant calculated the ratio ofkW reduction per kWh
saved. This ratio was based on program logs provided by IPC which document actual savings
from custom projects in 2007. These logs were supplemented with historical logs ofPacifiCorp's
Industrial Energy FinAnswer and Self Direction Credit programs in Utah which will include
similar measures to IPC's Custom Effciency program. Demand savings ratios were calculated
for each end-use.
5.2.4 Market Penetration
The achievable potential savings are calculated by applying the end-use savings potential to the
baseline energy consumption and incorporating a market penetration rate for each sector.
Market Penetration by Sector
The market penetration rate can be defined as the percentage of customers who choose to install
energy effcient measures out of the total number of eligible customers. Nexant developed
market penetration curves using historical program data from IPC and PacifiCorp.
""Nexan Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 5-8
Section 5 Industrial Potential
Market penetration oflPC's Custom Effciency progrm has grown steadily in five (5) years
since its inception. A logarithmic regression of the program's market penetration was developed
to predict program growth in the coming years. Figure 5.10 shows the market penetration IPC
has achieved since the start of the program.
IPC Industrial Effciency
16.0%
.
y .. u.ull2öLn(X) - u~
R2 = n ".,.,7~//.//
~/2 3 4 5
..._....__......................-....._-_._....._........................._........._.........._--..................._......_..........................................._.....
. Market Penetration
-Log. (Market Penetration)
14.0%
12.0%
c 10.0%o:iII 8.0%
il
ãi 6.0%D.l 4.0%
II 2.0%::
0.0%
-2.0%
-4.0%
Program Year
Figure 5.10 IPC's Custom Efficiency Market Penetration Curve
To achieve superior savings forecasting, Nexant also looked at the market penetration from
PacifiCorp's Industrial Energy FinAnswer program in Utah. This program closely matches IPC's
Custom Effciency program and Nexant believes that the savings and participation achieved
though this program are a good indication of the savings and participation achievable through
IPC's customer base. The Energy FinAswer program has been in existence for eight (8) years
and provides a valuable resource for forecasting IPC's market penetration.
A baseline market penetration rate curve was developed by incorporating the data available from
IPC and PacifiCorp. This curve was created with the assumption that program growth wil follow
its current trend for four (4) years, followed by a transition to the growth calculated for the
Energy FinAswer program which provides a deeper prospective for program forecasting.
The 2007 Custom Effciency logs provided by IPC were used to calculate the market penetration
rate for each sector. The baseline market penetration forecast curve was applied to this data to
develop a curve for each sector. Table 5-3 shows the forecasted market penetration rate broken
down by sector through 2019. Note that in this baseline curve the warehouse/store sector has
achieved the maximum expected penetration rate. A complete market penetration rate forecast
through 2028 is provided in Appendix C.
Table 5.3 Forecasted Market Penetration Rate by Sector 2009.2019
""Neanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 5-9
Section 5 Industrial Potential
Sector"20:09 20:10:2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 20:16 2017 i B 2I111 2019æ
Education 1.6%1.6%1.7%1.8%1.8%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%
Food Processina 21.8%23.1%24.2%24.9%25.4%26.0%26.4%26.6%26.8%26.9%27.0%
Health 2.6%2.8%2.9%3.0%3.1%3.1%3.2%3.2%3.2%3.3%3.3%
Lodaina 1.6%1.6%1.7%1.8%1.8%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%
Manufacturina 2.8%2.9%3.1%3.2%3.3%3.3%3.4%3.4%3.4%3.4%3.5%
Offce 31.5%33.4%35.1%36.0%36.9%37.6%38.3%38.6%38.8%39.0%39.2%
Public Assemblv 1.6%1.6%1.7%1.8%1.8%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%
Public Order and 1.6%1.6%1.7%1.8%1.8%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%Safety
Warehouse/73.8%73.8%73.8%73.8%73.8%73.8%73.8%73.8%73.8%73.8%73.8%Storaae
Water Process 1.6%1.6%1.7%1.8%1.8%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%1.9%
Market Penetration and Incentive Rate
For any DSM program the market penetration rate wil be linked directly to the utility incentive
rate. As utilities offer greater incentives, measure payback periods decrease and customers are
more likely to participate in the energy effciency DSM program. To calculate achievable
savings potential under different incentive scenarios, the correlation between market penetration
and incentive level was established.
Based on a 2006 survey of PacifiCorp customers, it was found that market penetration rates grow
quickly as the incentive level grows from 0 to 50 percent of customer cost, but increase at a
slower rate as incentive levels reach 75% and above. This correlation was used to develop a
market penetration rate curve for low, moderate, aggressive, and maximum incentive scenarios.
5.2.5 Program Economics
Once the industrial savings potential was calculated, Nexant used its experience with similar
DSM programs to estimate the program economics.
Customer Cost
Customer costs are the costs required by the customer to install an energy efficient measure.
Nexant developed levelized customer cost estimates for each end-use on a dollar per kWh saved
basis. A large database of historical projects was created with the Custom Effciency logs
provided by IPC and data from PacifiCorp's Energy FinAswer and Self Direction Credit
programs. The levelized customer cost was applied to the savings potential for each end-use to
calculate the total customer cost.
Admin Cost
Admin costs represent an important piece in determining overall progrm cost effectiveness.
These costs include the costs incurred by the utility to design, market, administer, verify, and
otherwise run a DSM program. Nexant calculated a levelized admin cost curve to forecast the
total expenditures required to run the Custom Effciency program. The current admin costs were
calculated with the total utility cost reported in the 2007 DSM Annual Report minus the total
incentives paid. Based on experience with the Energy FinAnswer and Self Direction Credit
t."'NexQnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 5-10
Section 5 Industrial Potential
programs, N exant has found that the levelized admin cost decays at a rate of 6.1 % per program
year. This rate was applied to IPC's current expenditures to determine the administrative costs
through the 2028 forecast period.
Avoided Cost
A voided costs are essentially the expenditures saved by the utility from electrcity savings and
reduced demand. IPC provided market price forecasts through 2035 for each pricing period.
Electrcal usage load shapes for each end-use by sector were calculated based on data from the
Regional Technical Forum and other DSM studies. This data was used to determine the avoided
cost of supply for each end-use by sector. A discount rate of 8% was used to calculate the total
avoided cost over the lifetime of the savings.
5.3 INDUSTRIAL PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
The Custom Efficiency progrm has provided IPC with reliable energy savings since its
inception and Nexant believes that it wil continue to be an integral part ofIPC's DSM resource.
As the program is built upon custom efficiency measures, the savings potential wil evolve with
emerging technologies, Nexant can make no recommendations regarding specific measures.
However, steps should be taken to ensure that IPC achieves savings as close to its potential as
possible.
With a custom efficiency program, utilities are capped at a set economic savings potentiaL.
Where a prescriptive program may add eligible measures to increase potential, customers
participating in a custom program essentially have the ability to receive rebates for all viable
measures. To increase achievable potential of the Custom Efficiency program, IPC should focus
its efforts on improving market penetrtion rates. In the industrial sector, informational market
barrers are often as significant as financial market barrers in accounting for low baseline
penetration rates and so reliance solely on incentives is generally insufficient. To act directly on
informational market barriers, a commonly used program element is to feature active outreach
though account representatives and technical support contractors to help identify and develop
potential energy savings projects. A selection of case studies that highlight successful energy
effciency projects is also useful to lower customers' perceptions of risk or technology
performance.
While the food processing sector commands the majority of consumption, it only has the fourth
highest market penetration rate by sector. This indicates that although significant savings are
achieved by this sector, there remains room for increased energy savings. Additionally, the
manufacturing sector has the second highest share of consumption at 14.1 %, but only contrbutes
3% of the energy savings in 2009 due to its low market penetration rate.
Improving market penetration rates can be a diffcult balance of incentives, marketing, customer
service, and a myriad of other factors. According to a 2006 survey the most common barrers to
participation in DSM programs are lack of awareness and lack of time. Based on this input, IPC
should continue its operation of the Custom Efficiency program with increased emphasis on
program marketing and improved ease of participation.
e:1Nuanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 5-11
Section 6 Irrigation Potential
6.1 SUMMARY OF IRRIGATION POTENTIAL
The irrgation sector consumes annually 1,606,000 MWh, 12% ofIPC total sales for an average
load of 183 aMW. The Irgation Efficiency Rewards program targets energy effciency
improvements in this sector. It encourages customers to acquire energy effcient pumps and
motors as well as energy saving irrgation equipment.
With no detailed information available regarding both the quantity of irrgation equipment
installed on IPC terrtory and its operating condition (impacting energy consumption), a bottom-
up approach, like the one adopted for the residential sector, was not adapted to the irrgation
sector. Nexant instead chose to utilize a top-down approach to forecast the remaining energy
saving potential available in the irrgation sector. The top-down approach considered three
parameters to evaluate the remaining potential:
· The percentage of kWh saved each year compared to the total irrgation electrc sales.
Compared to typical numbers achieved by other utilities, this percentage gives an idea of the
remaining potential available
· The number of customer enrolled each year compared to the theoretical annual turnover
stock
· The number of irrgation energy effciency measures available compared to neighboring
utilities
The three parameters are characterized as follows: the Irgation Effciency Rewards program has
been very successful so far-12,304 MWh saved in 2007 with only 819 participants. This
represents 0.76% of the irrgation sector energy sales. The average energy efficiency program in
the US usually saves between 0.1% and 0.8% of the total electrcity sales. Utilities which have
been ahead of the energy efficiency cure, like PG&E in California can reach 1 % of the total
electrcity sales saved anually. The progrm clearly creates a level of energy savings above the
average in IPC terrtory. The success of the progrm is due in part to the fact that an average
irrgation customer consumes i 10 MW annually when a residential customer consumes only
13MWh. This creates both economies of scale for marketing efforts and a greater incentive for
each individual customer whose annual electric bil is ten times higher than a residential
customer's.
Considering the fact that the irrgation sector encompasses about 15,300 customers and that
irrgation measures typically have lifetimes ranging from 5 to 15 years, the number of systems
undergoing replacement each year is comprised between 1,000 and 3,000. With 1,235 customers
in 2006 and 819 in 2007, the program probably reached between 50% and 80% of the customers
who renewed their equipment those years. The program has seen a steep increase in its
participation rate since its offcial launch in 2005. The extremely high levels of participant
enrolments are probably transitory and wil not last over the years.
Thorough market research of the programs offered by the Bonnevile Power Administration,
Pacificorp and PG&E shows that ¡PC is already ahead of the curve in terms of irrgation energy
Section 5 Industrial Potential
efficiency measure portolio. IPC has one of the most comprehensive set of energy efficiency
irrgation measures in the Northwest. The set of measures targets all components of the irrigation
chain: piping, wheel levelers, goosenecks, gaskets, pressure regulators, nozzles.
Nexants market research and the high market penetration rates mentioned above are the sign
that all of the available potential is captured each year in the irrgation sector. Nexant does not
recommend implementation of new energy efficiency progrms in the irrigation sector.
For all those reasons, Nexant forecasts stabilization or more likely a small decline in the
Irgation Efficiency Rewards program enrollment and savings in the coming years.
i1NeQnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 6-2
Section 7 Demand Response Potential
7.1 SUMMARY OF DEMAND RESPONSE POTENTIAL
IPC has considerable opportnities for demand response growth. Nexant estimates the total
available demand response potential to be 168 MW. This potential represents 5% ofIPC's
current peak load. It would be available at levelized costs ranging from $1O/kW-yr to $50/kW-yr.
IPC currently has two demand response programs which have provided a total of 48.2 MW of
peak demand reduction in 2007: 37.4 MW and 947 customers (about 40 kW/customer) for the
Irrgation Peak Rewards program, 10.8 MWand 13,692 customers (about 1 kW/customer) for
the AlC Cool Credit program. With a forecasted peak demand of 3,240 MW in 2008, those two
programs are able to shed 1.5% of the peak load.
Nexant performed a demand response potential analysis to determine ifIPC had already captured
all its demand response potential or if there was remaining untapped potentiaL. After a screening
process of IPC's customer segments, it appears that two new progrms could be launched and
that additional potential could be captured through the existing programs. The AlC Cool Credit
program total potential is close to 60 MW while the Irgation Peak Rewards program has a total
potential of 50 MW. Those numbers include the potential already captured as of 2008. The total
untapped potential in those two programs as of 2007 would thus amount to about 60 MW.
Nexant believes there is the same amount of untapped potential (59 MW) in the commercial and
industrial sectors. Both sectors could be fertile grounds for the implementation of a curtailable
rates program or a demand buyback program. The commercial sector has 34 MW of potential
while the industrial sector has 25 MW of potential. Drawing upon its experience with PG&E
demand response programs in California, Nexant stands by those numbers as reasonable and
achievable. The sectors' potentials are summarized in the chart below.
Demand Response Potential
70
60
50
40
¡¡
30
20
10
o
Industrial Comercial Irrgation Residential AC Cycling
Figure 7.1 - Demand Response Potential
Section 7 Demand Response Potential
The market penetrations and assumptions used in this study are derived from the experience
gathered by several utilities (Pacificorp, Southern California Edison, Florida Light and Power)
during the last decade. The calculation methodology is detailed in the next section.
7.2 DEMAND RESPONSE POTENTIAL MODEL
To estimate demand response potential, Nexant chose to consider three types of possible
programs:
· Fully dispatchable: this type of program is often referred to as direct load control. It
reduces the demand in summer peak periods by shutting down air conditioning
equipments or by reducing their cycling time. Pacificorp runs a Utah's Cool AC Load
Control Program and major Californian investor-owned utilities run air conditioner load
control programs as well.
· Curtailable rates: this type of contract requires that the customer shed a given load when
requested by the utility. The utility provides either rate discounts or incentives. The
customer is financially penalized ifhe fails to shed the load. Those programs are well
adapted to large commercial and industral customers.
· Demand buyback: also called demand bidding. With this tye of program, the customer does
not have any requirement to shed load. The customer can choose to participate on an event-
by-event basis. An incentive is paid to the customer based on the price difference between
the utility rate and the electrcity market price.
Different programs have inherently different market penetration potentials and different capital
and operating costs. Each type of program can also not be applied to all tyes of sectors. For
instance demand buyback, which requires a bidding process, can not be implemented in the
residential sector.
Before estimating demand response potential, Nexant determined which type of program was
best adapted to each sector. The residential sector's best fit is clearly a direct load control
program. Several utilities demand response programs were reviewed by Nexant for comparison.
Since very few such programs have been evaluated, it was not possible to assess the influence on
DR potential of parameters such as local climate. Nexant chose to use the average of the
participation rates observed for the same programs in different utilities terrtories. For residential
programs, Florida Power & Light achieved penetration rates of 19% while Utah Cool Keeper
participation rate reached 27%. Nexant chose to forecast a 20% penetration rate for Idaho Power
territory.
For the irrgation sector a system of scheduled load shedding was assumed. Customers subscribe
in advance for specific days and hours when their irrgation systems wil be turned off. Programs
researched include BP A Irgation Scheduling Program and PacifiCorp Irgation Program.
The situation is different for the commercial and the industral sectors where curtail able rates and
demand buyback are more applicable. For its analysis, Nexant chose to assume implementation
of a curtailable rate program for the commercial and industrial sectors. This draws upon past
experiences that have shown that curtailable rate programs have inherently more potential than
í-'1NexQnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 7-2
Section 7 Demand Response Potential
demand buyback programs. Nevertheless, IPC wil be free to propose the one or the other option
(curtilable rates versus demand buyback) to its customers depending on their needs.
The demand response potential analysis unfolds in five successive steps:
· Total base peak load must be estimated for the sector being considered. As an example, the
base peak load for the residential sector will be restrcted to the cooling load only since it is
the load targeted by the AlC Cool Credit progrm.
· Eligibility rates are applied to the total base peak load to calculate how much of that load is
eligible for demand response programs, for instance, among large industral facilities only
those with loads over 250 kW wil be targeted by a demand buyback program.
· Technical load impact rates are applied to the potential calculated in step 2. The technical
load impact is the percent reduction in load resulting from the program. For instance, if 90%
of the residential cooling load can be shed (10% margin for equipment failure) and if a 50%
cycling strategy is applied, then 45% (90%*50%) of the load can technically be shed.
· Program participation rates are applied to the technical load calculated in step 3. Participation
rates are calculated as the percentage of customers who enroll in the program.
· Event participation rates are the last factor to be considered. It accounts for the fact that only
a fraction of the people enrolled in the program wil actually participate on the demand
response day. Those participation rates can vary widely, from 100% for residential AlC load
cycling programs to 13% for curtailable rate programs targeting industral customers.
All the parameters defined above have been summarized in Table 7-1.
t-1Neanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 7-3
Section 7 Demand Response Potential
Table 7.1 Rates Summary
A ~ec:t()r %EUgifjilt~Iec:nnløal :lC!aCl Imlaøt Program participation Event partieipatlÐll
Irriaation 100%30%20%100%
Residential AC Cycling 100%45%20%100%
Industrial 80%30%25%90%
Commercial 60%25%25%90%
As mentioned above, a curtailable rates program has been assumed for the industral and
commercial sectors.
The costs have been estimated for each program using average program cost numbers. The costs
considered below are incentive payments, equipments and maintenance.
Per kW costs are summarized in Table 7-2.
Table 7.2 Cost per kW per year (in $)
Sector ~nriual (¡ost1
Irrigation $10
Residential AC Cycling $21
Industrial $48
Commercial $48
1 Costs include incentives only.
Per customer costs are summarized in the Table 7-3.
Table 7.3 Costs per Customer (in $)1
Sector Development ~rmual
Irrigation $700 $50
Residential AC Cycling $320 $34
Industrial $1,200 -
Commercial $1,200 -
1 Costs include equipment and maintenance only.
7.3 DEMAND RESPONSE PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS
7.3.1 Summary: Potential and Costs
Using the methodology described above, Nexant calculated the total demand response potential
for the residential, irrgation, commercial and industral sectors. Table 7-4 shows the steps in the
calculation.
Table 7-4 Demand Response Potential (MW)
Seetor Eri(ilse Baseline EUgifjle ineclnical 'Brogram ~d¡evalíle
"fløteritial enrollment
Irriçiation Total 829 829 249 50 50
Residential AC Cooling 664 664 299 60 60Cvclina
í-1NexQnT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 7-4
Section 7 Demand Response Potential
Considering that a demand response measure has a lifetime of about 10 years, and using typical
program cost figures, Nexant calculated the levelized costs ($/kW) for each program as shown in
Table 7-5.
Table 7.5 Levelized Costs ($/kW)
Sector Cost lilRWp
Irrigation $12
Residential AC Cycling $57
Industrial $30
Commercial $16
, Levelized costs are calculated over the life of the
proram.
All programs combined wil yield a total potential close to l70MW at prices ranging from 10 to
50$/kW-yr. Nexants recommendations for each program are developed in more details in the
following sections.
7.3.2 AlC Cool Credit
The A/C Cool Credit Program has considerable room for growth, due in part to the fact that the
residential sector is the biggest contrbutor to the peak demand. The total potential is in the range
of60 MW, for a levelized cost of$57/kW-yr.
IPC wil have to recruit approximately 80,000 customers to reach this target. This target is high
in absolute terms but represents only 20% of IPC residential base. This is in line with other
utilities' program participation rates. FP&L achieved 19% on its residential demand response
program. PAC Utah Cool Keeper has reached an even higher penetration rate of 27%.
7.3.3 Irrigation Peak Rewards
The Irrigation Peak Rewards program was highly successful with a very high penetration rate of
about 19.5% in 2007 (947 projects out of 4,852 eligible irrgation electrcal accounts). The
program provides peak demand savings at a price of$12/kW-yr. Nexant believes there is stil a
small margin for growt in this sector. Capturing it wil be one of the objectives of the 2009 new
fully dispatchable irrgation pilot program.
7.3.4 Commercial Program
Based on its experience with PG&E demand response program, Nexant estimates that there is an
untapped demand response potential of 34 MW in the commercial sector that can be captured at
a levelized cost of $ 16/kW-yr. In the retail sector, marketing efforts aimed at supermarket chains
and big box retailers in California have yielded significant amount of peak demand savings. The
two main underlying reasons are as follows: the load shed per store is usually large, close to 95
c,1NeOØT Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 7-5
Section 7 Demand Response Potential
kW (approximately the load shed by 200 residential customers) and the efforts to implement
demand response in one store can rapidly scale to the company's other stores. PG&E currently
has a large commercial customer with more than 50 stores involved in demand response. The
program includes HVAC system temperature setback and lighting measures. All the stores' loads
can be shed simultaneously directly from the corporate headquarter.
A straightforward calculation shows that targeting the 11 Albertson's stores in IPC terrtory
would create 550 kW of demand savings (55 kW potential per store were assumed for middle
size stores). Targeting the 31 Wal-Mart on IPC terrtory would yield close to 3 MW of demand
savings. The calculations for the commercial potential consider a curtailable rate program
because it is the best fit for large commercial customers.
Nexant also estimates that there might be a non negligible potential in a Small Commercial A/C
Cycling program. IPC could build on the experience gathered managing its two existing load
cycling programs to create such a program.
Our participation rates estimates are based on different programs: Dominion Virginia Power
Curtailable Service, Duke Curtailable Service Pilot, Southern California Edison C&I Base
Interrptible Program.
7.3.5 Industrial Program
Our analysis shows a 25 MW potential for the industrial sector for a levelized cost of$30/kW.
However, Nexant wants to emphasize that demand response potential forecasts for industral
customers always bear a greater uncertainty than in other sectors. This is due to the fact that the
low number of customers does not provide an averaging effect that usually reduces uncertinty.
Additionally, the demand response potential is very dependent upon the processes implemented
at each facility. Unlike residential and commercial sectors were the tyical target end-uses are
HV AC loads, no typical end-uses can be targeted in an industr until an energy audit has been
performed onsite to identify the loads that would be eligible for a demand response program. If
an industrial demand response program is created on IPC terrtory, Nexant recommends the
demand response measures to be tailored to each industral facility specifically.
Wineries and high-tech industr have been among the biggest industral players in PG&E
demand response arena. Past projects have created peak demand savings ranging from 500kW
for high tech up to 4 MW for some wineries. Some projects have also targeted frozen food
storage facilities were a tyical demand response measure consists in reducing the duty cycle of
the chilers during demand response events. The thermal inertia of the frozen food in the
warehouse usually gives room for peak demand savings without increasing the warehouse
temperature significantly.
7.3.6 Aggregators
IPC could explore the possibility of running a capacity bidding progrm with an aggregator. The
aggregator wil charge a premium to run the program, but may be able to deliver a MW target
more cost-effectively since they have acquired more demand response marketing expertise and
may require less overhead. PG&E currently has ten aggregators operating a capacity bidding
i.1NeQIJ Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 7-6
Section 7 Demand Response Potential
program, and the market in California is highly competitive. The aggregators typically sign
contracts to deliver a certain MW goal, and then they are responsible for developing a
pedorming portfolio of demand response customers. Some utilities dislike the aggregated
approach because it introduces a middle person between the utility and its largest customers.
Given the small number of very large customers, it may be possible to target these accounts for
demand response without hiring an aggregator.
i.'1NeQnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study 7-7
Section 8 DSM Potential Simulation Model
8.1 MODEL SUMMARY
As part of this DSM potential evaluation, Nexant constrcted a dynamic DSM simulation tool
for each sector to allow IPC to make its own savings forecasts based on variable inputs. The
simulation tool is framed as a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet which Nexant believes provides IPC
with the most transparent platform.
8.1.1 Model Outputs
The model has the ability to calculate the technical, economic, and achievable electricity and
demand savings by sub-sector and end-use. The model wil provide summaries of each potential
in a given program year, as well as forecasts through 2028. The breakdown of savings is also
presented according to DSM program.
In addition to energy savings the tool also calculates the economics associated with each
scenario. The model wil provide summaries of the following economic variables for a given
program year:
.Customer costs
.Incentives
.Admin costs
.A voided costs
.Total utility costs
.Total resource costs
.UC test
.TRC benefit/cost ratio
8.1.2 Model Variables
The simulation tool provides a simple interface which allows the user to modify key DSM
variables such as:
· Total sales and load forecasts
· Wholesale electricity price forecasts
· Line losses
· Utility discount rates
· Customer discount rates
Additionally, the transparent nature of the spreadsheet model allows IPC to see all the variables
and inputs that go into the DSM forecast. All calculation variables discussed for each primary
sector are visible in the modeL. While these variables represent the result ofNexants research
and experience, the user has the ability to make modifications if new data becomes available or
different scenarios are to be calculated.
""Neanr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study Proposal 8-1
Corporate Headquarters
101 Second Street, 10th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-3672
tel: [phone]
fax: [phone]
ww.nexant.com
Submitted To:
An IDACORP
Demand Side Management
Potential Study - Volume II
Appendices
Submitted By:
~1NexQnT
August 14, 2009
Contents
Volume II
Appendix A New Measure Descriptions ............................................................................... A-I
Residential Measures .............................................................................................................. A-I
Commercial Measures ............................................................................................................ A-I
Appendix B Savings Forecasts .............................................................................................. B-1
Residential Savings Forecast .................................................................................................. B-1
Residential measures supply cures........................................................................................ B-3
Commercial Savings Forecast................................................................................................. B-7
Commercial Supply Curves ............................. ....................................................................... B-9
Industrial Savings Forecast......... .............................. .......................................... .................. B-19
Industrial Supply Curve ........................................................................................................ B-2l
Appendix C DSM Simulation Model Inputs ....................................................................... C-24
Measures Inputs .................................................................................................................... C-24
Sensitivity analysis................................................................................................................ C-32
Load Profiles......................................................................................................................... C-33
Avoided Cost ........................................................................................................................ C-35
Sales and Load Forecast........................................................................................................ C-36
Residential Model Inputs ...................................................................................................... C-37
Commercial Model Inputs ......................................................................... ........................... C-44
Industral Model Inputs............................................ ........... ............................ ...................... C-63
""'Nexnr Idaho Power Company - Demand Side Management Potential Study - Volume II
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

A
Ne
w

M
e
a
s
u
r
e

D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
s
As

p
a
r
t

o
f

t
h
i
s

e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

N
e
x
a
n
t

h
a
s

i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d

a

n
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

n
e
w

m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s

t
o

b
e

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d

i
n

t
h
e

c
u
r
r
e
n
t

p
r
o
g
r
a
m

o
f
f
e
r
i
n
g
s
.
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
s

o
f

t
h
e
s
e

m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s

c
a
n

b
e

f
o
u
n
d

b
e
l
o
w
.
RE
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L

M
E
A
S
U
R
E
S
Hi
g
h
-
e
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r
.

F
o
r

t
h
i
s

a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
,

t
h
e

d
e
f
i
n
i
t
i
o
n

o
f

a

r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

e
l
e
c
t
r
i
c

w
a
t
e
r

h
e
a
t
e
r

w
a
s

a
d
a
p
t
e
d

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

C
o
d
e

o
f
Fe
d
e
r
a
l

R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s

t
o

b
e

"
a

p
r
o
d
u
c
t

w
h
i
c
h

u
t
i
l
i
z
e
s

o
i
l
,

g
a
s
,

o
r

e
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y

t
o

h
e
a
t

p
o
t
a
b
l
e

w
a
t
e
r

f
o
r

u
s
e

o
u
t
s
i
d
e

t
h
e

h
e
a
t
e
r

u
p
o
n
de
m
a
n
d
,

i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g

(
a
)

s
t
o
r
a
g
e

t
y
p
e

u
n
i
t
s

w
h
i
c
h

h
e
a
t

a
n
d

s
t
o
r
e

w
a
t
e
r

a
t

a

t
h
e
r
m
o
s
t
a
t
i
c
a
l
l
y

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
d

t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
,

i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
.
.
.

e
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
st
o
r
a
g
e

w
a
t
e
r

h
e
a
t
e
r
s

w
i
t
h

a
n

i
n
p
u
t

o
f

1
2

k
i
l
o
w
a
t
t
s

o
r

l
e
s
s
.

.
.
"

(
1
0

C
F
R

p
a
r
t

4
3
0
.
2
)
.

A

h
i
g
h
-
e
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

w
a
t
e
r

h
e
a
t
e
r

w
i
l

t
y
p
i
c
a
l
l
y

u
s
e
be
t
w
e
e
n

1
5
-
5
0
%

l
e
s
s

e
n
e
r
g
y

t
h
a
n

a

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

w
a
t
e
r

h
e
a
t
e
r
.

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

a
r
e

a
c
h
i
e
v
e
d

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

o
n
-
d
e
m
a
n
d

w
a
t
e
r

h
e
a
t
i
n
g

o
r

i
m
p
r
o
v
e
d

t
a
n
k
in
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
.
En
e
r
g
y
S
t
a
r

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
.

A

q
u
a
l
i
f
y
i
n
g

E
n
e
r
g
y
S
t
a
r

f
r
e
e
z
e
r

u
s
e
s

1
0
%

l
e
s
s

e
n
e
r
g
y

t
h
a
n

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d

b
y

t
h
e

c
u
r
r
e
n
t

f
e
d
e
r
a
l

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
.
En
e
r
g
y
S
t
a
r

q
u
a
l
i
f
i
e
d

f
r
e
e
z
e
r
s

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

b
o
t
h

u
p
r
i
g
h
t

a
n
d

c
h
e
s
t

f
r
e
e
z
e
r
s
.

M
o
r
e

i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

a
b
o
u
t

E
n
e
r
g
y
S
t
a
r

f
r
e
e
z
e
r
s

c
a
n

b
e

f
o
u
n
d

a
t

t
h
e
En
e
r
g
y
S
t
a
r

w
e
b
s
i
t
e

(
w
w
w
.
e
n
e
r
g
y
s
t
a
r
.
g
o
v
.
)
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L

M
E
A
S
U
R
E
S
Au
t
o
m
a
t
i
c

M
i
l
k
e
r

T
a
k
e
o
f
f
s
:

A
u
t
o
m
a
t
i
c

m
i
l
k
e
r

t
a
k
e
o
f
f
s

a
r
e

d
e
v
i
c
e
s

u
s
e
d

w
i
t
h

a
u
t
o
m
a
t
i
c

m
i
l
k
i
n
g

m
a
c
h
i
n
e
s
.

T
h
e
y

ar
e

a

t
y
p
e

o
f
co
n
t
r
o
l

d
e
s
i
g
n
e
d

t
o

r
e
m
o
v
e

t
h
e

m
i
l
k
i
n
g

'
c
l
a
w
'

w
h
e
n

m
i
l
k

f
l
o
w

d
r
o
p
s

t
o

a

p
r
e
s
e
t

l
e
v
e
L
.

T
h
i
s

r
e
d
u
c
e
s

o
v
e
r
-
m
i
l
k
i
n
g

a
n
d

c
u
t
s

d
o
w
n

o
n
th
e

u
s
e

o
f

t
h
e

v
a
c
u
u
m

p
u
m
p
,

s
a
v
i
n
g

t
h
e

e
x
c
e
s
s

e
n
e
r
g
y

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
.

S
o
m
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s

c
o
m
e

w
i
t
h

t
h
e

a
d
d
e
d

b
e
n
e
f
i
t

o
f

a
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

f
a
r
e
r
s
to

t
r
a
c
k

t
h
e

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

a
n
d

m
i
l
k
i
n
g

d
a
t
a

a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d

w
i
t
h

e
a
c
h

c
o
w
.
Bl
o
c
k

H
e
a
t
e
r

T
i
m
e
r
s
:

A

b
l
o
c
k

h
e
a
t
e
r

i
s

a

d
e
v
i
c
e

t
h
a
t

h
e
a
t
s

t
h
e

e
n
g
i
n
e

b
l
o
c
k

o
f

tr
a
c
t
o
r
s

a
n
d

o
t
h
e
r

d
i
e
s
e
l

e
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
.

T
h
e

h
e
a
t
e
r

i
s
ne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y

t
o

a
l
l
o
w

e
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t

t
o

s
t
a
r
t

i
n

c
o
l
d

w
e
a
t
h
e
r
.

A
l
t
h
o
u
g
h

t
h
e

h
e
a
t
e
r

o
n
l
y

n
e
e
d
s

o
n
e

o
r

t
w
o

h
o
u
r
s

t
o

s
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
l
y

w
a
r
m

t
h
e
en
g
i
n
e

b
l
o
c
k
,

f
a
r
m
e
r
s

o
f
t
e
n

l
e
a
v
e

t
h
e
m

p
l
u
g
g
e
d

i
n

o
v
e
r
n
i
g
h
t
.

A

b
l
o
c
k

h
e
a
t
e
r

t
i
m
e
r

p
r
e
v
e
n
t
s

t
h
e

h
e
a
t
e
r

f
r
o
m

r
u
i
n
g

l
o
n
g
e
r

t
h
a
n
ne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
.
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
n
g

F
a
n
s
:

C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
n
g

f
a
n
s

a
r
e

u
s
e
d

t
o

m
o
v
e

a
i
r

a
r
o
u
n
d

f
a
r
m

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s

t
o

e
n
s
u
r
e

a
i
r

q
u
a
l
i
t
y

a
n
d

l
i
v
e
s
t
o
c
k

c
o
o
l
i
n
g
.
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
n
g

f
a
n

i
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s

a
r
e

o
f
f
e
r
e
d

f
o
r

f
a
n
m
o
t
o
r

c
o
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
s

t
h
a
t

m
e
e
t

c
f
m
W

r
a
t
i
n
g
s

a
c
c
o
r
d
i
n
g

t
o

f
a
n

s
i
z
e
.

F
a
n
s

a
r
e

t
e
s
t
e
d

b
y
"'"

Ne
x
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
A-
1
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

A

N
e
w

M
e
a
s
u
r
e

D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
s
in
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t

b
o
d
i
e
s

s
u
c
h

a
s

t
h
e

B
i
o
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l

a
n
d

S
t
r
c
t
u
r
a
l

S
y
s
t
e
m
s

l
a
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
y

a
t

t
h
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

I
l
i
n
o
i
s

o
r

t
h
e

A
i
r

M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
an
d

C
o
n
t
r
o
l

A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n

I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

I
n
c
.
Hi
g
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

L
i
v
e
s
t
o
c
k

W
a
t
e
r
e
r
s
:

L
i
v
e
s
t
o
c
k

w
a
t
e
r
e
r
s

a
r
e

t
r
o
u
g
h
s

t
h
a
t

g
e
t

f
i
l
l
e
d

a
u
t
o
m
a
t
i
c
a
l
l
y

a
n
d

a
r
e

m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
e
d

a
t

a

c
o
n
s
t
a
n
t
te
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
.

T
r
o
u
g
h
s

n
e
e
d

t
o

b
e

h
e
a
t
e
d

t
o

p
r
e
v
e
n
t

w
a
t
e
r

f
r
o
m

f
r
e
e
z
i
n
g

i
n

t
h
e

w
i
n
t
e
r
.

H
i
g
h

e
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

w
a
t
e
r
e
r
s

h
a
v
e

t
h
i
c
k

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
to

p
r
e
v
e
n
t

h
e
a
t

l
o
s
s
e
s

a
n
d

a
d
j
u
s
t
a
b
l
e

t
h
e
r
m
o
s
t
a
t
s
.

T
h
e
y

m
a
y

e
m
p
l
o
y

a

f
l
o
a
t
i
n
g

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
n
g

c
a
p

t
o

p
r
e
v
e
n
t

h
e
a
t

l
o
s
s

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

s
u
r
f
a
c
e

o
f
th
e

w
a
t
e
r
.

T
h
e

r
e
d
u
c
e
d

h
e
a
t

l
o
s
s

l
o
w
e
r
s

t
h
e

p
o
w
e
r

d
r
a
w

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

h
e
a
t
i
n
g

e
l
e
m
e
n
t
.
Hi
g
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

V
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

S
y
s
t
e
m
s
:

V
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

s
y
s
t
e
m
s

a
r
e

u
s
e
d

t
o

b
r
i
n
g

f
r
e
s
h

a
i
r

i
n
t
o

a

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y

a
n
d

e
x
h
a
u
s
t

d
i
r
t
y

a
i
r
,

a
s

w
e
l
l

a
s
,
ma
i
n
t
a
i
n

a

c
o
m
f
o
r
t
a
b
l
e

t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

f
o
r

l
i
v
e
s
t
o
c
k
.

I
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e
s

a
r
e

o
f
f
e
r
e
d

f
o
r

v
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

f
a
n

a
n
d

m
o
t
o
r

c
o
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
s

t
h
a
t

m
e
e
t

a

g
i
v
e
n
cf
m
/

r
a
t
i
n
g

a
c
c
o
r
d
i
n
g

t
o

f
a
n

s
i
z
e
.

V
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

f
a
n
s

a
r
e

r
a
t
e
d

b
y

t
h
e

s
a
m
e

i
n
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t

t
e
s
t
i
n
g

b
o
d
i
e
s

a
s

c
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
n
g

f
a
n
s
.
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
m
a
b
l
e

V
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
:

V
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

s
y
s
t
e
m
s

a
r
e

u
s
e
d

t
o

b
r
i
n
g

f
r
e
s
h

a
i
r

i
n
t
o

a

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y

a
n
d

e
x
h
a
u
s
t

d
i
r
t
y

a
i
r

a
s

w
e
l
l

a
s
ma
i
n
t
a
i
n

a

c
o
m
f
o
r
t
a
b
l
e

t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

f
o
r

l
i
v
e
s
t
o
c
k
.

P
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
a
b
l
e

v
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
s

v
a
r
y

t
h
e

s
p
e
e
d

o
f

v
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

f
a
n
s

t
o

m
e
e
t

t
h
e
im
m
e
d
i
a
t
e

n
e
e
d
s

o
f

th
e

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
.

T
h
i
s

e
n
s
u
r
e
s

t
h
a
t

p
o
w
e
r

i
s

n
o
t

w
a
s
t
e
d

b
y

c
o
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s
l
y

r
u
n
n
i
n
g

t
h
e

f
a
n
s

w
h
e
n

t
h
e

v
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n
re
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s

o
f

t
h
e

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y

a
r
e

s
a
t
i
s
f
i
e
d
.
VF
D
s

f
o
r

D
a
i
r
y

V
a
c
u
u
m

P
u
m
p
s
:

D
a
i
r
y

v
a
c
u
u
m

p
u
m
p
s

a
r
e

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d

t
o

m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n

a

c
o
n
s
t
a
n
t

v
a
c
u
u
m

s
u
p
p
l
y

f
o
r

p
r
o
p
e
r

o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

o
f
au
t
o
m
a
t
i
c

m
i
l
k
e
r
s
.

G
e
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
,

t
h
e

p
u
m
p
s

a
r
e

d
e
s
i
g
n
e
d

t
o

p
r
o
v
i
d
e

a

v
a
c
u
u
m

f
o
r

t
h
e

l
a
r
g
e
s
t

p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e

d
r
a
w
.

D
u
r
i
n
g

p
a
r
t
i
a
l

o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
,

a
i
r
is

b
l
e
d

i
n
t
o

t
h
e

s
y
s
t
e
m

a
n
d

t
h
e

p
u
m
p

s
t
i
l

o
p
e
r
a
t
e
s

a
t

f
u
l
l

p
o
w
e
r
.

A

v
a
r
i
a
b
l
e

f
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

d
r
i
v
e

(
V
F
D
)

i
n
s
t
a
l
l
e
d

o
n

a

v
a
c
u
u
m

p
u
m
p

c
a
n
me
a
s
u
r
e

t
h
e

a
c
t
u
a
l

v
a
c
u
u
m

l
o
a
d

o
f

t
h
e

s
y
s
t
e
m

a
n
d

r
e
d
u
c
e

t
h
e

p
o
w
e
r

t
o

t
h
e

p
u
m
p
.

T
h
i
s

r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

f
u
l
l

lo
a
d

t
o

p
a
r
t
i
a
l

lo
a
d

c
a
n
he
l
p

r
e
d
u
c
e

e
n
e
r
g
y

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
.
Pr
e
m
i
u
m

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

M
o
t
o
r
s

2
5
0
-
5
0
0

h
p
:

T
h
e

N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

E
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
l

M
a
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
e
r
s

A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n

(
N
E
M
A
)

h
a
s

e
x
p
a
n
d
e
d

t
h
e
i
r

P
r
e
m
i
u
m
Ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

r
a
t
i
n
g

t
o

i
n
c
l
u
d
e

m
o
t
o
r
s

f
r
o
m

2
5
0
-
5
0
0

h
p
.

T
h
i
s

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

i
s

d
e
f
i
n
e
d

a
s

t
h
e

r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

o
f

m
o
t
o
r
s

b
e
t
w
e
e
n

2
5
0

a
n
d

5
0
0

h
p
th
a
t

m
e
e
t

N
E
M
A
'
s

P
r
e
m
i
u
m

r
a
t
i
n
g
.
Es
c
a
l
a
t
o
r

M
o
t
o
r

C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
:

A
n

A
C

i
n
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

m
o
t
o
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

d
e
v
i
c
e

s
e
n
s
e
s

t
h
e

l
o
a
d

o
n

t
h
e

e
s
c
a
l
a
t
o
r

m
o
t
o
r
(
s
)

a
n
d

a
d
j
u
s
t
s

t
h
e

v
o
l
t
a
g
e
an
d

c
u
r
e
n
t

a
c
c
o
r
d
i
n
g
l
y
.

S
i
n
c
e

a
n

e
s
c
a
l
a
t
o
r

i
s

a

c
o
n
s
t
a
n
t

s
p
e
e
d
/
v
a
r
i
a
b
l
e

l
o
a
d

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
,

t
h
e

e
s
c
a
l
a
t
o
r

m
o
t
o
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r

o
p
e
r
a
t
e
s

t
h
e
es
c
a
l
a
t
o
r

s
y
s
t
e
m

a
t

i
t
s

p
e
a
k

e
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

a
t

a
l
l

t
i
m
e
s
,

r
e
d
u
c
e
s

t
h
e

m
o
t
o
r

e
n
e
r
g
y

c
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
,

a
n
d

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
s

e
n
e
r
g
y

s
a
v
i
n
g
s
.
LE
D

C
a
s
e

L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
.

T
h
e

u
s
e

o
f

L
E
D

l
i
g
h
t
s

h
a
s

b
e
e
n

e
x
p
a
n
d
i
n
g

t
o

v
a
r
i
o
u
s

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
.

T
h
i
s

m
e
a
s
u
r
e

i
n
v
o
l
v
e
s

t
h
e

r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

o
f
lo
w

e
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y
,

T
1
2

o
r

T
8

l
i
g
h
t
s

u
s
e
d

i
n

r
e
f
r
i
g
e
r
a
t
e
d

d
i
s
p
l
a
y

c
a
s
e
s

i
n

g
r
o
c
e
r
y

s
t
o
r
e
s

w
i
t
h

h
i
g
h

e
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y
,

l
o
n
g

l
a
s
t
i
n
g
,

L
E
D
s
.
I.
1
N
e
m
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
A-
2
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B
Sa
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
RE
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L

S
A
V
I
N
G
S

F
O
R
E
C
A
S
T
Ta
b
l
e

B
-
1

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
l
e
c
t
c
i
t
y

S
a
v
i
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t

2
0
0
9
-
2
0
2
8

(
M
)
il
An
n
l
i
a
n
e
e
s
43
3
85
2
1,
9
4
4
3,
4
4
1
4,
2
3
2
4,
9
6
3
5,
1
7
8
5,3
5
4
5,
5
2
0
5,
6
9
1
Li
a
h
t
i
r
i
a
7,5
3
6
7,7
1
0
7,
8
8
7
8,
0
6
9
7,
9
8
8
6,
8
0
3
5,
5
6
2
4,
2
6
3
2,
9
0
5
2,
9
6
9
We
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
1,
6
5
8
1,
7
5
9
1,
9
6
7
2,
1
6
4
2,
2
3
9
2,
3
1
4
2,
3
7
3
2,
4
3
3
2,
4
9
4
2,
5
5
6
En
e
r
a
v

H
o
u
s
e

C
a
l
l
s
51
8
46
3
41
6
39
8
37
8
35
6
36
9
38
1
39
5
40
8
En
e
r
n
v

S
t
a
r

H
o
m
e
s
46
5
55
9
61
2
66
8
80
6
87
0
93
3
99
8
1,0
6
6
1,0
9
3
Re
b
a
t
e

A
d
v
a
n
t
a
a
e
56
4
59
8
64
9
70
2
75
8
74
9
77
2
79
6
82
1
84
6
He
a
t
i
n
9

a
n
d

C
o
o
l
i
n
g
ef
f
e
i
e
n
e
v
62
2
1,
2
1
4
2,
1
5
3
3,
1
6
9
4,2
6
0
4,
8
9
9
5,
6
3
6
6,
2
9
3
6,
8
6
1
7,
0
9
5
We
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

K
i
t
43
7
67
7
95
4
1,
4
5
8
2,
1
6
5
2,7
0
3
3,
1
3
6
3,
3
5
5
3,5
6
1
3,
7
2
7
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g

S
h
e
l
l

R
e
t
r
o
f
i
t
Pr
o
n
r
a
m
64
3
1,3
1
5
2,
6
9
1
3,
4
4
1
3,
5
2
0
3,5
9
7
3,
6
7
6
3,
7
5
7
3,
8
4
0
3,
9
2
4
Mis
e

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
44
45
93
95
14
6
14
9
15
3
15
6
15
9
16
3
To
t
a
l
12
,
9
2
1
15
,
1
9
3
19
,
3
6
6
23
,
6
0
5
26
,
4
9
3
27
,
4
0
4
27
,
7
8
8
27
,
7
8
6
27
,
6
2
2
28
,
4
7
2
5,
8
1
8
5,
9
4
5
6,0
7
5
6,
2
0
8
6,3
4
4
6,
4
8
2
6,6
2
4
6,
7
6
8
6,
9
1
6
7,
0
6
7
3,
0
3
4
3,
1
0
1
3,1
6
9
3,
2
3
9
3,
3
1
0
3,
3
8
3
3,4
5
7
3,
5
3
3
3,
6
1
1
3,
6
9
0
2,
6
2
0
2,
6
8
5
2,
7
5
1
2,
8
1
9
2,8
8
8
2,
9
5
9
3,0
3
2
3,
1
0
5
3,
1
8
1
3,
2
5
8
42
2
43
7
45
2
46
7
48
3
49
9
51
6
53
3
55
1
56
9
1,
1
2
1
1,
1
4
9
1,
1
7
8
1,
2
0
7
1,
2
3
8
1,
2
6
9
1,3
0
1
1,
3
3
4
1,3
6
7
1,
4
0
2
87
2
89
9
92
6
95
5
98
4
1,
0
1
4
1,
0
4
4
1,
0
7
6
1,1
0
8
1,
1
4
2
7,
3
3
5
7,
5
8
0
7,
8
3
0
8,
0
8
6
8,3
4
8
8,
6
1
7
8,
8
9
1
9,
1
7
2
9,
4
6
0
9,
7
5
4
3,
8
2
5
3,
9
2
6
4,
0
2
9
4,1
3
4
4,
2
4
2
4,3
5
2
4,
4
6
4
4,
5
7
9
4,
6
9
6
4,
8
1
6
4,
0
1
1
4,0
9
9
4,
1
8
9
4,
2
8
1
4,
3
7
5
4,4
7
2
4,
5
7
0
4,6
7
1
4,
7
7
3
4,8
7
8
16
6
17
0
17
4
17
8
18
2
18
6
19
0
19
4
19
8
20
2
29
,
2
2
4
29
,
9
9
0
30
,
7
7
3
31
,
5
7
4
32
,
3
9
3
33
,
2
3
1
34
,
0
8
8
34
,
9
6
5
35
,
8
6
2
36
,
7
7
9
i1
N
e
x
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
B-
1
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
Ta
b
l
e

B
-
2

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i

D
e
m
d

S
a
v
i
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t

2
0
0
9
-
2
0
2
8

(
M
'O
'
t
~.
AD
D
l
i
a
n
c
e
s
0.
0
1
4
0.
0
2
5
0.
0
5
5
0.
0
9
7
0.
1
2
2
0.1
4
5
0.1
5
4
0.
1
6
0
0.
1
6
7
0.
1
7
3
Li
a
h
t
i
n
a
0.
7
5
9
0.
7
7
6
0.
7
9
4
0.
8
1
3
0.
8
0
4
0.6
8
5
0.5
6
0
0.
4
2
9
0.
2
9
3
0.
2
9
9
We
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
a
n
0.
2
1
5
0.
2
2
7
0.
2
5
3
0.
2
7
8
0.
2
8
8
0.
2
9
7
0.3
0
5
0.
3
1
3
0.3
2
1
0.
3
2
9
En
e
r
Q
V

H
a
u
s
e

C
a
l
l
s
0.
1
4
0
0.
1
2
5
0.
1
1
3
0.
1
0
8
0.
1
0
2
0.0
9
6
0.0
9
9
0.
1
0
3
0.
1
0
6
0.
1
1
0
En
e
r
a
v

S
t
a
r

H
a
m
e
s
0.
1
2
3
0.
1
4
9
0.
1
6
3
0.
1
7
8
0.
2
1
5
0.2
3
3
0.2
5
0
0.
2
6
8
0.
2
8
7
0.
2
9
5
Re
b
a
t
e

A
d
v
a
n
t
a
g
e
0.
1
0
7
0.
1
1
4
0.
1
2
3
0.
1
3
4
0.
1
4
4
0.
1
4
3
0.
1
4
7
0.
1
5
2
0.
1
5
6
0.1
6
1
He
a
t
i
n
g

a
n
d

C
o
o
l
i
n
g
ef
f
c
i
e
n
c
y
0.
0
6
5
0.
1
2
4
0.
2
2
8
0.3
4
1
0.
4
6
2
0.
5
4
7
0.
6
4
3
0.7
2
8
0.8
0
0
0.8
2
6
We
a
t
h
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
a
n

K
i
t
0.
0
7
9
0.
1
1
8
0.
1
6
3
0.
2
4
6
0.
3
6
1
0.
4
5
3
0.
5
2
4
0.5
5
8
0.5
9
0
0.
6
2
0
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g

S
h
e
l
l

R
e
t
r
a
f
i
t
Pr
a
a
r
a
m
0.1
1
1
0.
2
2
8
0.
4
6
6
0.
5
9
6
0.
6
1
0
0.
6
2
4
0.
6
3
7
0.
6
5
1
0.6
6
6
0.6
8
0
Mi
s
e

M
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.0
0
0
0.0
0
0
0.
0
0
To
t
a
l
1.
6
1.
9
2.
4
2.
8
3.1
3.
2
3.
3
3.4
3.4
3.
5
*
0.
1
7
7
0.
1
8
0
0.
1
8
4
0.1
8
8
0.
1
9
2
0.
1
9
6
0.2
0
0
0.2
0
4
0.
2
0
8
0.
2
1
3
0.
3
0
6
0.
3
1
2
0.
3
1
9
0.3
2
6
0.
3
3
3
0.
3
4
1
0.3
4
8
0.3
5
6
0.
3
6
4
0.
3
7
2
0.
3
3
8
0.
3
4
7
0.
3
5
6
0.3
6
5
0.
3
7
4
0.
3
8
3
0.3
9
3
0.4
0
3
0.
4
1
3
0.
4
2
3
0.1
1
4
0.
1
1
8
0.
1
2
2
0.
1
2
6
0.
1
3
0
0.
1
3
4
0.1
3
9
0.1
4
3
0.
1
4
8
0.
1
5
3
0.3
0
3
0.
3
1
1
0.
3
1
9
0.
3
2
8
0.
3
3
7
0.
3
4
6
0.3
5
5
0.3
6
4
0.
3
7
4
0.
3
6
4
0.1
6
6
0.
1
7
1
0.
1
7
6
0.
1
8
2
0.
1
8
7
0.
1
9
3
0.1
9
9
0.2
0
5
0.
2
1
1
0.
2
1
7
0.8
5
3
0.
8
8
0
0.
9
0
8
0.
9
3
7
0.
9
6
6
0.
9
9
6
1.
0
2
7
1.
0
5
9
1.
0
9
1
1.
1
2
4
0.6
3
7
0.
6
5
4
0.6
7
1
0.
6
8
9
0.
7
0
7
0.
7
2
6
0.7
4
4
0.7
6
4
0.
7
8
3
0.
8
0
4
0.6
9
5
0.
7
1
1
0.
7
2
6
0.
7
4
2
0.
7
5
9
0.
7
7
5
0.7
9
2
0.8
1
0
0.
8
2
8
0.
8
4
6
0.0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
3.6
3.
7
3.
8
3.
9
4.
0
4.
1
4.2
4.
3
4.
4
4.5
t.
1
N
e
a
n
T
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
B-
2
.l
~æ
CI
.~
~
C"co
1
5~i:
61
1
~~
61¡j
I
¡U
ii-0
~
~
Ji
en "'i:W .!
6;~:i0~-JQ.Q.:ien
enwa::ienc:w::-Jc:¡:
co ZW
:g c
lB ëñw
"'a:
i
L --
~
~
~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0co..co io ~("N ..i0000C!0 0c:c:c:c:c:c:c:~0~~~~~~~~
(llMiil$) lS~ ~!Iln paz!laAai
§
~
00 =0 (IÒE0::"I :ê õ:;
3:i::!.~en0II150:;~0 cÒS .æ0000-("Q.ë
Gl (I::E(I
~C)elc:Gl el0:E ::0 ~(I0:!Ò Gl en0"CN:.c::;elIIE'3 ~E .::::c:0 CJ el0C.0 EÒ0ü0
~..
00-0..el:!
0
&I~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
Ta
b
l
e

B
-
S

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

S
u
p
p
l
y

C
u
r
e

-

S
ì
n
g
l
e

F
a
m
y

H
o
u
e
h
o
l
d
¡
$
0
.
0
6
0
l
$
0
.
0
5
0
§~
$
0
.
0
4
0
!i
$
0
.
0
3
0
N 'i .§

$
0
.
0
2
0
$0
.
0
8
0
,.
r-
I
-
r
..
$0
.
0
7
0
$0
.
0
1
0
$-
o
50
,
0
0
0

1
0
0
,
0
0
0

1
5
0
,
0
0
0

2
0
0
,
0
0
0

2
5
0
,
0
0
0

3
0
0
,
0
0
0

3
5
0
,
0
0
0

4
0
0
,
0
0
0
Cu
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

A
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

(
M
W
h
)
..
.
.
.
.
1
MW
h
.
~
ii
i
i.i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
SF

-

W
i
n
d
o
w
s

r
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

-

L
o
w

i
n
c
o
m
e
0.
5
2
4
32
,
5
3
7
SF

-

D
u
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n
Q

w
/
H
e
a
t

D
u
m
D

-

L
o
w

i
n
c
o
m
e
0.
5
3
1
1,
1
1
6
SF

-

I
n
f
i
l
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

-

L
o
w

i
n
c
o
m
e
0.
5
3
5
13
,
6
4
0
SF

-

D
u
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n
g

F
A
F

-

L
o
w

i
n
c
o
m
e
0.
5
3
6
1,
1
0
9
SF

-

W
i
n
d
o
w
s

r
e
D
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
0.
5
4
5
43
,
3
6
4
SF

-

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.
5
4
5
19
,
0
6
5
SF

-

L
o
w

I
n
c
o
m
e

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

p
î
O

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.
5
7
0
22
2
SF

-

G
r
a
v
i
t
y

F
i
l
m

H
e
a
t

E
x
c
h
a
n
a
e
r
0.
5
7
0
3,
3
5
7
SF
.

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

P
T
i

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.
5
7
9
70
2
SF

-

E
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c

t
h
e
r
m
o
s
t
a
t
0.
5
8
4
14
,
3
4
5
SF

-

I
n
f
i
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
0.
5
8
5
21
,
3
3
5
SF

.

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

H
i
a
h

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
v
0.
5
8
9
4,
3
4
2
SF

-

D
u
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n
g

F
A
F
0.
5
9
2
5,
1
9
2
SF

-

H
P

t
o

H
P

u
i
i
r
a
d
e
0.
6
4
6
31
,
5
4
9
SF

-

C
e
i
l
n
g

F
a
n
0.
6
4
8
1,
5
6
5
SF

-

S
h
o
w
e
r
h
e
a
d
s

a
n
d

s
i
n
k

a
e
r
a
t
o
r
s
0.
6
7
7
2,
7
7
2
SF

-

E
n
e
r
a
v

S
t
a
r

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
0.
7
3
1
2,
5
2
9
SF

-

F
r
e
e
z
e
r

r
e
c
v
c
l
i
n
c
0.
7
3
4
46
0
SF

-

R
e
f
r
i
a
e
r
a
t
o
r

D
e
c
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
i
n
a

a
n
d

R
e
c
l
i
n
c
0.
7
4
3
4,
9
4
7
SF

.

D
u
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n
a

w
/
H
e
a
t
o
u
m
o
0.
7
6
6
5,
5
3
1
SF

-

E
n
e
r
a
y

S
t
a
r

L
i
c
h
t
1.
9
0
1
12
,
9
5
5
SF

-

A
C

t
o

E
v
a
p
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

C
o
o
l
e
r

u
o
r
a
d
e
2.
0
9
2
13
,
1
2
9
SF

-

H
e
a
t

p
u
m
p

u
i
a
d
e

8
.
5

H
S
P
F
2.
2
2
8
37
,
4
7
7
SF

-

E
n
e
r
a
y

S
t
a
r

C
l
o
t
h
e
s

W
a
s
h
e
r
4.
0
2
0
46
,
0
6
9
SF

-

E
n
e
r
a
y

S
t
a
r

R
e
f
r
l
O
e
r
a
t
o
r

w
i
t
h

t
o
o

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
5.
1
8
1
14
,
3
9
1
SF

-

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
t
a
r

H
o
m
e
.

w
/
Z
o
n
a
l

E
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
7.
5
6
9
8,
9
1
9
1
C
o
s
t
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

u
t
i
l
t
y

c
o
s
t

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
2
S
a
v
i
n
g
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
'-1

Ne
K
a
n
r
8-
4
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
Ae
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
Ta
b
l
e

8
-
6

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

S
u
p
p
l
y

C
u
r
e

-

M
u
l
t
i

F
a
m
y

H
o
u
e
h
o
l
d
$0
.
0
4
5
$0
.
0
4
0
¡
$
0
.
0
3
5
..i!

$
0
.
0
3
0
ûl 8
$
0
.
0
2
5
~!
$
0
.
0
2
0
'i .!
:

$
0
.
0
1
5
ãi ~
$
0
.
0
1
0
$0
.
0
0
5
$-
I
-J
..
i I I
5,
0
0

1
0
.
0
0
0

1
5
,
0
0
0

2
0
,
0
0
0

2
5
,
0
0
0

3
0
,
0
0
0

3
5
,
0
0
0

4
0
,
0
0
0

4
5
,
0
0
0
Cu
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

A
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

(
M
W
h
)
...
.
.
.
MW
h
Så
v
i
ô
å
S
2
MF

-

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.
5
4
5
1,
1
7
6
MF

-

W
i
n
d
o
w
s

R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
0.
5
4
5
2,
4
5
5
MF

-

L
o
w

I
n
c
o
m
e

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

P
i
p
e

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.
5
7
0
46
MF

-

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

P
i
p
e

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.
5
7
9
14
5
MF

-

G
r
a
v
i
t
y

F
i
l
m

H
e
a
t

E
x
c
h
a
n
g
e
r
0.
5
8
4
95
1
MF

-

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

H
i
a
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v
0.
6
0
3
1,
2
3
6
MF

-

H
P

t
o

H
P

u
o
g
r
a
d
e
0.
6
4
6
5,
3
8
9
MF

-

C
e
i
l
n
g

F
a
n
0.
6
4
8
26
MF

-

R
e
f
r
i
g
e
r
a
t
o
r

D
e
c
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
i
n
g

a
n
d

R
e
c
v
c
l
i
n
g
0.
7
3
0
32
4
MF

-

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
t
a
r

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
0.
7
3
7
24
4
MF

-

F
r
e
e
z
e
r

r
e
c
v
c
l
i
n
a
0.
7
3
7
45
MF

-

E
n
e
r
g
v

S
t
a
r

L
i
g
h
t
0.
7
5
7
2,
6
6
9
MF

-

S
h
o
w
e
r
h
e
a
d
s

a
n
d

s
i
n
k

a
e
r
a
t
o
r
s
1.
0
1
7
87
4
MF

-

E
n
e
r
g
v

S
t
a
r

R
e
f
r
i
g
e
r
a
t
o
r

w
i
t
h

t
o
o

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
1.
2
6
8
2,
9
5
6
MF

-

A
C

t
o

E
v
a
o
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

C
o
o
l
e
r

u
p
g
r
a
d
e
2.
1
0
1
3,
2
5
9
MF

-

E
n
e
r
g
v

S
t
a
r

H
o
m
e
4.
0
1
6
11
,
7
1
7
MF

-

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
t
a
r

C
l
o
t
h
e
s

W
a
s
h
e
r
4.
2
2
9
5,
0
0
8
1
C
o
s
t
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

u
t
i
l
t
y

c
o
s
t

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
2
S
a
v
i
n
g
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
t-
1
N
e
K
a
n
r
8-
5
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e
"
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
Ta
b
l
e

B
-
7

E
n
e
r
g
y

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

S
u
p
l
y

C
u
r
e

-

M
a
u
f
a
c
t
e
d

H
o
m
e
:E

$
0
.
0
3
5
~~
$
0
.
0
3
0
U 8
$
0
.
0
2
5
~!l

$
0
.
0
2
0
I
$
0
.
0
1
5
1 j
$
0
.
0
1
0
$0
.
0
4
5
-
-
i
J
-J
$0
.
0
4
0
$0
.
0
0
5
$-
10
,
0
0
0

2
0
,
0
0
0

3
0
,
0
0
0

4
0
,
0
0
0

S
O
,
O
O
O

6
0
,
0
0
0

7
0
,
0
0
0

8
0
,
0
0
0
Cu
m
u
l
a
t
l
v
a

A
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

(
M
W
h
)
ce
n
t
s
/
k
W
h
1
MW
h
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Så
V
i
l
'
l
'
S
2
MH

-

D
u
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n
g

w
/
H
e
a
t

o
u
m
o

-

L
o
w

i
n
c
o
m
e
0,
5
1
2
2,
5
0
7
MH

-

W
i
n
d
o
w
s

R
e
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
0,
5
4
5
8,
6
6
4
MH

-

L
o
w

I
n
c
o
m
e

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

P
i
p
e

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0,
5
7
0
35
MH

-

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

P
i
p
e

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.
5
7
9
11
1
MH

-

I
n
f
i
l
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
0,
5
9
4
4,
2
3
4
MH

-

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

H
i
a
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v
0,
5
9
7
1,
4
6
3
MH

-

C
e
i
l
n
a

F
a
n
0.
6
4
8
24
8
MH

-

H
P

t
o

H
P

u
p
a
r
a
d
e
0.
6
6
0
6,
7
5
9
MH

-

S
h
o
w
e
r
h
e
a
d
s

a
n
d

s
i
n
k

a
e
r
a
t
o
r
s
0,
6
8
3
95
3
MH

-

D
u
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n
a

w
/
H
e
a
t
o
u
m
o
0.
6
8
9
3,
5
4
3
MH

-

E
n
e
n
:
i
y

S
t
a
r

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
0.
7
2
7
91
7
MH

-

F
r
e
e
z
e
r

r
e
c
y
c
l
i
n
g
0.
7
3
2
16
5
MH

-

R
e
f
r
i
a
e
r
a
t
o
r

D
e
c
o
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
i
n
a

a
n
d

R
e
c
v
c
l
i
n
a
0,
7
4
2
67
9
MH

-

E
n
e
r
a
y

S
t
a
r

L
i
g
h
t
0.
7
5
7
2,
0
5
0
MH

-

D
u
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n
g

F
A
F
1.
0
5
2
4,
6
2
3
MH

-

E
n
e
r
a
v

S
t
a
r

R
e
f
r
i
a
e
r
a
t
o
r

w
i
t
h

t
o
o

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
1.
2
6
8
2,
2
7
1
MH

-

H
e
a
t

p
u
m
p

u
p
g
r
a
d
e

8
.
5

H
S
P
F
1.
5
4
4
10
,
8
1
6
MH

-

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
t
a
r

M
a
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d

H
o
m
e
2.
0
4
0
17
,
2
7
3
MH

-

A
C

t
o

E
v
a
p
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

C
o
o
l
e
r

u
o
a
r
a
d
e
2,
1
2
2
2,
3
3
0
MH

-

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
t
a
r

C
l
o
t
h
e
s

W
a
s
h
e
r
4.
1
5
1
5,
8
4
0
1
C
o
s
t
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

u
t
i
l
i
y

c
o
s
t

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
2
S
a
v
i
n
g
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
t.
1
N
e
K
Q
n
r
8-
6
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
~~f!
&
CI
"§
t'
~
00
~I
~
~
J~"~
~
-å"€
m
~
I0ur-
=!..~f-
i-(/c:0w0:0u.(/
C)z
~(/..c:
e30:a:W
:g :Ei::EQ)0
'C 0
r-
eO
=Mom N ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ r- m N ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ M 00 M ro M r- m ro ~ r- ~ ~ ~ m m 0 ~ N~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ r- ~ ~ 0 r- ~ ro N m r- ro N r- ~
00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ó ~ ri ¿ 00 Ó ri ~ Ó ri~r- m ~ M ~ r- m ~ M ~ ro 0 N ~ r- m ~ ~ ~ ro~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r- r- r- r- ro ro ro ro ro m m m m
~~
~
i
ìen
ãi~
~ë
~~
~ai:;~e:"0c:
è¥~
~ ~ 0 ~ ~ N r- M ~ ~ m ro ro 0 m ~ ~ ~ ~ r-~ 00 ro M ~ ~ N ro r- m M m ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 N 0 ~~ ~ ro ~ N N ~ 0 ro ro ~ ~ N ~ N ~ m ~ M N
ri m ¿ Ñ m ~ ri~ 00 ~ ¿ ri Ñ ~ ó m 00 00 0000m 0 N ~ ~ r- m ~ N ~ ~ ro 0 N ~ ~ r- m ~ M~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r- r- r- r- r- r- ro ro
ro ~ M m ~ ~ 0 r- ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ ro ~M m M 0 ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r- m N ~ NN ~ ~ 0 N M M N ~ m r- ~ M ~ m r- ~ ~ N ~~ooÑ~mÑ¿oo~ri~mÑ ¿ ~óri~mÑN N M M M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r- r- r- r- ro
~ N M ~ ~ ~ r- ro m 0 ~ N M ~ ~ ~ r- ro~~~~~~~~NNNNNNNNN00000000000000000NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
~~Eou
j
~~
l-
I2:~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
Ta
b
l
e

B
-

C
o
n
u
e
r
c
i
a

D
e
m
d

S
a
v
i
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t

2
0
0
9
-
2
0
2
8

(
M
20
0
9
7
15
6
17
1
20
1
0
9
16
1
17
7
20
1
1
10
16
6
18
3
20
1
2
11
17
2
18
8
20
1
3
12
17
7
19
4
20
1
4
13
18
2
20
0
20
1
5
14
18
8
20
6
20
1
6
14
19
4
21
3
20
1
7
15
19
9
21
9
20
1
8
16
20
5
22
5
20
1
9
17
21
1
23
2
20
2
0
18
21
7
23
8
20
2
1
19
22
3
24
5
20
2
2
19
22
9
25
2
20
2
3
20
23
5
25
8
20
2
4
21
24
1
26
5
20
2
5
22
24
7
27
2
20
2
6
23
25
3
27
9
20
2
7
23
26
0
28
6
20
2
8
24
26
6
29
3
í:
1
N
e
x
a
Ð
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
8-
8
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L

S
U
P
P
L
Y

C
U
R
V
E
S
Ta
b
l
e

8
-
5

E
a
s

U
p
g
r
d
e
s

N
o
n
-
L
i
g
h
t
i

M
e
a
s
e
s

S
u
p
p
l
y

C
u
r
e
$0
.
1
0
0
$0
.
0
9
0
_
$
0
.
0
8
0
..~_
$
0
.
0
7
0
4l-¡
$
0
.
0
6
0
0 ~
$
0
.
0
5
0
:;;:i:

$
0
.
0
4
0
CIN :¡

$
0
.
0
3
0
~..

$
0
.
0
2
0
$0
.
0
1
0
$-
0
r-
#
12
J
10
,
0
0
0
20
,
0
0
0
30
,
0
0
0
40
,
0
0
0
50
,
0
0
0
-H
V
A
C
-M
o
t
o
r
s
-
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

S
h
e
l
l
-P
l
u
g

L
o
a
d
-G
r
o
c
e
r
y
-
A
g
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
Cu
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

A
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

(
M
W
h
)
t-
1
N
e
x
a
n
r
B-
9
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
~~
&
CI
.~
~
ci
i
q;
o..
å:
cic::;.cci:.
I
~u,.ø.
~
~
~
.f'f:.i
~l\0i:..
~
ì,~"i
L
1
L
1
000ci =0 Q)I'E::0 Õ0;:0 Ici~"'0 .aCD-.c (/0 ~ëi0:E ~0 .!ci -0D-o II 'ëLO:;Q)c:E0SQ)0 0)0 0 lt
Do c:ci lt0CD::..:ã Q)32II(/0 ::"'0 CD c:0 :e ltciE0~~('.
CD ~0 ::c:lt0:;c.0 II Eci:;0(.0 E ~N ~0 0 0D-o 00..ci lt032..
00LO0LO0LO0LO0g('('N N ....0 000000000óóóóóóóóó~~~~~~~~~
(llMlI/$) ¡so:) ~!i¡n paZ!l8A8i
&is
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
Ta
b
l
e

B
-
7

E
a
s
y

U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s

S
u
p
p
l
y

C
u
r
e

D
a
t
a
Li
a
h
t
l
"
Me
a
s
u
r
e
te
l
l
i
S
/
k
W
'
MV
l
t
i
$
a
v
l
n
a
s
.
CF
L

L
a
m
o

o
r

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
0.2
3
6
14
,
7
8
8
2-
l
a
m
a

4
'

T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
0.3
1
1
43
,
6
6
9
3-
l
a
m
a

4
'

T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
0.
3
1
1
14
,
6
7
1
20
-
1
0
0

W

C
e
r
a
m
i
c

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
0.
4
5
6
79
,
2
9
9
2-
l
a
m
a

4
'

T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
0.
4
5
9
13
,
1
9
9
LE
D

o
r

e
a
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

e
x
i
t

s
i
a
n
0.
6
5
1
2,
3
2
0
Tim
e

c
l
o
c
k

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
0.
6
6
4
64
1
~
a
m
n

4
'

T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
0.
7
0
1
16
,
0
3
6
De
l
a
m
o
i
n
a

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
s
0.
7
1
6
7,
9
0
6
40
0
-
7
5
0

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
0.
7
5
8
82
,
8
4
7
32
0
-
4
0
0

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
0.
8
8
4
43
,
6
9
3
2 l
a
m
n

8
'

T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

V
H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
0.
9
6
3
38
1
1
2 l
a
m
a

4
'

T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
0.
9
9
6
4,
1
8
9
4-
l
a
m
a

4
'

T
8

H
i
a
h

B
a
v

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.0
2
5
22
,
5
1
3
3
la
m
a

4
'

T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.
0
6
3
5,
2
4
6
4 l
a
m
a

4
'

T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.
1
9
9
5,
1
8
2
12
0
-
1
7
5

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
1.
2
0
4
27
,
8
2
4
4-
l
a
m
n

8
'

T
8

H
ö
o
h

B
a
v

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.
2
2
0
10
,
9
1
0
3-
l
a
m
n

4
'

T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.
2
3
1
2,
9
0
1
1 l
a
m
p

4
'

T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.
2
6
5
6,4
7
4
12
0
-
3
2
0

W

C
e
r
a
m
i
c

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
1.
2
8
0
41
,
7
3
6
35
0

W

+

C
e
r
a
m
i
c

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
1.
2
8
0
31
,
3
0
2
Au
t
o
-
o
f
f

t
i
m
e

s
w
i
t
c
h
1.
3
4
5
2,
3
5
5
-la
m
p

4
'

T
8

H
i
g
h

B
a
y

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.
3
9
3
5,3
9
4
2
l
a
m
p

4
'

T
5

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.4
5
3
4,
1
8
9
Ph
o
t
o
c
e
l
l

d
i
m
m
i
n
n

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
1.4
8
3
85
2
l
a
m
a

8
'

T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.5
1
8
77
9
Oc
c
u
n
a
n
c
v

s
e
n
s
o
r
,

w
a
l
l

o
r

c
e
i
l
n
a

m
o
u
n
t
e
d
1.5
2
3
6,
4
3
7
Au
t
o
-
o
f
f

t
i
m
e

s
w
i
t
c
h
1.5
9
4
1,9
6
2
3-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.6
2
8
4,
9
9
0
2
la
m

8'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.6
4
8
2,
1
4
2
2-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
r
e
1.6
9
0
3,
0
8
4
4~
a
m
4'
T
8

H
i
a
h

B
a
v

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.8
0
5
4,
9
2
5
1
la
m

4'
T
5

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.8
5
5
6,
4
7
4
2-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.9
0
9
5,
4
2
8
-l
a
m
4'
T
5

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.9
0
9
4,
2
2
3
4-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.9
6
6
9,
9
4
7
8
la
m

T5
H
O
I
a
m
n
2.
0
1
1
4,
4
3
6
1-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
2.
0
9
1
4,
9
3
4
Ce
n
l
r
a
l
l
i
a
h
t
i
n
a

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

S
\
l
t
e
m
2.
1
2
2
3,1
1
1
17
5
-
3
2
0

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
2.
2
7
9
19
,
5
5
6
3-
l
a
m
a

4
'

T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
2.
3
7
8
5,
8
0
2
LE
D

o
r

"
"
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

s
i
a
n

I
i
a
h
t
i
n
a
3.
0
5
2
1,
7
5
0
6~
a
m
o

4
'

T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
3.
4
3
0
3,
7
3
0
,
Co
s
t
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

u
t
i
l
t
y

c
o
s
t

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
· S
a
v
i
n
g
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

i
n
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
HV
A
C
..
_
.
.
-
.i
i
i
FM
ü
¡
¡
i:
Î
l
t
S
k
W
'
MW
h

S
a
ì
¡
¡
¡
¡
g
$
~
7
d
a
y
,

t
w

s
t
a
a
e

s
e
t
b
a
c
k

t
h
e
r
m
o
s
t
a
t
0.2
1
7
5,
5
7
8
Gr
o
u
n
d

S
o
u
r
c
e

H
P

O
o
e
n
0.6
8
2
54
2
Air
~
s
i
d
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

s
y
s
t
e
m

r
a
a
a
i
r
0.7
8
3
90
4
Va
r
i
a
b
l
e

s
p
e
e
d

d
r
i
v
e
,

f
a
n
0.7
8
4
1,0
3
3
Va
r
i
a
b
l
e

s
o
e
e
d

d
r
i
v
e
,

D
u
m
0.
9
3
2
85
4
Wa
t
e
r
-
s
i
d
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
1.
0
0
2
48
3
5
t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

1
-
o
h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
4

S
E
E
R
1.4
0
6
1,
4
4
4
Pr
e
-
c
o
o
l
e
r

a
d
d
e
d

t
o

c
o
n
d
e
n
s
e
r
1.8
4
5
1,
2
1
1
5
to
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

1
-
o
h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
5

S
E
E
R
2.
3
5
7
1,
6
8
5
5
t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

3
-
o
h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
4

S
E
E
R
2.
7
3
7
1,
4
4
4
Re
t
r
f
i
t

t
o

d
i
r
e
c
t

e
v
a
p
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

c
o
o
l
e
r
2.
8
9
5
7,
7
2
5
5 t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

1
-
p
h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t

M
i
n

1
6

S
E
E
R
3.
1
1
7
1,
8
9
6
Air
-
s
i
d
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
3.
2
5
6
2,
Q
2
Au
t
o
m
a
t
e
d

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

s
y
s
t
e
m
3.
3
1
1
13
5
5 t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

3
-
o
h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
5

S
E
E
R
3.
4
9
7
1,6
8
5
5
to
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

3
-
o
h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
6

S
E
E
R
4.
1
3
0
1,8
9
6
11
-
1
9

t
o
n

A
C

u
n
i
l
,

m
i
n

1
0
.
8

E
E
R
5.
1
6
6
1,3
4
7
6-
1
0

t
o
n

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

m
i
n

1
1

E
E
R
5.
3
7
2
1,2
3
3
Re
t
r
o
f
i
t

t
o

i
n
d
i
r
e
c
t

e
v
a
o
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

c
o
o
l
e
r
5.
7
1
3
5,
7
9
4
20

t
o
n

o
r

m
o
r
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

m
i
n

1
0

E
E
R
6.
9
1
7
1,
0
3
1
Co
s
t
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
e
v
e
l
l
z
e
d

u
t
i
l
i
t
y

c
o
s
t

a
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
2
S
a
v
i
n
g
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
Mo
l
a
r
s
,-
.
_
.
_
.
-
Me
a
s
u
r
e
c¡
¡
¡
¡
t
S
k
W
1
MV
l
h
S
a
v
l
n
a
.
.
'
ar
i
a
b
e
~
D
e
e
a

u
r
i
v
e
s
0.
3
3
2
1,
0
9
6
30
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
0.
7
0
7
3,
4
6
1
40
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
0.
8
4
8
4,5
8
1
35
0
h
Mo
t
o
r

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
0.
8
8
0
4,
0
2
4
25
0

h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
0.
8
8
2
3,
0
2
8
45
0

h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
0.
9
1
4
62
4
9
EC
M
m
o
t
o
r
0.
9
6
1
18
4
20
0

h
Mo
l
a
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
l
v
i
i
1.0
0
2
1,
1
6
3
25
h
Mo
t
o
r

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
l
v
n
a
1.0
8
4
85
6
30
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
r

.
n
n
1.1
0
2
87
8
50
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
1.1
3
2
5,
9
7
3
12
5
h
Mo
l
a
r

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f

.
n
1.
1
4
1
75
5
40
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
m
.
.
n
1.1
6
9
59
6
15
0
h
Mo
t
o
r

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f

.
n
1.1
9
4
70
9
10
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f

.
n
1.2
4
8
1,
3
1
0
60

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
r

.
n
1.2
6
4
85
0
50

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
l
l
i
n
1.3
6
7
65
9
20

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f
n
1.4
4
9
46
7
75

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f
y
i
n
g
1.5
2
4
99
4
7.
5

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
f
v
i
n
n
1.6
1
9
65
3
15

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
n
'
¡
n
n
1.
6
3
1
36
2
10

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
t
v
i
n
a
1.
6
7
5
74
0
5 h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f
v
n
a
2.
7
9
8
24
9
Es
c
a
l
a
t
o
r

M
o
t
o
r

C
o
n
t
r
l
l
e
r
2.
9
6
7
54
7
Do
w
n
s
i
z
i
n
a

m
o
t
o
r

d
u
r
i
n
a

r
e
t
r
o
f
i
t
3.
0
3
7
2
3 h
e

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
3.
0
5
9
20
5
2 h
e

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
t
v
i
n
n
4.
0
1
0
11
1
1
h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

.
4.
4
2
2
77
1.
5
h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
i
i
a
4.
4
3
3
89
,
Co
s
t
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

u
t
i
l
t
y

c
o
s
t

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

i
n
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
·
S
a
v
i
n
g
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

i
n
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
r
a
m
I.
1
N
e
m
n
r
B-
1
1
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
Gr
o
c
e
r
y
.
Mè
a
S
U
r
e
Au
t
o
-
c
l
o
s
e
r
-
w
a
l
k
-
i
n
0.
4
3
1
18
Fl
o
a
t
i
n
a

h
e
a
d

p
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
0.
4
7
1
82
9
Fl
o
a
t
i
n
a

s
u
c
t
i
o
n

e
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
0.
5
3
9
21
0
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t

l
o
w
-
t
e
m
p

c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
o
r
0.
6
2
5
76
0
EC
M

c
a
s
e

f
a
n

m
o
t
o
r
s
0.
6
3
9
1,
6
2
7
Au
t
o
-
c
1
o
s
e
r
-
w
a
l
k
-
i
n
0.
7
1
5
12
Au
t
o
-
c
l
o
s
e
r

-
r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
0.
7
3
2
41
9
An
t
i
-
s
w
e
a
t

h
e
a
t

(
A
S
H
)

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
0.
7
8
6
71
7
Flu
o
r
e
s
c
e
n
t

w
a
l
k
-
i
n

l
i
a
h
t

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
0.
8
9
9
44
8
Re
f
r
i
a
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

l
i
n
e

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.
9
1
3
35
No
-
h
e
a
t

a
l
a
s
s

d
o
o
r
s
0.
9
9
2
41
1
Ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
,

l
o
w
-
t
e
m
p

r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
1.
0
6
5
38
9
T8

f
l
u
o
r
e
s
c
e
n
t

l
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
1.
0
7
0
34
2
Ele
c
t
r
o
n
i
c

T
1
2

b
a
l
l
a
s
t
1.
1
9
4
40
3
Ve
r
t
i
c
a
l

n
i
g
h
t

c
o
v
e
r
s
1.
4
8
9
72
Do
o
r
i
a
s
k
e
t
-
w
a
l
k
-
i
n
1.
4
9
9
64
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t
,

l
o
w
-
t
e
m
e

r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
1.
6
4
6
66
8
Ev
a
o
o
r
a
t
o
t

F
a
n

C
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
1.
6
7
7
63
Ho
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l

n
i
a
h
t

c
o
v
e
r
s
2.
0
2
2
41
Do
o
r

g
a
s
k
e
t
-
r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
2.
1
5
2
51
7
Ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
,

m
e
d
i
u
m
-
t
e
m
e

r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
2.
3
1
5
1,
7
4
0
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t
,

w
a
t
e
r
-
c
o
o
l
e
d

c
o
n
d
e
n
s
e
r
2.
3
6
7
28
9
LE
D

C
a
s
e

L
i
a
h
t
i
n
a
2.
5
2
8
42
0
Ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

e
v
a
e
o
r
a
t
o
r

f
a
n

m
o
t
o
r
s
2.
7
2
1
64
Au
t
o
-
c
1
o
s
e
r
-
r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
2.
8
0
7
78
Ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
,

a
i
r
-
c
o
o
l
e
d

c
o
n
d
e
n
s
e
r
3.
2
0
0
21
2
Ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
,

e
v
a
p
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

c
o
n
d
e
n
s
e
r
3.
8
5
0
35
1
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t
,

l
o
w
-
t
e
m
e

r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
4.
0
4
3
1,
1
0
8
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t
,

m
e
d
i
u
m
-
t
e
m
e

o
e
e
n

c
a
s
e
4.
3
4
5
45
6
An
t
i
-
s
w
e
a
t

h
e
a
t

(
A
S
H
)

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
6.
1
4
5
83
l
C
o
s
t
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

u
t
i
l
t
y

c
o
s
t

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
2
S
a
v
i
n
g
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g

S
h
e
l
l
-
.
Mè
a
s
O
r
e
i
ce
n
t
s
/
k
W
h
'
MI
N
h
s
å
.
v
i
n
l
'
$
2
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
1
9

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.
5
9
3
5,
5
1
6
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
1
1

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.
6
8
0
2,
3
6
4
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
2
4

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
1.
4
4
8
2,
0
8
4
Ad
d
i
n
a

r
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
v
e

r
o
o
f

t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
1.
7
0
5
2,
7
9
7
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
3
8

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
1.
8
1
0
3,
3
0
0
Ad
d
i
n
g

w
i
n
d
o
w

s
h
a
d
e

s
c
r
e
e
n
3.
6
2
5
11
,
5
6
2
U~
0
.
4
2
,

S
H
G
C
~
0
.
4
0
6.
9
6
7
2,
5
7
5
U~
0
.
4
2
,

S
H
G
C
~
0
.
4
0
,

V
L

T
"
0
.
5
9.
2
6
5
3,
8
6
3
1
C
o
s
t
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

u
t
i
l
i
t
y

c
o
s
t

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
2
S
a
v
i
n
g
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
-
-
-
ii.
.
.
.
ce
n
t
s
/
k
W
h
'
l\
W
h

S
a
v
i
n
a
s
~
80

P
l
u
s
l
I

P
C
-
d
e
s
k
t
(
)
D
0.
3
9
8
8,
1
1
80

P
l
u
s
l

P
C
-
s
e
r
v
e
r
0.
6
4
3
22
4
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R
l
I

P
C
0.
7
3
3
7,
0
9
2
En
e
r
a
y
S
t
a
r

v
e
n
d

in
a

m
a
c
h
i
n
e
0.
7
5
4
93
3
PC

n
e
t
w
r
k

p
o
w
e
r

m
a
n
a
a
e
m
e
n
t
0.
8
4
7
2,
8
7
0
No
n
-
c
o
o
l
e
d

s
n
a
c
k

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
0.
9
4
5
20
1
En
e
r
a
v
S
t
a
r

d
i
s
h
w
a
s
h
e
r
,

E
F

.
6
5
1.
0
1
4
48
Hig
h
-
e
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

w
a
s
h
e
r
1.
2
3
5
56
Ot
h
e
r

c
o
l
d

e
r
o
d
u
c
t

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
1.
2
9
2
28
8
Lo
w
-
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

d
i
s
h

m
a
c
h
i
n
e
1.
6
2
3
10
3
Be
v
e
r
a
a
e

m
a
c
h
i
n
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
1.
9
0
0
28
8
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R
l
I

C
o
o
i
e
r
2.
5
2
6
67
lH
i
a
h
-
e
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

c
o
i
n
-
o
o

w
a
s
h
e
r
3.
9
3
2
24
En
e
r
g
y
S
t
a
r

r
e
f
r
i
g
e
r
a
t
o
r
4.
8
1
9
52
,
C
o
s
t
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

u
t
i
l
t
y

c
o
s
t

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
2
S
a
v
i
n
g
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
Ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
-
..
.
.
.
ce
n
t
l
/
k
W
h
'
MI
N
h

S
a
v
l
n
a
s
2
Pr
o
a
r
a
m
m
a
b
l
e

v
e
n
t
i
a
t
i
o
n

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
0.
4
0
3
2,
4
3
3
Blo
c
k

h
e
a
t
e
r

t
i
m
e
r
0.
4
3
5
18
3
VF
D

o
n

d
a
i
r
y

v
a
c
u
u
m

D
u
m
a
0.
9
4
2
7,
1
8
6
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
n
g

f
a
n
1.
0
0
7
1,
9
1
8
Hi
g
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v

S
t
o
c
k

t
a
n
k
1.
0
3
8
2,
1
3
3
Hi
g
h
-
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

v
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

s
v
t
e
m
1.
5
4
3
3,
5
9
3
Au
t
o
m
a
t
i
c

M
i
l
k
e
r

T
a
k
e
o
f
f
s
3.
4
9
6
3,
9
3
1
,
C
o
s
t
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

l
e
v
e
l
i
z
e
d

u
t
i
l
i
t
y

c
o
s
t

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
2
S
a
v
i
n
g
s

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t

t
h
e

t
o
t
a
l

a
c
h
i
e
v
a
b
l
e

p
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

o
v
e
r

t
h
e

l
i
f
e

o
f

t
h
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
L-
1
N
e
x
a
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
8-
1
2
i~
&ti
.~
t3
a:
1
'0
C"..
åi
~;:ui:
Q).u
IEw
oii:
:Q.5ai
1 =(IE::0 ~00 IÓ:0"0
~
0 .aT"CfãiU~R -0 .i .æi:0 3:0~0 i:;:
IL
ó ::ëuco-(I
~i:EQ)ll (I.u ~0)eI.0 IE i:i:
1=L 0 .!eIw0~oi 0 0 (I
of
i:Ó £L "0ëi:Q (0 CP "0.5 :a i:J ai ì ~E¥(I000CPcii
L
0 .ø:0 .i :0..Ó ~i:R-ei~~c.
CP Ef-0~u~
~0 ll0"S 00Ei:L ó 0N=.c0~l 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00)co "-(0 LO ~C'N T"0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓ~~~~~~~~~~
(llMlI/$) ¡so:) ~!i¡n paziiaAai
&Iu
~
Iil'"
o§
t!
CQ
t
q;
~ci
&uRø.~
.r
æ
of
J
~
~
C"N 0)0)V LO V LO C"0 CO CO V toN0)I"..C"I"to i.C"0 ..LO C"CO °i;°CX CO °"!LO N LO V O.0 LO ..cqIX..C\e;C"..O'C\CO CÔ i-IX ..c ..')ci
UJ;,~
==
..LO to to i...CO I"I"~0)I"..0)N 0 I"i...CO N to 0)C"0)to ..-C"o:~i.~......~C'i.CO I"CO;,ci 0 0 ....C\M M C"v i.iò CÒ ,.
~..en-c
CDu
e:
Q)fI-EIg~Q)fIC/
I~
:i:;e:.c e :J fI1:9 fI C/e:..-::-
lo~
~
0 ~fI e:e:Ii:e:Q)e:0 ~"0"g 0 fI
i¡;fI E a:u Õ e:eii:C/Q)ro -l!0 :c -~e:~e:
Q)-;:l!~e:
i!u I~~-"¡:Q)e:fIci;B 0 Q)0 ==:ci fI l-e:E "E ~e:0..e:Q)
~Q)e e:u 0
~~"0 g .ü Q-Q)Q)0 "ü -ro ~"0
CJ IE ro e:E IE e:E
e:e:.~~0:w e:0 0 ~c.Q)0 0 w 0 .c
"ü C/~-¡ro w U .g a."0 IE Q)e::E E "0 EQ)~15
e:
e
Q)-Q)-::0 e:::e:.c ::0 W "0 c.~::ro ::Q):;èi Q)
"E ro .E"0 .c o¡:g ei 'õ Q).ü E á&:9 ro ~~e:..IE ~Q)ro ~:c ;:0 w :(w c.ci I ci a.
....
ci
E
f!CleQ.
Q).c-Õ
~
Q);;..
~ø
8~:s::
"0
.~
~~
Q).c--e:
Q)fI~Q.
~
tl
8
E
f!Cl0 =..Q.l'Q):i.c :g-Õ i;:~"C.;enQ)ii.c ~-...S~0ll0"E-¡Q):;EQ)e:C)Q)m-c:0 mQ.::
Q)Q)::"C
èñro"C;:c:Q)m:E E0Q)0ro,
-¡;:c:-m0c.-EQ)0.c u-
~-e:
Q)0fIll
~0..Q.~~
fICle:os:
roCJ
N
..
&
Is
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
Ta
b
l
e

B
-

1
0

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

A
c
h
e
v
a
b
l
e

S
a
v
i
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t

b
y

M
e
a
s
e
s

(
M
)
Mé
ã
9
U
t
e
N
ä
r
i
J
20
0
9
20
1
0
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
!
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
.
20
1
7
20
1
8
20
1
.
20
2
0
20
2
1
20
2
2
20
2
!
20
2
4
20
2
5
20
2
6
20
2
1
20
2
8
1 la
m

4'
T
8

F
i
x
1
u
r
e
18
5
22
5
26
0
29
1
32
1
34
9
37
7
40
4
43
0
45
7
48
3
50
9
53
5
56
2
58
8
61
4
64
1
66
8
69
5
72
2
21
a
m
4'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
12
0
14
6
16
8
18
9
20
8
22
6
24
4
26
1
27
8
29
6
31
2
32
9
34
6
36
3
38
0
39
8
41
5
43
2
45
0
46
7
3
la
m

4'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
15
0
18
2
21
1
23
6
26
0
28
3
30
5
32
7
34
9
37
0
39
1
41
3
43
4
45
5
47
6
49
8
52
0
54
1
56
3
58
5
4
la
m

4'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
14
8
18
0
20
8
23
3
25
7
28
0
30
2
32
3
34
4
36
6
38
7
40
7
42
8
45
0
47
1
49
2
51
3
53
5
55
6
57
8
2
la
m

8'
T
8

F
i
x
1
u
r
e
22
27
31
35
39
42
45
49
52
55
58
61
64
68
71
74
77
80
84
87
21
a
m
8'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

H
O

f
l
x
1
u
r
e
61
75
86
96
10
6
11
6
12
5
13
4
14
2
15
1
16
0
16
8
17
7
18
6
19
5
20
3
21
2
22
1
23
0
23
9
2
la
m

8'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

V
H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
10
9
13
3
15
3
17
2
18
9
20
6
22
2
23
8
25
3
26
9
28
4
30
0
31
5
33
1
34
6
36
2
37
7
39
3
40
9
42
5
4-
l
a
m
4'
T
8

H
i
a
h

B
a
v

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
14
1
17
1
19
8
22
2
24
4
26
6
28
7
30
7
32
7
34
7
36
7
38
7
40
7
42
7
44
7
46
7
48
8
50
8
52
9
54
9
6-
l
a
m
4'
T
8

H
i
a
h

B
a
v

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
15
4
18
8
21
7
24
3
26
8
29
1
31
4
33
6
35
9
38
1
40
2
42
4
44
6
46
8
49
0
51
2
53
4
55
6
57
9
60
2
4-
l
a
m
4'
T
8

H
i
g
h

B
a
y

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
64
4
78
3
90
4
1,
0
1
4
1,
1
1
7
1,
2
1
5
1,3
1
1
1,4
0
4
1,4
9
7
1,5
8
8
1,6
7
9
1,7
7
0
1,
8
6
1
1,9
5
3
2,0
4
4
2,1
3
7
2,2
2
9
2,3
2
3
2,4
1
6
2,
5
1
1
4-
l
a
m
8'
T
a

H
i
a
h

B
a
v

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
31
2
38
0
43
8
49
1
54
1
58
9
63
5
68
1
72
5
77
0
81
4
85
8
90
2
94
6
99
1
1,
0
3
5
1,
0
8
0
1,
1
2
6
1,1
7
1
1,2
1
7
1
la
m

4'T
5
f
i
x
t
u
r
e
18
5
22
5
26
0
29
1
32
1
34
9
37
7
40
4
43
0
45
7
48
3
50
9
53
5
56
2
58
8
61
4
64
1
66
8
69
5
72
2
2
la
m

4'
T
5

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
12
0
14
6
16
8
18
9
20
8
22
6
24
4
26
1
27
8
29
6
31
2
32
9
34
6
36
3
38
0
39
8
41
5
43
2
45
0
46
7
3-
l
a
m
4'T
5

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
14
3
17
4
20
0
22
5
24
7
26
9
29
1
31
1
33
2
35
2
37
2
39
2
41
3
43
3
45
3
47
4
49
4
51
5
53
6
55
7
4~
a
m
4'T
5

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
12
1
14
7
16
9
19
0
20
9
22
8
24
6
26
3
28
1
29
8
31
5
33
2
34
9
36
6
38
3
40
1
41
8
43
6
45
3
47
1
1-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
14
1
17
2
19
8
22
2
24
5
26
6
28
7
30
6
32
8
34
8
36
8
38
8
40
8
42
8
44
8
46
8
48
9
50
9
53
0
55
0
2-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
88
10
7
12
4
13
9
15
3
16
6
18
0
19
2
20
5
21
8
23
0
24
3
25
5
26
7
28
0
29
3
30
5
31
8
33
1
34
4
3-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
83
10
1
11
6
13
1
14
4
15
7
16
9
18
1
19
3
20
5
21
6
22
8
24
0
25
2
26
3
27
5
28
7
29
9
31
1
32
4
1-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
45
9
55
8
64
4
72
2
79
5
86
6
93
4
1,0
0
0
1,0
6
6
11
3
1
1,
1
9
6
1,
2
6
1
1,
3
2
6
1,3
9
1
1,4
5
6
1,5
2
2
1,5
8
8
1,6
5
4
1,
7
2
1
1,
7
8
9
2-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
37
7
45
9
53
0
59
4
65
5
71
2
76
8
82
3
87
7
93
1
98
5
1,
0
3
8
1,0
9
1
1,
1
4
5
1,1
9
9
1,2
5
3
1,3
0
7
1,3
6
2
1,4
1
7
1,
4
7
2
3-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
42
0
51
0
58
9
66
0
72
8
79
2
85
4
91
5
97
5
1,
0
3
5
1,
0
9
4
1,
1
5
4
1,2
1
3
1,2
7
3
1,3
3
2
1,3
9
2
1,4
5
3
1,5
1
4
1,5
7
5
1,
6
3
7
2-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
15
5
18
9
21
8
24
4
26
9
29
3
31
6
33
9
36
1
38
3
40
5
42
7
44
9
47
1
49
3
51
5
53
7
56
0
58
3
60
5
2-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1,2
4
9
1,5
1
9
1,7
5
3
1,9
6
6
2,
1
6
6
2,
3
5
7
2,
5
4
2
2,7
2
4
2,9
0
3
3,
0
8
0
3,2
5
7
3,4
3
4
3,6
1
1
3,7
8
8
3,
9
6
6
4,
1
4
4
4,
3
2
4
4,
5
0
5
4,6
8
8
4,8
7
1
3-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
16
6
20
2
23
3
26
1
28
8
31
3
33
8
36
2
38
6
40
9
43
3
45
6
48
0
50
3
52
7
55
1
57
5
59
9
62
3
64
7
4-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
28
4
34
6
39
9
44
8
49
3
53
7
57
9
62
0
66
1
70
2
74
2
78
2
82
2
86
3
90
3
94
4
98
5
1,
0
2
6
1,
0
6
8
1,
1
1
0
6-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
10
7
13
0
15
0
16
8
18
5
20
1
21
7
23
3
24
8
26
3
27
8
29
3
30
8
32
4
33
9
35
4
36
9
38
5
40
0
41
6
De
l
a
m
in
a

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
s
22
6
27
5
31
7
35
6
39
2
42
7
46
0
49
3
52
6
55
8
59
0
62
2
65
4
66
6
71
8
75
0
78
3
81
6
84
9
88
2
12
0
-
1
7
5

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
61
6
75
0
86
5
97
0
1,
0
6
9
1,
1
6
3
1,
2
5
5
1,
3
4
5
1,
4
3
3
1,5
2
1
1,6
0
8
1,6
9
5
1,7
8
3
1,8
7
0
1,9
5
8
2,
0
4
6
2,
1
3
5
2,2
2
4
2,3
1
4
2,4
0
5
17
5
-
3
2
0

W

P
u
i
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
43
3
52
7
60
8
68
2
75
1
81
8
88
2
94
5
1,
0
0
7
1,
0
6
9
1,1
3
0
1,1
9
2
1,2
5
3
13
1
4
1,3
7
6
14
3
8
1,
5
0
1
1,
5
6
3
1,
6
2
7
1,
6
9
0
32
0
-
4
0
0

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
i

H
a
l
l
d
a
96
8
1,1
7
7
1,3
5
9
1,
5
2
4
',6
7
9
1,
8
2
7
1,
9
7
1
2,1
1
1
2,2
5
0
2,3
8
8
2,5
2
5
2,
6
6
2
2,
7
9
9
2,
9
3
6
3,
0
7
4
3,
2
1
3
3,
3
5
3
3,4
9
3
3,6
3
4
3,7
7
7
40
0
-
7
5
0

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
1,8
3
5
2,
2
3
2
2,
5
7
6
2,
8
8
9
3,1
8
3
34
6
4
3,
7
3
7
4,0
0
4
4,2
6
7
4,5
2
8
47
8
8
5,
0
4
8
5,3
0
7
5,
5
6
8
5,
8
3
0
6,
0
9
2
6,
3
5
7
6,6
2
3
6,8
9
1
7,1
6
1
20
-
1
0
0

W

C
e
r
a
m
i
c

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
1,7
5
7
2,
1
3
7
2,
4
6
6
2,
7
6
6
3,0
4
7
3,
3
1
6
3,
5
7
7
3,8
3
2
4,0
8
4
4,3
3
4
4,
5
8
4,
8
3
1
5,0
8
0
5,
3
3
0
5,
5
8
0
5,
8
3
2
6,
0
8
5
6,3
3
9
6,5
9
6
6,8
5
4
12
0
-
3
2
0

W

C
e
r
a
m
i
c

M
a
t
a
l

H
a
l
l
d
a
92
5
1,1
2
5
1,2
9
8
1,
4
5
6
1,
6
0
4
1,
7
4
5
1,
8
8
2
2,0
1
7
2,1
5
0
2,2
8
1
2,4
1
2
2,
5
4
3
2,
6
7
4
2,
8
0
5
2,
9
3
7
3,
0
6
9
3,
2
0
2
3,3
3
7
3,4
7
2
3,6
0
7
35
0

W
+

C
e
r
a
m
i
c

M
e
l
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
69
3
84
3
97
3
1,
0
9
2
1,
2
0
3
1,3
0
9
1,
4
1
2
1,
5
1
3
1,
6
1
2
1,7
1
1
1,8
0
9
1,9
0
7
2,0
0
5
2,
1
0
4
2,
2
0
3
23
0
2
2,
4
0
2
2,5
0
2
2,6
0
4
2,7
0
6
CF
L

L
a
m
p

o
r

F
i
x
1
u
r
e
32
8
39
9
46
0
51
6
56
8
61
8
66
7
71
5
76
2
80
8
85
5
90
1
94
7
99
4
1,
0
4
1
1,
0
8
7
1,
1
3
5
1,
1
8
2
1,2
3
0
1,2
7
8
lE
D

o
r

e
Q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

e
x
i
t

s
h
:
i
n
51
62
72
81
89
97
10
5
11
2
11
9
12
7
13
4
14
1
14
9
15
6
16
3
17
1
17
8
18
6
19
3
20
1
LE
D

o
r

a
a
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

s
i

n

l
I
a
h
t
i
n
a
39
47
54
61
67
73
79
85
90
96
10
1
10
7
11
2
11
8
12
3
12
9
13
4
14
0
14
6
15
1
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y

s
e
n
s
o
r
,

w
a
l
l

o
r

c
e
i
l
n
a

m
o
u
n
t
e
d
23
7
28
8
33
3
37
3
41
1
44
7
48
3
51
7
55
1
58
5
61
8
65
2
68
6
71
9
75
3
78
7
82
1
85
6
89
0
92
5
Ph
o
t
o
c
e
l
l

d
i
m
m
i
n
a

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
Ce
n
t
r
a
l
l
i
a
h
t
i
n
a

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

s
y
s
t
e
m
11
5
13
9
16
1
18
0
19
9
21
6
23
3
25
0
26
6
28
3
29
9
31
5
33
1
34
8
36
4
38
0
39
7
41
3
43
0
44
7
Au
t
o
o
o
f
f
t
l
m
e

s
w
i
t
c
h
87
10
5
12
2
13
7
15
0
16
4
17
7
18
9
20
2
21
4
22
6
23
9
25
1
26
3
27
5
28
8
30
0
31
3
32
6
33
8
Au
t
o
-
o
f
f

t
i
m
e

s
w
i
t
c
h
72
88
10
1
11
4
12
5
13
6
14
7
15
8
16
8
17
8
18
9
19
9
20
9
21
9
23
0
24
0
25
0
26
1
27
1
28
2
Tim
e

c
l
o
c
k

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
2
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
5
t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
.

1
:
-
ha
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
4

S
E
E
R
41
47
52
57
62
66
71
75
79
83
88
92
96
10
0
10
5
10
9
11
3
11
8
12
2
12
6
5 t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

1
-
ha
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
5

S
E
E
R
48
55
61
67
72
77
83
88
92
97
10
2
10
7
11
2
11
7
12
2
12
7
13
2
13
7
14
2
14
8
5
t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

1
-
ha
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
6

S
E
E
R
54
62
69
75
81
87
93
98
10
4
11
0
11
5
12
1
12
6
13
2
13
7
14
3
14
9
15
4
16
0
16
6
5
t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

3
-
ha
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
4

S
E
E
R
41
47
52
57
62
66
71
75
79
83
88
92
96
10
0
10
5
10
9
11
3
11
8
12
2
12
6
5
t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

3
-
as
e

A
C

u
n
l
l
,

M
i
n

1
5

S
E
E
R
48
55
61
67
72
77
83
88
92
97
10
2
10
7
11
2
11
7
12
2
12
7
13
2
13
7
14
2
14
8
5
t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

3
-
ha
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
6

S
E
E
R
54
62
69
75
81
87
93
98
10
4
11
0
11
5
12
1
12
6
13
2
13
7
14
3
14
9
15
4
16
0
16
6
6-
1
0

t
o
n

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

m
i
n

1
1

E
E
R
35
40
45
49
53
57
60
64
68
71
75
79
82
86
89
93
97
10
0
10
4
10
8
11
-
1
9

t
o
n

A
C

u
n
i
l
,

m
i
n

1
0
.
8

E
E
R
38
44
49
53
58
62
66
70
74
78
82
86
90
94
98
10
2
10
6
11
0
11
4
11
8
20

t
o
n

o
r

m
o
r
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

m
i
n

1
0

E
E
R
29
34
37
41
44
47
51
54
57
60
63
66
69
72
75
78
81
84
87
90
Air
-
s
i
d
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
58
67
74
81
88
94
10
1
10
7
11
3
11
9
12
5
13
1
13
7
14
3
14
9
15
5
16
1
16
7
17
3
18
0
Wa
t
e
r
.
s
i
d
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
19
21
24
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
41
43
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
Air
w
s
i
c
l

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

s
Y
S
t
e
m

r
e
o
a
i
r
26
29
33
36
39
42
44
47
50
52
55
58
60
63
66
68
71
74
76
79
Pr
e
-
c
o
o
l
e
r

a
d
d
e
d

t
o

c
o
n
d
e
n
s
e
r
46
53
59
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
99
10
4
10
9
11
4
11
9
12
3
12
8
13
3
13
8
14
3
Re
t
r
o
f
i
t

t
o

d
i
r
e
c
t

e
v
a
p
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

c
o
o
l
e
r
22
0
25
2
28
0
30
6
33
1
35
5
37
8
40
1
42
4
44
7
46
9
49
2
51
4
53
7
58
0
58
3
60
6
62
9
65
3
67
6
Re
t
r
o
f
i
t

t
o

i
n
d
i
r
e
c
t

e
v
a
p
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

c
o
l
e
r
16
5
18
9
21
0
23
0
24
8
26
6
26
4
30
1
31
8
33
5
35
2
36
9
38
6
40
3
42
0
43
7
45
4
47
2
49
0
50
7
Va
r
i
a
b
l
e

s
p
e
e
d

d
r
i
v
e
,

f
a
n
29
34
37
41
44
47
51
54
57
60
63
66
69
72
75
78
81
84
87
90
'-
"
N
a
t
a
n
T
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

Sid
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
8-
1
5
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
,,,
,
,
.
,
,
.
,
"
Mè
a
s
ú
t
è
N
a
l
1
20
0
9
20
t
O
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
S
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
6
20
1
7
20
1
8
20
t
9
20
2
0
20
2
1
20
2
2
20
2
3
20
2
4
20
2
5
20
2
6
20
2
7
20
2
8
Va
r
i
a
b
l
e

s
o
e
e
d

d
r
i
v
e
.

D
u
m
p
24
28
31
34
37
39
42
44
47
49
52
54
57
59
62
64
67
70
72
75
7
d
a
v
,

t
w
o

s
t
a
o
e

s
e
t
b
a
c
k

t
h
e
r
m
o
s
t
a
t
19
9
22
8
25
4
27
7
30
0
32
1
34
2
36
3
38
4
40
4
42
4
44
5
46
5
48
6
50
6
52
7
54
8
56
9
59
0
61
2
Au
t
o
m
a
t
e
d

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

s
v
s
t
e
m
4
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
12
1
h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f
y
n
g
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6
1.
5
h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f
v
i
n
a
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
8
2
h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f
v
.
n
o
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
3
h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
M
ng
8
8
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
5
h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f
y
i
ng
9
10
11
11
12
12
13
14
14
15
15
16
17
17
18
18
19
20
20
21
7.
5

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
in
a
24
26
28
29
31
33
34
36
37
39
40
42
43
45
47
48
50
52
53
55
10

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
in
a
27
29
31
33
35
37
39
40
42
44
46
47
49
51
53
55
57
58
60
62
15

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
in
g
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
29
30
20

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
tin
a
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
36
37
38
39
25

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
"
tin
a
31
34
36
38
41
43
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
59
61
63
65
68
70
72
30

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
vi
n
o
32
35
37
39
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
61
63
65
67
69
72
74
40

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
vi
n
g
22
24
25
27
28
30
31
32
34
35
37
38
40
41
43
44
46
47
49
50
50

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
i
l
vi
n
g
24
26
28
30
31
33
34
36
38
39
41
42
44
45
47
49
50
52
54
55
60

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
Vi
n
g
31
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
57
59
61
63
65
67
69
71
75

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
i
l
.n
o
36
39
42
45
47
49
52
54
57
59
61
64
66
69
71
73
76
78
81
84
10
0

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
Yi
n
g
48
52
55
59
62
65
68
71
75
78
81
84
87
90
94
97
10
0
10
3
10
7
11
0
12
5

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
Vi
n
o
28
30
32
34
36
38
39
41
43
45
47
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
61
63
15
0

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
vi
n
o
26
28
30
32
34
35
37
39
40
42
44
45
47
49
51
52
54
56
58
60
20
0

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
vi
n
o
43
46
49
52
55
58
61
63
66
69
72
75
77
80
83
86
89
92
95
98
Do
w
n
s
i
z
i
n
g

m
o
t
o
r

d
u
r
i
n
o

r
e
t
r
o
f
i
t
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
EC
M

m
o
t
o
r
7
7
8
8
9
9
10
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
15
Va
r
i
a
b
l
e

S
o
e
e
d

D
r
i
v
e
s
55
60
64
66
71
75
79
82
86
89
93
97
10
0
10
4
10
8
11
1
11
5
11
9
12
3
12
7
Uc
:
0
.
4
2
,

S
H
G
C
c
:
0
.
4
0
,

V
L

T
"
0
.
5
69
87
10
3
11
7
13
0
14
2
15
4
16
6
17
8
18
9
20
1
21
2
22
4
23
5
24
7
25
8
27
0
28
2
29
3
30
5
Uc
:
0
.
4
2
,

S
H
G
C
c
:
0
.
4
0
46
58
68
78
87
95
10
3
11
1
11
9
12
6
13
4
14
2
14
9
15
7
16
4
17
2
18
0
18
8
19
6
20
3
Ad
d
i
n
o

w
i
n
d
o
w

s
h
a
d
e

f
i
l
m
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Ad
d
i
n
o

w
i
n
d
o
w

s
h
a
d
e

s
c
r
e
e
n
31
7
39
9
47
0
53
4
59
4
65
1
70
6
76
1
81
4
86
7
91
9
97
1
1,
0
2
4
1,0
7
6
1,
1
2
9
1,
1
8
2
1,
2
3
5
1,
2
8
8
1,
3
4
2
1,
3
9
6
Ad
d
i
n
o

r
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
v
e

r
o
o
f

t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
58
73
86
97
10
8
11
9
12
9
13
9
14
8
15
8
16
7
17
7
18
6
19
6
20
6
21
5
22
5
23
5
24
4
25
4
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
2
4

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
37
47
55
63
70
77
83
90
96
10
2
10
8
11
5
12
1
12
7
13
3
13
9
14
6
15
2
15
8
16
5
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
3
8

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
59
75
88
10
0
11
1
12
2
13
2
14
2
15
2
16
2
17
2
18
1
19
1
20
1
21
1
22
1
23
1
24
1
25
1
26
1
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R

1
1

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
42
53
63
71
79
87
94
10
2
10
9
11
6
12
3
13
0
13
7
14
4
15
1
15
8
16
5
17
2
18
0
18
7
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
1
9

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
99
12
5
14
7
16
7
18
5
20
3
22
0
23
7
25
4
27
0
28
7
30
3
31
9
33
6
35
2
36
9
38
5
40
2
41
9
43
6
En
e
r
o
v
S
t
a
r

v
e
n
d
i
n
o

m
a
c
h
i
n
e
19
24
29
33
37
41
44
48
51
55
58
61
65
68
72
75
79
82
86
89
Be
v
e
r
a
g
e

m
a
c
h
i
n
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
6
7
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Oth
e
r

c
o
l
d

p
r
o
d
u
c
t

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
6
7
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
No
n
-
c
o
o
l
e
d

s
n
a
c
k

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
13
14
15
15
16
17
18
18
19
En
e
r
g
y
S
t
a
r

d
i
s
h
w
a
s
h
e
r
,

E
F

.
6
5
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
En
e
r
g
y
S
t
a
r

r
e
f
r
i
g
e
r
a
t
o
r
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
Lo
w
-
t
e
m
o
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

d
i
s
h

m
a
c
h
i
n
e
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
10
10
10
80

P
l
u
s
l
8

P
C
-
d
e
s
k
t
o
o
47
3
60
8
72
4
82
9
92
7
1,
0
2
1
1,1
1
1
1,
1
9
9
1,
2
8
6
1,
3
7
2
1,4
5
8
1,
5
4
3
1,
6
2
8
1,
7
1
3
1,
7
9
9
1,
8
8
5
1,
9
7
2
2,
0
5
9
2,
1
4
6
2,
2
3
4
80

P
l
u
s
(
I

P
C
-
s
e
r
v
e
r
13
16
19
22
25
27
30
32
34
37
39
41
43
46
48
50
53
55
57
60
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R
(
I

P
C
39
9
51
3
61
1
69
9
78
2
86
1
93
7
1,0
1
1
1,
0
8
5
1,1
5
7
1,2
2
9
1,
3
0
1
1,
3
7
3
1,
4
4
5
1,
5
1
7
1,
5
9
0
1,
6
6
3
1,
7
3
6
1,8
1
0
1,
8
8
4
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R
(
I

C
o
p
i
e
r
3
3
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
PC

n
e
t
w
o
r
k

p
o
w
e
r

m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
74
95
11
3
12
9
14
4
15
9
17
3
18
7
20
0
21
4
22
7
24
0
25
3
26
7
28
0
29
3
30
7
32
0
33
4
34
8
Fl
a
t

p
a
n
e
l

L
C
D

d
i
s
p
l
a
y
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y

s
e
n
s
o
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
£.1

Ne
K
ø
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
8-
1
6
~~
iÎ
CI
-§
~
co
L
"'
~'"g ~ æ M R ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ g m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~coa.'V"-C\vCOfD -e..MCCN~
'V m 00 v .. M fD m 'V .. fD M 0 C\ .. M ~ æ 'V ~ 00 ..M'Væ~M.. ..C" co ..v.. .. MCC
...10
SN
M.. M .. Il N il m 'V co N N co N .. .. N co M il M IlM~mIiM"- ..~ Il ..~.. .. MCC co Il 0 co .. 0 .. m .. co .. M il M 0 .. NOll co il ..I l ..NMCC..CC....~~~~~~~~~~~~~N~
~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ m ~~ S ~ ~ ~..qM..N"'COlO ....C"fDc\~
ie '"~
MfD .. .. M .. 'V co V co .. N co NOm en co M il co NM~COIiM.. ..N il ..MCC .. NCO
ït: lO~N
~ ~ re~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ re ~ ~ ~ ø; ~ ~ ~ ~~..qM..N"=COIO ..CO('fDN~
M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ co M ~ ~ N ~ .. ~ ~~ co ~ il a ß
..'"N.~
M M .. .. en co M co Mil.. N .. .. 0 co 'V .. N il en coM~COVN"" .... 10 "'("(0 .. ~Il co N.. 0 il '' M 0 NIl.... M ~ (0.. 0.. en .. M.... N NCO.. Il (0.. il .. .. N M M v.. ''.. .. N.. 0..qM..NVCOIO ..COMCON~
piVSN
Il .. co co Il .. .. .. co .. 0 '' en M v ~ 0 co .. il N ....NNIl..Il(oCOMm..NNNM "'coco..om..cnM..C\ocCO "'COMCO..
MNN......M..MvNNm_mlO......V"'1lM~.."'N.. .... v MCC....Il
i:'"~
M.. co '' il co N.. M M.. N.. .. en M co .. .. v en MM....'VN.. ..0 V Mil.. Oil~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~..mM..C\v(OlO ..CCMIO.. i i I I
'' en M M M .. il N en .. il en 0 CC en co co .. 0 N 00 æ~ ~ N~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ M ~ ~~ ~ ~...""lN
, Mre~~~~~~M~8N~~00~~co~~~~
~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~re ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~coæt"T-C'M~~ ~coN~~d'C
~
N 00 co 00 ~ "" ~ co t" NOON t" ~ 00 ~ t" co 0 ~ m 00N~~",N~ ~m "" t"~ ~ mv
~oq
o('
~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~comC"T-C'C"~~ T-~Ni.~
N ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t" ~ ~ N; ~ 00 re ~ co m "" ~ ~
.~('
=
N ~ co ~ ~ T- 0 co N ~ 00 N æ ~ ~ 00 00 co m v 0 ~Nmcot"C'~ ~OO (' Nv mv N ~ 0 ~ N ~ 00 C" 0 C' ~ ~ i. 00 00 ~ ~ 0 ~ N 00 co~ ~ N "I ~ V ~ ~ co m C" ~ 0 ~ co 0 (' i. m 00 C" ~c.ooC"~N('~1D ~IlN~~
;..(1.,
=~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~coooC"T-NC"Il", ~~N~~N "" ~ 00 i. 0 0 i. N 0 "I N ~ T- ~ co co i. 00 (' Il ~Nmi.MNT- ~oo M N"I OO~
.. M
-I
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m i. N ~ ~ ~ ~ T- co ~ ~ i. 00 M ~ ~~ ~ roT- 0 co t" ~ i. ~ M i. ~ 00 ~ i. ~ N i. ~ 0 ~~ ~ ~ "I ~ M V V N "I ~ 0 m i. M ~ M V co co ~ coCDoo('T-~('Il"l ~1lC\1l~
lÐ.. MI o v ~ 00 0 v 0 ~ ~ m v N 00 00 ~ 0 C" 00 00 m i. N~ ~ T- (' ~ C" ~ "I g 00 g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~N ~ 0 ~ ~ 00 00 i. N m "I ~ N ~ co (" 0 i. ~ M i. ~Nooll('T- ~ M N~ ~M
eN.,.~
NOll 00 m ~ 00 i. N m m ~ 0 T- co N 00 V ~ M 0 ~C'~"IC'~ co M NM ~M OM co co m N ~ N ~ (" v m N CD i. co ~ ~ ~ 0 m ~~~~M ("M""oommmOOMOv("("('Il~1llC~N ~("Il"I T-IlNv~
m N il (" 00 m Il 00 ~ Il v i. co i. ~ 0 0 m N N N T-~~M N("("coCOoom~C'ooM("N~vCOi.Il~N 'lC"VV ~IlNv_
~Ni ~ æ m v ~ co ~ ~ N 00 "I ~ 00 T- i. Oil v co M i. N-COVC'~ co N NC" COM
00 ~ t" 0 00 ~ N i. i. co M N m N ro v m v N N "" i.~~M Nt"M.t"~mCO~CO~NNmM"I~i.~N ~M'l"C ~vNv~NNd""
~
T- ~ V T- i. ~ ~ v N ~ m ~ co ~ i. æ N v CD Nom~covC'~ Il N ~(" CON
:: N
~
~ 0 N 00 ~ ~ m N N i. NOON m m co 00 m N N co m_~N NNMNocooocomvmN'I~NNM~""N _NvM T-"INoi~'I Il 00 ,. N C" CO M _ ~ M ~ M ~ V ~ m M i. N ~ co~IlMC'_ Il N ~N liN
o_~
i.
~ M ~ M 0 ~ i. M ~ co ~ ~ ~ ~ v i. co M il N 00 M~IlMN_ V N ~C' ~N co m ~ "I co N il æ,. ~ m v v Il ~ ~ ~ M m N i. M~N NNNm~voollooN~N_"IT-OM"ICON ~NvM 'lVNv~
co æ m ~ i. 00 N V m . i. m co m v co i. ~ v 0 t" i.N 'lNNCOMM~.COOi.NONOooNvCON ~N"It" ~vNM_ i i I I IOJ 'I
gN
~ ~ "" 00 ~ 0 il M ~ i. 0 ~ æ OM M N (" ~ N ~ 0~vNT-~ "I ~ ~C' VN
~E '" _æ ~~ .æ '-~ E m.~CD ,-,-a3.£ L- I!L-l~~og Ig ~ ~ ~ c: :¥g"8o'"i ~~~£ ~~ ~ 0 ~~C C ~~ ø C - C .¡¡ tJ tJl ~ m .S -f -f C eo "Eo UJ °E ~ Eti ~ -g ~ g 8 xl:Q - ~ ~ ø ~ g S ø ~ u i:e ;: ;:,:,,:~o~o~o .9 i~i~.,,,~ 8 c 0 e ::1:2 ¡!:¡.g 0: E c 5-' Q;~ c 5 c:I Ql~1 e: 0.1 ~E"E ~ ~ ~ '" ãí I~ 0 e C i "E :; C 8 Ql :II _ ,.¡ ",.! Ig E C ;: 0 = ü Jg UJ ~ Ql .2 :¡ ~ Ql· 9 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C ø ~ i: ~ ~ ~ 0 00 E 8 i ~ ~ ~I g Ul~ ! g ff ~ i ~I~ g ~ E E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ø ~mOl i c ~ .æ ~I ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ C £ i c.s C - '- 00 00 a ~ 0 0 Xu u ~ 2 ø m ~ ~ C ~ C ~ ~ m ø ~I GO m ~ ~ ~ 0 ø u ~ c ~g C"'-.0-' 11~1~~!8Ql-~~oT~.T~Ool~c"S-Oi-ll_.,~0~QlØI~I~~!OOOx~~;:uc N ~ ~~?~Uø.2 ~ 8 u E E E E E 6 _ C ¡ m ~ u ~ ~ Ul~ _ ~ ~ E'êi~ 0 0 y 6~~'~1~ ~ i ~ u ø W ~ 0 0 C ø ~ ~ E ~ Q ~ _ ~ 0 £ ~ 0 i
I ~ ~ ~ .æ ~ ~ 0 ~ = ~ ~ a3 m J ~ ø m m a3 0 C .æ ~ 0 0 ~ I ~ 0 E N ~ ~ S æ i¡ ~ ~ u l ~ i~ 0 I ~ biG ~ 0 0 0 E ~
g g g i i . i , ~ ~ § t i ~ ~ ¿ ~ ~ ! ! ~ a3 ~ , E i ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ - 0 ~ I~ ~ & ~ ~ ~ æ ~ § ~ g ~ ~ ~æ æ æ æ m ~
~ l -8 E E ~ ~ R .- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w m I~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ø ~ u 2 ff ~ ~ ~ ~ ø 0 § ~ ä 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ W - U ~ ~ U 00 ~ U U U U U ~ 8
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~I~ l l l l ~ ~ ~! E ~ E l i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ æ ~ ~ ~ E ~I~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ æ æ æ ~ ~
~~~ l l l l l ~ ~! ~ ~ 666 6 l j j : l ~ l 811l l l II i 8 ~~; a~ ~ ~ i i ~ l ~ir l!i E ~ ~ ~ ~ n 8
I ~ i in ~ ff ff ff ~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ff ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ff ff ~ ~ ~ in æ æ ~ ö ~ ~ ž £ £ ~ ff ~ ~ ~ ~ I 8 ~ ~ X x~ in
....
ci
=
~::
~
Ijen
eÕ~
~ë
~Q)Cl
ig
:¥
Q)"0ëi"0r:
È¥~
~ma.E8
~c.~~
Ši~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

B

S
a
v
i
n
g
s

F
o
r
e
c
a
s
t
s
Me
å
s
û
r
e
N
å
í
t
20
0
9
20
1
0
:2
0
f
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
t
5
20
1
6
20
1
.
7
20
1
8
'2
0
1
9
20
2
0
21
1
2
1
20
2
2
:2
0
2
3
20
2
4
20
2
5
20
2
6
20
2
7
20
2
8
El
e
c
t
r
i
c

c
o
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n

o
v
e
n
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hi
g
h

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

S
t
o
c
k

t
a
n
k
94
12
0
13
8
15
1
16
2
17
0
17
8
18
5
19
0
19
5
20
0
20
4
20
7
21
0
21
3
21
6
21
8
22
0
22
2
22
4
Au
t
o
m
a
t
i
c

M
i
l
k
e
r

T
a
k
e
o
f
f
17
3
22
1
25
4
27
9
29
9
31
4
32
8
34
0
35
0
36
0
36
8
37
5
38
1
38
7
39
3
39
7
40
2
40
6
40
9
41
2
Bl
o
c
k

h
e
a
t
e
r

t
i
m
e
r
8
10
12
13
14
15
15
16
16
17
17
17
18
18
18
18
19
19
19
19
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
n
a

f
a
n
85
10
8
12
4
13
6
14
6
15
3
16
0
16
6
17
1
17
5
17
9
18
3
18
6
18
9
19
2
19
4
19
6
19
8
20
0
20
1
Hi
a
h
-
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
v

v
e
n
t
i
a
t
i
o
n

s
v
s
t
e
m
15
8
20
2
23
2
25
5
27
3
28
7
30
0
31
1
32
0
32
9
33
6
34
3
34
9
35
4
35
9
36
3
36
7
37
1
37
4
37
7
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
m
a
b
l
e

v
e
n
t
i
a
t
i
o
n

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
91
11
6
13
3
14
6
15
7
16
5
17
2
17
8
18
4
18
9
19
3
19
7
20
0
20
3
20
6
20
8
21
1
21
3
21
5
21
6
VF
D

o
n

d
a
i
r
y

v
a
c
u
u
m

D
u
m
p
22
2
28
2
32
4
35
6
38
2
40
1
41
9
43
4
44
8
46
0
47
0
47
9
48
8
49
5
50
2
50
8
51
3
51
8
52
3
52
7
25
0

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
11
8
12
7
13
4
14
1
14
8
15
5
16
1
16
8
17
5
18
1
18
8
19
5
20
1
20
8
21
5
22
2
22
9
23
6
24
3
25
0
30
0

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
13
5
14
5
15
3
16
1
16
9
17
7
18
4
19
2
20
0
20
7
21
5
22
2
23
0
23
8
24
6
25
4
26
2
27
0
27
8
28
6
35
0

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
15
7
16
8
17
8
18
8
19
7
20
6
21
4
22
3
23
2
24
1
25
0
25
9
26
8
27
7
28
6
29
5
30
4
31
4
32
3
33
3
40
0

h
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
17
9
19
2
20
3
21
4
22
4
23
4
24
4
25
4
26
4
27
4
28
4
29
5
30
5
31
5
32
5
33
6
34
7
35
7
36
8
37
9
45
0

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
24
4
26
2
27
7
29
2
30
6
31
9
33
3
34
7
36
0
37
4
38
8
40
2
41
6
43
0
44
4
45
8
47
3
48
7
50
2
51
7
50
0

h
p

M
o
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
23
4
25
0
26
5
27
9
29
2
30
5
31
8
33
1
34
4
35
8
37
1
38
4
39
7
41
1
42
4
43
8
45
2
46
6
48
0
49
4
LE
D

C
a
s
e

L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
13
17
21
24
26
29
31
34
36
38
40
43
45
47
49
51
54
56
58
60
Es
c
a
l
a
t
o
r

M
o
t
o
r

C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
21
23
24
26
27
28
29
30
32
33
34
35
36
38
39
40
41
43
44
45
Gr
o
u
n
d

S
o
u
r
c
e

H
P

O
p
e
n
13
15
17
18
20
21
22
24
25
27
28
29
31
32
33
35
36
37
39
40
Gr
o
u
n
d

S
o
u
r
c
e

H
P

C
l
o
s
e
d
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
.
.
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
Ph
o
t
o
l
u
m
i
n
e
s
c
e
n
t

E
x
i
l

S
i
g
n
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8
l
a
m
p

T
5
H
O

l
a
m
p
10
2
12
4
14
4
16
1
17
7
19
3
20
8
22
3
23
8
25
2
26
7
28
1
29
6
31
0
32
5
33
9
35
4
36
9
38
4
39
9
Mu
l
t
i

L
a
m
p

H
a
r
d

W
i
r
e
d

C
F
L
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
t-
1
N
e
K
a
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y
.

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e
"
8-
1
8
~e~~
"§
~
~
t
~
~
~
LU~o~
U)~Z
~U)-J~æ~U)~CZ
CD~
m
(
-
I2~
~~~~~~N~NO~OMM~~N~~N~ ~ ~ 00 M ~ ~ N N mom 0 ~ M N 0 ~ ~ N~ M m ~ N ~ M N ~ N ~ ~ 0 m 00 00 00 ~ ~ ~ro ri ~ Ô ri ~ ro ô~ ri ~ ~ m ô Ñ ~ m m Ñ ~· ~mm~~~~oooooooorooommmmmoo. ~~=
¡
M ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ 00 0 ~ m m M ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ m~ ~ ~ N 00 ~ ~ ~ N 00 ~ m ~ 0 m ~ 0 0 m 000 N N m ~ ~ NON 00 ~ ~ N 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m~ m ri ~ 00 ô ri ~ m ~ m ~ ri ~ m 00 ô ri ~~~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ro 00 00 00 00 m m m m
=
~~
g
ll00~~
~
l~~
~~~~00~c
~~,~c~Eoü
j
~~
NON 00 MOON ~ M 0 ~ N ~ M 0 ~ ~ M m ~~~~m~~~OM~~MMm~m~NNmo ~ 00 M ~ 00 ~ 00 m ~ 0 00 ~ 0 ~ ~ N ~ ~ 0~~ro~ri~oomôÑ~~ ~môÑ~mm~m m m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 00 00 00 00 m
~~~
~
B
~~
.t~l.€
m
1
i~~~
~
o ~ ~ M 0 ~ N 00 0 m ~ m ~ 0 ~ M 0 ~ m ro~ N M ~ N ~ 0 00 ~ ~ 0 ro m ~ ~ 0 ~ M ~ m~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ 00 m 0 N M m m rori ~ ro ô~ri ~~m ~ ro m ô ~ ri~ ~ m ro mM~M~~~~~~~~~m~~~~~mm
m m 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ M N m ~ 0 m ~ ~ 00 M m ~ NN m ~ M ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ N ro m ~ 0 N m m ~ mM ~ N m ~ M N ~ ~ m ~ ~ 0 ~ M N 0 ~ 00 ~Ñ ro ri ~ Ñ m ~ m m~ m ~ ~ m Ñoo ~ Ñ ~ro~ ~ ~ ~ 00 00 m m moo ~ N N M M ~ ~ ~ mNNNNNNNNNMM~MMMMMMM~
~ ~ m ~ M ~ 0 00 ~ M ~ m ~ 0 M ~ N ~ ~ 00~ ~ N 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ m ~ N ~ N ~ N 000 N ~ ~ 00 00 N m M ~ M ro m ~ 00 N ~ 0 m ~~~m~môm~~ôm Ñro~ô~ririÑô00 m moo ~ ~ N N M M ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ 00 m 0NNNMMMMMMMMM~MMMMMM~
~NM~~~~oomO~NM~~~~ro~~~~~~~~~NNNNNNNNN00000000000000000000NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
~~
&'"
o§
~
!X
j
":
~ M m 00 ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N M 00N ~ M m ~ ~ 0 ~ m ~ N 0 ~ ~ N 0 00 M m mo M ~ ~ M ~ 00 ~ N M ~ ~ m 0 N ~ ~ ~ 0 N ~¿ ¿ m m mm ~ ~ ~ ~~~oo 00 00 00 00 m mm
~
~
~
B~æ
'"
.r~
L
1lNi-i:
~
o~OJ
N~om~m~~O~M~mmm~NNN~~ 0 ~ ~ M 00 m ~ 0 00 ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ 00 m ~ 00 ~~ ~ 0 M ~ 00 ~ M ~ ~ 00 0 N ~ m ~ 0 M ~ m
m m ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 00 00 00 oom m m m m ö ö ö ö.. ~ ~ ~
m m ~ ~ ~ 00 00 N ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ M 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 00~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ M N ~ N m m ~ ~ ~ ~ M 0 00 0~ ~ ~ 00 ~ M ~ 00 m ~ N ~ ~ 00 0 N ~ ~ m N
¿ m m m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00000000 00 m m m m m ö~
=
Q)E:;
~
I,."0.arn
-æ~
~ë
~Q)enl
Q):grn
-g
Ë~
00 00 m ~ NOM m ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ m ~ ~ M m 0 ~~ ~ 0 00 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m 0 ~ M ~ ~ M ~ ~~ ~ 0 ~ M ~ ~ ~ 00 m 0 ~ M ~ ~ m ~ m ~ Nri ri ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ¿ m m
i;
~8
~Q.
~~
N 00 0 ~ 0 m m ~ N 00 00 M 0 ~ m 00 M N m ~00 0 ~ ~ ~ M ~ N ~ 00 M 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 M m Mm ~ ~ ø ~ ~ 0 m m ~ 0 ~ N 00 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ M~ 00 mmöö~~~Ñriri~~ ~mm~oomNNNNMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MM~O~O~~~~M~m~~~M~NO00 ~ ~ m N ~ M ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 00 M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~M 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ N 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 00 m ~ö~~ÑÑriri ~~~~m~~oommö~ÑMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM~~~
o ~ N M ~ ~ m ~ 00 m 0 ~ N M ~ ~ ~ ~ 00~~~~~~~~~~NNNNNNNNN0000000000000000000NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Ši~
~l!
iP'"
.~
~
co
j
"'
w
~~(.
~Q.Q.~UJ..c:æl-UJ~C~
Ndi
=
~::g
I
~enãi:.c:
~
1:
~~roc:~
~i:"0c:
~~.~
l
jo..
~
0
10 0 10 0 10 0 10("("C\C\~~0 I00000000000000~~~~~tl tl ~
(IiMli/$) lSO~ ~!iln paZ!lSASi
..
IiI
!i
~~e
&'"
-§¡
~
co
1
q:
Ðo
~R
i=
j
1
~..-...i:..~f-
I'(J 0 (V I'io ..
N co LO (J -.0 (V 0
~co.I'-.io I'(V 0..as 0 ..0)cD ..c 0 (V (V (V (V 0 -.
)i (V (V -.io io co 00
C'fI
¡c
.3::E
I'I'..00 00 I'I'00 C\..0 C\00 0
lici
00 C!.."-"!"!ci ........(V
=
..-
¡¡.ii.
ii
..gi~:¡e:"'co00)0):¡en :icoen g g..0)en0)
Q en ~~E ~0 ~~~E?
-8ii0)0 0ciüa.::u :::i
~
E
e!
ë =
E 0-~~0)::.i Õen-;:
E?
..
i00-~;:
0)~.i rn-0)et...i0-~
~
...æ0)0::C-
O)0 1:.i ãi Q)-:¡E..e:Q)0)C);:jg (0c:0 0 co-0-::en 0)Q)0 ::"C()ë::;~"C==c:0)co:¡:E E::Q)"'()c:0)co ,.~ãi ;:c:Q)-co0c.;:-E~0)0
0).i u-æ.i --e::0-0)0e:en C-O)~0en.s~0-co~::0-
~enenene:-.S:en0 coU(JN
a-
SI~
1
(è'"
.~
~
ci
t
":
(
~
JÈ
~
~æ~
.stl~~t:.-c
1
.ä..to-i:~
:Q
~
(WNci~mmoo~~~~~~~O~Nm~~~~O~NM~~~~~~oommOO~NM~NNNNNNNNNNNNNMMMMMM
~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ N ~ 0 ~ 00 ~ ~ N M M ~ ~ ~~ 00 m ~ ~ 0 ~ N ~ 0 ~ m ~ m ~ m ~ ~ 00 ~~ ~ ~ ~ 00 m moo ~ ~ ~ N N M M ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~ÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑÑ
00 ~ ~ ~ m ~ N m ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ M m M m m ~00 ~o M ~ ~ ~ mOM 00 ~ 00 M 00 M m 0 NO~ 00 N ~ ~ 00 0 ~ M ~ ~ ~ 00 0 ~ M ~ ~ m ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=
~::
~
I
gl
~Q.
c:
~~
gi~
Q)"C
ëñ"Ci:
~~
00 N M ~ 0 ~ m ~ ~ ~ M 0 ~ 00 ~ ~ 00 ~ 0 ~O~~~~~M~~mN~OM~~~~~N~ ~ ~ m ~ M ~ ~ ~ 00 0 ~ M ~ ~ ~ 00 0 N ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
m ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ N 00 ~ M ~ M N N ~ ~ M ~ ~ 0~ ~ ~ 00 0 ~ ~ m M ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ m~ ~ N ~ M ~ N ~ 00 ~ ~ 00 N ~ m N ~ ~ ~ 0O~ÑÑMM~~~~~~~~~~~~~mT-. ~ ~ -e T" T" T" T" T" ,- T" T" T" T" T" T" T" T" T" T"
¡;~E8
~
æ.~~
N ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ 0 00 ~ ~ ~ m M 00 ~ M ~ N N~ ~ ~ ~ m 0 N ~ ~ ~ N ~ m 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ m m~ ~ m 0 ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 00 m 0 ~ N M ~ ~ÑÑÑMMMMMMMMMMM~~~~~~
~~M~NNM~~~~~m~om~~omm~~~N~ON~~~O~~~O~~O~~ ~ M 00 M ~ N ~ ~ 0 M ~ 0 M ~ 0 M 00 M ~mO~~ÑÑMMM~~~~~~~~~~~T" T" T" T" T" T" ., T" T" T" T" T" T" ,. T" T" T" T".T"
o ~ N M ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 m 0 ~ N M ~ ~ ~ ~ 00O~~~~~~~~~~NNNNNNNNN00000000000000000000NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
I=in
J!::0-s:-
Q)"Co
:E
s:o;:.!::
E.-en
:EenC
~~ ~m~M ~~~ ~S æ m~ ~~ ~~~m ~ 0 N ID re ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~;;M_ ~NN_V ~Vm-_ _ m w m~OON~~M Ñ ÑÑ~ Ñ Ñ~MN ~Ü
~ g ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~g ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~m e m ~~~-~-~O~-mmeN~V_~.mm~ ~-eNOmO-OO~Ñ Ñ~M~~ mø~~~ ~ w m~w~~~-N - NN~ N-N-MN
~ m~~~~;~ ~ ~~~;; m~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ N ~ ~ N ~ ~ ci ci ci 0 0 0 ~ N N N ~ ~ N N ó ~ N ~ N ~ ~ M ~ ~ MN
~ ~~~ ~8 ~ ~ ~ ~e ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ m m m ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~M N N N ~ ~~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ M ~N ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ci ci ci IDo ci ~ ~ w ci ~ ~- N _N_ _NN ____NNNMM_MM __N _
00 ONO 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ ~ 0 M 0 ~- v V M
~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~000000000000000000000000000000000
g 8~8gg ggg ~ ~ g ~~~~ ~~~g~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g g ~~ci ci ci d ci ci ci ci ci ci Ó ci ci d ci ci ci ci ci d ci d ó ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d
i.s
Jl
~
~..
U
=(IE=i
~
I,.
Æ
m~
~ë
~(Ici
¡gII:æ
.:i:"0c:
i:~
~ g gg~~ ~g gõ gg~gg 0000 ~ g g g g ~ g g ~ M M~~ ~d ci ci d d ci ci ci d ci ci d ci d d ci ci d d ci ci d ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d ci d 0
N ~w 0 v - m m mm m Mv v ~o omN~C 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ æ æ æ M ~ffN~M~~~~~~~~~~m~v~~~ ~~~~~re~8~~N ~ NN~ ~ N MN..~¡.
,.c:IIciEo()
j2~
~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ff~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~ 0 ~ v ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~~ ~~N ~~~~~ re~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~.~~~.~
00 ~ ~ ~~ ~ oo~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~N~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~~~ ~
e ~ ~w 0 g e ~ 8 ~ ~m ~~ ~~ ~~~~o 0 N N ~ ~ ~ m NN ~ ~N~ o~ 0 vM~v ~ N vmm~~~~ w Nv~ ~
~i!Q)
U)u.EE0i-:i "
Q..5~æ0r:z ;i
.~U)
&"C Ws:i:
Q)~I0-U)c:0-Wce::~
.!::
.s
~~
ü
L
""
m ~ ~ g i~g~~m ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ø ID M~ ØN~~ ~vN~ ~Ñ ~n) Ñ ÑÑ i.~U
00 ~ ~ m N M ~ 0 ~ V ~ ro v ~ 00 ~ ~ M M ~ ~ ~ ID~~ V OvNv ~ØvMMMvNm VMm~~m ~~ mM~~~ø~~O~møVNM~vvmø00 Ò ~Ñ Ñ~~~ OOOOM~ -N T'C\ "IN
~ ID ~ 0 ~ ø M 00 M V ~ 00 ~ 0 v m ø v m M M ~ NID m M M ~ m m ~ N M N 00 ID V ~ ~ ~ V ID ~ ~ 0 v~ 0 ~ M N 0 ~ ~ N ~ m N ~ ci ci ci 0 ~ ~ N N N MN
ffff ~ ~m~~ ~ 0 ~ 8 ~ ~ ~s ~ ~~~ ~ ff ~
o 0 ~ 0 d M N N ~ ID ~ ro m M ~ m ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~MM MM T' NT'NT' T' T'T''t
000 goo a go 0 ~ 0 0 0 08 0 0 00 0 0 0.. ~ ..
g~ ~ ~ ~ ~g g g g g g ~ g~ ~~ ~gg g g. 0 ci d d d d d ci ci ci ci ci ci Ó ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g g g g~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ g ~ gd d ci d ó d d ci ó ci ci ci ci Ó ci ci d d ó d ci ci ci =
~::
~
I
:fenj~.!~ë
~(I~c:~
~i:
-g
~~
ë~~~ ~
~ 0 0 v 0 Ov 0 0 0 N MOO T' 0 M NOT' T' T' N000 N 0 0 0 0 CON v 0 0 0 ID 0 0 0 0 00 0d ci ci ci ci ci d ci d ci ci ci ci ci d ~ dd ci ci d ci ci
ID T' M v M m N ~ ID 0 V T' m 00 m m M m ~ 0 0 00 vo mN OOT'~MmvMOIDO~~mVVIDIDID M IDN M~T'~ ~Mv 'tT'.. ..N .. "IN
:-c:
~8
j
~~
g.. M ~ æm~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~w ~ ~N ~o..w OOID~.. ...... 'tM .. "IN
0.. T' ~~~ÖMNWOOW OO~~O~OOM~o N~~~mN oroomM~~~~~~~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~M~~ ~ N~
Si~
~::
.sl~
ü
~
"C
~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ NO ID ID mN N N ~ ~ m ~ m~ ~OO~~M~NN~~vMMM~~ OMMIDvM~m~ov~N~mm~WNNM~ ~ ~~v vON~ ~~~~M Ñ Ñ~coNÜ
w ~ N vOW V ID V m ID ~ W M~ 0 ~ V Mm~ m V W 00 mwmo~ V N ~ ID ~ 0 M V M M M V m W V m ~ ~ m M e N V m M ~~ V N ~ m m m 0 ~ 0 M ~ ~ W ~ ~ V V m ~ m ID N M m w":Ñò mÔtÒÑi. M-qÑ - ~~,. aSfD~m ~~Nm~N ~ N~
~ æ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ff ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~N do ci N M 0 ~ M M ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ N N N ~ dod d ci ~N
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ff ~ ~ ~ 8 ~~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~ M M M M~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~MN N ~ ~ ~. ~ mm M mMm ciNNNNN ~ N~ N ~ ~~~~N~~NN~
0000080000 ggo oog 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0'" "'~
~ ~ g g g gm g g g g gg ~~g ~gg g g g g ~ g~~ggci d ci d ci ci ci ci d ci d d d ci ci ci ci 0 ci d ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci Ò
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~8 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~d d ci ci ci d d ci d d ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d ó ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci =
~~
~
I~.aCJ
ro:;i:
~iië
~Q)C)
¡g
~
Q)"0
èñ
"0i:
~~
g g gg g ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~g g g goo 0 g g 0 ~ ~g 0ci ci ci ci ci d ci d ci ci d ci d ci d ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d d ci ci ci ci ci
~ o~ ~ NNNmN~ m v ~mNmwo~oo mmmmMmmN~ MOM N ~ m ~ mv ~ ø ~ m M m v v W M 0 w~mM WmNmømm~~eWN ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~N ~ N~
~
~8
j
~
~
~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ff ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~ ll m ~ m~~~~ ~~N~~M ~ NW
m ~ m ~ ~ 0 0 0 ø m N N m~ ~ O~N~~ ~ 0 0 NoomoNNNN~NNN__~~ _N N~_N_N_NM~~
o ~ - ~ ~ ~ g ~ m ff ~ 0 g ~e ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ m~ ~~N~~~vOO o~~ 0 ~mID~ - ~ v~
l.l
~
..
ãI~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s
Ta
b
l
e

C
-
2

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i

M
e
a
s
e

I
n
p
u
t
s
..

.

.
.

L
\
.
,

ü
\
\
.
/
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
;
j
L
g
~
~
l
:
L
t
~
V
!
i
L
¡
j
;
;
.
L
;
L
i
l
l
i
i
g
;
;
i
.
.
.
M
e
ä
s
¡
¡
¡
:

A
"
m
m
f'
'
'
í
l
a
m
;
¿
.
=
:
'
=
'
:
.
\
\
\
\
Y
n
l
l
.
.
/
~
.
~
,
.
.
I
"
.
'
Y
'
.
d
'
'
:
~

I
;
;
;
i
'
;
;
;
"

C
"
s
t
.,
.
.
.
y
"
'
r

.
i
/

i
.

.
-
"
t
.
\
\
i
.
/
.
j
,
¡
û
.
¡
i
è
,
,
"
t
r
.
~
"
"

1
1
I
/
k
b
l
EU

L
i

h
t
i
n

1
1
a
m

4
'
T
8
F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
e
e
E

u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t
T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

6
0

6
7

0
.
0
1
4
1

0
.
0
1
5
8

1
1

1
2
1
:
1

5

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
i
n

2
1
a
m

4
'

T
a

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

E

u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

7
8

8
7

0
.
0
1
8
2

0
,
0
2
0
5

1
1

$

2
3

$

5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
.

h
t
l
n

3
1
a
m

4
'

T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

E

u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

1
4
5

1
6
3

0
.
0
3
4
0

0
.
0
3
8
1

1
1

$

3
5

$

1
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
i
n

4
l
a
m

4
'

T
a

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

E

u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

1
9
1

2
1
4

0
.
0
4
4
8

0
,
0
5
0
2

1
1

$

4
7

$

1
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
l
i
n

2

l
a
m

8
'

T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

E

u
l
v
a
l
e
n
t

T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

9
9

1
1
1

0
.
0
2
3
2

0
.
0
2
6
0

1
1

$

5
5

$

1
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
l
i
n

2

i
a
m

8
'

T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

E

u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

2
7
2

3
0
6

0
.
0
6
3
8

0
.
0
7
1
6

1
1

$

8
1

$

3
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
U
n

2
1
a
m

8
'
T
8
F
i
x
t
u
r
e
V
H
O
f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e
E

u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t
T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

4
8
4

5
4
4

0
.
1
1
3
6

0
.
1
2
7
4

1
1

$

8
1

$

3
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
i
n

4
-
a
m

4
'
T
8
H
l
a
h
B
a
v
f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e
f
i
x
t
u
r
e
d
r
a
w
i
n

2
5
0
-
4
0
0
W

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

4
9
5

5
5
6

0
.
1
1
6
0

0
.
1
3
0
2

1
1

$

2
5
0

$

6
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
l
i
n

6
-
l
a
m

4
'

T
8

H
i
a
h

B
a
v

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

d
r
a
w
i
n
a

4
0
0

W

a
r

m
a
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

8
1
3

9
1
3

0
.
1
9
0
6

0
.
2
1
4
0

1
1

$

3
0
0

$

7
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
l
i
n

4
-
t
a
m

4
'
T
8
H
i

h
B
a
v
f
l
X
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e
f
i
x
t
u
r
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
a
7
5
0
W
a
r
m
a
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

2
,
2
6
3

2
,
5
4
0

0
.
5
3
0
5

0
.
5
9
5
3

1
1

$

2
5
0

$

1
5
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
l
i
n

4
-
l
a
m

8
'
T
8
H
i

h
B
a
v
f
l
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

fix
t
u
r
e

dra
w
i
n
a
7
5
0
W

ar
m
a
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

1
,
8
7
4

2
,
1
0
4

0
.
4
3
9
3

0
.
4
9
3
0

1
1

$

3
0
0

$

1
5
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
l
i
n

l
l
a
m

4
'
T
5
f
i
x
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e
E
a
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t
T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

6
0

6
7

0
.
0
1
4
1

0
.
0
1
5
8

1
1

$

1
3

$

8

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
i
n

2
1
a
m

4
'

T
5

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

E
a
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

7
8

8
7

0
.
0
1
8
2

0
.
0
2
0
5

1
1

$

2
7

$

8

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
i
n

3
-
l
a
m

4
'

T
5

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

E
a
u
i
v
a
l
e
r
t

T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

1
3
8

1
5
5

0
.
0
3
2
3

0
.
0
3
6
3

1
1

$

4
0

$

1
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
l
i
n

4
-
l
a
m

4
'
T
5
f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e
E
a
u
i
v
a
i
e
n
t
T
1
2

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

1
5
6

1
7
5

0
.
0
3
6
5

0
.
0
4
0
9

'
1

$

5
4

$

2
0

$

0
.
0
'
4
EU

L
i

h
t
l
n

H
a
m

4
'
T
5
H
O
f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

I
-
l
a
m

4
'
T
l
2
f
i
x
t
u
r
e
H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

7
1

7
9

0
.
0
1
6
6

0
.
0
1
8
6

1
1

$

1
7

$

1
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
l
n

2
.
i
a
m

4
'

T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

2
-
l
a
m

4
'

T
1
2

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

8
8

9
9

0
.
0
2
0
7

0
.
0
2
3
3

1
1

$

3
4

$

'
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
.

h
l
i
n

3
-
l
a
m

4
'

T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

3
-
l
a
m

4
'

T
1
2

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

1
2
4

1
3
9

0
.
0
2
9
0

0
.
0
3
2
6

1
1

$

5
0

$

1
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
"

h
t
i
n

1
-
l
a
m

4
'

T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

1
-
l
a
m

S
'
T
1
2

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

2
3
0

2
5
8

0
.
0
5
3
9

0
.
0
6
0
5

1
1

$

1
7

1
0

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
i
n

2
-
l
a
m

4
'

T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

2
.
l
a
m

8
'

T
1
2

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

3
7
8

4
2
5

0
.
0
8
8
7

0
.
0
9
9
5

1
1

$

3
4

$

1
0

i

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
l
n

3
-
l
a
m

4
'

T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

3
.
l
a
m

8
'

T
1
2

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

6
2
6

7
0
3

0
.
1
4
6
7

0
.
1
6
4
7

1
1

$

5
0

$

1
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
l
n

2
.
l
a
m

4
'
T
5

H
O
f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e
4
-
l
a
m

4
'
T
1
2
f
l
x
t
u
r
e

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

1
5
6

1
7
5

0
.
0
3
6
5

0
.
0
4
0
9

1
1

$

3
4

$

2
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
l
n

2
-
l
a
m

4
'
T
5
H
O
f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e
4
-
l
a
m

8
'
T
1
2
f
i
x
t
u
r
e
H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

1
,
2
5
2

1
,
4
0
5

0
.
2
9
3
4

0
.
3
2
9
3

1
1

$

3
4

$

2
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
l
n

3
-
l
a
m

4
'

T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

d
r
a
w
i
n
a

2
5
0

W
a
r

m
a
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

2
4
8

2
7
8

0
.
0
5
8
0

0
.
0
6
5
1

1
1

$

5
0

$

4
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
l
n

4
-
l
a
m

4
'
T
5
H
O
f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

Fix
t
u
r
e

dra
w
i
n
a

40
0
W

or
mo
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

5
6
6

6
3
5

0
.
1
3
2
6

0
.
1
4
8
8

1
1

$

6
7

$

7
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
.

h
t
i
n

5
-
l
a
m

4
'

T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

d
r
a
w
i
n
g

4
0
0

W
a
r

m
a
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

3
1
8

3
5
7

0
.
0
7
5
0

0
.
0
8
4
2

1
1

$

1
0
1

$

7
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
.

h
t
i
n

D
e
l
a
m

i
n
a

f
i
t
u
r
e
s

R
e

l
a
c
e

a

T
1
2

f
i
x
t
u
r
e

t
a

T
8

a
r

T
5

r
e
t
r
o
f
i
t

L
a
m
o
s

2
2
5

2
5
2

0
.
0
5
2
6

0
.
0
5
9
1

1
1

~

1
9

$

1
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
.

h
t
i

1
2
0
-
1
7
5

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

d
r
a
w
i
n

1
5
0

W

a
r

m
a
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

2
8
3

3
1
8

0
.
0
6
6
3

0
.
0
7
4
4

1
6

$

1
5
0

$

2
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
.

h
t
i

1
7
5
-
3
2
0

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

d
r
a
w
n

2
5
0

W

o
r

m
o
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

2
9
0

3
2
5

0
.
0
6
8
0

0
.
0
7
6
3

1
6

$

1
7
0

$

5
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
i
n

3
2
0
-
4
0
0
W
P
u
l
s
e
S
t
a
r
t
M
e
t
a
i
H
a
i
i
d
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

Fi
x
t
u
r
e
d
r
a
w
i
n

4
0
0
W
o
r
m
o
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

1
,
1
8
5

1
,
3
3
0

0
.
2
7
7
7

0
.
3
1
1
6

1
6

$

1
7
0

$

7
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
l
n

4
0
0
-
7
5
0
W

Pu
l
s
e

St
a
r
t

Me
t
a
l

Ha
l
i
d
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

Fi
x
t
u
r
e
d
r
a
w
i
n

1
0
0
0
W
a
r
m
a
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

2
,
8
0
8

3
,
1
5
1

0
.
6
5
8
1

0
.
7
8
8

1
6

$

3
0
0

$

1
5
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
I

h
t
l
n

2
0
-
1
0
0

W

C
e
r
e
m
i
c

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

d
r
a
w
i
n

4
0
.
2
5
0

W

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

3
3
6

3
7
7

0
.
0
7
8
7

0
.
0
8
8
4

1
6

$

1
3
0

$

1
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
l
n

1
2
0
-
3
2
0
W

Ce
r
a
m
i
c

Me
t
a
l

Ha
l
i
d
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

Fi
x
t
u
r
e
d
r
a
w
i
n

4
0
0
W
a
r
m
o
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

5
3
0

5
9
5

0
.
1
2
4
3

0
.
1
3
9
5

1
6

$

1
5
5

~

5
0
!

~

0
.
0
1
4
iE
U

L
.

h
t
i
n

3
5
0
W
+

Ce
r
a
m
i
c

Me
t
a
l

Ha
l
i
d
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

Fi
x
t
u
r
e
d
r
a
w
i
n

7
5
0
W
o
r
m
a
r
e

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

1
,
0
6
1

1
,
1
9
1

0
.
2
4
8
7

0
.
2
7
9
1

1
6

$

1
5
5

$

1
0
0

I

~

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
i
n

C
F
L

L
a
m
o

o
r

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

R
e

l
a
c
e

i
n
c
a
n
d
e
s
c
e
n
t

L
a
m
o
s

1
5
9

1
7
9

0
.
0
3
7
3

0
.
0
4
1
9

'
6

$

6

$

2

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

U

h
t
i
n

L
E
O

o
r

e
o
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

e
x
i
t

s
i
a
n

R
e

l
a
c
e

i
n
c
a
n
d
e
s
c
e
n
t

o
r

f
l
u
o
r
e
s
c
e
n
t

e
x
i
t

s
i

n

3
3
3

3
7
4

0
.
0
3
1
5

0
.
0
3
5
3

1
6

$

5
1

$

1
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

l

h
t
i

L
E
O

o
r

e
Q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

s
i
a
n

I
i
Q
h
t
i
n
a

R
e

l
a
c
e

m
a
r
a
u
e
e
/
S
k
m

I
i
a
h
t
i
n
a

S
o

f
t

s
i
a
n

a
r
e
a

8
6

9
6

0
.
3
9
2
0

0
.
4
4
0
0

1
6

$

1
8

$

2
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
t
i
n

O
c
c
u
o
a
n
c
v

s
e
n
s
o
r
,

w
a
l
l

o
r

c
e
i
l
l
n
o

m
o
u
n
t
e
d

R
e

l
a
c
e

M
a
n
u
a
l
l
i
a
h
t

s
w
i
t
c
h

S
e
n
s
o
r

2
9
0

3
2
5

-

.

8

$

7
7

$

2
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
'

h
t
i
n

P
h
o
t
o
c
e
l
l

d
k
n
m
l
n

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

R
e

l
a
c
e

N
o

D
r
i
o
r

d
i
m
m
i
n
a

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

P
h
o
t
o
c
e
l
l

2
3
9

2
6
8

-

-

8

$

6
0

$

2
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
U
n

C
e
n
t
r
a
l
l
i
a
h
t
i
n
o

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

s
v
s
t
e
m

R
e

l
a
c
e

M
a
n
u
a
l

s
w
i
t
c
h
e
s

o
r

n
o

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

S

f
t

f
l
o
o
r

a
r
e
a

1

1

-

-

8

$

0

$

0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
I

h
t
l
n

A
u
t
a
.
o
f
f

t
i
m
e

s
w
i
t
c
h

R
e

l
a
c
e

C
a
n
t
r
l
l
n
a

1
0
0
-
2
0
0

W

S
w
i
t
c
h
e
s

1
3
3

1
4
9

-

-

8

$

4
3

$

1
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

U

h
U
n

A
u
t
o
-
o
f

t
i
m
e

s
w
i
t
c
h

R
e

l
a
c
e

C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
n
g

m
o
r
e

t
h
a
n

2
0
0

W

S
w
i
t
c
h
e
s

2
2
1

2
4
8

-

-

8

$

4
3

$

2
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

L
i

h
U
n

T
i
m
e

c
l
o
c
k

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

N
o

r
i
o
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

T
i
m
e

c
l
o
c
k
s

5
8
4

6
5
5

-

-

8

$

2
4
0

$

2
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

H
V
A
C

5

t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

1
-

h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
4

S
E
E
R

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

1
-
5

t
a
n

A
C

u
n
r
r

I
a
n

2
3
9

2
6
8

0
.
3
4
2
9

0
.
3
8
4
8

1
5

$

5
0

2
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

H
V
A
C

5

t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s

1
-

h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
5

S
E
E
R

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

5

t
o
n

a
r

l
e
s
s

A
C

u
n
i
t

t
a
n

2
7
9

3
1
3

0
.
4
0
0
0

0
.
4
4
8
9

1
5

$

1
0
0

$

5
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

H
V
A
C

5

t
o
n

o
r

l
a
s
s
,

1
.

h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
8

S
E
E
R

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

5

t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s

A
C

u
n
r
r

t
o
n

3
1
4

3
5
2

0
.
4
5
0
0

0
.
5
0
5
1

1
5

$

1
5
0

$

7
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

H
V
A
C

5

t
a
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

3
-

h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
4

S
E
E
R

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

1
-
5

t
a
n

A
C

u
n
i
t

t
a
n

2
3
9

2
6
8

0
.
3
4
2
9

0
.
3
8
4
8

1
5

$

7
5

$

5
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

H
V
A
C

5

t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

3
.

h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
5

S
E
E
R

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

5

t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s

A
C

u
n
i
t

t
o
n

2
7
9

3
1
3

0
.
4
0

0
.
4
4
8
9

1
5

$

1
5
0

$

7
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

H
V
A
C

5

t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

3
-

h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
6

S
E
E
R

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

5

t
a
n

a
r

l
e
s
s

A
C

u
n
i
t

t
o
n

3
1
4

3
5
2

0
.
4
5
0
0

0
.
5
0
5
1

1
5

$

2
2
5

$

1
0
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

H
V
A
C

6
-
1
0

ta
n

AC

un
i
t
,

m
i
n

1
1

E
E
R

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

6-
'
0

to
n

AC

un
i
t

t
a
n

1
2
0

1
3
5

0
.
1
7
2
2

0
.
1
9
3
3

1
5

$

1
0
0

$

5
0

$

0
.
0
'
4
EU

H
V
A
C

1
1
.
1
9
t
o
n
A
C
u
n
i
t
,
m
i
n
l
0
.
8
E
E
R

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

11
-
1
9
t
o
n
A
C
u
n
i
t

t
a
n

1
2
5

1
4
0

0
.
1
7
9
2

0
.
2
0
1
1

1
5

$

1
0
0

$

5
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

H
V
A
C

2
0

t
o
n

a
r

m
a
r
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

m
i
n

1
0

E
E
R

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

2
0

t
a
n
+

A
C

u
n
i
t

t
a
n

9
3

1
0
4

0
.
1
3
3
3

0
.
1
4
9
6

'
5

$

7
5

$

5
0

$

0
.
0
'
4
EU

H
V
A
C

A
i
r
-
s
i
d
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n

N
o

D
o
o
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

t
o
n

3
0
0

3
3
7

0
.
1
1
4
4

0
.
1
2
8
3

1
5

$

1
7
0

$

7
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

H
V
A
C

W
a
t
e
r
-
s
i
d
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n

N
o

D
o
o
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

t
o
n

1
,
1
9
9

1
,
3
4
6

0
.
0
5
7
9

0
.
0
6
5
0

1
0

$

4
6
3

$

7
5

$

0
.
0
1
4
EU

H
V
A
C

A
i
r
-
s
i
d
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

s

s
t
e
m

r
a
D
a
l
r

N
o
n
-
f
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

u
n
i
t

4
,
4
9
9

5
0
5
0

1
.
7
1
5
4

1
.
9
2
5
2

1
5

6
3
0

$

2
5
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
0:
9
6
0.
9
6õ:õ:õ:õ:õ:
0.9
6õ:õ:õ:
0.9
6õ:õ:
0.9
6õ:õ:õ:õ:õ:õ:õ:
0.
9
6õ:õ:õ:
0.
9
6
0.
9
6
0.
9
6õ:õ:
0.
9
6õ:õ:
0.
9
6õ:õ:õ:
0.
9
6õ:õ:
0.
9
6õ:
õ1õ1õ1õ1õ1õ1õ1
0.8
0
õ1õ1õ1õ1
65
1
2
$
-
3
9
:
6
8.
0
8
4

$

5
1
.
3
1
7.
6
2
6

$

9
5
.
6
2
6.
8
3
7

$

1
2
5
.
9
3
5.
5
0
4

$

6
5
.
3
0
5.
0
9
7

$

1
7
9
.
5
7
8.
3
3
4

$

3
1
9
.
5
0
4.
6
8
1

$

3
2
6
.
5
0
5.
9
5
8

$

5
3
6
.
3
9
7.
8
8
2

$

'
.
4
9
2
.
5
5
6.
7
3
0

$

1
,
2
3
6
.
0
2
4.
5
6
1

$

3
9
.
6
5
5.
7
3
2

$

5
1
.
3
1
5.
1
5
5

$

9
0
.
9
5
4.
4
4
0

$

1
0
2
.
6
1
4.
0
7
3

$

4
6
.
6
4
4.
9
7
9

$

5
8
.
3
0
6.
6
7
6

$

8
1
.
6
2
11
.
0
0
1

$

1
5
1
.
5
9
15
.
6
4
4

2
4
9
.
5
4
21
.
0
9
0

$

4
1
2
.
7
8
4.
4
4
0

$

1
0
2
.
6
'
2'
.
0
9
0

$

8
2
5
.
5
7
3.
6
0
5

$

1
6
3
.
2
5
4.
3
1
9

$

3
7
3
.
1
4
2.
5
3
6

$

2
0
9
.
8
9
10
.
8
0
8

$

1
4
8
.
0
9
8.
1
9
5

$

2
4
7
.
3
4
4.
5
0
1

$

2
5
3
.
5
2
10
.
8
5
1

$

1
,
0
3
5
.
7
3
12
.
4
4
1

$

2
,
4
5
4
.
8
3
19
.
1
5
9

$

2
9
3
.
7
1
7.
7
5
0

$

4
6
3
.
7
6
7.
7
5
0

$

9
2
7
.
5
2
31
.
5
4
1

$

1
3
9
.
1
3
14
.
2
0
0

$

2
9
1
.
0
2
3.
3
9
8

$

7
5
.
0
5
4.
8
4
8

$

1
4
6
.
8
2
4.
9
6
9

$

1
2
0
.
8
6
3.
5
6
2

$

0
.
4
'
5.
4
3
4

$

6
7
.
1
4
4.
6
5
0

$

1
1
1
.
9
1
'0
.
0
6
0

$

2
9
5
.
4
4
6.
7
0
1

$

2
3
7
.
5
4
4.
1
1
2

$

2
7
7
1
3
3.
1
4
1

$

3
1
1
.
7
7
3.
5
6
2

$

2
3
7
.
5
4
2.
8
0
9

I

~

2
7
7
1
3
2.
3
8
9

$

3
1
1
.
7
7
1.
8
4
7

$

1
1
9
.
3
4
1.
9
1
9

$

1
2
4
.
1
6
1.
4
4
0

.

$

9
2
.
3
8
3.
0
1
1

$

2
9
8
.
1
1
7.
6
8
9

$

8
8
2
.
7
2
11
.
4
2
1

$

4
.
4
7
1
.
0
2
t-
1
N
e
K
O
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

"
C-
2
?
~~
~
C

~
~
~
~
EUElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElEl ê!EUElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElElEl
HV
A
C

R
e
t
r
o
f
i
t

t
o

d
i
r
e
c
t

e
V
8
D
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

c
o
o
l
e
r
HV
A
C

R
e
t
r
o
f
i
t

t
o

i
n
d
i
r
e
c
t

e
V
8
0
0
r
a
t
i
v
e

c
o
o
l
e
r
HV
A
C

V
a
r
i
a
b
l
e

s
a
e
e
d

d
r
i
v
e
,

f
a
n

-

-
HV
A
C

V
a
r
i
a
b
l
e

s
o
e
e
d

d
r
i
v
e
,

D
u
m
HV
A
C

7

d
a
v
,

t
w

s
t
a
a
e

s
e
t
b
a
c
k

l
h
e
r
m
o
s
l
a
t
HV
A
C

A
u
t
o
m
a
t
e
d

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

s
Y
S
t
e
m
Mo
t
o
r

1

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
"

i
n
,
Mo
t
o
r

1
.
5
h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
i
Mo
t
o
r

2

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
'

i
n
Mo
t
o
r

3

h

M
o
t
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
i
i
Mo
t
o
r

5

n
o

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
Mo
t
o
r

7
.
5

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
I
l

i
n
,
Mo
t
o
r

1
0

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
"

i
n
Mo
t
o
r

1
5

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
Mo
t
o
r

2
0

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
Mo
l
o
r

2
5

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

.
n
Mo
t
o
r

3
0

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
'

'
i
l
Mo
t
o
r

4
0

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
"

i
n
Mo
t
o
r

5
0

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
Mo
t
o
r

6
0

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
i
Mo
t
o
r

7
5

h

M
o
i
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
.

i
n
Mo
l
o
r

1
0
0

h

M
o
l
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
"

.
¡
¡
Mo
l
o
r

1
2
5

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
"

.
n
a
Mo
l
o
r

1
5
0

h

M
o
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
t
i

.
n
a
Mo
l
o
r

2
0
0

h

M
o
t
o
r
.

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
i
l

i
n
a
Mo
t
o
r

D
o
w
n
s
i
z
i
n
g

m
o
t
o
r

d
u
r
i
n
g

r
e
t
f
i
t
Mo
t
o
r

E
C
M

m
o
t
o
r
Mo
t
o
r

V
a
r
i
a
b
l
e

S
o
e
e
d

D
r
i
v
e
s
Bu
i
l
d
i
n

S
h
e
l
l

U
~
0
.
4
2
,

S
H
G
C
~
0
.
4
O

V
L
T
'
0
.
5
Su
i
l
d
i
n

S
h
e
l
l

U
~
0
.
4
2
,

S
H
G
C
~
0
.
4
O
Su
i
l
d
i
n

S
h
e
l
l

A
d
d
i
n
a

w
i
n
d
o
w

s
h
a
d
e

f
i
l
m
Bu
i
l
d
i
n

S
h
e
l
l

A
d
d
i
n
.

w
i
n
d
o
w

s
h
a
d
e

s
c
r
e
e
n
Bu
i
l
d
i

S
h
e
l
l

A
d
d
i
n
a

r
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
v
e

r
o
o
f

t
r
e
t
m
e
n
t
Bu
U
d
i
n

S
h
e
l
l

I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
2
4

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
t
i
o
n
Bu
i
l
d
i
n

S
h
e
l
l

I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
3
8

m
i
n

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Bu
i
l
d
i
n

S
h
e
l
l

I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
1
1

m
i
n

i
n
s
l
a
t
i
o
n
Bu
i
l
d
i
n

S
h
e
l
l

I
n
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
1
9

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Pl
u

L
o
a
d

E
n
e
r
a
v
s
t
a
r

v
e
n
d
i
n
a

m
a
c
h
i
n
e
Pl
u

L
o
a
d

B
e
v
e
r
a
Q
e

m
a
c
h
i
n
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
Pl
u

L
o
a
d

O
t
h
e
r

c
o
l
d

p
r
o
d
u
c
t

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
Pl
u

L
o
a
d

N
o
n
-
c
o
o
l
e
d

s
n
a
c
k

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
Pl
u

l
o
a
d

E
n
e
r
a
v
S
t
a
r

d
i
s
h
w
a
s
h
e
r
,

E
F

.
6
5
Pi

L
o
a
d

E
n
e
r
a
v
S
t
a
r

r
e
f
r
i
a
e
r
a
t
o
r
Pl
u

L
o
a
d

l
o
w
~
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

d
i
s
h

m
a
c
h
i
n
e
Pl
u

L
o
a
d

8
0

P
i
~

P
C
.
.
e
s
k
t
o
o
Pl
u

L
o
a
d

8
0

P
l
u
~

P
C
-
s
e
r
v
e
r
Pl
u

L
o
a
d

E
N
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R
i
I

P
C
Pl
u

L
o
a
d

E
N
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R
i
I

C
o
o
i
e
r
Pl
u

l
o
a
d

P
C

n
e
t
w
r
k

p
o
w
e
r

m
a
n
a
g
~
m
e
r
i
!
Pl
u
a

L
o
a
d

F
l
a
t

p
a
n
e
l

L
C
D

d
i
s
p
l
a
v
Re
p
l
a
c
i
n
g

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

A
C

u
n
i
t
Re
p
l
a
c
i
n
g

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

A
C

u
n
i
t
Sin
g
l
e

s
p
e
e
d

H
V
A
C

s
y
s
t
e
m

f
a
n
Sin
g
l
e

s
p
e
e
d

H
V
A
C

s
y
s
t
e
m

p
u
m
Ma
n
u
a
l

t
h
e
r
m
o
s
t
a
t
Ma
n
u
a
l

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
p
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
p

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

or

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
p
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
p

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
e

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
e

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

he

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
p
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
p

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
e

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
p

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
p

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
r

h
p

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
e

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
e

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
e

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
e

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
r

h
p

s
t
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Sa
m
e

o
r

l
a
r
g
e
r

h
e

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
10
-
2
0
0

h
e

e
x
i
s
t
i
n
a

m
o
t
o
r
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

i
n
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

m
o
t
o
r
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r

5
-
2
0
0

h
p
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

w
i
n
d
o
w
s
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

w
i
n
d
o
w
s
No

f
i
l
m

o
r

s
h
a
d
i
n
a
No

s
c
r
e
e
n

o
r

s
h
a
d
i
n
i
No
n
-
r
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
v
e

l
o
w

o
i
t
c
h
-

r
o
O
f
In
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

l
e
v
e
l

R
1
1

o
r

l
e
s
s
In
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

l
e
v
e
l

R
1
1

o
r

l
e
s
s
In
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

l
e
v
e
l

R
5

o
r

l
e
s
s
In
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

l
e
v
e
l

R
5
0
r

l
e
s
s
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

v
e
n
d
i
n
g

m
a
c
h
i
n
e
Ve
n
d
i
n
g

m
a
c
h
i
n
e

w
i
t
h

n
o

s
e
n
s
o
r
Ve
n
d
i
n
g

m
a
c
h
i
n
e

w
i
t
h

n
o

s
e
n
s
o
r
Ve
n
d
i
n
a

m
a
c
h
i
n
e

w
i
t
h

n
o

s
e
n
s
o
r
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

d
i
s
h
w
a
s
h
e
r
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

r
e
f
r
i
a
e
r
a
t
o
r
Dis
h

m
a
c
h
i
n
e

w
I

e
l
e
c
i
i
f
c
-
b
o
o
s
t
e
r
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

D
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

c
o
m
D
u
t
e
r
,

d
e
s
k
t
o
D
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

o
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

c
o
m
D
u
t
e
r

s
e
r
v
e
r
St
a
n
d
a
r
d

e
r
s
o
n
a
l

c
o
m

u
t
e
r
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

c
o
o
i
e
r

w
/
o
u
t

i
d
l
e
/
o
f
f

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
No

c
e
n
t
r
a
l

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

c
a
t
h
o
d
e

r
a
y

(
C
R
T
)

d
i
s
o
l
a
to
n
iõ!!!!
un
i
t!!Mo
t
o
r
Mõ
Mo
t
o
r
Mo
t
o
r
MõMõMõMõ
Mo
t
o
r
MõMõ
'MMõ
Mo
t
o
r
Mo
t
o
r
MõMõ
Mo
t
o
r
Mõ
õëMõ
¡:ft

w
i
n
d
o

a
r
a
n
w
i
n
d

a
r
e
a
89

f
t

w
i
n
d
o

a
r
e
ft

w
i
n
d
o
w

a
r
e
ft

r
o
o
f

a
r
e
a
ft

c
e
i
l
i
n
a

a
r
e
a
ft

c
e
i
l
i
n
q

a
r
e
a
It

wa
l
l

a
r
e
'ima
~
ma
c
h
i
n
e
ñ1ñ1
'ë
e
r
re
f
r
i
g
e
r
a
t
o
r
re
m
o
v
e
k
W
¡;
PC PC~PCii
r
90
3
87
7
1,
õ
7
89
4,
2
1
01"577f 9s
14
6
1am54ñõ99
',6
0
4
1,8
1
9
2,
0
4
9
2,
1
2
0
i:
3,
0
0
84,ã,
7,
2
3
4
'0
,
0
7
7
1342
3,5
4
2i 1 "2 "2 Õ T 1 1 "2
T.
54
7
543a
I3a66s
54
2
54
24s
io '9
6
23
4
1,
0
1
3
76I,
1,0
0
1ms1"64 ãõ
10
6
iaio49mãõm ',9
0
1~~2,
3
8
0
3,
2
9
0
3,
3
7
6Š,7,
8,1
1
9
'.
!
14
--3,2 T "2 "2Õ T "2 T "3
i.6i6i4225a6 73
860
80
9ilI3I2 26
2
0.9
4
7
7
0.7
1
0
7
0.0
2
0
0
õ.õ.
0.0
5
1
0
õ:õlõ.
õTõ.õ.õ.õ.õ:õ.
õF
imrn1.
i.õ.
0.
0
8
2
8
0.
0
0õ.õ.õ.õ.õ:õ:õ.õ:õ:
0.
0
7
2
9
õ.õ.õ.
0.
0
6
'
9
0.
0
5
2
2
õ.
0.
0
'
3
0õ.
1.
0
6
3
6
0.7
9
7
7
0.0
2
2
5
0.0
2
8
0
ii
0.0
5
7
2
õ:
0.1
4
8
0
0.'
8
1
9
0.
2
4
0
4
õ.õ.õ.
0.
6
0
3
6
õ.õ.õ.ni1.
i.
'2'õõ:
0.
0
0
1
0
õ.õ.õ.õ:õ.õ.õ:
'õõT
0.0
8
1
8
õ:
0.0
8
3
6
õ:õ:õ:õ:
0.
0
1
4
8
0.
0
3
0
0
W
$
W
$
W W
$
11

$
M
$
15

$
15

$
W
$
W
$
15

$
W
$
15

$
15

$
15

$
W
$
15

$
W
$
W
$
W
$
W
$
15

$
15

$
15

$
W $W $
W
$
m~
$
~
$
m
$
m
$
15

$
40

$
40

$
40

$
40

$
M
$
M
$
M
$
M
$
11

$
13

$
g
$
4
$
4
$
4
$
6
$
10

$
4
$
40
0
55
0
18
7
18
7
17
5
1 50 73 65 73 99 71 90

$
16
8

$
16
5

$
32
9

$
33
1

$
39
8

$
38
4

$
33
2

$
36
6

$
55
5
98
1

$
60
9

$
96
4 .
'
$
'1
0I8"2 T "3 T Õ 1
$
1
$
1
$
1
$
35
0

$
17
0

$
17
0

$
17
0

$
55

$
30

$
12
7

$
15

$
15

$
10

$
40

$
19

$
15
0

$
20
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
30
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
80

0
.
0
1
4
60

$

0
.
0
1
4
40

$

0
.
0
1
4
o
$

0
.
0
1
4
20

$

0
.
0
1
4
25

$

0
.
0
1
4
30

$

0
.
0
1
4
35

$

0
.
0
1
4
40

$

0
.
0
1
4
55

0
.
0
1
4
70

$

0
.
0
1
4
90

$

0
.
0
'
4
11
0

0
.
0
1
4
13
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
15
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
18
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
22
0

0
.
0
1
4
28

$

0
.
0
1
4
35
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
42
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
55
0

$

0
.
0
1
4
65
0

~
$

0
.
0
1
4
75
0

I
S

0
.
0
1
4
.
3

$

0
.
0
1
4
30

0
.
0
'
4
60

I
S

0
.
0
1
4
1
0
.
0
1
4
1
$

0
.
0
1
4
1
I
S

0
.
0
1
4
1
I
S

0
.
0
1
4
o
$

0
.
0
1
4
o
$

0
.
0
1
4
o
I
S

0
.
0
1
4
o
$

0
.
0
1
4
o
I
S

0
.
0
1
4
75

$

0
.
0
1
4
75

$

0
.
0
1
4
50

$

0
.
0
1
4
25

I
S

0
.
0
1
4
15

$

0
.
0
1
4
~
$

0
.
0
1
4
75

$

0
.
0
1
4
5
$

0
.
0
1
4
10

$

0
.
0
1
4
'0

I
S

0
.
0
1
4
25

$

0
.
0
1
4
10

$

0
.
0
1
4
10

$

0
.
0
1
4
0.8
0
õFõ.õ.
õFõFõ.
0.9
6õ.
0.
9
6
0.
9
6õ.õ.
0.
9
6õ.õ.õ.
0.
9
8õ.õ.
0.
9
8
0.
9
8õ.õ.õ.õ.õ.õ.
õFõFõFõFõFõFõFõFõFõ.õ.õ.õ.õ.õ.õ.õ.õ.õ.õ.õ.õ.
3.
:
i
t
4

$

8
9
6
.
8
5
1.
7
3
9

$

6
7
2
.
6
4
'3
.
6
9
0

I
S

1
,
0
7
1
.
5
2
11
.
7
3
0

$

8
8
6
.
1
4
26
.
9
5
5

$

3
,
3
3
9
.
5
3
2.
8
7
3

$

1
.
1
4
2.
4
0
5

$

5
2
.
1
2
2.
3
9
9

$

6
4
.
9
9
2.
6
4
6

$

8
6
.
3
7
3.
4
4
4

$

1
3
2
.
9
'
3.
7
5
4

$

1
6
6
.
4
5
6.
3
2
9

$

4
0
3
.
6
4
6.
1
3
2

$

4
9
5
.
9
7
6.
2
8
8

$

6
5
5
.
7
8
7.
0
2
4

$

9
0
7
.
2
7
9.
1
9
4

$

1
,
4
6
0
.
6
9
9.
0
5
7

$

1
,
6
5
5
.
1
5
8.
5
7
8

$

1
,
8
6
5
.
5
2
7.
4
1
9

$

1
,
9
3
0
.
3
5
7.
9
7
8

$

2
,
6
6
8
.
9
3
6.
7
0
3

$

2
,
7
3
8
.
8
9
8.
0
7
7

$

4
,
0
6
0
.
7
8
8.
7
7
6

$

5
,
8
5
2
.
9
5
8.
4
1
3

$

6
,
5
8
6
.
0
5
9.
8
8
0

$

9
,
1
7
5
.
1
1
3.
4
6
7

$

1
1
.
4
8
'0
.
2
8
3

$

3
8
4
.
0
4
20
.
7
8
0

S

2
,
3
7
3
.
0
9
1.
5
8
6

$

2
.
0
2
2.
1
0
2

$

1
.
3
5
2.
3
3

$

1
.
5
5
2.
3
3
8

$

'
.
5
5
5.
7
1
8

$

0
.
4
0
9.
5
7
6

$

1
.
3
5
7.
7
6
6

$

2
.
1
4
18
.
9
6
9

$

1
.
5
3
21
.
3
2
5

$

3
.
5
8
'1
.
6
4

$

1
1
6
0
.
4
0
5.
0
0
3

$

4
3
0
.
8
1
7.
1
7
'

$

4
3
0
.
8
1
9.
5
3
2

3
0
1
.
5
7
7.
9
4
4

$

1
5
0
.
9
6
1.
9
7
1

6
4
.
0
6
5.
5
3
1

$

4
8
5
.
3
4
11
.
3
1
3

$

1
4
8
.
6
7
8.
1
0
2

$

1
4
8
.
6
7
7.
3
2
9

$

1
2
5
.
3
6
2.
7
4
9

7
9
.
8
6
8.
7
9
3

$

1
1
6
.
8
1
4.
6
3
2

$

6
4
.
0
9
í-
1
N
e
K
a
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
C-
2
8
~:i
.sl~
ü
i
"'
CDNÜ
N ~ ~ m ~ø~ e v M m~ ~ e m N - ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ NO. V m 0 V ~ ~ MN ~ ø ~ _ N N _ ø N~ M~ _ ~ ~ M mm ~ e~~: ~ ~ Ó: ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d~;:~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ d ~ ~ ã: ~ ~ ~~~: ~: ~~::~~N~~~gffv--MN~~~~~reM~~~~~ro~;~m~~ø~ ~~ ~-~~ ~~a~~.. - "'iöfh li li li fA li ll U' fh liFHR. fß fl En
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ;~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~e R ~~e ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ m ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~m rn~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N ~m ~ MOO M N ~ m ø N ~ m ~ M M~ ~ ~ N N M N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N ~ NN M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ $~ ~ ~~ $ $$ ~~ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $~ $ ~ ~ $ $$ $ ~ $ $ $ $ $ $$ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ $$ $ ~ ~ ~ ~00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a a q q ~ ~ q qq q aq a a a a a a a a a a aa a a a a aa a a a a a a a a a a aa a a a a aa a a a aa00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000lilillllllØlllllilillllflllfhlillllllllEAllllElllflfhlltlfhfhfhfh
~ ~~ g ~ g ~ ~~ m ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g~ ~ g gg gg g ~ ~ ~ ~o 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ M~ ~ o~ g ~~ g 8~ ~~~ ~ MM~~N ~NNM
~~~~~ ~~~w~~~~~~~~~ø ~ ø~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ø~øø~w ww ø w
~ ~ ~ ~ 0 00 0 0 m m N ~ ~ M 0 M~ 0 ~ w ~ ~ ~ N~~ 0 m~ ~ N~ 0 ~ 0 0 ~ N 0 ~ N N~~O ~ ~ ~ M M ~ V~m~~ooooo MOMNO~~~~~MMm~O~~~eMe ~M N ~~ ~m~oo~~~~~~~~~ vMe_N ~~~~ro~NN ~ ~~ ~o~~wÑ~ ~~~M
~ø~~~øø~~~~ø~ø~~~øøø~~ ~~ø~ø~~~~~øø~ø ø~øøøøø~~~~~ø~
o v ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v e ~ ~ ~~ N N N ~ ~ ~~ NN ~ ~ ~w ~ w ~ ~ ~ m m ~ ~ 0 0 ~~~~ e 0 ~ 0 N m 0~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~-~~~~~~ ~ ~~MM~~~~~~~~~ ~
=
~::
~
Iienãi~.æ
&.
c:
~Qli:~~
Ql:gen
-g
~~
~ ~ ~~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ v~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ _ N, ggõ~~~8õ~gg~~~~~~~~~~g~~§§coo 0 0 0 ci 0 od 0 co 0 00 coo 0 00 0 ci 0 d
Mv~~ONOM~oO~OOeeCO'MOOO~~o:NOOOOMO~~cooocooc:
W~MO~~ ~ ~'mco~~v~MNoC'c:o
, å~~~g~~~~å~~~~~~§~~~~~~~8g000 M ~ ~ 0 0 0 00 OO~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0c: 0 ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d ci 0 c: 0 c: c: c: 0 ci 0 c: 0 0 0 ci ci
~~~~m~re~'MOOO~~~~OOOOMO~~cic:odcic:cic:
0000COCOM~'M~_ MveMNONoo
~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ff ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ m~ ~ ~~ § g~ ~ ~ 0 - ~~ 0 ~ N ~ ~ re~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~" Ñ~~"" "N ~No:""""
~ re~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~R~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ m~; ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ N ~~~g ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~" N~~""" ".," Ñ"'~"""
gl~l~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 00
$l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ s s s S £ g ~
==i:
~8
~a.~~
Si~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

I
n
p
u
t
s
PM
Fo
o
d

S
e
r
v
i
c
e
HI

E
f
f
C
i
e
n
e
V
n
d
u
c
t
i
o
n

C
o
o
k
i
n
o
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

C
o
o
k
i
ñ
Ea
c
h
2,1
1
8
2,
7
7
0.
6
0
6
0
If
8
0
1
12
$
2,2
1
3
48
0
$
0
.
0
1
4
PM
fo
o
d

S
e
r
v
i
c
e
Hi
n
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c

V
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

H
o
o
d
s
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

V
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

H
o
o
d
Ea
c
h
9,7
9
9
10
,
9
9
8
2.
7
4
5
0
3.
0
8
0
8
'0
$
3,7
1
5
$
80
5
$
0
.
0
1
4
PM
Fo
o
d

S
e
r
v
i
c
e
Ele
c
t
r
i
c

S
t
e
a
m

c
o
o
k
e
r
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

C
o
o
k
e
r
Ea
c
h
5,9
4
0
6,6
6
7
1.8
5
1
0
2.
0
7
7
4
10
$
4,1
5
0
$
75
0
$
0
.
0
1
4
PM
Fo
o
d

S
e
r
v
c
e
El
e
c
t
r
i
c

c
o
n
v
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
y
e
n
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

O
v
e
n
Ea
c
h
2,2
6
2
2,5
3
9
0.
5
0
0
0
0.5
6
'
2
12
$
2,
7
'
3
$
35
0
0.0
1
4
PM
Fo
o
d

S
e
i
v
i
e
a
Ele
c
t
r
i

c
o
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n

o
v
e
n
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

O
v
e
n
Ea
c
h
18
,
3
2
20
,
6
8
7
4.2
0
0
0
4.
7
1
3
8
12
$
'6
,
8
8
4
$
1,0
0
0
0.0
1
4
¡P
M
A
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
Hio
h

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
v

S
t
o
c
k

t
a
n
k
Sta
n
d
a
r
d

T
a
n
k
Ea
c
h
1,2
0
9
1,
3
5
7
0.1
0
0
8
0.1
1
3
1
10
$
40
0
$
75
$
0
.
0
1
4
PM
A
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
Au
t
o
m
a
t
i
c

M
i
l
k
e
r

T
a
k
e
o
f
f
s
No

A
u
t
o
-
t
a
k
e
o
f
f
Ea
c
h
99
8
','
2
0
0.4
0
7
0
0.
4
5
6
8
10
$
60
5
$
23
5
$
0
.
0
1
4
PM
A
r
l
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
Blo
c
k

h
e
a
t
e
r

t
i
m
e
r
No

T
i
m
e
r
Ea
c
h
51
2
57
5
'0
$
20
$
10
$
0
.
0
1
4
PM
A
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
Cir
c
u
l
a
t
i
n
a

f
a
n
St
a
n
d
a
r
d

F
a
n
Ea
c
h
73
1
82
0
0.0
9
9
8
0.
1
1
2
0
10
$
89
$
44
$
0
.
0
1
4
PM
A r
l
c
l
t
u
r
e
Hin
h
-
e
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v

v
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

s
Y
S
t
e
m
St
a
n
d
a
r
d

V
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

S
Y
S
t
e
m
Fa
n
1,2
6
0
1,4
1
4
0.2
0
6
8
0.2
3
2
1
10
$
24
8
$
12
3
$
0
.
0
1
4
PM
A
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
Pr
o
n
r
a
m
m
a
b
l
e

v
e
n
t
l
a
t
i
o
n

c
o
n
t
r
l
l
e
r
No

Co
n
t
r
o
l
e
r

Co
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
d

F
a
n
1,0
2
0
1,1
4
5
0.1
3
9
0
0.
1
5
8
0
12

I

~
11
5

$
20
$
0
.
0
1
4
PM
A
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
VF
D

o
n

d
a
i
r
v

v
a
c
u
u
m

D
u
m
O
Na
V
F
D
hn
2,
5
0
5
2,8
1
1
0.3
7
0
0
0.
4
1
5
3
'5
$
34
0
~
16
5
0.0
1
4
,p
M
Ne
w

Mo
t
o
r

25
0

h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
Sa
m
e

a
r
I
a
r
h

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Mo
t
o
r
14
,
7
1
1
16
,
5
1
1
2.3
5
3
8
2.6
4
1
7
15
$
1,6
0
7
$
96
0
0.0
1
4
0.9
6
11
.
0
2
2
$1
3
,
3
9
4
.
1
6
PM
Ne
w

Mo
t
o
r

30
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
Sa
m
e
o
r
l
a
er
h
sta
n
d
a
r

m
o
t
o
r
Mo
t
o
r
18
,
0
2
3
20
,
2
2
8
2.8
8
3
7
3.
2
3
6
4
15
$
1,5
4
0
$
92
0
$
0
.
0
1
4
0.9
6
13
.
4
2
9
$1
6
,
0
9
.
4
6
PM
Ne
w

Mo
t
o
r

35
0

h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
Sa
m
e

or

la

er
h
st
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Mo
t
o
r
20
,
1
4
2
22
,
6
0
6
3.2
2
2
7
3.6
1
7
0
'5
$
2,1
7
6
$
1,3
'
0
$
0
.
0
'
4
0.9
6
11
.
0
5
3
18
,
3
3
8
.
7
6
PM
Ne
w

Mo
t
o
r

40
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
Sa
m
e

ar
i
a

r
h

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Mo
t
o
r
23
,
6
9
8
26
,
5
9
7
3.7
9
1
7
4.2
5
5
5
15
$
2,4
7
4
$
1,
4
8
0
$
0
.
0
'
4
0.9
6
'1
.
4
2
6
$2
1
5
7
6
.
3
9
PM
Ne
w

Mo
t
o
r

45
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
Sa
m
e
o
r
l
a
r
r
h

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Mo
t
o
r
31
,
8
5
0
35
7
4
6
5.0
9
5
9
5.7
1
9
3
15
$
3,5
9
8
$
21
6
0
$
0
.
0
1
4
0.9
6
10
.
6
7
7
$2
8
9
9
8
.
2
8
PM
Ne
w

Mo
t
o
r

50
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
Sa
m
e

ar
i
a

er

h
st
a
n
d
a
r
d

m
o
t
o
r
Mo
t
o
r
33
,
1
1
2
37
,
1
6
2
5.2
9
7
9
5.9
4
6
15
$
4,
7
2
2
$
2,8
3
0
I ~

0
.
0
1
4
0.9
6
8.7
8
4
$3
0
1
4
7
.
2
7
PM
Ne
w

Gr
o
c
e
r
v

LE
D

C
a
s
e

L
i
a
h
t
i
n
a
5f
t
T
l
2
Ll
a
h
t
B
a
r
37
5
42
1
0.0
6
0
5
0.0
6
7
9
8
$
14
9
$
55
$
0
.
0
1
4
0.9
6
2.8
6
7
$
17
9
.
9
6
PM
Ne
w

Mo
t
o
r

Es
c
a
l
a
t
o
r

M
o
t
o
r

C
o
n
t
r
l
l
e
r
No

C
o
n
t
r
o
H
e
r
HI
"
23
5
26
4
0.0
6
1
0
0.0
8
6
5
15

!

~
20
0
$
55
ri
r

0
.
0
1
4
0.9
6
3.5
2
3
21
3
.
9
6
PM
Ne
w

HV
A
C

Gr
o
u
n
d

S
o
u
r
c
e

H
P

O
n
e
n
Air

S
o
u
r
c
e

H
e
a
t

P
u
m
n
to
n
50
6
56
7
0.3
1
7
8
0.3
5
6
6
30
¡ $
70
0

$
25
$
0
.
0
1
4
0.8
0
18
.
4
9
8
74
2
.
2
2
PM
Ne
w

HV
A
C

Gro
u
n
d

S
o
u
r
c
e

H
P

C
l
o
s
e
d
Air

S
o
u
c
e

H
e
a
t

P
u
m
o
to
n
'3
2
14
8
0.2
0
4
8
0.2
2
9
8
30
$
70
0

$
25
$
0
.
0
1
4
0.8
0
5.7
7
5
'9
3
.
8
5
PM
Ne
w
L
;
,
h
t
i
n
n
Ph
o
t
o
l
u
m
i
n
e
s
c
e
n
t

e
x
i
t

S
i
n
n
In
c
a
n
d
e
s
c
e
n
t

e
x
i
t

S
i
a
n
fl
u
r
e
10
5
11
8
0.0
'
2
0
0.0
1
3
5
'6
$
20
0
$
20
$
0
.
0
1
4
0.9
6
4.1
0
4
$
9'.
8
0
PM
Ne
w
L
;
"
h
t
i
n
a
8
l
a
m
n

T
5
H
O

l
a
m
n
75
0

H
I
D
fl
u
r
e
73
5
82
5
0.
3
7
7
0
0.4
2
3
1
15
$
56
0
$
11
0
$
0
.
0
1
4
0.9
6
4.8
9
9
61
4
.
0
6
PM
Ne
w

L
i
a
h
t
i
n
a

M
u
t
t
l

L
a
m
a

H
a
r
d

W
i
r
e

C
F
L
25
0
W

H
I
D
fi
x
t
r
e
79
8
89
5
0.
1
0
5
9
0.1
1
8
6
ll
l
:
53
2

.
~
10
0

L
$

0
.
0
1
4
0.
9
6
4.
5
4
0

1
.
52
5
.
9
1
t-
1
N
e
K
Ø
n
T
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e
"
C-
3
0
f:
ef ~~~ef ef ~~ef ef ef ef00000
C"N N N C"C"N N C"N N C"N N N N N N N N N N N N........................
=
~::f:~~~~~ef ~ef ef ef ef ef ~i000000::io (0 io CO io io ~io io i.i.i."C(Y -.(Y (Y (Y (Y -.(Y (Y (Y (Y (Y è7..
~ñi"'i:.t $
&.
~
ëf:~~~ef ef ::~~ef ef ~ef ef ~Q)en000000mCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOi:
1 (Y (Y (Y (Y (Y (Y (Y (Y (Y (Y (Y (Y mNNNNNNNNNNNN::
Q)
.g 32en.s "Ci:r-m
U Ef:Q)~Cl~ef ::~~?f ?f ~ef ef ~.'i ::0 0 0 0 0 0 i:f-a ('0 ('a 0 ('0 a 0 0 0 m0encien0cienci0cicicic.......E0Ü
~00-f:~m
ef ef ef ef ef ef ~ef ef ~~~i.:!0 0 0 0 0 (000a000000000ii.,.,.I',.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.W ..........................~0I'
f:
;æIIeni:c:- c:.9 IIëii.i IIE ..~IIIIQ)
&
II Q)Q) Q)uuc:U II i:II e .ieII ..::Ü .ë:0 o:O 0 a.:¡a.I:ë e II ~ g u .i ..Õ u i: -:::. ~Q)i:::o II i:c:¡¡ -g .i II -Q)II IIo Q)0 :2 æ~~~o:u. :i --o a.
~::
.s
~
~
èf ~ '# '# '* ef '# ?f '# '# ?J ~000000000000
en en en en en en en en en en en en
?f?f'#?f?f?f?f?f'#cf?f"l ~oioioioi oioiT"T"T"
ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci cioi T" T" oi T" T" T" T". T" T" T""'
io ('9..WN~ ..00)
..MÓ
f:
i. co9~w..a cico
t5
.s
~~
NC"Ü
u
~~..U ~l ~l a..=l l Q)u u
~:.E::u m -.u õ'#:.M co I(co '#co co :.;:.~~I'..0 ca m i0'#..........ci '#;:..0 "0~\0 ~\0 Æu~~~
"ë ~.~u ti.Ð ~
~
.~
l:.æ0l:l:a.ti ti ë
8 ..8 ti Q)'"Ei:8
§
8 Q)ci8.r
(I
.r
II
E i:
"r
II .r
II0(I ::l (,E 8 Q).5 :!
~0 8 u (J..
~
~:i .8
l
"0..0 i:
:l -I "0 n ~(I i l!
I
Q)
I ë E -:i 00i:-a .(I (,;:1 (,E J!1 i:.E II(I :i
~~1 ~~(,c:
~.!co 0
~~
l
(.
~
-I :l ~I I ~~i:c:0V)0 0 t-a.U :i :i U i!0 ~co co \0 E ~II"3 "3 U :!il II II .!~.!I-.E .E .!co
~~
U)
ü))-..c(Zc(
~
&:;(.¡:,g ü)it:ZQ)W ~"'U)
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
~

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s
LO
A
D

P
R
O
F
I
L
E
S
Ta
b
l
e

C
-
8

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i

L
o
a
d

P
r
o
f
i
e
s

b
y

E
n
d
-
U
s
e
En
d

U
s
e
~
We
i
a
h
t
e
d

A
v
e
r
a
a
e
El
e
c
t
r
i
c

F
u
r
n
a
c
e
0.
0
0
2
9
0.
6
8
3
6
0.
2
8
5
9
$
0.
0
6
6
El
e
c
t
r
i
c

R
o
o
m
0.
0
0
7
5
0.
0
2
0
1
0.
0
0
2
9
0.
6
8
3
6
0.
2
8
5
9
$
0.
0
6
6
He
a
t

P
u
m
p
0.
0
0
7
5
0.
0
2
0
1
0.
0
0
2
9
0.
6
8
3
6
0.
2
8
5
9
$
0.
0
5
1
Ce
n
t
r
a
l

A
C
0.
4
3
5
3
0.
3
7
7
4
0.
0
3
6
8
0.
1
2
3
1
0.
0
2
7
4
$
0.
1
1
5
He
a
t

P
u
m
p
0.
4
3
5
3
0.
3
7
7
4
0.
0
3
6
8
0.
1
2
3
1
0.
0
2
7
4
$
0.
1
2
2
Ro
o
m
A
C
0.
4
3
5
3
0.
3
7
7
4
0.
0
3
6
8
0.
1
2
3
1
0.
0
2
7
4
$
0.
1
2
5
Ev
a
p
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

C
o
o
l
e
r
0.
4
3
5
3
0.
3
7
7
4
0.
0
3
6
8
0.
1
2
3
1
0.
0
2
7
4
$
0.
1
2
7
Di
s
h
w
a
s
h
e
r
0.
0
8
2
6
0.
1
2
8
6
0.
0
1
4
2
0.
6
3
0.
1
4
4
7
$
0.
0
8
3
Wa
s
h
e
r
0.
0
7
6
0.
1
5
9
2
0.
0
1
6
1
0.
6
0
9
0.
1
3
9
8
$
0.
0
8
7
Wa
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
i
n
a
0.
0
5
2
3
0.
1
1
3
1
0.
0
3
6
9
0.
5
2
4
2
0.
2
7
3
4
$
0.
0
8
8
Fi
r
s
t

R
e
f
r
i
a
e
r
a
t
o
r
0.
0
6
9
3
0.
1
2
0
4
0.
0
8
6
1
0.
4
1
0
5
0.
3
1
3
7
$
0.
0
9
2
Se
c
o
n
d

R
e
f
r
i
a
e
r
a
t
o
r
0.
0
6
9
3
0.
1
2
0
4
0.
0
8
6
1
0.
4
1
0
5
0.
3
1
3
7
$
0.
0
9
6
Fr
e
e
z
e
r
0.
0
7
1
5
0.
1
1
8
2
0.
0
8
5
8
0.
4
0
5
1
0.
3
1
9
4
$
0.
1
0
1
Dr
v
e
r
0.
0
7
6
0.
1
5
9
2
0.
0
1
6
1
0.
6
0
9
0.
1
3
9
8
$
0.
1
0
1
Co
l
o
r

TV

0.
0
5
4
8
0.
1
0
2
1
0.
0
6
6
0.
4
7
6
3
0.
3
0
0
9
$
0.
1
0
0
Li
g
h
t
i
n
g
0.
0
5
4
8
0.
1
0
2
1
0.
0
6
6
0.
4
7
6
3
0.
3
0
0
9
$
0.
1
0
5
Pl
u
g

L
o
a
d
0.
0
6
9
3
0.
1
2
0
4
0.
0
8
6
1
0.
4
1
0
5
0.
3
1
3
7
$
0.
1
1
1
En
d

U
s
e
Ta
b
l
e

C
-
9

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

L
o
a
d

P
r
o
f
i
e
s

b
y

E
n
d
-
U
s
e
0.
0
8
8
0.
1
9
7
0.
1
4
3
0.
0
8
1
0.
0
6
9
0.
0
8
6
0.
0
8
6
0.
1
7
0
0.
2
6
4
0.
1
6
2
0.
2
2
9
0.
3
0
0
0.
3
2
5
0.
2
8
2
0.
2
6
9
0.
1
3
0
0.
0
9
2
0.
1
8
6
0.
1
4
3
0.
0
9
1
0.
0
9
6
0.
0
9
1
0.
0
9
3
õ.
0.
4
9
7
0.
3
5
1
0.
3
9
6
0.
4
6
0
0.
4
3
2
0.
4
7
8
0.
4
9
1
0.
2
2
0
i1
N
e
K
Q
n
r
C-
3
3
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
~::
.s
~
~
ü
1
"'
lu::
;¡
~e~
"iji
.g.so-
U~~¡.
""'''''NU)..CO..(O..('c\('Noocidd
CO It a: -. coNMO'vcn~-.~~""00000
N.. CX oq Q)~~~~:gcicicicic:
a: co C\ IJ 10O' cn a: 0' en..0000ciodcio
o..ailO..~b~~~cic:cic:ci
(:ü
=
~:;
g
I~
Æ
1õ
:e
~ë
~~tti:tt:2
Q)"0i:"0i:ttE~
~0-
S
~ii~~
Ši~
go
1..
i
~ ga:ax m i:I! en en lí::::.. "0 l! c ".s ...., l'o: g Ë E'"~£~~~88 l
:i
:=:i ~l! ..ø= ~ce.s;S8~.sËE~
£ÆS:~::8 0
~
.s
~
~
ü
!
a:
l-tLoocwc
~
tlou
"B:g
~....
U
C' C' C' C' C' C' C' C' N N N C' N C' C' C' C' N C' N C'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ m m~ ~ ~~ m~ ~ m ~ mm
~ ;t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;t ;t ~ ~ ~;t ~ ~;t ~ ~ ;t ~
~ ~ C' ~ C' ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ _ ~ 0 ~ 00 _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ro ~ ro ro m m moo0000000000000000000 __o ó ó ó ó ó ó ó ci ó ci ó ó ó ci ci ci ci 0 ci 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~ 00 M ~ ~ 00 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ _ ~ _ 00 C' ~ m~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ 0 ~ 00_ _ C' N N000000000000_ 0-___ ___ó ci ó ó ó ó ó ó ó ci ó ó ó ó ci ci ci ci ci ci 0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.£~¡.
ro ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ C' ~ _ ~ ~ ~ - ~ 0 ~ m N ~l ~ B ~~~~~ 88 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ó ó ó ó ci 0 ci ci Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó 0 ci 0 ci ci ci 00
~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~.
~ ~ 0 ~ ro N ~ ro C' 0 C' ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ci C'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ro m m ~ 0 moo - C' N N ~000000000000_ 0 __ _____ó ó ó ci ó ci ci ci ci 0 Ó Ó Ó Ó Ó ci ci ci ci 0 ci~.~~~~~~...~~~~~~~~~~
.;IIoo~
CD~
~
m 00 ~ ro ~ - ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ co ~ ~ ~_00 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ro ro ~ ro 00 ~ ~ m ~ m 000000000000000000000_o ci ó ci ó ó ó ci ó ci ó ó ci Ó 0 Ó 0 Ó ci ci Ó~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OO~O-NM~~~~OO~O_NM~~ ~oooO--------__NNNNNNNNN000000000000000000000NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
..IV
~
io('ü
=
~::
~
i
ìen
-æ
Ië
~acoc:co::
Q)"0
Cñ"0c:
~~
""c:
~8
j~co:s
~:Jo:i
Is
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s

SA
L
E
S

A
N
D

L
O
A
D

F
O
R
E
C
A
S
T
Ta
b
l
e

C
I
2
!
P
C

S
a
l
e
s

F
o
r
e
t

2
0
0
9
-
2
0
2
8

(
M
W
)
72
0
0
9

2
0
1
0
2
0
U

2
1
1
1
2
"
"
1
3

2
0
1
4

2
O
t
l
Z
O
l
l
1

-

2
0
1
7

2
0
1
8

2
0
1
9

2
0
2
0

2
1
1
2
1
7
:

2
õ
~
.

:
u

2
0
5

2
1
1
2
6
-
2
0
2
7

2
0
2
8
5,
3
8
'
,
0
8
4

5
,
4
6
6
,
2
5
2

5
,
5
5
9
,
7
1

5
,
6
1
1
,
3
9
7

5
,
6
6
7
,
2
5

5
,
7
0
3
,
3
0
6

5
,
7
4
1
,
9
5
2

5
,
6
4
0
,
6
6
4

5
,
8
8
3
,
0
2
3

5
,
9
2
5
,
7
"

6
,
0
1

,
0
8

6
,
1
'
9
,
7
4
3

6
,
2
2
7
,
7
1
8

6
,
3
3
6
,
9
3

,
4
4

,

6
,
5
,
9
4

6
,
6
6
e
,
5
3
9

6
,
7
8
5
,
2
8
0

6
,
9
0
1
,
4
5
3

7
,
0
1
2
,
5
5
8
4,
0
7
3
,
7
5
1

4
,
1
6
3
,
8
8
4

4
,
2
4
8
,
3
4
4

4
,
3
1
2
,
4
8
2

4
,
3
7
9
,
8
9
3

4
,
4
2
8
,
9
8
0

4
,
4
7
8
,
7
4
7

4
,
5
6
8
,
2
0
2

4
6
1
4
,
0
6
6

4
,
6
4
8
,
0
0
2

4
,
7
3
9
,
2
0
5

4
,
8
4
'

,
2
2
6

4
,
9
4
6
,
1
0
4

5
,
0
5
5
,
5
9
2

5
,
1
6
6
,
2
6
6

5
,
2
8
'
,
4
9
1

5
,
3
9
8
,
4
8
7

5
,
5
1
9
,
3
6
0

5
,
6
3
9
5
8
5

5
,
7
5
3
9
6
9
1,
6
0
2
,
6
4
2

1
,
6
0
0
,
9
9
3

1
,
5
9
7
,
3
3
5

1
,
5
9
3
,
6
9
2

'
,
5
9
0
,
8
1
5

1
,
5
8
2
3
4
0

1
5
8
5
3
0
1

1
,
5
8
8
,
2
1
0

1
,
5
8
2
,
5
8
0

1
,
5
8
4
,
7
9
1

1
,
5
8
7
,
7
5
0

1
,
5
9
0
,
8
2
4

1
,
5
9
3
,
8
7
2

1
,
5
9
6
,
8
7
1

1
,
5
9
9
,
8
6
6

1
,
6
0
2
,
8
6
0

1
,
6
0
5
,
9
0
8

1
,
6
0
8
,
8
6
4

1
,
6
1
1
,
6
6
0

1
,
6
1
4
5
9
7
2,
4
6
0
,
8
5
9

2
,
5
1
5
,
9
1
8

2
,
5
6
3
,
5
6
3

2
,
6
0
7
,
2
4
9

2
,
6
5
0
,
6
6
4

2
,
6
8
5
,
7
6
5

2
,
7
3
2
,
3
8
3

2
,
7
8
1
,
4
3
4

2
,
8
1
0
,
8
8
1

2
,
8
5
7
,
'
6
3

2
9
0
5
4
8
6

2
,
9
8
2
,
2
6
8

3
,
0
1
2
,
1
3
4

3
,
0
6
4
,
4
8
0

3
,
1
1
7
,
2
9
8

3
,
1
7
2
,
8
5
5

3
,
2
2
7
,
8
7
1

3
,
3
0
9
,
5
4
1

3
,
3
9
4
,
6
0
6

3
,
4
5
9
,
2
8
5
ir
m
.
.

1
,
4
7
2
,
4
7
2

1
,
5
0
9
;
7
8
3

1
,
5
1
2
,
2
0
8

1
.
4
6
6
,
7
1
8

1
,
4
6
6
,
4
5
5

1
4
6
2
,
8
9
0

1
,
4
6
3
,
0
6
4

1
,
4
6
6
.
0
3
6

1
,
4
5
9
,
2
3
9

1
,
4
5
8
,
9
3
9

1
4
5
8
8
3
9

1
,
4
6
1
,
5
3
6

'
,
4
5
4
,
0
3
9

1
,
4
5
3
,
1
3
9

1
,
4
4
3
,
1
3
9

1
4
4
5
,
0
3
6

1
,
4
3
2
,
3
3
9

1
,
4
2
1
,
2
3
9

1
,
4
1
1
,
2
3
9

1
,
4
0
6
,
5
3
8
Fir
m

S
a
l
e
s

1
4
,
9
9
0
,
8
0
9

1
5
,
2
5
6
,
8
3
0

1
5
,
4
8
1
,
1
6
3

1
5
,
5
9
3
,
5
3
9

1
5
,
7
5
5
,
1
0
3

1
5
,
8
6
3
,
2
8
0

1
6
,
0
0
1
,
4
4
7

1
6
,
2
4
4
,
5
4
6

1
6
,
3
4
9
,
7
8
9

1
6
,
4
7
4
,
6
0
7

1
6
,
7
0
6
,
3
6
7

1
6
,
9
7
5
,
5
9
8

1
7
,
2
3
3
,
8
6
6

1
7
,
5
0
7
,
0
1
8

1
7
,
7
7
2
,
2
3
0

1
8
,
0
5
7
,
1
5
7

1
8
,
3
3
0
,
1
4
3

1
8
,
6
4
4
,
2
6
4

1
8
,
9
5
8
,
5
4
2

1
9
,
2
4
6
,
9
4
7
i
S~
t
e
m

S
a
l
e
s

1
4
,
9
9
0
,
8
0
9

1
5
,
2
5
6
,
8
3
0

1
5
,
4
8
1
,
1
6
3

1
5
,
5
9
3
,
5
3
9

1
5
,
7
5
5
,
1
0
3

1
5
8
6
3
,
2
8
0

1
6
,
0
0
1
,
4
4
7

1
6
,
2
4
4
,
5
4
6

1
6
,
3
4
9
,
7
8
9

1
6
,
4
7
4
,
6
0
7

1
6
,
7
0
6
3
6
7

1
6
,
9
7
5
,
5
9
8

1
7
,
2
3
3
,
8
6
6

1
7
,
5
0
7
,
0
1
8

1
7
,
7
7
2
,
2
3
0

1
8
,
0
5
7
1
5
7

1
8
,
3
3
0
,
1
4
3

1
8
,
6
4
4
,
2
8
4

1
8
,
9
5
8
,
5
4
2

1
9
,
2
4
6
,
9
4
7
Fl
i
i
i

O
f
-
S
v
s
t
e
m

S
e
l
e
s

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0
To
t
a
l

S
a
l
e
s

1
4
,
9
9
0
,
8
0
9

1
5
,
2
5
6
,
6
3
0

1
5
,
4
8
1
,
1
6
3
1
5
,
5
9
3
,
5
3
9

1
5
,
7
5
5
,
1
0
3

1
5
,
8
6
3
,
2
8
0

1
6
,
0
0
1
,
4
4
7

1
6
,
2
4
4
,
5
4
6

1
6
,
3
4
9
,
7
8
9

1
6
,
4
7
4
,
6
0
7

1
6
,
7
0
6
,
3
6
7

1
6
,
9
7
5
,
5
9
8

1
7
,
2
3
3
,
8
6
6

1
7
,
5
0
7
,
0
1
8

1
7
,
7
7
2
,
2
3
0

1
8
,
0
5
7
,
1
5

1
8
,
3
3
0
,
1
4
3
1
8
,
6
4
4
,
2
8
4

1
8
,
9
5
8
,
5
4
2

1
9
,
2
4
6
,
9
4
7
Ta
b
l
e

C
-
I
3
!
P
C

A
v
e
r
g
e

L
o
a
d

F
o
r
e

2
0
0
9
-
2
0
2
8

(
M
ii
.
.
.
.
"
r
20
;2
0
1
1
1
20
n
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
-
20
1
$
.
20
1
6
20
1
7
20
1
1
20
1
9
20
2
0
20
2
1
20
2
2
20
2
3
20
2
4
20
20
2
0
20
2
7
20
2
8
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
L
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
61
5
62
5
63
5
64
1
64
7
65
1
65
6
66
7
67
2
67
7
68
,
70
0
71
2
72
4
73
74
9
76
2
77
5
78
9
80
1
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
46
6
47
6
48
5
49
3
50
0
50
6
51
2
52
2
52
7
53
1
54
2
55
3
56
5
57
8
59
0
60
61
7
63
1
64
4
65
lr
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
3
16
3
18
2
18
1
18
2
18
1
18
1
18
1
18
1
18
1
18
1
18
1
18
2
18
2
18
3
18
2
18
3
18
4
18
4
16
4
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
L
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
1
28
8
29
3
29
7
30
3
30
7
31
2
31
7
32
1
32
7
33
2
33
8
34
4
35
0
35
6
36
2
36
9
37
9
38
8
39
8
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l

F
i
r
m
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
8
17
2
17
3
16
7
16
7
16
7
16
7
16
7
16
7
16
7
16
7
16
6
16
6
16
6
16
5
16
5
16
4
16
2
16
1
16
1
lo
s
s
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
7
17
0
17
2
17
4
17
6
17
8
17
9
18
2
18
3
18
5
18
8
19
0
19
4
19
7
20
0
20
3
20
6
21
0
21
4
21
7
Fi
r
m

L
o
a
d
1,8
8
0
1,9
1
3
19
4
1
1,
9
5
4
1,9
7
6
19
8
9
2,0
0
8
2,
0
3
6
2.
0
5
1
20
6
7
20
9
6
21
2
9
2,1
6
3
2,
1
9
7
22
3
1
22
6
5
2,3
0
1
2,
3
4
1
2,3
8
0
24
1
7
L.
.
h
I
L
o
a
d
.
.
.
.
1.7
1
0
1,7
4
0
1,7
6
6
1.
7
7
7
1,7
9
7
18
1
0
1,
8
2
6
1,8
5
2
1,8
6
1,
8
8
0
1,
9
0
7
19
3
6
19
6
7
1,
9
9
9
2,0
2
9
20
8
0
2.
0
9
3
2,
1
2
9
2,1
6
5
2,
1
9
7
He
a
\
t

l
o
a
d

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2,
0
1
3
20
4
8
2,0
7
8
2.0
9
3
2,
1
1
6
21
3
0
2,1
5
0
2,
1
8
0
2.
1
9
6
22
1
4
2.
2
4
5
2,2
7
9
2.
3
'
5
2,
3
5
3
23
8
9
2,4
2
5
2,4
6
4
2,
5
0
7
2.5
4
8
2,
5
8
6
Su
s
t
e
m

L
o
a
d
1.
8
8
0
1,9
1
3
1,9
4
1
1,
9
5
4
1,9
7
6
1,9
8
9
2,0
0
8
2.0
3
6
2.
0
5
1
2,0
6
7
2,
0
9
6
2.
1
2
9
2.1
6
3
2,
1
9
7
2.
2
3
1
2,2
6
5
2.3
0
1
2.
3
4
1
2,3
8
0
2.
4
1
6
Fir
m

O
f
f
-
S
"
"
l
e
m

L
o
a
d
.
.
.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
To
t
a
l

L
o
a
d
1,
8
8
0
1.9
1
3
1.9
4
1
1,
9
5
4
1,
9
7
1,
2,0
0
6
2,
0
3
6
2,
0
5
1
2.
0
~
1
2,
0
'
"
2.
1
2
9
2.1
6
3
2,
1
9
7
2.
2
3
1
2.2
6
2,3
0
1
2,
3
4
1
2,3
8
0
2,
4
1
6
(.1

Ne
K
O
Ð
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e
"
C-
3
6
.l::
.s
~
~
ü
i
"'
~::a.~..wCo:E..c(¡:zwc
ëñw0:
00 M ~ ø M m m w ~ M ~ ØN ~W 0 ~ m~
:tj-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~.(.i!p.Ii ~~OM~ ~ ~ VW OVMN~OØ ~øØW
~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M g re
¡~---- - - -- -----------o M ~ ø ~ æ 0 øm ø M m ~NØV 0 ~ V 0i,,~; v M N ~ 0 æ m ø ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ V V M M MHSs lJLOlOlOLOvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv'19
N M LO Næ ø M ~v M mo LOO ioa LO _ w_V M N - m ø ~ w lO V M M NN ~ _ 0 0 m m~ ~ ~ ~ m m m mw m mm mmmm mø LO LO
::1 lI
~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~g; ~re ~~~o ~ ~ ~ ~m m m m m m ø øoo ø woo wøøw ~ ~ ~ ~
LO m LO v ~ ø LO LO M N 0 _ N M io LO m m _ _m ~ m v N m ~ mv N - omø ~ m LO v V M~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
~~
.!
rd
~
J
.ã::
1
.g
~....o
~
i
:'il. l
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ re~~~ ~m ~m ~øwøøø~~ ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~~mmmm
.n..,: ~ ~ m ~ 6 ~ æ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ll v..........MMMMMMMMM
jti':'! g~m~~~~~;~re~~~~~~~~~
.,Il "'....................................'"
i
8~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~re ~~~~~~ ~ ~~
.,1 ':$ "'.................................... '"
.I ó
'"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~gg~ ~
g¡
ø w m _ N V moo _ _ v ~o M LOmM w ø~ § m ~ 8 ~ ~~ ~ m ~ ~~~~~~ ~~
W N _ ø v w v WV N~ 0 ~MO~ N~ ~ ~~ ~ M m ~ N m ~~ ~ m ~ ~~~ N ~ 0 ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~
~~M~N~_N~m~~Mm~mø~~~ØN~~ Nmw~NO~~M~mNN~~OO ø~~~~~~~~w~~~ MMMMMM NNNNNNNNNNN
~Ro ~ N ~ m m ø ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ N ~ mLii.. 0 M ~ U) co ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 M ~ m M ~ ~ill e (Øe('~OmCO~~~lOeeMN
:1 ~ mmmmmcocococococococococo
Li~ 0 we M lO ~ 0 ~m (Ø ~ ~ ~ ~m Ne uiø ~
o~wm~MlOWCONNlOØ~ ~o ~o. M~OCO~lOMNomco~ww~ee~NN~ ~ ~ m m m m m m co co co co co co co co co co co
N ~ ~ co m M U) U) co ~ ~N_ 0 _~ ~ N W
1llr~~I:lO M U) ~ co 0 ~ M U) ~ m N lO co 0 M ~ 0 N
~ M ~ m ~ ~ ~ M ~ 0 mmco~ ~w ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ æ m m m æ æ mcoco coco co co co co co
g ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~: ~: = ~N~~~~ ~~ ~~.. oocococooooooocccccc~ NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
~-
~ ¡¡
" II
g, 4?
¡¡ ,.
~ ~
~ 5
~ c:
~ ~Ell"e t' ~
~ -~~
~ c3.-g
:.~~"0 "O:,
~ ff ~
~ ~ ~
.! CD ..il ~ ~:; õi :;
~ l ~:g u 0
ta i! e0.:: 0
8 ig 8of ~ (Øu 0 0.. 0 011 N N
8~ mre~ ~ ~ ~ m~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~t ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~~~ ~ ~m;~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ æ æ æ æ æ æ æ co co co co co co co co
re~ ~ ~ ~~ w ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~~ m ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ w ~ w (Ø W (Ø (Ø U) U) W W W lO lO ~ lO lO
~~ ~ Ñ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~;~ ~re~ ~ ~ ~a ~~~ ~~~ U) W W ww W (Ø wWW(ØWW W ~
'"-lOCONWM~~COlOMOCOlOM_COW 0~~~~~~~M~~~~rererererere ~
~
~ë~ ..~ ~~~ e~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ zll~~~~~~~~(Øu)u)www(Øw(Øww æ" '.~~
~ E., 0~~~~~~~~Ñ~~~~æ~~~m~ ~ücoCO~~~~~~~~~~(Ø(Ø(ØW(Ø(ØW ~;
E il E
e tt CD~mt ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~" g~~ Cl "
:. t.~
~. g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~. ~~~~~'~t~~~ii~~~~~~;; ~ § l%~ l ~ ~.æ ! ~
~~~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i ~.I~~w~mff~~~~~~m~~~~~gg~ ~ l ~.lDg 0 ." ig. w::ø: ~ "5 0~:M~~~~~~~ag~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ i
ë,... S5 M M N 0 æ (0 co ~ CD ~ V V V M M N N.... 0.::..Q
~...:! (Ø W (Ø W W to to to to lO lO to to to to to to lO 10 10 8 ~. 8~.:::= i ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
~ 0 _ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 _ N ~. ~ ~ ~~~g~ õõõ ~ õ ~ õ 0 õ S SSS S S S S s
! NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
r-("ü
=
~::
~
I~Æ
ãi~
~
c:
~Q)cimi:
:¥
Q)
:g ,en-0i:
ì¥~
""i:
~8
~D.
,g~
&
I~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s

Ye
a
r
20
0
9
11
4
7
6
10
9
2
0
--
H
i
9
2
--
2
16
6
4
83
2

-
--
~
4
40
0
40
0
35
0
0
84
1
11
8
9
98
9
57
1
16
a
0
20
1
0
11
3
3
9
10
7
8
9
10
7
8
9
25
2
1
16
4
4
82
2
37
0
39
5
39
5
34
5
8
83
1
11
7
4
97
7
56
4
47
0
10
5
3
20
1
1
11
2
1
4
10
6
7
0
10
6
7
0
24
9
4
16
2
6
81
3
36
6
39
1
39
1
34
2
0
82
2
11
6
2
96
6
55
8
46
4
10
4
2
16
6
1
20
1
2
11
0
2
3
10
4
8
9
10
4
8
9
24
5
1
15
9
8
79
9
36
0
38
4
38
4
33
6
2
80
8
11
4
2
95
0
54
8
45
7
10
2
4
16
3
3
20
1
3
10
8
2
5
10
3
0
0
10
3
0
0
24
0
7
15
7
0
78
5
35
3
37
7
37
7
33
0
1
79
4
11
2
1
93
3
53
9
44
8
10
0
5
16
0
3
20
1
4
10
6
1
9
10
1
0
4
10
1
0
4
23
6
1
15
4
0
77
0
34
6
37
0
37
0
32
3
9
77
9
11
0
0
91
5
52
8
44
0
98
6
15
7
3
20
1
5
10
4
1
7
99
1
2
99
1
2
23
1
7
15
1
0
75
5
34
0
36
3
36
3
31
7
7
76
4
10
7
9
89
8
51
8
43
1
96
8
15
4
3
20
1
6
10
3
2
4
98
2
3
98
2
3
22
9
6
14
9
7
74
8
33
7
36
0
36
0
31
4
8
75
7
10
6
9
89
0
51
4
42
8
95
9
15
2
9
20
1
7
10
1
2
8
96
3
7
96
3
7
22
5
2
14
6
8
73
4
33
0
35
3
35
3
30
8
9
74
2
10
4
9
87
3
50
4
41
9
94
1
15
0
0
20
1
8
99
4
5
94
6
3
94
6
3
22
1
2
14
4
2
72
1
32
4
34
7
34
7
30
3
3
72
9
10
3
0
85
7
49
5
41
2
92
4
14
7
3
20
1
9
98
3
6
93
5
9
93
5
9
21
8
7
14
2
6
71
3
32
1
34
3
34
3
30
0
0
72
1
10
1
9
64
8
48
9
40
7
91
4
14
5
7
20
2
0
97
5
7
92
8
4
92
8
4
21
7
0
14
1
5
70
7
31
8
34
0
34
0
29
7
6
71
5
10
1
1
84
1
48
5
40
4
90
6
14
4
5
20
2
1
96
7
9
92
1
0
92
1
0
21
5
2
14
0
3
70
2
31
6
33
7
33
7
29
5
2
71
0
10
0
3
83
4
48
2
40
1
89
9
14
3
4
20
2
2
96
2
91
3
6
91
3
6
21
3
5
13
9
2
69
6
31
3
33
5
33
5
29
2
8
70
4
99
5
82
7
47
8
39
8
89
2
14
2
2
20
2
3
95
2
5
90
6
3
90
8
3
21
1
8
13
8
1
69
1
31
1
33
2
33
2
29
0
5
69
8
98
7
82
1
47
4
39
4
88
5
14
1
1
20
2
4
94
3
9
89
8
2
89
8
2
20
9
9
13
6
9
68
30
8
32
9
32
9
28
7
9
69
2
97
8
81
3
47
0
39
1
87
7
13
9
8
20
2
5
93
6
4
89
1
0
89
1
0
20
8
2
13
5
8
67
9
30
5
32
6
32
6
28
5
6
68
6
97
0
80
7
46
38
87
0
13
8
7
20
2
6
92
9
8
88
4
7
88
4
7
20
6
8
13
4
8
67
4
30
3
32
4
32
4
28
3
6
68
2
96
3
80
1
46
3
38
86
4
13
7
7
20
2
7
92
2
4
87
7
7
87
7
7
20
5
1
13
3
7
66
9
30
1
32
1
32
1
28
1
3
67
6
95
5
79
5
45
9
38
2
85
7
13
6
6
20
2
8
91
4
1
86
9
8
86
9
8
20
3
3
13
2
5
66
3
29
8
31
9
31
9
27
8
8
67
0
94
7
78
8
45
5
37
9
84
9
13
5
4
i
P
a
c
i
f
l
c
o
r
p

2
0
0
6

D
S
M

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

T
r
e
n
d
s

f
r
o
m

C
e
n
s
u
s

H
o
u
s
i
n
g

S
u
r
v
e
y
s

1
9
9
7
-
2
0
0
5
2 2
0
0
7

D
S
M

T
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

P
o
t
e
n
t
l
e
l

S
t
u
d
y

f
o
r

G
e
o
r
g
i
a

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

N
e
x
a
n
t
3
2
0
0
6

C
o
l
o
r
a
d
o

D
S
M

M
a
r
k
e
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

K
e
m
a
t,
1
N
e
K
a
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
C-
3
8
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s

Ye
a
r
Ta
b
l
e

c
i
s

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

E
n
d
-
U
s
e

S
a
t
u
a
t
i
o
n
s
"¡
¡
i
l
Pll
r
i
p
12
.
1
%
IT121212121212121'
12
.
4
%1'1"1"1"
12
.
6
%
1212
12
.
6
%
12
.
7
%
46
.
6
%4f
4ã4a
šõš1
52
.
7
%
53M5
55
.
3
%
56
.
2
%
575'5ã
59
.
2
%
596õ
61
.
2
%
61
.
8
%
73
.
3
%
m%75
76
.
7
%
77
.
9
%
79ãõã1ã2ã3ã3
83
.
0
%
ã3
83
.
0
%
ã3ã3ã3
83
.
0
%
83
.
0
%
14
.
7
%
14
.
6
%1'
14
14
.
2
%
1413
13
.
8
%
13
.
7
%
13
13
.
4
%
13
.
3
%
13
.
2
%
13
12
.
9
%
12
.
8
%
12121'12
el
è
é
t
t
i
ø

e
l
e
é
t
l
é
Fl
"
f
f
å
c
è
3

R
o
o
r
r
1
20
0
9

1
1
.
4
%

3
.
5
%
20
1
0

1
1
.
5
%

3
.
5
%
20
1
1

1
1
.
6
%

3
.
5
%
20
1
2

1
1
.
7
%

3
.
5
%
20
1
3

1
1
.
8
%

3
.
5
%
20
1
4

1
1
.
9
%

3
.
5
%
20
1
5

1
1
.
9
%

3
.
5
%
20
1
6

1
2
.
0
%

3
.
5
%
20
1
7

1
2
.
1
%

3
.
5
%
20
1
8

1
2
.
2
%

3
.
5
%
20
1
9

1
2
.
3
%

3
.
5
%
20
2
0

1
2
.
4
%

3
.
5
%
20
2
1

1
2
.
5
%

3
.
5
%
20
2
2

1
2
.
6
%

3
.
5
%
20
2
3

1
2
.
7
%

3
.
5
%
20
2
4

1
2
.
8
%

3
.
5
%
20
2
5

1
2
.
8
%

3
.
5
%
20
2
6

1
2
.
9
%

3
.
5
%
20
2
7

1
3
.
0
%

3
.
5
%
20
2
8

1
3
.
1
%

3
.
5
%
1
P
a
c
i
f
C
o
r
p

2
0
0
6

D
S
M

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y
2 A
m
e
r
i
c
a
n

H
o
u
s
i
n
g

S
u
r
v
e
y

2
0
0
3
,

U
.
S
.

C
e
n
s
u
s

B
u
r
e
a
u
,

H
o
u
s
i
n
g

&

H
o
u
s
e
h
o
l
d

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

S
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
s

D
i
v
i
s
i
o
n

(
h
t
t
:
/
/
w
w
.
e
n
e
r
g
y
s
t
a
r
.
g
o
v
/
i
a
/
p
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
/
d
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
s
/
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
s
f
D
e
s
M
a
r
a
i
s
_
O
W
_
C
a
m
p
a
i
g
n
.

pd
f
)
3
C
a
l
~
o
n
i
a

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
a
t
e
w
i
d
e

A
p
p
l
i
a
n
c
e

S
a
t
u
r
a
t
i
o
n

S
u
r
v
e
y

(
h
U
p
:
/
I
w
w
w
.
e
n
e
r
g
y
.
c
a
.
g
o
v
/
r
e
p
o
r
t
s
/
4
0
0
-
0
4
-
0
0
9
/
2
0
0
4
-
0
8
-
1
7

_

4
0
o
-
0
4
-
o
0
9
V
O
L
2
B
.
P
D
F
)
42
0
0
7

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
t
a
r

R
e
f
r
i
g
e
r
a
t
o
r
s

(
h
U
p
:
/
I
w
w
.
e
n
e
r
g
y
s
t
a
r
.
g
o
v
/
i
a
/
p
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
/
m
a
n
u
C
r
e
s
/
d
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
s
/
2
0
0
7
R
e
f
r
i
g
e
r
a
t
o
r
y
r
g
.
p
d
f
)
All

t
r
e
n
d
s

f
r
o
m

C
e
n
s
u
s

H
o
u
s
i
n
g

S
u
r
v
e
y
s

1
9
9
7

-
2
0
0
5
12
.
1
%
1212121212
12
.
3
%
12
.
3
%1'
12
.
4
%
12
.
4
%
12
.
5
%
1"1"
12
.
6
%
121212
12
.
7
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%i:
2.
6
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%2:2:
2.
5
%
2.
5
%2.
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2Æ2.2.
24
.
8
%
24
.
6
%
24
24
.
2
%
2423
23
.
6
%
23
.
4
%
23
23
.
0
%
22
.
8
%
22
.
6
%
222222212121
i1
El
e
c
t
i
c

E
1
C
t
t
l
Fu
.
.
n
å
c
e

1

R
b
ô
m
,
,
~
20
0
9

2
9
.
9
%

1
.
4
%

1
0
.
1
%

5
4
.
1
%

1
0
.
1
%

5
.
4
%

2
1
.
6
%
20
1
0

3
0
.
1
%

1
.
5
%

1
0
.
1
%

5
5
.
3
%

1
0
.
1
%

5
.
3
%

2
1
.
4
%
20
1
1

3
0
.
3
%

1
.
5
%

1
0
.
1
%

5
6
.
4
%

1
0
.
1
%

5
.
2
%

2
1
.
2
%
20
1
2

3
0
.
5
%

1
.
6
%

1
0
.
2
%

5
7
.
6
%

1
0
.
2
%

5
.
1
%

2
1
.
0
%
20
1
3

3
0
.
7
%

1
.
6
%

1
0
.
2
%

5
8
.
7
%

1
0
.
2
%

5
.
0
%

2
0
.
8
%
20
1
4

3
0
.
9
%

1
.
7
%

1
0
.
2
%

5
9
.
9
%

1
0
.
2
%

4
.
9
%

2
0
.
6
%

4
7
.
20
1
5

3
1
.
1
%

1
.
7
%

1
0
.
2
%

6
1
.
1
%

1
0
.
2
%

4
.
8
%

2
0
.
4
%

4
8
.
2
%
20
1
6

3
1
.
3
%

1
.
8
%

1
0
.
2
%

6
2
.
2
%

1
0
.
2
%

4
.
7
%

2
0
.
2
%

4
9
.
1
%
20
1
7

3
1
.
5
%

1
.
8
%

1
0
.
3
%

6
3
.
4
%

1
0
.
3
%

4
.
6
%

2
0
.
0
%

5
0
.
0
%
20
1
8

3
1
.
7
%

1
.
9
%

1
0
.
3
%

6
4
.
5
%

1
0
.
3
%

4
.
5
%

1
9
.
8
%

5
1
.
0
%
20
1
9

3
1
.
9
%

1
.
9
%

1
0
.
3
%

6
5
.
7
%

1
0
.
3
%

4
.
4
%

1
9
.
6
%

5
1
.
9
%
20
2
0

3
2
.
1
%

2
.
0
%

1
0
.
3
%

6
6
.
9
%

1
0
.
3
%

4
.
3
%

1
9
.
4
%

5
2
.
8
%
20
2
1

3
2
.
3
%

2
.
0
%

1
0
.
3
%

6
8
.
0
%

1
0
.
3
%

4
.
2
%

1
9
.
2
%

5
3
.
8
%
20
2
2

3
2
.
5
%

2
.
1
%

1
0
.
4
%

6
9
.
2
%

1
0
.
4
%

4
.
1
%

1
9
.
0
%

5
4
.
7
%
20
2
3

3
2
.
7
%

2
.
1
%

1
0
.
4
%

7
0
.
3
%

1
0
.
4
%

4
.
0
%

1
8
.
8
%

5
5
.
6
%
20
2
4

3
2
.
9
%

2
.
2
%

1
0
.
4
%

7
1
.
5
%

1
0
.
4
%

3
.
9
%

1
8
.
6
%

5
6
.
6
%
20
2
5

3
3
.
1
%

2
.
2
%

1
0
.
4
%

7
2
7
%

1
0
.
4
%

3
.
8
%

1
8
.
4
%

5
7
.
5
%
20
2
6

3
3
,
3
%

2
.
3
%

1
0
.
4
%

7
3
.
8
%

1
0
.
4
%

3
.
7
%

1
8
.
2
%

5
8
.
4
%
20
2
7

3
3
.
5
%

2
.
3
%

1
0
.
5
%

7
5
.
0
%

1
0
.
5
%

3
.
6
%

1
8
.
0
%

5
9
.
3
%
20
2
8

3
3
.
7
%

2
.
4
%

1
0
.
5
%

7
6
.
1
%

1
0
.
5
%

3
.
5
%

1
7
.
8
%

6
0
.
3
%
1 2
0
0
9

f
i
g
u
r
e
s

f
r
o
m

P
a
c
i
f
i
c
o
r
p

2
0
0
6

D
S
M

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

T
r
e
n
d
s

f
r
o
m

G
e
n
s
u
s

H
o
u
s
i
n
g

S
u
r
v
e
y
s

1
9
9
7
-
2
0
0
5
2
2
0
0
9

f
i
g
u
r
e
s

a
n
d

t
r
e
n
d
s

f
r
o
m

R
e
d
d
i
n
g

D
S
M

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y
Ye
a
r
44444454546
46
.
8
%4f4f
4ã
48
.
7
%
4949
50
.
1
%
šõ
'5š1525253
6.
0
%5.
5.
8
%
5.
6
%5:
5A5.5:
š.
4.9
%4.4:4.
¡¡434:4.
3.9
%3:
3.6
%
24
.
0
%
24
.
1
%
24
.
2
%
24
24
.
4
%
24
24
.
6
%
24
.
7
%
242425
25
.
1
%
25
.
2
%
25
.
3
%
25
.
4
%
252š25
25
.
8
%
25
.
9
%
10
.
7
%1'
10
.
9
%"iT1
'1 11
.
3
%
1TIT1111111T12
IT12121'1"
12
.
6
%
so
.
'5š25iMi
5s
56
.
3
%
š'šã59
59
.
9
%
ii
61
.
7
%
ã263
'e 65
.
4
%
66676ã
70
.
6
%
71
.
2
%
'7'7 72
.
9
%
737474
75
.
2
%
757eñ:
77
.
6
%
797ã7979ãõ
81
.
0
%
81
.
6
%
99
.
6
%
9999
99
.
6
%
9999999999
99
.
6
%
99999999
99
.
6
%
9999
99
.
6
%
99
.
6
%
10
'
1õ
.
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
1õ1õ1õ
10
0
.
0
%
1õ
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
1õ1õ1õ1õ1õ
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
1õ
10
0
.
0
%
1õ1õ1õ1õ
10
0
.
0
%
1õ
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
1õ1õ
10
0
.
0
%
1õ1õ1õ1õ
10
0
.
0
%
1õ
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
1õ1õ1õ1õ
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
1õ1õ1õ1õ
'i1õ1õ
10
0
.
0
%
1õ
10
0
.
0
%
I,
1
N
e
m
n
r
C-
3
9
99
.
6
%
99
.
6
%
99
.
6
%
999999999999
99
.
6
%
99
99
.
6
%
99
99
.
6
%
99
99
.
6
%
999999
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e
"
99
.
6
%
99
99
.
6
%
999999999999
99
.
6
%
99
99
.
6
%
99999999
99
.
6
%
99
99
.
6
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
1õ1õ
10
0
.
0
%
1õ1õ
10
0
.
0
%
1õ1õ1õ1õ
10
0
.
0
%
1õ
10
0
.
0
%
Ap
p
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s

Ye
a
r
20
0
9
32
.
3
%
3.5
%
13
.
~
5
'
1
-
-
4
5
.
4
%

f
"
1
3
.
5
%
2.
6
%
25
.
0
%
44
.
9
%
-8
9
.
9
%
~
-
-7
2
:
6
%
~~

~
-
-
~
-

9
9
.
6
%
13
.
0
%
56
.
3
%
19
.
8
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
0
32
.
6
%
3.5
%
13
.
8
%
46
.
8
%
13
.
8
%
2.
6
%
24
.
8
%
45
.
0
%
90
.
1
%
72
.
9
%
99
.
6
%
12
.
9
%
56
.
4
%
80
.
4
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
1
32
.
9
%
3.5
%
14
.
0
%
48
.
3
%
14
.
0
%
2.
6
%
24
.
6
%
45
.
1
%
90
.
3
%
73
.
2
%
99
.
6
%
12
.
8
%
56
.
5
%
81
.
0
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
2
33
.
2
%
3.5
%
14
.
3
%
49
.
7
%
14
.
3
%
2.
6
%
24
.
4
%
45
.
2
%
90
.
5
%
73
.
6
%
99
.
6
%
12
.
6
%
56
.
6
%
81
.
6
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
3
33
.
5
%
3.5
%
14
.
5
%
51
.
2
%
14
.
5
%
2.
6
%
24
.
2
%
45
.
3
%
90
.
7
%
73
.
9
%
99
.
6
%
12
.
5
%
56
.
7
%
82
.
2
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
4
33
.
8
%
3.5
%
14
.
8
%
52
.
6
%
14
.
8
%
2.
6
%
24
.
0
%
45
.
4
%
90
.
9
%
74
.
2
%
99
.
6
%
12
.
4
%
56
.
8
%
82
.
8
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
5
34
.
1
%
3.5
%
15
.
0
%
54
.
0
%
15
.
0
%
2.
6
%
23
.
8
%
45
.
5
%
91
.
1
%
74
.
5
%
99
.
6
%
12
.
3
%
56
.
9
%
83
.
4
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
6
34
.
4
%
3.5
%
15
.
3
%
55
.
5
%
15
.
3
%
2.
6
%
23
.
6
%
45
.
6
%
91
.
3
%
74
.
8
%
99
.
6
%
12
.
1
%
57
.
0
%
84
.
0
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
7
34
.
7
%
3.5
%
15
.
5
%
56
.
9
%
15
.
5
%
2.
6
%
23
.
4
%
45
.
7
%
91
.
5
%
75
.
2
%
99
.
6
%
12
.
0
%
57
.
1
%
84
.
6
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
6
35
.
0
%
3.5
%
15
.
8
%
58
.
4
%
15
.
8
%
2.
6
%
23
.
2
%
45
.
8
%
91
.
7
%
75
.
5
%
99
.
6
%
11
.
9
%
57
.
2
%
85
.
2
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
1
9
35
.
3
%
3.
5
%
16
.
0
%
59
.
8
%
16
.
0
%
2.6
%
23
.
0
%
45
.
9
%
91
.
9
%
75
.
8
%
99
.
6
%
11
.
8
%
57
.
3
%
85
.
8
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
2
0
35
.
6
%
3.
5
%
16
.
3
%
61
.
2
%
16
.
3
%
2.6
%
22
.
8
%
46
.
0
%
92
.
1
%
76
.
1
%
99
.
6
%
11
.
6
%
57
.
4
%
86
.
4
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
2
1
35
.
9
%
3.
5
%
16
.
5
%
62
.
7
%
16
.
5
%
2.6
%
22
.
6
%
46
.
1
%
92
.
3
%
76
.
4
%
99
.
6
%
11
.
5
%
57
.
5
%
87
.
0
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
2
2
36
.
2
%
3.
5
%
16
.
8
%
64
.
1
%
16
.
8
%
2.6
%
22
.
4
%
46
.
2
%
92
.
5
%
76
.
8
%
99
.
6
%
11
.
4
%
57
.
6
%
87
.
6
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
2
3
36
.
5
%
3.
5
%
17
.
0
%
65
.
6
%
17
.
0
%
2.6
%
22
.
2
%
46
.
3
%
92
.
7
%
77
.
1
%
99
.
6
%
11
.
3
%
57
.
7
%
88
.
2
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
2
4
36
.
8
%
3.
5
%
17
.
3
%
67
.
0
%
17
.
3
%
2.6
%
22
.
0
%
46
.
4
%
92
.
9
%
77
.
4
%
99
.
6
%
11
.
1
%
57
.
8
%
88
.
8
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
2
5
37
.
1
%
3.
5
%
17
.
5
%
68
.
4
%
17
.
5
%
2.6
%
21
.
8
%
46
.
5
%
93
.
1
%
77
.
7
%
99
.
6
%
11
.
0
%
57
.
9
%
89
.
4
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
2
6
37
.
4
%
3.
5
%
17
.
8
%
69
.
9
%
17
.
8
%
2.6
%
21
.
6
%
46
.
6
%
93
.
3
%
78
.
0
%
99
.
6
%
10
.
9
%
58
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
2
7
37
.
7
%
3.
5
%
18
.
0
%
71
.
3
%
18
.
0
%
2.6
%
21
.
4
%
46
.
7
%
93
.
5
%
78
.
4
%
99
.
6
%
10
.
8
%
58
.
1
%
90
.
6
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
20
2
8
38
.
0
%
3.
5
%
18
.
3
%
72
.
8
%
18
.
3
%
2.6
%
21
.
2
%
46
.
8
%
93
.
7
%
78
.
7
%
99
.
6
%
10
.
6
%
58
.
2
%
91
.
2
%
93
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
1 P
a
c
i
f
C
o
r

2
0
0
6

D
S
M

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y
2
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
n

H
o
u
s
i
n
g

S
u
r
v
e
y

2
0
0
3
,

u
.
S
.

C
e
n
s
u
s

B
u
r
a
u
,

H
o
u
s
i
n
g

&

H
o
u
s
e
h
o
l
d

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

S
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
s

D
i
v
s
i
o
n

(
h
t
l
p
J
/
w
w
.
e
n
e
r
g
r
.
g
o
v
/
i
a
i
p
a
n
e
r
s
/
d
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
s
/
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
s
/
D
e
s
M
a
r
a
i
s
_
D
W
_
C
a
m
p
a
i
g
n
.
p
d
f
)
3
C
a
l
i
f
o
n
i
a

R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
a
t
e
w
i
d
e

A
p
p
l
i
a
n
c
e

S
a
t
u
r
a
t
i
o
n

S
u
r
v
e
y

(
h
t
l
p
:
/
l
w
.
e
n
e
r
g
y
.
c
a
.
g
o
v
/
r
e
p
o
r
t
s
J
4
0
0
-
0
4
-
0
0
9
/
2
0
0
4
-
0
8
-
1
7

_

4
0
Q
.
-
Q
V
O
L
2
B
.
P
D
F
)
42
0
0
7

E
n
e
r
g
y

S
t
e
r

R
e
f
r
g
e
r
a
t
o
r
s

(
h
t
l
p
:
l
l
w
.
e
n
e
r
g
y
s
t
a
r
.
g
o
v
n
a
/
p
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
/
m
a
n
u
C
r
e
s
/
d
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
s
/
2
0
0
7
R
e
f
r
i
g
e
r
a
t
o
,
-
i
r
g
.
p
d
)
t-
1
N
e
x
ø
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
C-
4
0
!2::3.i
~
~
=i:Q).g E::II Õ
j ;:
I;:"0ø..a
j U)
-¡
:æ
~1 a.
c:Q)
.t EQ)0)coIIi:U)~a
o~o
§M Q):gU)Æ "0i:co1E~~;:i:~coc.
§\0 (...
~Û..0a.~0¡.J:
~co:E
..i i!§..u
l l
f
I
J
z ..!
&::p l(.~~~~I.~
-gQ)
'"~~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s
*
.~
Me
a
s
u
r
e
20
0
9
20
1
0
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
6
20
1
7
20
1
8
20
1
9
20
2
0
20
2
1
20
2
2
20
2
3
20
2
4
20
2
5
20
2
6
20
2
7
20
2
8
AC

t
o

E
v
a
o
o
r
a
t
l
e

C
o
o
l
e
r

u
o
a
r
a
d
e
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
AC
u
ra
d
e

t
o

S
E
E
R

1
4
1%
1%
2%
2%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
Air

S
o
u
r
c
e

H
e
a
t

P
u
m
o

u
o
a
r
a
d
e

t
o

G
e
o
t
h
e
r
m
a
l
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
Ce
i
l
n
g

F
a
n
1%
1%
2%
2%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
Dis
h
w
a
s
h
e
r
1%
2%
5%
9%
12
%
15
%
17
%
18
%
19
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
Du
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n
a

.

L
o
w

I
n
c
o
m
e
10
%
11
%
13
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
15
%
Du
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n
a

M
a
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
87
%
75
%
65
%
60
%
55
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
50
%
Du
c
t

S
e
a
l
l
n
n

S
l
n
n
l
e

F
a
m
l
l
v
1%
2%
3%
5%
8%
9%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
'0
%
Ele
c
t
r
o
n
i
c

t
h
e
r
m
o
s
t
a
t
1%
2%
3%
5%
8%
9%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
'0
%
En
e
Sta
r

C
l
o
t
h
e
s

W
a
s
h
e
r
3%
7%
17
%
30
%
35
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
En
e
r
St
a
r

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
36
%
37
%
38
%
39
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
En
e
r
Sta
r

Ho
m
e

13
%
15
%
16
%
17
%
20
%
22
%
23
%
24
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
En
e
Sta
r

H
o
m
e
.

w
/
H
e
a
t

P
u
m
p
4%
6%
13
%
17
%
20
%
22
%
23
%
24
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
En
e
r
Str

M
a
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d

H
o
m
e
38
%
39
%
41
%
43
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
45
%
En
e
St
a
r
L
l
o
h
t
62
%
62
%
62
%
62
%
60
%
50
%
40
%
30
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
En
e
r
St
a
r

R
e
f
r
l
a
e
r
a
t
a
r

w
i
t
h

t
o
o

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
3%
7%
17
%
30
%
35
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
40
%
Fr
e
e
z
e
r

R
e
c
l
l
n
a
1%
,%
2%
2%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
Gr
a
v
i
t
v

F
i
l
m

H
e
a
t

E
x
c
h
a
n
a
e
r
1%
2%
3%
5%
8%
9%
10
%
10
%
'0
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
'0
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
10
%
He
a
t

D
U
m
D

u
n
a
r
a
d
e

8
.
5

H
S
P
F
,%
2%
3%
4%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
HP

t
o

H
P

u
D
o
r
a
d
e
1%
2%
4%
7%
10
%
15
%
20
%
24
%
27
%
27
%
27
%
27
%
27
%
27
%
27
%
27
%
27
%
27
%
27
%
27
%
In
f
U
t
r
a
t
l
n

C
o
n
t
r
l
5%
6%
7%
9%
11
%
15
%
17
%
18
%
19
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
In
f
i
l
t
r
t
i
o
n

c
o
n
t
r
l
.

L
o
w

I
n
c
o
m
e
19
%
20
%
21
%
23
%
24
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
25
%
In
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
1%
2%
4%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
In
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

-

L
o
w

I
n
c
o
m
e
24
%
25
%
28
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
Lo
w

I
n
c
o
m
e

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

P
i
D
e

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
n
1%
2%
3%
3%
4%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
PV
S

t
e
r
n

l
k
W
1%
1%
2%
2%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
Re
f
r
i
a
e
r
a
t
o
r

D
e
c
m
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
l
n
a

a
n
d

R
e
c
v
c
H
n
a
1%
2%
8%
18
%
29
%
40
%
45
%
48
%
50
%
52
%
52
%
52
%
52
%
52
%
52
%
52
%
52
%
52
%
52
%
52
%
Sh
o
w
e
r
h
e
a
d
s

a
n
d

s
i
n
k

a
e
r
a
t
o
r
s
1%
2%
4%
8%
9%
12
%
15
%
18
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
So
l
a
r

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r
1%
1%
2%
2%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
Wa
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

H
I

h

E
f
f
e
n
c
y
,%
2%
5%
9%
12
%
15
%
17
%
18
%
19
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
20
%
Wa
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

P
i
D
e

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
1%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
Wi
n
d
o
w
s

R
ø
n
l
a
e
e
e
n
t
1%
2%
4%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
Win
d
o
w
s

r
e
D
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

-

L
o
w

I
n
c
o
m
e
24
%
25
%
28
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
30
%
f.
1
N
e
x
a
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
C-
4
2
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s

:'i
:
n
r
,
)
l
f
.
t
,
~
Me
a
s
u
r
e
20
0
9
20
1
0
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
6
20
1
7
20
1
6
20
1
9
20
2
0
20
2
1
20
2
2
20
2
3
20
2
4
20
2
5
20
2
6
20
2
7
20
2
8
AC

t
o

E
v
a
n
r
a
t
i
v
e

C
o
o
l
e
r

u
n
n
r
a
d
e
11
5
18
1
38
0
53
1
69
3
71
2
74
3
77
4
80
5
83
8
87
1
90
5
93
9
97
4
1,0
1
1
1,0
4
7
1,0
8
5
1,1
2
4
1,1
6
3
1,2
0
4
AC

u
n
n
r
a
d
e

t
o

S
e
E
R

1
4
60
63
13
3
13
9
21
8
22
8
23
7
24
7
25
7
26
8
27
8
28
9
30
0
31
1
32
2
33
4
34
6
35
8
37
0
38
3
Air

S
o
u
r
c
e

H
e
a
t

P
u
r
n
o

u
D
c
r
a
d
e

t
o

G
e
o
t
h
e
r
m
a
l
9
9
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
24
24
25
26
26
27
28
28
29
Ce
i
J
n
n

F
a
n
28
4
29
1
59
5
60
8
93
4
95
4
97
5
99
6
1,0
1
8
1,
0
4
1
1,0
6
4
1,
0
8
7
1,1
1
1
1,
1
3
5
1,1
6
0
1,
1
8
6
1,2
1
2
12
3
9
1,2
6
6
1,
2
9
4
Di
s
h
w
a
s
h
e
r
22
8
47
5
1,
2
3
4
2,3
0
7
3,
1
9
3
4,0
9
4
4,
8
'
0
5,2
7
9
5,
7
7
5
62
9
9
6,
4
8
0
6,6
3
6
6,7
9
6
6,9
6
0
7,1
2
7
7,
2
9
9
7,4
7
5
7,6
5
5
7,8
3
9
8,
0
2
8
Du
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n

-

L
o
w

I
n
c
o
m
e
56
63
77
9'
94
96
99
10
2
10
4
10
7
11
0
11
3
11
6
11
9
12
2
12
6
12
9
13
3
13
6
14
0
Du
c
t

8
e
a
l
i
n
n

M
a
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
62
5
55
8
50
1
47
8
45
4
42
7
44
1
45
6
47
'
48
6
50
3
51
9
53
8
55
4
57
2
59
0
60
9
62
9
64
9
67
0
Du
c
t

S
e
a
l
i
n

S
i
n
n
l
e

F
a
m
i
l
18
38
56
96
15
8
18
3
20
9
21
5
22
0
22
6
23
2
23
9
24
5
25
2
25
8
26
5
27
3
28
0
28
7
29
5
El
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c

t
h
e
r
m
o
s
t
a
t
99
20
3
31
1
53
1
86
9
99
9
1,
1
3
5
1,1
6
0
1,
1
8
5
1,2
1
1
1,2
3
8
1,2
6
5
1,2
9
3
1,3
2
1
1,3
5
1
',
3
8
0
1,4
1
1
1,
4
4
2
1,4
7
3
1,
5
0
6
En
e
St
a
r

C
l
o
t
h
e
s

W
a
s
h
e
r
81
5
1,9
5
9
4,8
7
8
8,8
2
8
10
,
5
6
1
12
,
2
1
1
12
,
5
0
9
12
,
8
1
5
13
,
1
2
8
13
,
4
4
9
13
,
7
7
7
14
,
1
0
2
14
,
4
3
5
14
,
7
7
5
15
,
1
2
3
15
,
4
8
0
15
,
8
4
5
16
,
2
1
8
16
,
6
0
1
16
,
9
9
2
En
e
r
St
a
r

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
2,0
8
0
2,
2
0
8
2,3
2
9
2,
4
5
4
2,
5
8
5
2,
6
0
7
2,6
7
4
2,7
4
4
2,8
1
5
2,8
8
7
2,
9
6
2
3,0
3
8
3,
1
1
7
3,1
9
7
3,
2
8
0
3,3
6
4
3,
4
5
1
3,5
4
0
3,
6
3
1
3,7
2
4
En
e
r
Sta
r

Ho
m
e

27
2
32
6
35
7
38
9
47
0
50
7
54
3
58
1
62
0
63
6
65
1
66
8
66
4
70
1
71
8
73
6
75
4
77
3
79
2
81
2
En
e
St
a
r

H
o
m
e

-

w
/
H
e
a
t

P
u
m
o
32
58
12
8
17
2
20
8
22
4
24
0
25
7
27
4
28
1
28
8
29
5
30
2
30
9
31
7
32
4
33
2
34
0
34
9
35
7
En
e
r
St
a
r

M
a
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d

H
o
m
e
12
9
13
6
14
8
16
0
17
3
17
1
17
6
18
2
'8
7
'9
3
19
9
20
5
21
1
21
8
22
5
23
1
23
8
24
6
25
3
26
1
En
e
r
Sta
r
C
"
'
h
t
22
5
,
8
4
4
23
1
,
0
3
8
23
6
,
3
5
2
24
1
,
7
8
8
23
9
,
3
7
0
20
3
,
8
6
4
16
6
,
6
7
9
12
7
7
5
9
87
,
0
4
7
88
,
9
6
2
90
,
9
1
9
92
,
9
1
9
94
9
6
3
97
0
5
3
99
,
1
8
8
10
1
,
3
7
0
10
3
,
6
0
0
10
5
,
8
7
9
10
8
,
2
0
8
11
0
,
5
8
9
En
e
r
Sta
r

R
e
f
r
i
i
-
e
r
a
t
o
r

w
i
t
h

t
o
n

F
r
e
e
z
e
r
62
1
1,4
9
2
3,7
0
6
6,
6
9
0
79
8
4
9,
1
5
4
9,3
5
5
9,5
6
1
9,7
7
1
9,9
8
6
10
,
2
0
6
10
,
4
3
1
10
,
6
6
0
10
,
8
9
5
11
,
1
3
4
11
,
3
7
9
11
,
6
3
0
11
,
8
8
5
12
,
1
4
7
12
,
4
1
4
Fr
e
e
z
e
r

R
e
l
"
"
c
l
i
n
n
17
36
55
75
11
6
11
9
12
2
12
5
12
9
13
2
13
5
13
9
14
3
14
6
15
0
15
4
15
8
16
2
16
6
17
0
Gr
a
v
i
t
v

F
i
l
m

H
e
a
t

E
x
c
h
a
n
n
e
r
30
63
96
16
4
26
8
29
5
33
5
34
3
35
0
35
8
36
5
37
3
38
1
39
0
39
8
40
7
41
6
42
5
43
4
44
3
He
a
t

n
u
m
n

u
n
n
r
a
d
e

8
.
5

H
S
P
F
95
20
0
31
4
43
9
57
4
58
9
61
5
64
0
66
6
69
3
72
0
74
8
77
6
80
5
83
5
86
5
89
6
92
7
95
9
99
2
HP

t
o

H
P

u
n
o

r
e
d
e
31
64
13
1
23
6
34
6
52
5
71
8
88
5
1,0
2
2
1,0
4
9
1,
0
7
6
1,1
0
5
',1
3
4
1,'
8
4
',1
9
4
1,2
2
6
1,
2
5
8
1,2
9
1
1,
3
2
5
1,3
6
0
In
f
i
l
t
r
a
t
i
n

C
o
n
t
r
l
32
1
39
8
48
'
64
0
80
9
1,
1
3
9
1,3
3
3
1,
4
5
6
1,5
8
6
1,7
1
9
1,
7
7
2
',8
2
6
1,
8
8
'
1,9
3
7
1,
9
9
4
2,
0
5
3
2,1
1
2
2,
1
7
3
2,2
3
5
2,
2
9
8
In
f
i
l
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
.

L
o
w

i
n
c
o
m
e
32
6
35
5
38
5
43
6
47
0
50
5
52
1
53
7
55
3
56
9
58
6
60
3
62
0
63
8
65
6
67
4
69
3
71
2
73
1
75
1
In
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
3'
64
13
1
16
7
'7
1
17
5
17
9
18
3
18
7
19
1
19
5
20
0
20
4
20
8
21
3
21
8
22
2
22
7
23
2
23
7
In
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

-

L
o
w

i
n
c
o
m
e
30
0
32
0
36
6
40
1
41
'
42
0
42
9
43
8
44
8
45
8
46
8
47
8
48
9
49
9
51
0
52
2
53
3
54
5
55
7
56
9
Lo
w

I
n
c
o
m
e

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

P
i
n
e

I
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
69
14
2
21
8
22
3
30
5
38
4
39
2
40
1
41
0
41
9
42
8
43
7
44
7
45
7
46
7
47
7
48
8
49
8
50
9
52
1
PV
S

t
a
m

l
k
W
13
5
13
8
28
3
29
0
44
5
45
4
46
4
47
5
48
5
49
6
50
7
51
8
52
9
54
1
55
3
56
5
57
7
59
0
60
3
61
6
Re
f
r
l
n
e
r
a
t
o
r

D
e
c
o
m
m
l
s
s
l
o
n
i
n
n

a
n
d

R
e
c
v
c
l
i
n
n
'6
32
12
8
29
2
47
6
86
5
75
7
81
7
86
0
90
5
91
6
92
6
93
6
94
7
95
7
96
7
97
8
98
8
99
8
10
0
9
Sh
o
w
r
h
e
a
d
s

a
n
d

s
i
n
k

a
e
r
a
t
o
r
s
17
7
36
4
74
6
1,
1
4
5
1,7
5
8
2,3
7
6
3,
0
3
7
3,7
2
7
4,
2
3
5
4,3
3
1
4,4
2
9
4,5
3
0
4,
6
3
3
4,7
3
8
4,
8
4
5
4,
9
5
5
5,0
6
8
5,1
8
3
53
0
0
54
2
1
So
l
a
r

W
a
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r
69
71
14
6
15
0
23
0
23
4
23
9
24
5
25
1
25
7
26
3
26
9
27
5
28
2
28
9
29
6
30
3
31
0
31
7
32
5
Wa
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

H
i
n

E
f
f
l
c
i
e
r
i
c
t
Ï
91
18
8
48
1
88
6
1,2
0
9
1,5
1
8
1,7
6
0
1,9
0
5
2,
0
5
7
2,
2
'
4
2,2
6
4
2,3
1
6
2,
3
6
8
2,4
2
2
2,
4
7
7
2,5
3
3
2,
5
9
1
2,6
5
0
2,
1
0
2,7
7
1
Wa
t
e
r

H
e
a
t
e
r

P
i
n
4
l
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
11
0
22
5
48
1
70
7
96
4
1,2
1
6
1.2
4
2
',
2
7
0
1,
2
9
8
1,
3
2
6
1,3
5
5
1,
3
8
5
1,4
1
6
1,
4
4
7
1,4
7
9
1,
5
'
1
1,5
4
4
15
7
8
1,6
1
3
1,6
4
9
Win
d
o
w

R
a
n
l
a
c
e
m
a
n
t
31
64
13
1
16
7
17
1
17
5
17
9
18
3
18
7
19
1
19
5
20
0
20
4
20
8
21
3
21
8
22
2
22
7
23
2
23
7
Win
d
o
w
s

r
e
n
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

-

L
o
w

i
n
c
o
m
e
30
0
32
0
36
6
40
1
41
1
42
0
42
9
43
8
44
8
45
8
46
8
47
8
48
9
49
9
51
0
52
2
53
3
54
5
55
7
56
9
i.
1
N
e
x
a
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e
"
C-
4
3
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

I
n
p
u
t
s
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L

M
O
D
E
L

I
N
P
U
T
S
Ta
b
l
e

C
-

I

7

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

E
x
i
t
i

B
u
d
i

S
t
o
c
k

(
s
q

f
t
)
,
..
.
.
.
.
.
2
2
"
'
,
,
'
,
'
..
.
F
§
§
~
"
¿
L
.
...
,
i
L
X
"
,
.
,
.
.
.
.
,
!
.
i"
'
o
o
a
S
t
ö
~
~
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
..
i
:
d
¡
¡
~
i
t
""
"
J
~
~
i
.
:"
1
'
.
.
.
.
1
'
~
i.
n
"
"
I
U
i
ii
..
.
i
ii
i
i
ii
20
0
8
33
,
9
7
2
,
1
7
8
4,
9
1
3
,
7
1
4
40
,
0
2
0
,
9
0
5
3,
6
1
3
,
1
5
9
23
,
3
4
4
,
4
2
9
20
,
4
6
1
,
1
2
3
9,
2
2
4
,
2
8
1
11
,
6
0
8
,
8
8
2
41
,
7
6
5
,
5
7
2
20
0
9
35
,
1
9
0
,
1
3
4
5,
0
8
9
,
8
7
9
41
,
4
5
5
,
7
1
8
3,
7
4
2
,
6
9
7
24
,
1
8
1
,
3
6
4
21
,
1
9
4
,
6
8
6
9,
5
6
1
,
8
0
3
12
,
0
2
5
,
0
7
9
43
,
2
6
2
,
9
3
4
20
1
0
36
,
4
3
0
,
2
0
7
5,
2
6
9
,
2
4
2
42
,
9
1
6
,
5
8
5
3,
8
7
4
,
5
8
6
25
,
0
3
3
,
4
9
6
21
,
9
4
1
,
5
7
0
9,
9
0
5
,
6
9
9
12
,
4
4
8
,
8
3
3
44
,
7
8
7
,
4
8
6
20
1
1
37
,
6
9
2
,
0
5
1
5,
4
5
1
,
7
5
4
44
,
4
0
3
,
0
9
9
4,
0
0
8
,
7
9
2
25
,
9
0
0
,
5
8
9
22
,
7
0
1
,
5
6
7
10
,
2
5
5
,
8
7
8
12
,
8
8
0
,
0
2
7
46
,
3
3
8
,
8
0
3
20
1
2
38
,
9
7
5
,
3
0
2
5,
6
3
7
,
3
6
3
45
,
9
1
4
,
8
3
2
4,
1
4
5
,
2
7
4
26
,
7
8
2
,
3
9
1
23
,
4
7
4
,
4
5
7
10
,
6
1
2
,
2
4
3
13
,
3
1
8
,
5
3
5
47
,
9
1
6
,
4
3
9
20
1
3
40
,
2
7
9
,
5
7
7
5,
8
2
6
,
0
1
2
47
,
4
5
1
,
3
3
3
4,
2
8
3
,
9
9
2
27
,
6
7
8
,
6
4
1
24
,
2
6
0
,
0
0
9
10
,
9
7
4
,
6
9
3
13
,
7
6
4
,
2
2
9
49
,
5
1
9
,
9
2
1
20
1
4
41
,
6
0
4
,
4
7
5
6,
0
1
7
,
6
4
5
49
,
0
1
2
,
1
2
8
4,
4
2
4
,
9
0
3
28
,
5
8
9
,
0
6
2
25
,
0
5
7
,
9
8
3
11
,
3
4
3
,
1
2
0
14
,
2
1
6
,
9
6
9
51
,
1
4
8
,
7
5
7
20
1
5
42
,
9
4
9
,
5
7
7
6,
2
1
2
,
1
9
9
50
,
5
9
6
,
7
2
5
4,
5
6
7
,
9
6
3
29
,
5
1
3
,
3
6
7
25
,
8
6
8
,
1
2
5
11
,
7
1
7
,
4
1
1
14
,
6
7
6
,
6
1
4
52
,
8
0
2
,
4
3
4
20
1
6
44
,
3
1
4
,
4
5
0
6,
4
0
9
,
6
1
4
52
,
2
0
4
,
6
1
2
4,
7
1
3
,
1
2
6
30
,
4
5
1
,
2
5
7
26
,
6
9
0
,
1
7
5
12
,
0
9
7
,
4
4
8
15
,
1
4
3
,
0
1
4
54
,
4
8
0
,
4
1
5
20
1
7
45
,
6
9
8
,
6
4
2
6,
6
0
9
,
8
2
2
53
,
8
3
5
,
2
5
9
4,
8
6
0
,
3
4
4
31
,
4
0
2
,
4
2
3
27
,
5
2
3
,
8
6
1
12
,
4
8
3
,
1
0
9
15
,
6
1
6
,
0
1
6
56
,
1
8
2
,
1
4
8
20
1
8
47
,
1
0
1
,
6
8
9
6,
8
1
2
,
7
5
8
55
,
4
8
8
,
1
1
8
5,
0
0
9
,
5
6
7
32
,
3
6
6
,
5
4
5
28
,
3
6
8
,
9
0
3
12
,
8
7
4
,
2
6
8
16
,
0
9
5
,
4
6
2
57
,
9
0
7
,
0
6
1
20
1
9
48
,
5
2
3
,
1
1
2
7,
0
1
8
,
3
5
2
57
,
1
6
2
,
6
2
4
5,
1
6
0
,
7
4
5
33
,
3
4
3
,
2
9
5
29
,
2
2
5
,
0
1
2
13
,
2
7
0
,
7
9
2
16
,
5
8
1
,
1
8
6
59
,
6
5
4
,
5
6
6
20
2
0
49
,
9
6
2
,
4
1
8
7,
2
2
6
,
5
3
2
58
,
8
5
8
,
1
9
8
5,
3
1
3
,
8
2
4
34
,
3
3
2
,
3
3
3
30
,
0
9
1
,
8
9
3
13
,
6
7
2
,
5
4
9
17
,
0
7
3
,
0
2
2
61
,
4
2
4
,
0
5
6
20
2
1
51
,
4
1
9
,
1
0
4
7,
4
3
7
,
2
2
6
60
,
5
7
4
,
2
4
6
5,
4
6
8
,
7
5
2
35
,
3
3
3
,
3
1
4
30
,
9
6
9
,
2
4
1
14
,
0
7
9
,
3
9
7
17
,
5
7
0
,
7
9
6
63
,
2
1
4
,
9
1
3
20
2
2
52
,
8
9
2
,
6
5
4
7,
6
5
0
,
3
6
0
62
,
3
1
0
,
1
6
0
5,
6
2
5
,
4
7
4
36
,
3
4
5
,
8
8
3
31
,
8
5
6
,
7
4
6
14
,
4
9
1
,
1
9
7
18
,
0
7
4
,
3
3
4
65
,
0
2
6
,
5
0
3
20
2
3
54
,
3
8
2
,
5
4
1
7,
8
6
5
,
8
5
6
64
,
0
6
5
,
3
2
1
5,
7
8
3
,
9
3
3
37
,
3
6
9
,
6
7
9
32
,
7
5
4
,
0
9
1
14
,
9
0
7
,
8
0
1
18
,
5
8
3
,
4
5
4
66
,
8
5
8
,
1
7
8
20
2
4
55
,
8
8
8
,
2
3
1
8,
0
8
3
,
6
3
8
65
,
8
3
9
,
0
9
8
5,
9
4
4
,
0
7
2
38
,
4
0
4
,
3
3
3
33
,
6
6
0
,
9
5
3
15
,
3
2
9
,
0
6
1
19
,
0
9
7
,
9
7
4
68
,
7
0
9
,
2
8
1
20
2
5
57
,
4
0
9
,
1
7
8
8,
3
0
3
,
6
2
7
67
,
6
3
0
,
8
4
9
6,
1
0
5
,
8
3
5
39
,
4
4
9
,
4
7
2
34
,
5
7
7
,
0
0
5
15
,
7
5
4
,
8
2
7
19
,
6
1
7
,
7
0
8
70
,
5
7
9
,
1
4
1
20
2
6
58
,
9
4
4
,
8
3
1
8,
5
2
5
,
7
4
3
69
,
4
3
9
,
9
2
3
6,
2
6
9
,
1
6
2
40
,
5
0
4
,
7
1
6
35
,
5
0
1
,
9
1
4
16
,
1
8
4
,
9
4
3
20
,
1
4
2
,
4
6
6
72
,
4
6
7
,
0
8
1
20
2
7
60
,
4
9
4
,
6
2
9
8,
7
4
9
,
9
0
5
71
,
2
6
5
,
6
6
3
6,
4
3
3
,
9
9
3
41
,
5
6
9
,
6
8
0
36
,
4
3
5
,
3
4
3
16
,
6
1
9
,
2
5
5
20
,
6
7
2
,
0
5
9
74
,
3
7
2
,
4
1
1
20
2
8
62
,
0
5
8
,
0
0
7
8,
9
7
6
,
0
3
1
73
,
1
0
7
,
4
0
0
6,
6
0
0
,
2
6
8
42
,
6
4
3
,
9
7
6
37
,
3
7
6
,
9
5
1
17
,
0
5
7
,
6
0
4
21
,
2
0
6
,
2
9
2
76
,
2
9
4
,
4
3
6
i-
1
N
e
x
a
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
C-
4
4
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

ç

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s

Ta
b
l
e

C
I
8

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

N
e
w

B
u
d
i

S
t
o
c
k

(
s
q

f
t
)
..
r
r
.
.
.
.
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
c
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ii
...
.
i
:
h
h
d
.
i
l
6
¡
.
i
i
c
W
.
.
.-
iO
f
f
¡
P
~
I
ii
a:
a
Y
l
i
¡
.
i-
.
.
~
.
¿i
.
i
i
.
T
0
20
0
8
1,
2
1
7
,
9
5
6
17
6
,
1
6
4
1,
4
3
4
,
8
1
3
12
9
,
5
3
7
83
6
,
9
3
5
73
3
,
5
6
4
33
7
,
5
2
2
41
6
,
1
9
7
1,
4
9
7
,
3
6
2
20
0
9
1,
2
4
0
,
0
7
3
17
9
,
3
6
3
1,
4
6
0
,
8
6
7
13
1
,
8
9
0
85
2
,
1
3
2
74
6
,
8
8
4
34
3
,
8
9
6
42
3
,
7
5
4
1,
5
2
4
,
5
5
2
20
1
0
1,
2
6
1
,
8
4
4
18
2
,
5
1
2
1,
4
8
6
,
5
1
4
13
4
,
2
0
5
86
7
,
0
9
3
75
9
,
9
9
7
35
0
,
1
7
9
43
1
,
1
9
4
1,
5
5
1
,
3
1
7
20
1
1
1,
2
8
3
,
2
5
1
18
5
,
6
0
9
1,
5
1
1
,
7
3
3
13
6
,
4
8
2
88
1
,
8
0
3
77
2
,
8
9
0
35
6
,
3
6
6
43
8
,
5
0
9
1,
5
7
7
,
6
3
5
20
1
2
1,
3
0
4
,
2
7
5
18
8
,
6
5
0
1,
5
3
6
,
5
0
0
13
8
,
7
1
8
89
6
,
2
5
0
78
5
,
5
5
2
36
2
,
4
5
0
44
5
,
6
9
3
1,
6
0
3
,
4
8
2
20
1
3
1,
3
2
4
,
8
9
8
19
1
,
6
3
2
1,
5
6
0
,
7
9
5
14
0
,
9
1
1
91
0
,
4
2
1
79
7
,
9
7
3
36
8
,
4
2
7
45
2
,
7
4
0
1,
6
2
8
,
8
3
6
20
1
4
1,
3
4
5
,
1
0
3
19
4
,
5
5
5
1,
5
8
4
,
5
9
7
14
3
,
0
6
0
92
4
,
3
0
5
81
0
,
1
4
3
37
4
,
2
9
1
45
9
,
6
4
5
1,
6
5
3
,
6
7
6
20
1
5
1,
3
6
4
,
8
7
3
19
7
,
4
1
4
1,
6
0
7
,
8
8
7
14
5
,
1
6
3
93
7
,
8
9
0
82
2
,
0
5
0
38
0
,
0
3
7
46
6
,
4
0
0
1,
6
7
7
,
9
8
1
20
1
6
1,
3
8
4
,
1
9
2
20
0
,
2
0
9
1,
6
3
0
,
6
4
7
14
7
,
2
1
8
95
1
,
1
6
6
83
3
,
6
8
6
38
5
,
6
6
1
47
3
,
0
0
2
1,
7
0
1
,
7
3
3
20
1
7
1,
4
0
3
,
0
4
7
20
2
,
9
3
6
1,
6
5
2
,
8
5
9
14
9
,
2
2
3
96
4
,
1
2
2
84
5
,
0
4
2
39
1
,
1
5
9
47
9
,
4
4
5
1,
7
2
4
,
9
1
3
20
1
8
1,
4
2
1
,
4
2
3
20
5
,
5
9
4
1,
6
7
4
,
5
0
6
15
1
,
1
7
7
97
6
,
7
4
9
85
6
,
1
0
9
39
6
,
5
2
5
48
5
,
7
2
5
1,
7
4
7
,
5
0
4
20
1
9
1,
4
3
9
,
3
0
6
20
8
,
1
8
0
1,
6
9
5
,
5
7
4
15
3
,
0
7
9
98
9
,
0
3
8
86
6
,
8
8
1
40
1
,
7
5
6
49
1
,
8
3
6
1,
7
6
9
,
4
9
1
20
2
0
1,
4
5
6
,
6
8
6
21
0
,
6
9
4
1,
7
1
6
,
0
4
8
15
4
,
9
2
8
1,
0
0
0
,
9
8
1
87
7
,
3
4
8
40
6
,
8
4
9
49
7
,
7
7
5
1,
7
9
0
,
8
5
7
20
2
1
1,
4
7
3
,
5
5
0
21
3
,
1
3
3
1,
7
3
5
,
9
1
4
15
6
,
7
2
1
1,
0
1
2
,
5
6
9
88
7
,
5
0
5
41
1
,
7
9
9
50
3
,
5
3
7
1,
8
1
1
,
5
9
0
20
2
2
1,
4
8
9
,
8
8
7
21
5
,
4
9
6
1,
7
5
5
,
1
6
1
15
8
,
4
5
9
1,
0
2
3
,
7
9
6
89
7
,
3
4
5
41
6
,
6
0
4
50
9
,
1
2
0
1,
8
3
1
,
6
7
5
20
2
3
1,
5
0
5
,
6
9
0
21
7
,
7
8
2
1,
7
7
3
,
7
7
7
16
0
,
1
4
0
1,
0
3
4
,
6
5
4
90
6
,
8
6
3
42
1
,
2
6
0
51
4
,
5
2
0
1,
8
5
1
,
1
0
3
20
2
4
1,
5
2
0
,
9
4
7
21
9
,
9
8
9
1,
7
9
1
,
7
5
1
16
1
,
7
6
3
1,
0
4
5
,
1
3
9
91
6
,
0
5
2
42
5
,
7
6
6
51
9
,
7
3
4
1,
8
6
9
,
8
6
0
20
2
5
1,
5
3
5
,
6
5
3
22
2
,
1
1
6
1,
8
0
9
,
0
7
5
16
3
,
3
2
7
1,
0
5
5
,
2
4
4
92
4
,
9
0
9
43
0
,
1
1
7
52
4
,
7
5
9
1,
8
8
7
,
9
3
9
20
2
6
1,
5
4
9
,
7
9
8
22
4
,
1
6
2
1,
8
2
5
,
7
3
9
16
4
,
8
3
1
1,
0
6
4
,
9
6
4
93
3
,
4
2
9
43
4
,
3
1
2
52
9
,
5
9
3
1,
9
0
5
,
3
3
0
20
2
7
1,
5
6
3
,
3
7
9
22
6
,
1
2
6
1,
8
4
1
,
7
3
7
16
6
,
2
7
5
1,
0
7
4
,
2
9
6
94
1
,
6
0
8
43
8
,
3
4
9
53
4
,
2
3
3
1,
9
2
2
,
0
2
6
20
2
8
1,
5
7
6
,
3
8
8
22
8
,
0
0
8
1,
8
5
7
,
0
6
2
16
7
,
6
5
9
1,
0
8
3
,
2
3
5
94
9
,
4
4
3
44
2
,
2
2
6
53
8
,
6
7
9
1,
9
3
8
,
0
1
9
(,
1
N
I
X
Q
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y
.

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e
"
C.
4
5
~
.s
~~
ü
j
"'
co~ü
=
J'-
1
J
~
~
l0--
U
~::
g
Ijen
ë6~
~
"E
~(IC)
ig
~(I"0ëi"0c:
~~
a en co r-CD It ('N T"a en co r-CD i.":('N T"a enNT"T"T"T"..T"..T"T"a a 0 a a a a a a a enNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNT"
I
1%
co en a T"N ('":It CD r-co en 0 T"N ('..It CD r-co
IJ
a a T"T"T"T"T"T"T"T"T"T"N ~N ~N N N N Naaa0aaaaaaaa00aaaaaNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
'ii ~~E8
~a.2
~
..~¡.
Ši~
~
.s
~~
~
~.~
"-
.g
ä~
J
~
j
3..~¡.
I:
ü
:gi:Q)
i"'
i-
Ó
I
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ æ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ re~ ~ re e re re~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ æ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ii!iiiiii~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ a ~~ ~ ~ g~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ a M ~ a ~ 8 0 ~ 8 8~ a a 8 ~ 8 8 ~ 88
~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~ d ~ ~ d d d ~~ ~ ~ ~ ci~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~â d
I l
ø ~ ~ ~ ~ v v v ~ V N ø v ~ ~ - _ ~_ _ ~ _ _ ~ m VNO _ m w ø w w ~ ~ 0 ~ _ 0 ~v- ø ø ø øø ø ø ø øø~ ~ m ~ ~~ ~; ~; ~ ~ ~ m~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ 08 ~ ~õ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
~ q~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ q § ~ ~ q ~ ~ a ~ a q~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~a ~a ~ ~~ ~a ~aa a a a ~a000000000000000000000000000000000000000_ 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0
Ilii ~ N 0 0 - - - 00 0 ~ ~ N 0 0 W ø m~ ø ~ ø ø~o~o ~ m moo ~ 0 0 ø NO W 0 00 ~ w ww~ w w ~ w w w
- ~ mæ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ æ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~-~ æ~ ~ ~ ~ õ ~ ~ ~ ~æ 0 g æ~g ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~M~ ~ ~~ ~ 00 0 õ õ 8 g g 8 ~ ~ õ õ ~õ õ ~ õ õ õ õ 088; õS 8 8a õ g~ 8 8 õ gg õ8 g g 88g 8 8 gg g gci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci 0 Ó 0 0 0 0 ~ ci 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d d 0
~ ø MO 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ M ~ ø MO N - ø N _ ø _ _ ø_ v ~ ~ ø w ~ N ~ ~ N ~ ø 0 MOO 0 M ø ø ø ro ro ø ro ro ø ro
'i:!~ - ~ ~ ø ø øro ~ M ~ø - ~ ~ ro v N v v N ~ N N v ~ ~ ~ ~ m v M m W M 0 _ 8 ø _ 0 ø m _ m m m m m m m m m m
h: ~ M ~ _ M M M ~ v ~ M ~ M ~ _ v ~ _ v ~ _ ~ ~ _ ø ~ M V m ~ v v _ ~ ~ 0 _ 0 0 _ ~ 0 N N N N N N N N N NV N-----Oooo V N__ M__M_ _ ___00_ _000 M _ O~ 0 _00_000000000000
~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ â ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~â ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I/~(
i'
=
~::
~
I""
-gci
16~
~
1:
~~coi:co::
Q)"'e:
-g
E¥~
~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~~ ~ g~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ § ~§§ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~§ ~ ~ § ~ § § ~ ~ §~~ ~§~ ~ ~ ~~ § ~~ § § ~ §§~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ä~~ ~000000000000000000000000000000000000000 _ 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0
re ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ re ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ re ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ re g : ~ ã 8 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ N - - - - - 0 0 0 0 m N _ _ M _ _ M _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 _ _ _ 0 0 M _ o~ 0 0_ 00 _ 0 go 08 0 0 0 0 0 00~~ 6 6~ 6 66 ~ 6 66 6 6 ~ 6 â6 6 6 6 6 6 6 66 d 6 6 6 6 d ~ dd d d d d~ d d d d d ci d d 6 d d 6 d
/\( ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ M ~ M - ~ ~ V M ~ V ~ ~ g õ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N g ~ m N~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
IiI v N ~ - M M M ~ v ~ M V N V - N ~ 0 N W ~ ~ ~ 0 ø ~ g M l ~ V M - V - 0 - - 00_ ~ 0 N N N N ~ N N N N N
~ ~ a a aa a ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ q ~ ~ q q q ~ a~~a a~ ~ ~ ~ q ~ ~ ~ ~a ~ ~ q~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~000000000000000000000000000000000000000 _ 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~æ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ m~~~ ~g a æ ~ ~ æ ff ~! ~ ~ § ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ a~ ~ ~~~ 8~ ~ ~ ~ a ~~ ~ a ~ ~ a ~ a a~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~000000000000000000000000000000000000000 _ 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 000 ¡;
~8
j
~~
ø mm v N N N _ V _ v ø m m v ~ ø ø~ ø ro ø ø ØV m~ ~ m ø v N ~ v N ~ m v w 0 v ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I!:~ M w ~ M ~w W v m v M M ~ ~ M m v ~ m ~ ~ v v m~ ~~ v N _ m ~ _ m m M W M N 0 M~ N M M M M ~ M M M ~ M
~ re~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~8g~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ § õ ~ 8 g~~g ~~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~â ~ ~~ ~d~ dd do ~ d d d d d d~ ~ d d d d 0 cd dd d d dd d dod d ci ~d dâ dd d d d d d d d d
!I~ t: t: = l; '" '" g~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e e e e ~ e e e e e ! ! e e e e ee ~ e ø ! e e ! e ! ei~ l ~ ~ § S! ~BØ ~:i:::::::::::i:::::::::i:::i:i:::i:::i:::i:i:::::::: ::::::::::::::I~ =ø_=~ Q)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ æ ~ æ æ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ æ æ ~ æ æ æ l ~ ~ æ æ æ ~ ~ l ~ Æ Æ f 00 Æ ~ ~§ § § § § £ g § ~ £
I a: a: a: a: 0: 0:~ ~~mmmm~ :!~~:!~~ a: c:Q) ll~lQ)~ Ig ~ ~.~.~~~~ a:~~Sleeee ~~~~~l~ ¡I ig~ ffii~iff~~!.;3 ¡¡ .3 .a .a .a Q) Q) Q) Q) :i - l\ iE ~ 5 _Iêi N + W. .- t:~~~~~~ Q) Q) Q) Q) ~~~~i~~ 1¡==gl~Sg ~~~~~~-~ ~~I~rol~l\l~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ¡¡¡j~~~Q)~CWC8~-N Q)Q)Q)Q)Q)Q)~£~8
~ e e ~ e ~ em m m m Q) e Q) Q) ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ø ~ ~ æ 00 u ~ ~ ~ Q) ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ E :: ~.a æ .a.a .a.a .3 ~ ~ ~Ij ~ .a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ¡¡ ~ ~ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ ¡¡ e Q) Q) Q) Q) ~ E 0 ~ ~ ~ ß ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_
æ ~ æ ~ æ æ æ ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ II ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i l l l l e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ § e ~
ø ø ø ø ø ø 00 ø ø ø ø ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U e 5 .~ 2 ø ~ ~ Q) Q) 0 ø ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U Y 0 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : : ~ ~ ~I C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :::: 0 ~I~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ m ~ m ~ ~ ~ ¥v~~vooøoo~~.øvvvv.~~vv.~.v~v'-~ogo~o + E Q) Q) ~~~~~~~~~~~~ coo Q)
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ 0 015 2 goo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ £; 6 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ss~~~~~~~~~8~~~~ff~ 8~ æ~~ E£SSSgQ~~~ ¿- N ~ V N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ - N ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ N ~ N N ~ ~ øO _ _ M V N _ MU ~ ~O ~o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ N ~
&I~
~::
.s
~::
ü
'§
-=
~
00""ü
I
~ ~ ~~ ~ m moo 0 0 0 0 0 m m mm~ ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N 0 ~ mro N ro ro ro ~ ~ V 0 NN N N N ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0_
§§ ~ §§~ ~ § § ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~00000000 _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~ 0 0 g g g g g g g ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ õ ~ a ~ N ~~
o § 8 8 88 88 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 80 808 0000000000000000000000000o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
ll
ro m ro ro ro ro roo 0 m m m m m m m roø ro~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ _O~ ro
~g ~~~ ~ ~ g § ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~q q q q q q q q q ~ q q q ~ q qqq q~~ q ~q~~q q q00000000 _ 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 000 0000000 0
~ 0 0002~0 8~ ~ ~~ T ~ M ~ 0 00 ~ 0 m~gg~go g~ 20 gga8õ8g8õ8~~a~aa .a~ .~8 .aaaa88qa880_ _ ___ _ _ __ 0 00 000 00 0 00 0 0
Liii¡ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ 8 § § § §§ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~~ ~~E~ ~
gg g g ggg gg g g g g g g g ggg gg g gg 8888 8ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci Ó ci Ó Ó Ó
i
~ g 8 ggg§ g gSg gg ggâ-~ E § ~ ~E ~8000000000000000 000008.aaaaaqaaqaqqaqq .qqqqq .0_ _ _ ___ _ __ 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0
I!~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~aa ~~ õ g ~ ~ ~ ~
NONNN_ _00_ _ _ _ _ ____ ____ ___000_g 8 g gg 88:5 g g 8 g:5 8 g g g gg gg gg g g 88 g g000 ci ci 0 0 ó ~ 0 0 ó 0 0 ci ci ci ci 0 ci ó d 0 ci 0 0 ci ci ci
~ 00 g 0gg g g g ~ ~ ~ ~ õ ~ 0 ~ õ~ ~ ~ ~
o § § g ggg g g g § 2 g 2 g 28 gg g g 8800000000000 õ 0 0 0 õo 00 00 0 0d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci d 0 ci ci ci 0 0 0 0 0 ci ci
=
~::g
I;."0.aen"i~.S
&.
e:
~
2h
~
~
~i:"0c:
~~
~ ~ ~~~ m m ~ g m m m mmm mm mm ~ææ~~ ~m m~m
~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ § ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~
~§ggggggggggggggggggggggggggo~~~":''''~~~ddcid § l~l§~~c: dooooo
:
~ ~ ~mm 0 0 00 - - ~ ~ 0 0000 0 ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ e ~ ~~ 0 0 00 0 0 N NNN 0 0 ON ON~ N_~õ~~~~~eo~~~~~~~~~~ w~~~~~~~ ~õ gggggggggg~~~õ8õgoõ000000088°008800000 80000008 gg 0000000000000000008
~ ~ â â ~ ci ci ci .. ci ci ci ci c: ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci 0 c: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci ci ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
~ v ~~ ~ 00 0 ° 0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 00 0 ~ m m ø ø ~ w ~ ~ 0
~ § ~~~ ~ § § §~ § § ~ § § ~ ~ ~ § § §§ § § § § § ~ ~0000000 0 ~ 00000 ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I
08°0000000____:80888888888888ggggggggggggggc:~"'"'":''''~~''c:c:c:c:
~_o~o~
§§§§§§odciooci
~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ E ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~88888888888888888888888888888ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci .. d ci ci d ci c: ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
~ § 8 ggggg g g ~ ~É ~ ~~! ~ § ~g~ ~88888888888888888888888ci .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ci c: ci c: ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
;.c:(lc.E8
~oc.
.E
~l
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - 00 N N N NN _ _ "' -00 ~ ~~~ ~ v N m_~o ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~gg g g g gg g g g g g g g g g gg ggg g gg g g g g gcicio d ó ci ci ci .. 0 ci ci ci ci c: c: ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
~ g g gg§g § ggg g g g ~ ~~ ~ g ~; ~80000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000o ~ ~ ,. ~ ~ .. .. .. .. ci c: ci c: ci ci ci ci 0 ci ci ci ci
o eicc: ei Q).9~12 ~ ~ ~ ~ õ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ! ~ m e ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ i~~~eOO~~~E~~~!~~ ~.9
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ i l l ~ l = = = = = = = = = ~ g ~ ~ i I~ ~ U U U ~ U ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ I 0 ø ø ø ø ø ø ø ø E E E E ~! e ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ E~ :§'§:§H.ê.c
~ ~.Q roi¡¡ -1§ il ,_ _ _ _-e ~ ~ 8 ~ E 1_ c:ig c: c ~e ~ c c: c c c: ~ ~c: ¡_ ~ In:: .. i~c:~~~; .6: c: c c c: c: c c c c' I.!i.;:. . C ~ 0 0 0 Q G) ~ Ec: E C li_ ø C'- . . _.__. " "" I~-?~- i ~ c~..-_.._..~...c:___ lL" ~ "8~lilc..~:~~~" ~~~~~~~~I~~l~~li~ ~ E~i333~fiee~w ~ ~ei..~o 19 ~~m~ ~~~~~~~~~ooooc ~ æln!Øln00mëë_..~E.~ci-~øo~m-~ ;.m~::o 0000000000 '§ m - Q)CD::.&.i=.Ë.6Eoo§~.9.s12 u.ÕroE'¡¡~~s~~~~iuiOc . cccccccccc~~ii~ ~~iiig££££ o000e~s~~u f!g.~ i Q) i ~ ~ : E i ~! i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~w w w w ~ ~ d ci i i ~ E E E E l ~ ~ ~ ~if: ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~8 5 ~ i ~ i ~I~ § w Z il W il Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 i 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i £ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0:,::, Q) 8i~~I~ Q)~ °3~3~~~~~~~~~~~~Bgggl~ ~ Q)~~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~
¡:k l Q) ~ 0 0 I ~ In 0 i 0 - 0 0 0 0 - - - - - - - - - 0 0 0 0 c: 0 W ø ø £ £ ~ g _ _ _ m Q) ~ Q) ro ro ~ ~ Q -l Q) ~;; ~.Q! ro ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i ~ ~ ~~ ~:8 ~.Q ~~ ~I~ ~ m m æ m mi~ 8 ~i~ii E ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~CHO ~~ 8~~i~liE~ ~~~ . .s.s.s.s ~ E~~e c:1e c mm rom e ~ 8telE æ~~~~ CDi?%02, 'bb~~mS.s .s.s.s.s.s~.s.s.s.so~oo~~~cici~~~ee~~~~Æè~~'~~wwc_:) ~~£Ææ~~~~~~~~~~e~~~~~gg~~~~~8~~;;~~~ g£ gsff~õ~ff~~~~æ~~~
&I~
~::
.E
~~
ü
i
'O
l:
0)..ü
~
8o
gg~~8g8~~~~88~§§;;§gggggg§§§g""""cic:""""""cidóci""""ó
0000
If;;~~~
00000000ciodci
oo~ ~ ooororororoo ONO~ ~oOvNooo~~~~oo~o08
§§~§§§§§§§§§§~§§~__00..__0000__0000
Ii::~~~
00000000cieioo-
g8~~888~~~~gg~googg~ggggaaaaggoggg00000000000000000.. .. ci ci .. .. .. ci ci ci ci .. .. ci ci ci ci
~~~~, 0000
o 0 ~ ~ g 00 mm~ ~ g 8 ~gó 0
~§Ég8§§8888§g8§§§.. .. ci ci .. .. .. ci ci ci Ó .. .. ci ci ci ci
=
~
~
Il(iE
~i:Q)EQ)C)Cti:
~
Q)32en"ti:
~~
mo
OOØ)('OOO(CU)U)U)OOCDOOMOOOO,.,...,.ooiooocooooo____ooogggggggggggggg.. ., ci c: .. ., .. ci ci ci ci ., .. ci
'"
§o
i i ~ ~ ~ m ~~~~ ~ m ~ m m~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ iii i ~ ~ ~ ~ gg ~ ~ 88 g~ ~~ ~ g g~~ ~ ~ 0 0 g o~~~ gog 0 0 ~g:5 g ~ 0"- 0"- 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 § 0 ~ g gg 8~ 8 ~~ g 8§
~ ~ d d ~ dâ~d d d d d d ci do d ci d d ~ d âdd dd d d d.. § d d ~~ ~d ci ci d ~ ~ ci
o v v o:8888
¡~l88ggæ 0000
OO!;~OOO~.~8~g~t;§8::o8§8"'''~~~õgooo~oo~~~ooè'oo....00......0000....0
"'
§o
00 ..roooOvvvvOOO(, ~Iloo..vooO~vVVOO~_NN§§g§§§§§ggg§§§§§§~ ~ ci ci ~ ~ ~ 0 ci ci ci ~ ~ ci ci ci ci
f=
~8
j~
~
i;
J l~
OO"lLOOOO""""....OOLOOO(l(I OOO('(I('('O 0..OO(lOOOONNNNOO..g8c;g8ggggggggg~ ~ ci ci ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci ci ~ .. ci
§
"ili
.9 gC C ~ ~
"iii '1 'l '1 .s Q)
=::c: u-.s U) u ~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ 55 ~jec æ æ æ Q) ø m m m Q) m Q) Q) Q) 0 0 0 0 Õ Q) Q) C ~ ~ c c c c c c 91_ E = ~ cl~
m ~ ~ ~,~ 5"~ 5 5,~ £ £ £ £ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ £ £ SEE.s.s.s.s S.s ~I~ ~ ~! U)I~
I
š
i"
,n
iE ~ en æ .lm c il 4ï ~ èi ~ ~ Iii to .æ4i 4ïB "7 ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ m = b e ~ l I. ~ u øen ~~i~ccc c gg ~ ~ ~~~æ~8 ~= en §enl~ëc ~~o ~ ~ 0 Q) "7 "T "T 0 § § E i ~ ~I:Q (l CS"g 0 (l -. -I en ë ~ (,::l ~ ë ,9 ~ 0 ~~ ~ 1 ~ 19 £ £ £ ~ 0 0 ~ c I ~ ~ ~ "g 0 ~ ~ I~ _ en S Q) "g ~ § § 8 E ~ i Wo Q) olÒ E E to tt to ~"3 I i: J: to en E i; E 8"0 0 ~ en -I,~ '0 0 ~.s.- i ai 0 I:. tt "0 eo ~ T i Q) (l ! e e en ~ en c ,5 c c en W W c - 5 0 Q) Q) :: en c en = c ~ ~ m ~ 1_ 8 L ë ~ 0 Q)~ æ ~ ~ ~ ~Is ~ èi 0 £ '7 ~ ~ 1 ~ i 5 c c 8 ~ ~i~ l ¡ ¡ l l ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ § 0 ~ e m ;16 c l (l Q) &en ~ 0 0 E E E E E ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ m E E Boo 0 ~ ei~ _ ~ ~ ~ U ~ W ~ g 0 i (l ~ E £ _ ~
mi~ ~I~ ~ ~ iii ~ ~ § ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ i i i ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ i g! ~ ~ ~ g ~ ê ~ ~ ~'l § i~ ~ gI~ TI ~ l E E ~ Q QI¡ §:. ~ ~ m Q) Q) m - ~ ~ 5 ~ m Q "0 l ~ ~ Q)! ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ fl~ l Q) 0 ~ W - (, ~ TI l
I~... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ § ~ ~ æ l l l l ~ ~ ~ l ë ~ ë l l ~ ~~ cl~ ~ ~ ~ l Eil ~ ~ I! j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~8 ~ ~I~ l ~ l ~ l ~ ,~ii ~ õ ~ S ~ ~ i: :11 l ~ ~ SI~ ~ l l ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~Il B ~ !IE E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~8 ~ ~I! ff ff ff ~ ff Q) £ ~ 8 8 i i ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ff ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ff ff £ Æ = ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~If £ ~ ¡ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~
Ši~
~::
.s
~:¡
C,
i
oq
.i
Sq5g~gggõ,.oo)ooo~~g~ggg.."lNoicDcDO..e .._..l.
15U
'"O,.v..a;00"'''''''~~00288888õocicicicicic:
I/ II U) ll .. ,.
~~~~~!
°8~~~~
.~ §§§§§§
! 000000
,
:
00........000000ggggggdcic:cide
Iii ~~ooooggggg§cic:cic:cic:
f:(!8li~¡;~~~~~C;ooõggg ~~§§§~~~:3~:3:3 000000
§~~~l~
~~~~:£llgggggg000000ci c: c: d c: c:
""IOMOCOCD m CX CO U' to CO =8ggL;§§g~~§§~Q)0008 Ecicicicic:c:cicic:c:cici ::
ë5;;
i;:(f.. Ø)CO tØlO ~~~~~~"8S§8§g .2888 88 enqq .q .q (i000000oodocio""i:
'*a.
~;o~coco~~1tU)U),.coo ë
§§§§§~Š~~~§§~Q)E0000000000000Q)0)coi:co::
~~~~~~
ig~ig~~~Q)"888888 ëñ"c:c:c:ciòci i:coEQ)ci
~am~~~;t~~~8S ;:888888 i:
~~~~~ci coc-o ci c: c: ci c:E0C,
~co rt.. coco M ,. .. .. It .. 0)0
§§§§§§(" (" (f P).. N a.NNNOM_00000..0cicic:c:dc::3~:3:3:3:3 ..~
c
j
i
C"crlltOlOlO....NNNN888888cidcic:cici
~
~iiI Æ 1;~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 00 ~~ e e~g~g~~ggg~æã õõõõõõ~acc~j~il il il il il il il il il il ~ ul~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i £ g ~ ~ ~
.....ii
I
Ig tn E ~~ g -æ ~8 i tn 81ê ~ ~ C ~
§~ æll~ g~i?~~~~~~ ~¡~OO ~~ ~ ~ ~~ 0 ø ro ~ E W il W W W W b 0 - ~ W~g~~oc~~ 5~~ZZZZZZ c U~I_~
~ ~ l g ~ i M t ~ i ~ a.~ £ ~ £ £ ~ c 8 ~ ~ EI~ ~ol~ I-~ ~ ~ ~I ~ ~ ~ c ? ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E Ê g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~c c c m ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ DI~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ - 0 ~ ~ ø 0 I~ ~ ~ $ ~ 5 ~o iii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ B B £ i ~
~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ §I~ ~w W W tE t W g ~ ~ ~I ~ o~ ~ & ~ ~ ~ 0 m § § g E =
~I§ I§ m g ml§ - g 0 ~I e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m ~~ ~ ~ w w W I ~ff Õ ~ ~ ~ æg ~ ~ ~ g~~ øø f ~~I
Ši~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s

Ta
b
l
e

C
-
2
1

C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i

M
e
a
s
u
r
e

A
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
i
l
t
y

F
a
c
t
o
r
,
.;
ii
.9
i
i
~
~
'.
.
j
.
.

~
.
.
,
.~
d
i
i
l
;
t
ì
9
n
.
.
"
'
.
"
'
.
..
'
.
.
.
.
'
.
i
~
~
~
í
t
l
i
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
i
.
,
'.
"
'
.
"
.
L
4
a
i
j
i
i
i
l
i
'
.
,.
.
.
,
'
,.,
.
1
la
m

4'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
2
la
m

4'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
3
la
m

4'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
4
la
m

4'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
21
a
m
8'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.0
%
0.0
%
3.
0
%
21
.
0
%
6.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
6.
0
%
0.0
%
2
la
m

8'
T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.0
%
0.0
%
3.
0
%
21
.
0
%
6.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
6.
0
%
0.0
%
2
l
a
m

8
'

T
8

F
i
x
t
u
r
e

V
H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
1.0
%
0.0
%
3.
0
%
21
.
0
%
6.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
6.0
%
0.
0
%
4-
l
a
m
4'
T
8

H
i
a
h

B
a
v

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
5.
0
%
0.0
%
17
.
0
%
0.
0
%
3.0
%
4.5
%
0.
0
%
2.0
%
5.
0
%
0.
0
%
6-
l
a
m
4'
T
8

H
i

h

B
a
v

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
5.
0
%
0.0
%
17
.
0
%
0.
0
%
3,0
%
4.5
%
0.
0
%
2.0
%
5.0
%
0.
0
%
4-
l
a
m
4'
T
8

H
i

h

B
a
v

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
5.
0
%
0.0
%
17
.
0
%
0.
0
%
3.0
%
4.5
%
0.
0
%
2.0
%
5.0
%
0.
0
%
4-
i
a
m
8'
T
8

H
i
a
h

B
a
v

f
i
x
l
u
r
e
5.
0
%
0.
0
%
17
.
0
%
0.
0
%
3.0
%
4.5
%
0.
0
%
2.
0
%
5.0
%
0.
0
%
1 l
a
m
n
-

4
'

T
5

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.
0
%
2
l
a
m

4
'

T
5

F
i
x
l
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.
0
%
3-
l
a
m
o

4
'

T
5

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.
0
%
4-
l
a
m

4
'

T
5

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
1-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
2-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
3-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

F
i
x
l
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
1-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
2-
l
a
m
4'

T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
3-
l
a
m
4'

T
5

H
O

F
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.
0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
2-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.0
%
6.0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
2.
l
a
m

4
'

T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
3-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.0
%
26
.
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
4-
l
a
m
4'
T
5

H
O

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
~a
m
4'

T
5

H
O

f
i
x
l
u
r
e
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
De
l
a
m
in
n

fix
t
u
r
e
s

13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.0
%
12
0
-
1
7
5

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
89
.
0
%
7.0
%
79
.
0
%
88
.
0
%
85
.
0
%
96
.
5
%
79
.
0
%
78
.
0
%
14
.
0
%
0.0
%
17
5
-
3
2
0

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
89
.
0
%
7.0
%
79
.
0
%
88
.
0
%
85
.
0
%
96
.
5
%
79
.
0
%
78
.
0
%
14
.
0
%
0.0
%
32
0
-
4
0
0

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
89
.
0
%
7.0
%
79
.
0
%
88
.
0
%
85
.
0
%
96
.
5
%
79
.
0
%
78
.
0
%
14
.
0
%
0.
0
%
40
0
-
7
5
0

W

P
u
l
s
e

S
t
a
r
t

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
89
.
0
%
7.0
%
79
.
0
%
88
.
0
%
85
.
0
%
96
.
5
%
79
.
0
%
78
.
0
%
14
.
0
%
0.
0
%
20
-
1
0
0

W

C
e
r
a
m
i
c

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
89
.
0
%
7.0
%
79
.
0
%
88
.
0
%
85
.
0
%
96
.
5
%
79
.
0
%
78
.
0
%
14
.
0
%
0.
0
%
12
0
-
3
2
0

W

C
e
r
a
m
i
c

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
89
.
0
%
7.0
%
79
.
0
%
88
.
0
%
85
.
0
%
96
.
5
%
79
.
0
%
78
.
0
%
14
.
0
%
0.
0
%
35
0

W
+

C
e
r
a
m
i
c

M
e
t
a
l

H
a
l
i
d
e
89
.
0
%
7.0
%
79
.
0
%
88
.
0
%
85
.
%
96
.
5
%
79
.
0
%
78
.
0
%
14
.
0
%
0.
0
%
CF
L

L
a
m
or

Fix
t
u
r
e

1.0
%
23
.
0
%
8.
0
%
1.0
%
4.0
%
5.
5
%
2.
0
%
17
.
0
%
11
.
0
%
0.
0
%
LE
D

o
r
e
uiv
a
l
e
n
t

e
x
i
l

s
i
a
n
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
LE
D

o
r
e
uiv
a
l
e
n
t

s
i
a
n

I
i
a
h
t
i
n
a
5.
0
%
85
.
0
%
85
.
0
%
85
.
0
%
3.0
%
6.5
%
10
.
0
%
85
.
%
15
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Oc
c
o
a
n
c
s
e
n
s
o
r
,

w
a
l
l

o
r

c
e
i
l
n
a

m
o
u
n
t
e
d
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Ph
o
l
o
c
e
l
l

d
i
m
m
i
n
o

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
89
.
0
%
7.0
%
79
.
0
%
88
.
0
%
85
.
%
96
.
5
%
79
.
0
%
78
.
0
%
14
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Ce
n
t
r
a
i
l
¡
¡
i
h
l
i
n
n

c
o
n
l
r
o
l

s
v
s
l
e
m
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Au
l
o
-
f
f

l
i
m
e

s
w
i
t
c
h

(
1
0
0
-
2
0
0

W
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Au
l
o
-
o
f
f

l
i
m
e

s
w
i
t
c
h

1
2
0
0
+

W
\
13
.
0
%
49
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
8.
0
%
6.0
%
26
.
0
%
19
.
0
%
23
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Tim
e

c
l
o
c
k

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
89
.
0
%
7.0
%
79
.
0
%
88
.
0
%
85
.
0
%
96
.
5
%
79
.
0
%
78
.
0
%
14
.
0
%
0.
0
%
5
t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

1
-
o
h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

M
i
n

1
4

S
E
E
R
77
.
0
%
81
.
0
%
61
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
29
.
5
%
12
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
63
.
0
%
0.
0
%
5
t
o
n

o
r

l
e
s
s
,

1
-
=
h
a
s
e

A
C

u
n
i
l
,

M
i
n

1
5

S
E
E
R
77
.
0
%
81
.
0
%
61
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
29
.
5
%
12
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
63
.
0
%
0.
0
%
5
Io
n

n
r
l
~
.
.

1
-
n
h
a
s
e
l
i
77
.
0
%
81
.
0
%
61
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
29
.
5
%
12
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
63
.
0
%
0.
0
%
'.
,
.
,
'
,

.
.
.
'
i
.
'
,
i
.
'
.
i
.
i
i
'
77
.
0
%
81
.
0
%
61
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
29
.
5
%
12
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
63
.
0
%
0.
0
%
~
'
i
i
77
.
0
%
81
.
0
%
61
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
29
.
5
%
12
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
63
.
0
%
0.
0
%
77
.
0
%
81
.
0
%
61
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
29
.
5
%
12
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
63
.
0
%
0.
0
%
6-
1
0

t
o
n

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

m
i
n

1
1

E
E
R
65
.
5
%
68
.
9
%
51
.
9
%
84
.
2
%
63
.
8
%
25
.
1
%
10
.
2
%
47
.
6
%
53
.
6
%
0.
0
%
11
-
1
9

t
o
n

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

m
i
n

1
0
.
8

E
E
R
58
.
9
%
62
.
0
%
46
.
7
%
75
.
7
%
57
.
4
%
22
.
6
%
9.
2
%
42
.
8
%
48
.
2
%
0.
0
%
20

I
o
n

o
r

m
o
r
e

A
C

u
n
i
t
,

m
i
n

1
0

E
E
R
53
.
0
%
55
.
8
%
42
.
0
%
68
.
2
%
51
.
6
%
20
.
3
%
8.
3
%
38
.
6
%
43
.
4
%
0.0
%
Air
-
s
i
d
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
77
.
0
%
81
.
0
%
61
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
29
.
5
%
12
.
0
%
56
.
0
%
63
.
0
%
0.0
%
'-
'
'
N
l
X
o
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y
.

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
C-
5
1
t
.s
~~
ü I
~Q)
oo
* * **~ * * ** ~ ~ *~* * * ** * * ~*~* * ***~ ~ ** * * *** * * *#* **** * ** *~**a a q a a a a aa a a aa a a a a a a a aaa a a a a a a a aa a a a a a a a a q a a aa a a a a a a a a00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 NioÙ
* * * * * * * *** * ** * * * ** ****** *** #***** * * ** * * ** ** * ** * * * ** **0000 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 O~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g~ ~ ~ gg g g g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ NN N ~ ci ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ê ê ê ~~ ~ ê ~ ~ ê êê
~ ~ Ê Ê ~ ~ ~ ~~ Ê ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ Ê ~ Ê ß ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ß ßß Ê 8ß ß~ ß Ê ßß ß ß ß ~ß ~ Ê ß Ê ßgß
;:12 ~ w w w ~ M M W ~ M M M M M M M ~ ci m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N m ci M W W W W W W W W W ci ci ci ci N ci N ci ci d ci ci ci/! N~N~~MM~N~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ M~~~~~~~~~~~~~MMM~~~~~~
* * * * * ** ** *** * * ** * * * ** ** ****** * ** * ** *** ** ** **** * * * * * **~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ddci~â~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ââââ~~~â â ââââ
ii ~~~~~MM~~MMMMMMMMMMMNNNNN~~~M M~~~~~~~~~~~~~M~M~~~~~~
=* * ** ** * ** ***** * * ** * ****** ********* * ** * * ** ** * ** * * * ** **a ~ a ~ ~ a a ~ a ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ aa a a ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a a a a ~ q ~ a a a q ~a~ re ~re re ~ ~ re~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ rere re re ~ ~ww W N N Nre 0 ~æ re re re re re re re reê ê ê ê ~~ ~ êê ê ê ~ê ~:i
~
I~.aen
ro~~c.ë
~Q)Cll'i:l':2
Q):gen"0i:
~Q)Cl
~ ~~~ # ~ ~ **# ~ ~~ * * * ** ~ ***~* ~ ~* * ~ #** * * * #* * * ** *** *~ * #* ~ ***00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ci ~ ci ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ø ø ø ø ci 0 ci ci ci cio 0 ~ ci ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci 0 ci ci ~ 0 ó d ó ó 0 0~ ~~~~~ NNNNNNN ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
* * * * * * **** ~ ** * * * ## * ## ** **** ** * ~* * * * ** ~ *** **** * * * * * ***q q a a q ~ ~ q q q a q q a a q a a q q q q q q q q a q q q ~ q a ~ a aa q a a a q q q ~ q ~ q q q a q qom 0 m ~ ~ ~ m 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ê ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ê ê ê ~~ ~ ~ ê ê ê ê ê ê
I J
i
* ~ * # ** * ** ** #* *** * # * ** #####* ** # ## * * * *** * ~~* **** * * ~ ** * *00000 M MOO 0 0 0000000000000 0 ~ ~ ~o 0 MOO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000000~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N ~ m æ m m ~ ~ ~ NON ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 dod N ~ N d ó d d ó ciW W~MM~ ~~~~~~~NNNN~~~~~ N MWWW~~W~ww~~~~ ~~~~~~
;,i:
~o(.
j~~
# * * * * * * * #* * * # # * # * * * # * * # * * # * * * * * * * # * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *q q q q qq q q a q q a a q q q q q a q q q q a q q a a a q q q q q a a a a a a a a a a ~ q ~ a a a q ~ ao ~ 0 ~ ~ M M ~ 0 m m mm m m moo 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 000 M~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~~ ~ 0 0 0000ø Ø~MM~ mmmmmmm MØ~oooooooooo~~~~~~NNN~~~~~~
Ii-
* * *** # * *** * *** * * ** ~ * **** ~ ~* ****# # * * #**# ** ~* * #* * # ~ ~ ***0000 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 M M MOO ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000M ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M d ci ci d ci ci ci 0 ci ci ci ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci 0 ci ci ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci d ci N ~ N d d d ci ci ciN ~ N ~ ~ MM ~ N ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N N N N ~ ~ ~ N M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
g~ ¡-l :o~~(\i..88 -"e:o m mum ê C cllli l ~ ~ ~ ~ c c c c ~ ~t~~~~ ~ cCc.c~_~~cccccc ~ ~~~ ~ i~igS8~ . ~ ~8øm-ro e-e -i~ . --~-~ -~-rorororo"" ~.. E~,,~l~ll~,,~-e~fu ~ i~..~~lI~ ~ ~~$~li¡~ ~llll1 ~lll ~ ~ ~ ~Ig - ~ ~ E .~ ~~i;818Iro-.. _~~:io~~~OOOOOOOOOOOOOO§ (I:: i;:=~~~~~ËËc::ils.cl~ uom~
.~.~ ~ ~ ~ l l i i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ iii i i ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Ii ~ i ~ 11 ! i ~ ~ ~ ~ l§ ~lU~~~I~~w~wwwZ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ¡ÖÖ ~ ~ ~.~~~ c~~ êi~~l æ~~ ~om c -g .~ -g :B ~ !' 8 Z i. Z Z Z i. i. ~ i. ~ ~ i. i. ~ i. .9 ls .š lsi ~ ~ C) C) .g .. U ~ a: a: 0: ~ ~ ¡ 0 U) 'C l! ~ Ù Ù l- ..1 c u
l ~ ¡ ~ ~ U) U) ; i ~ i ~ ~ ~ iii i l l g ~ ~ ~ 0 S 0 Si ~ .9 ø ~ i ~ .6 l s g B g i m ~ ~ i i m ~ a ~ ~ l ~.ii " 0 :: - ~ ~ 2i 1i Õ :: õ õ õ :: :æ :æ :æ :æ :d~ :æ :: :æ :: :æ :æ :æ :i 0 ~ - -, ~ 1 ~ ~ CD " CD "11"'1 ~ 8 01"'11'" E ~ ~ Cl Cl ;: e:~~8~~~~I~E~ ~~~ .c.c.c.c~E~~~lel~~=æ== ~~S ~~2a:o:e~$, 1 g~l~I's.c .c.c .c.c.c.c.c.c ~~~cici~~~!! ~! ~ ø c m ,a~ww c_~~£~~~~~ :i~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~ê~~~8~ m;~'C~~ g g£ g~ÆÕ~~~S~~ææ~~
B2~
~:i
.s
~~-
~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~~0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 (¥in
U
* * **** * * * * * * * * * ***** * * * * ** ** * * * ** * *** * * * * * * * * *** ** **
ci ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ~ ci ci ci ci d ci ci ci ci ci ci ció ó ci ci ci cici ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d cid °8" ~ ci ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~WWWW~W~MN
* * * * *** * * * * ** * * * * * *** * * * * * * * * * * * *** * ** ** ** * ** ** * * * **o~ 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 M MM
.~i; 0 ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci 0 0 ci 0 d ci ci ci d d ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d ci ci d ci ci d ci ci ci d ci M ci ø w ø ø ø ø ø ø M ~ m w ø
!: ~ N ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N M M N N N
i
I i
* * * * ** ** * * * * * * * ** * ** * * ** * * * * * * * ** * *** *** * ** * * *** ** **
ci ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci â â â â ci ci â ci â ci â ci â ci â ci ci ~ â ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~M ~~~~~~~~~~~~ MNNN
** * ** * * * * * * * ** * * ** ** ** * * ** * ** ** * * *** ** *** * ** * ** ** * **a~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ a a a a aa a a a a a aa a a a a a q a a a a a a a a a a a a a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ a a a a aao ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000000000000 ø 0 m m m m m 0 mo ~ ~ ~ MM~~~~ ~~N~NNNNNNNNNMMMM =
~ ~ ~ **** ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ * * * ** * * * * ~ ~ * * * * * *~* *** ** * * *~ ~ * *** ** *~a a a a aa a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a aa a a a a a a aa a a a a a a a a a a aa a a aa0000000000000000000000000000000000000 ø 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 00~ ~~ ~~~~~~ ~ w~
~:3g
I~.2eni'~
~ë
~
~~
Q):2en"0c:
~~
I
* * * *** * * * * * ** * * ** * * * ** * * ** * ** * ~ ** **** * * ** * **** *~~**~
~ ~â ~ â â â ~ ~ ~â â â ~ ~ â â â â â â â â â â ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ â â ââ â ~ â ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ â ~ â ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~øø~ø~øø~~~~~ ~mmmmm m MMWWW
.
* * ~ *** * ~ * * * * * ** ****** * * * ** * * *** * * *** ** *** * * * * ** * * * **
d ~ ~ ~ â â â â â â â â d â â â d ddd â â â â â â â â â â â â â â d â â â â ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ â ~ â ââo~~~ ~~N~~WWWW W MM
I j
* * ** *** * * * * ** * * * ** *** * * * * * * * * * **** *** *** * ** * * *** * ** *a a a a aa a a a a a aa a a a a a aa a a a q a q a a q q a q a q a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a aa0000000000000000000000000000000000000 m 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ M 000~ ~~~~øøøøø ø M~~~
::c:ttC.E8
l0.
~
~
ù
~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~
1m goo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g 8 ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~ 0 0 0:¡:¡~ ~~ ~
::
.æ
ii..t:W
ü
i
~lÐ ~ (¡ f/.! ~if/ c: lûí (¡.. êü:: ~ f/ (3 èiê6 tv ~.7 !! !! ~ .. I ~ .. ~ m 1š l: ~ :§ ~ i~ en I ~ ;:f/ ~ ~ i ~ c: c: c: c: g g g ~ l ~ ~ i ~ 8 ~ ~ ; ~ f/I~ 0 c: ~ ~ë ~ ~Ig ~lll ~ 88 f/ ~ l!jlg~ g"g 8~ ~:: ~~.g ~ elg ~~ ~~.TE .. Is 0 0 0 ~ ~ 0 c: E:~ 3 c: 8 ø ~ _ ~ ~ !! E c: ~ 0 ~ u = x -
8 1 9 9 E E mm ~ I~ c: c: c: Z Z ~ ~ e 0 f/ E 8 ~ ø 3 ~ g ûí ~ ~ ~ ø m § ~ m g e ë ë ! ~ ~ ej::.0 ~ ~ l l j j i ã ã ~ ~ § ~ j ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ i ~:I ~ j I t i ~ I l j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ IE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !c,~~ ~~ mmo m_ro-ro~_-c:~EE,~Oolo~c:-~-~ c~_c:om-ij øo~ °
i: :.UU1l11~. i ~ ~ ~ a!!~ dl!.Ullhil~i~~~.Hj~~~8¡l~~.~~.1
~'1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l l ! l~ ~~ i E 5 E l ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ .~ ~ l E ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ E l ~ l ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ 1 ~.~ ~ ~.!.~.2 .. .. 6 6 i 6 l , ,i~.! ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ l ~ ~ = ~ l: ~ ~i! ~ ~ m ~ E E E l ff Em ~ ~ E £.; 2 .S: 2.2 2 t: ° 0 _ _ _ _ I ~ ~ I ~ 2.. 2 i i.2 ~ 2 m to = u 0 ~ I ~ u ii Q) Q) "0 - Q).. 0)81~ .- _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 c: c ~ ~ 0 E ~ ~ = E E ~ ~ ro ~ ~ m m 0 j m:j .. .."0 E ~ c: Q) m _ 0 ._ozzzwwwww~ ~OO ~~~Z~~wwww~wwww~~~w~~oor~r~~~w~wO~ZUZ
&I~"'
~::..
~~
ü
j
"'
* ~ *~ ~~ ~ ~ ***~~~ *~ #* ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~*~00000000000000000000000000ci d ci ci ci ci ê ê ê ê ê ê ê ci ô ci ci d ci ci d ci d d d ci ;iÜ
* * * * ~ * * * ** * ** * *** * * * * * ** **000000000 0000 ~~ ~~~ -OOWØOOO~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci d d dd N N N N N N ci ~ ~ ~g ~~
* * * * * * * ~I~I~I~I* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *M M M M M M 0 ~i~igigio 0 m æ m m m moo m moo 0
l:ili ~~m~øøcidoodddNNNNNNci~~~dN~I/~ NNNNNN ~~~~ ~
* * ** * * * * ** * *** ***** ** * ****M M M M M MOO 0 0 0 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 NNO 00
!H~ ø ø ø ~ m w ci d d ci ci ci d d d d d ci d d ci d ó d d æi~ NNNNNN ~~~~~~ ~~~ ~
=
lj
** * * * * * * * * * ***** * **** *****0000000 0000 oo~~~~~ ~oo_ _O~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci d d d ci ciON N N N N N d d ~ ~ ê~~~::
~
ii
ãi~
~ë
~
igmc:~
~èi"0c:
~~
~ ~ ~ ß~ ~ ~~ ß ~ ~ ~ ~ ß ~ ß ~ S ß ~ ß ~ ~ ~ ß ßd d d d ci d d d d d d dd d d d d d dd ò ~~ ~M~
:1 ***********************#**
~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ aaaaaaaaaaaaaa~~aaa~ ~ w ~ m ~ 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 00 o~ 0 i ~~o~
:~
* * * *** * ** * * ~~ *~ * *~ ~**** ***0000000000000 øø ø ø ~ ~ 0 0 m m 0 00dd d ddcid cidodoo~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ci~~~o~mN LO U' 0.. ""
=-c:
~8
j2~
.
** * * ** * ~ * ** ** ** ** * * * * *** **a a ~ aa~aq q aqqaa~ aqa qqq~~aaagg ~ g~~ 00 0000000 000 ooom~~o~
~
** *~# * * * ****** ***** * * * ** **00000000000 00 ~ ~ M M M MOO U' U'O 00d ci ci ci d ci 0 ci ci ci 0 000 0 ci ci d ci d ~ ~ ~ci ~æ~..~~-- COCOs? co
I
Ig ~ E l~ g 1* Eo:i Ii; 8 r: -J
~6 r:¡~~ 66§~~~~~~ ~¡iæ ~
~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ E ~ m ~ m m ~ EIB ~ ~ ~
~ i i ~ r: j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e 6 ~ a ~Ig ~¿ G~ ~ 8 l ~ ø ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iiiiii l ~ x ~ ~ I E...... l¡;ir'E":õI~,i""C:I~.!~------:2£~,,g 11/r:r:r:m~Ee~~~r:~ 555555~~~5mOX:.~~.~"~$6o~o~ ~E~~~~~~8ø oo£i~~~~~ ~ ~~~l~E E~~~~~~~ mB~~ §~ iw lU W,C -c "C: lU E .. Q) ~ 0 - U tt or: r: õr9...:i .c i~ If ~ ~ õ I~ .s -ã êi~ I g 0 .c ; ;; ; ;; ; 0 B 5 5 õ ~:E
£ £ £ W w~ £ ~ æ ü £ ~~ æ ~ ~ e ~ ~~~ ~~ Æ ~~
..sI~
~:;
£:
~~
ü
t
q:
;
.
~ Ê Ê ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ê ~ ~ ~ Ê ~ ~ ~ Ê Ê ~~ Ê ~ É ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ê ~ Ê Ê~ ~ ~ ~ Ê ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ê Ê~ ~ Ê ~o 0 ci 0 ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci 0 ci ci ci
LOLOÜ
~ * * # # * # # * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * # * * * * * * ** * * * * * ** * * * * * * *** **~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ - - - - -- - - - - - - _ _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 _ m_ ~ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ m
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g g gg g ggg g g~
Ii
-
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * **- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - _ 0 00000 0 o~_o _ m _ _ _m _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ mm
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ g g g g g g g ~ ~ ~
!:- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
!;i::Î;~ ~ v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v m ~ m m m m m m v v ~ _ m _ _ _ m ~ M M M M M M M M m N
¡i~.\ m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m N m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m ~ ~
I =* * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * *** * * # * * * * * * * * * * * * * **- - - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ _ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m ~ 0 ~ m ~ ~ ~ m _ ~ _ _ _ _ _~ _ ~m.......~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ m M ~ M M M M M ~ ~ ~ N
\~ mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm~ømm mmm mmmmmmmmm~~jltj
J
~
l
3
~
* * * * * * ~ * * * * ~ ~ * * * * * * * ~ * * * * ~ * ~ * * # ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ * ~ * ~ * * # ~ * * * ~ ** * * *- - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~ - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- _ - _ _ 000000000 _ 0 ~ m _ ~ _ m _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ m~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~mg ~ ~ m ~ ~~m g gg g g ~ ~~ g ~~
~::
~
I:;
~ei~
~
"E
~
ig~tt::
Q):!en"'c:
Ë~
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ~ ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **- - - ~ - - ~ - - - - ~ - - - - - - - -- - - _ - _ 0 0 0 0 0000 N 0 0 _ m _ _ _ m _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Nm~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ m ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~m ~ ~ m~ ~ ~ m g g gg g gg~ g~~
J
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
ii iii iii iii iii i i iii iii iii i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~: i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iii; ~
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * ** * **- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 ~ m _ _ _ m _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __m
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ mg g g g g g g gg~~
:;c:~
~
~c.~~
.
.,;; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~
::'íd ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ m M M M M M ~ M M ~ m N
~ mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm~ømm mmm mmmmmmmmm~~
...
.........
Ai..
0:0:0:0:0:0:~ ~mmm~m cøøøø ~ ~~~~~~ ~C~~~~~ ø .5£.5££.5 w.Q~ø ~m~mø~ c ~ ~~~~~~ ~W~~~~ ø ø ø ~ ====~~ ø c~ Eo~ d¿ddddOC~~ie~c~~~a ~~~~l=¡ c!~_il~+ §§§§§§~~£~¡~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ø ø ø ø ~ ~ ~ ~ E ¡ Z ¡.~ = ~ ei~ g g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~Z ~ il ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i iii ~ ~ l ~ij ~ ¡ e - N ø ø ø ø ø ø ~ ~ ~ 8 ~
e ~ e ~ e ~ ~ailDlDlD Q) ~ Q) øx.~.~1(.~.~xxxxx f/C/C/C/C/ u.Q:; ~ Øf¡;I~~U -II .c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.Ë E:J ~;"Ë:: .a.aa.a.a.a.a-Si?ii~.c~.a ~ ~¡¡u.u.¡¡u.u.¡¡¡¡;;;;¡¡ Q, Q) Q) Q) Q,'e- E ut(ëë.O ~e.c.c.c.c.c.c ~=u.!: 0.~ .~ .~ .~ ~ ~ ~ flf ~f ~ x .~ x x ~ ~ Ox ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ° 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . , . ~ ~ A ~ § ~ E ~~~~~~~~ø~~ø:~~:mmmmmmm~~~~iææææ~~ e ~ii ~ :8~:: ~~~~~ ~ § ø
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i~ :J12 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~~ ~ c E ~ ~~~~~~~ø~~.ø~..~.~~~.~....._~~g~ ~+~~~i ~i~~~~~i5S~Q)i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ¿ ~ ~ 6 ~ ¿ ~ ~ ~ ~ d õ g Š ø 5 § § 5 § § ; ~ g~ ~~ Ñ M; Ñ ÑÑ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~
Iil~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s
')
Mé
â
S
i
l
e
N
4
m
e
Of
C
ê
Fl
I
d
S
é
t
v
l
c
e
Ri
à
l
t
l'
o
O
d
S
t
ê
i
e
Wå
t
u
s
e
Ed
ï
l
c
å
t
l
ó
n
_I
i
h
l.
d
a
W
a
'
.
Mls
c
e
l
l
â
n
e
o
u
a
'
A
O
r
k
\
I
l
l
U
t
é
Air
-
s
i
d
e

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r
s
v
s
t
e
m

r
a

a
i
r
24
.
8
%
24
.
8
%
24
.
8
%
24
.
8
%
24
.
8
%
24
.
8
%
24
.
8
%
24
.
8
%
24
.
8
%
0.0
%
Pr
e
-
c
o
o
l
e
r

a
d
d
e
d

t
o

c
o
n
d
e
n
s
e
r
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
0.0
%
Re
t
r
o
f
i
t

t
o

d
i
r
e
t

e
v
a

o
r
t
i
v
e

c
o
o
l
e
r
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
0.0
%
Re
t
r
o
f
i

t
o

i
n
d
i
r
e
c
l

e
v
a
o
o
r
a
l
i
v
e

c
o
o
l
e
r
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
0.
0
%
Va
r
i
a
b
l
e

s
p
e
e
d

d
r
i
v
e
,

f
a
n
57
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
64
.
4
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
0.
0
%
Va
r
i
a
b
l
e

s
a
e
e
d

d
r
i
v
e
,

u
m
p
57
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
64
.
4
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
0.
0
%
7
d
a
v
,

t
w
o

s
t
a
o
e

s
e
t
b
a
c
k

t
h
e
r
m
o
s
t
a
t
66
.
3
%
66
.
3
%
66
.
3
%
66
.
3
%
66
.
3
%
66
.
3
%
66
.
3
%
66
.
3
%
66
.
3
%
0.
0
%
Au
t
o
m
a
t
e

c
o
n
l
r
o
l

s
v
s
t
e
m
7.9
%
7.9
%
7.
9
%
7.
9
%
7.
9
%
7.9
%
7.9
%
7.9
%
7.9
%
0.
0
%
1 h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

.
n
60
.
6
%
60
.
6
%
60
.
6
%
60
.
6
%
60
.
6
%
60
.
6
%
60
.
6
%
60
.
6
%
60
.
6
%
0.
0
%
1.5
h
Mo
t
o
r

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
56
.
6
%
56
.
6
%
56
.
6
%
56
.
6
%
56
.
6
%
56
.
6
%
56
.
6
%
56
.
6
%
56
.
6
%
0.
0
%
2 h
Mo
t
o
r

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
52
.
9
%
52
.
9
%
52
.
9
%
52
.
9
%
52
.
9
%
52
.
9
%
52
.
9
%
52
.
9
%
52
.
9
%
0.
0
%
3h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
m

i
n
63
.
4
%
63
.
4
%
63
.
4
%
63
.
4
%
63
.
4
%
63
.
4
%
63
.
4
%
63
.
4
%
63
.
4
%
0.
0
%
5h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
0.
0
%
7.5

h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
66
.
8
%
66
.
8
%
66
.
8
%
66
.
8
%
66
.
8
%
66
.
8
%
66
.
8
%
66
.
8
%
66
.
8
%
0.
0
%
10
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

.
n
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
~
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
61
.
6
%
0.
0
%
15
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
59
.
4
%
59
.
4
%
59
.
4
%
59
.
4
%
59
.
4
%
59
.
4
%
59
.
4
%
59
.
4
%
59
.
4
%
0.
0
%
20

h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
55
.
5
%
55
.
5
%
55
.
5
%
55
.
5
%
55
.
5
%
55
.
5
%
55
.
5
%
55
.
5
%
55
.
5
%
0.
0
%
25

h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
63
.
5
%
63
.
5
%
63
.
5
%
63
.
5
%
63
.
5
%
63
.
5
%
63
.
5
%
63
.
5
%
63
.
5
%
0.
0
%
30

h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
57
.
6
%
57
.
6
%
57
.
6
%
57
.
6
%
57
.
6
%
57
.
6
%
57
.
6
%
57
.
6
%
57
.
6
%
0.
0
%
o
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
58
.
4
%
58
.
4
%
58
.
4
%
58
.
4
%
58
.
4
%
58
.
4
%
58
.
4
%
58
.
4
%
58
.
4
%
0.
0
%
50

h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

.
n
62
.
8
%
62
.
8
%
62
.
8
%
62
.
8
%
62
.
8
%
62
.
8
%
62
.
8
%
62
.
8
%
62
.
8
%
0.
0
%
60
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
58
.
9
%
58
.
9
%
58
.
9
%
58
.
9
%
58
.
9
%
58
.
9
%
58
.
9
%
58
.
9
%
58
.
9
%
0.
0
%
75
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i

i
n
67
.
6
%
67
.
6
%
67
.
6
%
67
.
6
%
67
.
6
%
67
.
6
%
67
.
6
%
67
.
6
%
67
.
6
%
0.
0
%
10
0

h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
I'
i
n
60
.
9
%
60
.
9
%
60
.
9
%
60
.
9
%
60
.
9
%
60
.
9
%
60
.
9
%
60
.
9
%
60
.
9
%
0.
0
%
12
5
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
l
59
.
8
%
59
.
8
%
59
.
8
%
59
.
8
%
59
.
8
%
59
.
8
%
59
.
8
%
59
.
8
%
59
.
8
%
0.0
%
15
0
h
Mo
t
o
r

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
l

.
50
.
7
%
50
.
7
%
50
.
7
%
50
.
7
%
50
.
7
%
50
.
7
%
50
.
7
%
50
.
7
%
50
.
7
%
0.
0
%
20
0
h
Mo
l
o
r

N
E
M
A

Q
u
a
l
i
f

.
61
.
4
%
61
.
4
%
61
.
4
%
61
.
4
%
61
.
4
%
61
.
4
%
61
.
4
%
61
.
4
%
61
.
4
%
0.0
%
Do
w
n
s
i
z
i
n
a

m
o
t
o
r

d
u
r
i
n
g

r
e
t
r
o
f
i
t
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
O.O
'
A
EC
M

m
o
t
o
r
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
0.0
%
Va
r
i
a
b
l
e

5

e
e
d

D
r
i
v
e
s
57
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
64
.
4
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
80
.
9
%
0.0
%
U~
0
.
4
2

S
H
G
C
~
0
.
4
0
,

V
L

T
~
0
.
5
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
,
0
%
0.0
%
U~
0
.
4
2
,

S
H
G
C
~
0
.
4
0
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
Ad
d
i
n
a

w
i
n
d
o
w

s
h
a
d
e

f
i
l
m
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
dd
i
n

w
i
n
d
o
w

s
h
a
d
e

s
c
r
e
e
n
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
Ad
d
i
n
o

r
e
f
l
e
c
t
v
e

r
o
o
f

t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
2
4

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
3
8

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
1
1

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
In
c
r
e
a
s
e

t
o

R
1
9

m
i
n

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
En
e
r
a
v
S
t
a
r

v
e
n
d
i
n
e

m
a
c
h
i
n
e
80
.
2
%
80
.
2
%
80
.
2
%
80
.
2
%
80
.
2
%
80
.
2
%
80
.
2
%
80
.
2
%
80
.
2
%
0.0
%
Be
v
e
r
a
a
e

m
a
c
h
i
n
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
86
.
1
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
52
.
5
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
Ot
h
e
r

c
o
l
d

D
r
o
d
u
c
t

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
86
.
1
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
52
.
5
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
No
n
-
c
o
o
l
e
d

s
n
a
c
k

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
86
.
1
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
99
.
0
%
52
.
5
%
99
.
0
%
0.0
%
En
e
r
a
v
S
t
a
r

d
i
s
h
w
a
s
h
e
r
,

E
F

.
6
5
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
0.0
%
En
e
r
g
y
S
t
a
r

r
e
f
r
i
g
e
r
a
t
o
r
68
.
2
%
68
.
2
%
68
.
2
%
68
.
2
%
68
.
2
%
68
.
2
%
68
.
2
%
68
.
2
%
68
.
2
%
0.0
%
Lo
w
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

d
i
s
h

m
a
c
h
i
n
e
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
93
.
1
%
0.0
%
80

P
i
u
~

P
C
-
d
e
s
k
t
o
p
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
0.0
%
80

P
l
u
s
,
"

P
C
-
s
e
r
v
e
r
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
0.0
%
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R
'
"

P
C
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
74
.
3
%
0.0
%
EN
E
R
G
Y

S
T
A
R
'
"

C
o
o
i
e
r
9.9
%
9.
9
%
9.
9
%
9.
9
%
9.
9
%
9.
9
%
9.
9
%
9.9
%
9.9
%
0.0
%
PC

n
e
t
w
o
~

D
o
w
e
r

m
a
n
a
o
e
m
e
m
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
94
.
1
%
0.0
%
Fl
a
t

p
a
n
e
l

L
C
D

d
i
s
p
l
a
y
5.0
%
5.0
%
5.
0
%
5.
0
%
5.
0
%
5.
0
%
5.
0
%
5.0
%
5.
0
%
0.0
%
'-
"
I

Ne
K
a
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

"
C-
5
6
~::..
~~
(.
l
~
* * * * # * * # * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *00 q 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000è 0 ó 0 ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci cii
I
..LCu
* * * * * * #* ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I; ~ ~ M ~ ~ d ci d ci d ci ci cid d d d d ci d d ci ci ci ci cici d ci d cid d ci ci d d d ci dd d cid cici ci ci ~ ~ ~~.mmmm oooooooooooooo~~ro~C ~~~~~~-~~--
I
:E
* * * * * * * * ** * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * ** * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * *. . . . aa a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a aaa a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a aa . . . .¡~ M M MOO 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000000000000000000000000 0g 00 goo ~~ ~ ~:i mmm ~~~~~~~~_~~_~~roro~ø,.
:;3
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~V M M MOO 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000000000000000000000000000000 0 ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~m ooooooooooooooø~ro~:¡ ..............................'i!
=
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~c~ M M MOO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ø ~ øommm~ oooooooooooooo~~~~= ............................
I
~::g
I
I"i~
Æë
lttc:~
Q)32C/"0c:
f¥~
~ * * * ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~ 8 Ê 8 8 ~ ~ 8 8 8 S S S ~ S SS 8 S 8 ~ ~ ~ Ê Ê Ê S S S S S S 8 * * * *
l ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci 00 ci ci 0 ci ci 0 ci ci ci ci 0 0 ci 0 ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci g g g g g g g g g g g g g g ~ ~ ~ ~o ............................
I
* * ~ * *~ * * * * * * * * ~ * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ~ * * * *.. ........ m ~ ~oo 00 00 ~N N N N N N M V ~ ~N NN 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~~ g g g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ mm ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g g g g g ggg g g gg g g ~ ~ ~~ø ............................
-I
** ** ** ** **** *** * *** ** * **** ** * **** **** ** **** *** ***** **
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ â ~ â ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ci ci ci ~ â ci ci ci d d ci ci ci d d ci d ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ~ ~ ~=~mmv, ooooooooooooooooæææI ............................
fEtta.Eo(.
j2tt:E.
* * * * Ê * * * ** * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ~ * * * * * * * *l ; ~ ~ ; ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ci d ci ci ci ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ~ ci ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ~ ~ ~t~mm~ oOooooooooooooæææool ............................
I
* * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ci ci ci d d ci ci d ci d ~ d d d ci ci d ci d ci ~ ~ ~ ~;....mmmv, oooooooooooooo~oooooo:0 ............................
~
cì
Ii
w
-,,:~ E "ll m .! .. ..Æ Ë.! ~.!'i: l'C II (1"'(10 II; II CD UUl~ ~ ~ ~ £ ~ ~ S 0 = ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ lc ~III II II ~ m c c c c - ~ õ m E (I ~ ~ (I ë 8 xIs ~ ~ II U) 2 c ~ æ. Ë ;; 0 e i II B 8 8 II E e ~; ~ 8 ~ 8 e ~I~ ~ i ~ ~ê c § ~ ~ ~ il~ãO;lglg~I~~~~ ~~ :i:ieæinËI~-E::"8"C8l!¡li.._I:§I~~ 1.(/'~-.5.5 :::i~"ãuiu;æll-æ fI~o ~ ice CD (I II ~ II c c c ë - ~ 8 (I Ð J III~ fI ~ C .. l' ~ i? 0 L - c CD~ 8 .. ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~I ~ ¡ 8 ~ i ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 § ~ ~ 8 ~ l II ¡ j ~ l ~ l!i~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g g ~ l ~ ~ l ~ ~ Æ ~~ : i ~I ~ ~ J CD CD (I 0 -c m m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - c e E EI~ 0 0 y ol~ c = ~ - .. 0 ci~ ~ c 0 (I. ø E ø 0 "C - õ:~
m 61 G I 6 ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ ~Ij ~ , e ~ l! ~ e II m m f i S l 8 8 0;1 ~ "C R ~ N ; ~ g ~ 16 8 ~ i ~ ~ ~ g ~ m 0 ~! G ~i~ ~ i ~ ~ ø s ~ ~ ~ '2 0 ~ ~ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ~ ~ ~ .. l' _ , E . ~ ~ ~ m n ~ ~ - 0 ~ i oc e i ~ Woo c 0 ~ ~ ~ ~g~~'G _~~~R~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ m-~~g ~ mRi~ l' ~ øÆ ~ ~~ ~~~ o~ ø~ w~o~~uU)~~.~TI
I ~ ~ ~ ~ iiI i ¡ l ~ ~I ~ I ? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i ~ i B i ~ ~ ttl ~ £ ~ ~ ~ l E ~ ~ ~ Æ j ~ ~ i ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a:§I:§lf~~~.§~~~~ ~ ~g~~~~i~ ~~~ e ~~~~~~¡ ~~t Bifl'fi E E~~U) 0; E!~ E:fi~
8 £ ~ £ ~ ~ ~ ~ ff ~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ Æ ~ ~ ~ ~ & ~ il ~ ! ~ 8 ~ ~i~ £ £ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ £ 8 :~ L
..
&I~
~::
.s
~:i
ü
j
q:
~* ~ * ~ * * ** * ~ ~ * * ~ * # * # # # # #* *a~aqa aaqqaaaq aqq a qqqaqqaq
lo 0 0 0 o~ g ~ ~ ~ ~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0
!'C
~ü
*** ** **** ***** ***********
I~~ ~ ~~ â â ââ â ââ ~ ~ ~~~~âii i~ii..
J:l
* * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ***~~_ooooooom ~ 00 ~oo_ -_0__~~~ ~~~ d 6 d d d dd ~ ~ ~ .~.ciii i~i i
if
* * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * **00 ooooom v 00 ~ 00_ __0__~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ci ci ci ci ci ci M ~ ~ ~ ~ æ ci i ~ ~ m ~ i
ì~~~~~ ~~~~~ mmm
=
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ê ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~¡ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ~ . . m . ci ¥ i i m i ~
l
il
Q)E:i
~
I~.2en
-æ
ië
~Q)C)lti:~
Q)"Ci:
"Ci:
~~
* * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * *- ---- ooooooom~ oo~ 00___0__
l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ~ . . m . ci i i ~ m i i
I
~~~ **8 ~~8Ê~8 ~ ~Ê s~~~~~~8~~
l~~ ~ ~~ ó ci ci ci ci do ~ ~.. m .~i i i mii
iñ
i
~ * *** * * ** * * * * * * * * **** ** * *- - 0 0 00 0 0 0 m v 0 0 MOO _ __ 0___ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ~ ~ . . m _ ci ¡ i ¥ m i i
!
II i:~Eoü
j
~~
~ ** * * ** ** * * * * * * * * * ** * *** *
~; ~;; ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ § ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~; ~ ~;;Z~~~~~ ~~~~~~ mmmmm~
.z
i
~~~*~~ ~*~*~** * *** ~*******~~~~-OooooOOm~OOMOO 0~ ~ ~~ ~ 0 0 do dod M ~~ ~ m ~ ó ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
i~~~~~ ~~~~~~ mm m m
.:i .!i~~~ !~= 8 :£ .. 8 S! ,,1 i; it. c § c i ~ ~ ~ !~ c c c c c c i emil 0~ 9 I .. s g .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 0 _ "~~j~~tj ~~~~~~~~~~OO~ l
. "g ~8 § ~ ëi ,:im g.5.5.5 .5.5 .51~8 ~ ~ ë E š:- ~ !i~ i : ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ø ~ ~ ¡~ ~ g ~ ~? 5B Š 5 5 ölS 0 ~ ~ ø 0 ~§o ~ ~ ~ a 0 0 ~ ~ a ~ 0 0 £ ~ ~~~~~ E~~~~~~~m~~~§~i~ ~ WEe 0 ~ Sec ~~ ~~~Ü~~~£ ~ O;;;~~;O~Õ5Õ~£.~.I..m_m._~~__i;g" J~u.",o",g5l0W" ~ ~""_,,
il~~IL W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N M M v v '" ~ W ø ø ~ ~ ~
&i~
~::
oS
~~
ü
i
""
j
~.e
æ
J
:-
~
l
~..-f¡.
*~ * ~ ~~ ~ ## ~ ~ ~ ~~ *** ## ~ * * ~ * ~ ~~ * * ~ *~# ~## * # # * # ## #* # ## *** # ##00 a 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ci ci ci ci 0 Ó Ó Ó ci d ci 0 ci Ó ci ci ci d d ci ci d d ci d d d d d d d d d d d d d ó d d d d d d d d d d ci d d
*# # # *# * ~# # * # ## # #* # ## ## ## # # # * # * **** # # # # # # # # ## # # ##### ## #000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 00
g g g g ~ R ~ ê ê ~ ~ gg g g R g ~ g R R R ~ R R R ~ ê ê ê ê ê ê ê g êê ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ê ê ê ê ê ê ~ ê ê g g
T ### # ## # # # # # # # # # #~ ## # ## # # # # # # # # # ## ## # ## # # # #### # ## # # # ***
~ â â â â â â â â â ~ ga ~ ~ â ââ â â â â â â â â â â ~ â â â â â â â â â â â â ~ â â â ââ â âg~ â â â â â â
i ~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ N ~ ~~~~~~~ ~~Nm~ NNN~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~
::,," # ## #* # ### # # # ## # ## ## # # # # # # ## # # # ### # ## # # ## # ## ## ### ### ###0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0
iyl;: d d d d d d d d d d g" d d d d d d d d d d ci ci ci 0 ci ~ ci ci ci 0 0 0 0 0 0 ó ci ci ci ci ci ci ci 0 0 0 0 g. g. g" ci 0 ci~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~N~ ~~ ~~~~m~ ~~ m~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~
*~ *~# * * # # * * * *#~ *~ * ** #* # * * ** * * * ** ** * * * * * * * **** #* # # # ** * *
I q qq q oq qqqq q q q q qqqqq qq q q qq qq q q q qqq qqqq q qq q qq qo q qqqqq qqq~ l5l5l5l5RR R êê ê ê l5l5l5l5RRRR R R R RRR R~ ê êê êêêê~ê êg~Rgggêê êêêêêê êgg
* ** * *** * * ** * ** * ** *** #* * * * ** * ## * * * ** * * * * * * ** ** * ** * *** **0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0
g gg g ~ R ~ ê ê ê ê g g g g ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ê ê ê ~ ~ ê~ ~ ê ê ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ êê ê ê ê ê ê êê gg
~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ g ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~
g g g g ~ R ~ ê ê ê ê g g g g ~ ~ R ~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ R ~ ~ ê ê ê ê ~ ê ê g ê ê ~ g g ~ ~ ~ ê ê ê ê ê êê ~ ê g g
# ** *** * ** # # * ** ***** * * * * * * *# ## * ** ** *** * * ***** * ****** ** *~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ a a a a ~ q ~ q q q q a a a a q q a q a a a a a q q q a a a a a a q q a a a a a a a a a a~~~ ~ ~~~ ê~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ ê~ ê~ê~~ê ê~ ~~ ~ ~~ êêê êê ~êê ê~~
.j
~
* * **** * * * * * * *** ** ** *** ** * * # * * * ** * ** * ** * * * ***** * * * * * * * *
â â â â â â â â â ga â â â â â ââ â â â â â â â â â ~ â â â â â â â â â ga â â â â ââ â â â â âgq gq â â ââw w w w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ø ø 00 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
*## # ## * * * ** * *# * ** ** * ** ** * * * * # * * * * ** # ** * * * ** ** * ** * *** **
â â â â â â â â â ga â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â ~ â â â â â â â â â â â â ~ â â â â â â ga â â ga â â â â......~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~~N ~~~ ~~ ~~m~~~ m ~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~
I iia: a: iia:a:
lli: tl tl tlUtl tlllcnUJcncnW(f c:
~~~~ ø I! ~~~~~~ ffjlø øøøøø~ i: ~ ~~~~~~ a:w~øe2 ø e ø ø ====~~~ Ig~ Eo~ ¿=¿¿¿=~ll~~2i~~~~~ ~lll!=~ c~~ l~+ §§§§§§~~~2~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ø m e ø ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~Ii ~ i ~ é g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ l ~ l m ~Ij ~ c: ~ ~ N ø ø ø m m m ~ ~ ~ 8 ~
~ e ~ e ~ e ~ m m ro ro m ~ m ø ~ ~ ~ ~ "~ "~ ~ iii ~ 00 æ æ æ æ 0 ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ê ~ ~ ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~I..y, .a .a .a .a .a .a .a -5 ~ -51-5 ~ .a ~ ~ t; U. u. t; u. u. i= i= i, i, t; e m ø ø ø 'ë E 0 ,¡ ~ ë a Š 8 g ..g ë J: .i.c .c oJ _ = t) .~ aI": ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "~ ~ - ~I"~ ~ ~ i ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ro ~ -E æ ø ø ~ 'E ~ ~ ë i I i I i I ~ § C E §L u. u. u. u. u. u. u. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t; Z ~ Z ~ X X X Z Z ~ X ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ø m ~ø c 00 00 0 ~ ~ ~ M M M ~ ~ 0 0I~ w w w W W 00 W W ~ W ø ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ l ~ 00 i = ø ø 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U Y 0 Cs øI", : : : : ~ ~ : : : : ~ : : : : : : ~ : : : : : : : : C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ æ ~ ~ æ c ~ ~ m ~....woow...~..............._~~gg~~ + ~ ~ ~I~ ~;ii~i~~~i~ gsa øl
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ 0 o,~ B b . . ø i: i: i: i: i: i: - ~ § ~ s~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,~~~,~"l~~~g~~~~ßß g~ ~~~~s£££s£~~;~ ro~NM. N N. ~.. ~ NM. ~NM~NMN NM. ~o ~ ~ M .N~MU~~O ~ U ~ ~~~~~~m~W~NC ~
I
0)i.U
=
~::
~
I
~en
~
~c.
ê:
~~ttc:~
Q):!en"0c:
~~
~~E'8
j
~~
..sI~
~:;..
~~
ü
~
55
q;
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ s~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d d ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci d ci ci ci d ci d ci ci d ci d d d ci d d d d d d ci d ci ci ci d ci d d d ci d d d
o(0Ü
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ 8 ~~8 ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~~~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ § ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g g g g ê ~ ~ R ~ ê g ê ~ ê ~ ~ ê
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~* ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ *~ ~ *~ * *# ~** # ~*# # ~ # # ~ # #* ### ## # # ##
j~ q q qq ~~ q q q q qqq q q q q qq q q qqqq qqqq ~qq q q q qq qqq q qqq qq qq q q qqiJ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ê êê êêêê êê ê êê ê êêêêê êê~ ê~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ê ~ ~~ê ê~ ê ê ê ê ~ê
~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ê ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ê ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ê ~ ~
I i
=
~
# # # # # # # # ## # ## # ##### # ### ## # ####* # ## #* # # # ## ##### # # # # ##
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ââ â â~ ~ ~â â ~~ â â ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~:~ ~ ~ ~ â â â â â â â â â ~ â~ â â â â ~ â~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ E E E E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ E ø E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i¥:i
~
Ijen
ët~
~t:
i¥
&cocco:2
Q)"Ci:
-g
~Q)i:
~
* # *# # *# # ## # #*# ## # # # # # # *~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ *~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ *~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~*0000 M MO 0 000 00 0000 00 0 00 0000 00 OMO 0 00 0 0 0 0 000 0000000 0 0 0 0
~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ê ~ ~ ~ ê êê ~ ê ~ ê ~ ê ê ê ê ê ê ~ ê ~ ê ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g g g g g ê ~ R g ê êg ê ê t~ ~ ~
i~ ~ * ~ ~ ~ ~ * * *~ ~#~ * *~ * * ~ ~ ~~ # #~ # ~* ** * * *~~ ~ ~ * ~ ~~ ~*~~~ ~* * * ~~
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000~ ~ gg 0 0 ~ ê ~ ê ê ê ê ê ê ê ê ê ê ~ ê ~ ê ê ê ê ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ g g g g g ê ~ ~ ~ ê ê g ê ê ê ~ ~ ê
~i
* ~ * ~ # # ~ ~ ~~ # ~*~ ~ *~ ~* # ~~ ~**~ ** ~ ** *~~ ~ ~ **## ~*~ *** ~* * # ~#0000 M MOO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00
i~ ~ ~ 00 ~ ~~ 0 00000 000000 0 000 000 O~ O~O 0 000 00 0 000 0000000 0 0 ~O~ ~ N~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~
......
I...~coa.Eoü
j
E
~
~ # * ~ ~ ~ ~ * * # *~# * ** * * ~ # #** * * * ~* ~ * * # ~ * # # ~ # ~ ~ ~ **** ~ * * # * *~
b- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ â ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ â ~ â â â â â â ~ â ~ â ~ â â ~ ~ ~ ~ â â â â â â â â â â â â â â ~ â ~ â:'~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 ~ 0~, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~
~
.Sl ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~
r!~j ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ci 0 0 0 0 Ó 0 ci ci ci 0 Ó 0 0 m 0 ci m ~ ~ moo 0 0 ci 0 0 ci ci 0 0 ci 0 0 ci ci m 0~ ~ N~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
..~.. ~.! 1i.,~..¡¡ .! g
1 Q)1D8C. g I.. C'cc= 10 ecccc It Q) äi
~ ø ~ ~ i 211 ~ ~ C' C C C ~ C _.. g . c Q) 0 0 0 0 Q) ~ ~ E~ C l lE ~ Ii I~ s ~. ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ - _ ~ i Q)
-~~2æ~~~~m~~~~ro~romroø~roro~~~~2 ~ §om3~~~o~ge ~ E æl~8 0 ~ - ~i~ ro ~ ro m m 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 c ~ ~ ø ~ ø c c m c c ~ ~ ~ i.~ c ~ø ¡š~ - ~.oi?:àoààà oooooooooc:c:c: .§ m ~ CDCD::.S._.E'-E88gÆ.9.c (.Io~m
UU~~ .~: !; l! iii i ~ ii ~ iii ~ iii i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~! l ~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ iii! i l ~ ~ ~ l
§ ~ g ~ ~ ~I ~ c W ~ W W W Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ õ ¡ 0 Û ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ æ ~ ~ ~ ~ i 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ § 0c m ~ ¡ ~I ~ - 8 z ~ z z z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 5 5 5 § i ~ G GOO u ~ ~ ~ ~ . æi g ., ~ ~ ~ ü ü ~ ~ I ~ ü~ 1D~~ ~i¡ ;¡~~~~~~iii~~~~~iõ~õ~ ~~I~ii~~:gssS~ ~~~~ ~i~~~~~l~m ~ ; ; .! ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ .! ~ ~ ! ., l ~ ~ ~ ~ 'I ~ I ~ w~ e ~ ~ G G J c~ 8 ~ ~ .0 ~I ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ v v ~ cl ~ m m m m E ~ ~ 0 I E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CD ~l. bb~~ ms ~ ,c,c.c,c .c.c.c.c~~~,c~ ~~~cici~~~ ø Q) ~ Q) æ ~l ~ ~ ~ gK~ww c_': ~£~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~go~~~~~~~8ß~;;~~~ ~g g g~Æõ~~~~~~ffff~~
l-
SI~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ii
Fó
o
d
Š
ê
i
*
¡
è
~
ii
~
~
~
j
î
.
.
i
,i
i
j
.
_
ii
i
LY
,
i..
.
.
.
.
.
..
:
'
i
i

i
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
i.
'
,
'
i.
.
.
.
i
ii
..
...
.
.
.
id
ii
i
.
.
.
i
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
Y

s
e
n
s
o
r

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Hi
o
h
-
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
v

w
a
s
h
e
r
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Hi
a
h
-
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
v

c
o
i
n
-
o
o

w
a
s
h
e
r
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Hi
g
h
-
e
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

c
o
i
n
-
a
p

w
a
s
h
e
r
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Eff
i
c
i
e
n
t
,

m
e
d
i
u
m
-
t
e
m
o

o
o
e
n

c
a
s
e
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t
,

m
e
d
i
u
m
-
t
e
m
p

r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t
,

l
o
w
-
t
e
m
o

r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t
,

l
o
w
-
t
e
m
o

r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t
,

l
o
w
-
t
e
m
o

r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
Ve
r
t
i
c
a
l

n
i
a
h
t

c
o
v
e
r
s
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
75
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
Ho
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l

n
i
a
h
t

c
o
v
e
r
s
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
75
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0:0
%
0.0
%
Re
f
r
i
a
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

l
i
n
e

i
n
s
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
Do
o
r

a
a
s
k
e
t
.
w
a
l
k
-
i
n
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
Do
o
r

a
a
s
k
e
t
.
r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
Au
t
o
-
c
l
o
s
e
r
-
w
a
l
k
-
i
n
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
Au
t
o
-
c
i
o
s
e
r
-
r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
Au
t
o
-
c
l
o
s
e
r
-
w
a
l
k
-
i
n
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
Au
t
o
-
c
l
o
s
e
r
-
r
e
a
c
h
-
i
n
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
No
-
h
e
a
t

a
l
a
s
s

d
o
o
r
s
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
80
.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
An
t
i
-
s
w
e
a
t

h
e
a
t

A
S
H

I

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
90
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
An
t
i
-
s
w
e
a
t

h
e
a
t

A
S
H
)

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
90
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
Ev
a
o
o
r
a
t
o
r

F
a
n

C
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
Ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

e
v
a
p
o
r
a
t
o
r

f
a
n

m
o
t
o
r
s
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
EC
M

c
a
s
e

f
a
n

m
o
t
o
r
s
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t

l
o
w
-
t
e
m
p

c
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
o
r
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Air
-
c
o
o
l
e
d

m
u
l
t
i
o
l
e
x

s
v
s
t
e
m
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
70
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Ev
a
p
o
r
a
t
i
v
e
-
c
o
o
l
e
d

m
u
l
t
i
o
l
e
x

s
v
s
t
e
m
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
60
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
,

a
i
r
-
c
o
o
l
e
d

c
o
n
d
e
n
s
e
r
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t
,

w
a
t
e
r
-
c
o
o
l
e
d

c
o
n
d
e
n
s
e
r
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Ef
f
c
i
e
n
t
,

e
v
a
p
o
r
a
t
i
v
e

c
o
n
d
e
n
s
e
r
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Flo
a
t
i
n
g

h
e
a
d

r
e
s
s
u
r
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
0,
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
90
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Flo
a
t
i
n
a

s
u
c
t
i
o
n

o
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
80
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
T8

f
l
u
o
r
e
s
c
e
n
t

l
i
a
h
t
i
n
a
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Ele
c
t
r
o
n
i
c

T
1
2

b
a
l
l
a
s
t
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Flu
o
r
e
s
c
e
n
t

w
a
l
k
-
i
n

I
i

h
t

f
i
x
t
u
r
e
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
Re
d
u
c
e
d

P
o
w
e
r

D
e
n
s
i
t
y

L
i
a
h
t
i
n
a
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Da

l
i
a
h
t

P
h
o
t
o

C
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Oc
c
u
o
a
n
c
v

S
e
n
s
o
r
s
40
.
0
%
10
.
0
%
10
.
0
%
10
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
50
.
0
%
50
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
20
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Hia
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v

E
x
i
t

S
i
a
n
s
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Re
f
l
e
c
t
i
v
e

R
o
o
f

T
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
50
.
0
%
50
.
0
%
50
.
0
%
50
.
0
%
50
.
0
%
50
.
0
%
50
.
0
%
50
.
0
%
50
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Hia
h

P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e

W
i
n
d
o
w
s
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
0.0
%
Pr
e
m
i
u
m

W
i
n
d
o
w
s
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
0.0
%
Pr
e
m
i
u
m

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v

H
V
A
C

U
n
i
t
s
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v

B
o
n
u
s
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
90
.
0
%
0.0
%
Ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

C
o
m
o

le
x

C
o
o
l
i
n
a

S
v
s
t
e
m
s
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
Air

S
i
d
e

E
c
o
n
o
m
i
z
e
r
s
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
0.0
%
En
e
r
a
v

M
a
n
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

C
a
n
t
r
o
l

S
v
s
t
e
n
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
De
m
a
n
d

C
o
n
t
r
o
l

V
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
0.0
%
Va
r
i
a
b
l
e

S
p
e
e
d

D
r
i
v
e
s
60
.
7
%
0.
0
%
35
.
3
%
0.
0
%
20
.
3
%
49
.
8
%
64
.
0
%
13
.
7
%
33
.
3
%
0.0
%
Hio
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v

I
c
e

M
a
k
e
r
s
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l

H
o
t

F
o
o
d

H
o
l
d
i
n
a

C
a
b
i
n
e
t
s

(
E
n
e
r
a
v

S
t
a
r
)
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
Hi
g
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

F
r
y
r
s

(
E
n
e
r
g
y

S
t
a
r
)
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
'-
1
N
e
m
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y
.

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e
"
C-
6
1
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s
,
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
i
\
~
~
n
é
~

.
.
.
.
.
'
.
.
.
..
.
..
"
,
.
'
~
d
u
c
â
t
i
l
)
.
'
il
l
e
i
l
í
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
i
.
.,.
.
,
.
.
i
l
~
~
\
!
I
'
*
V
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
,
.
.
.
,
...
M
e
a
a
~
~
'
l
'
a
m
~
.
.
.
.
.
"
..
.
.
.
\
.
.
'
,
.

,
\
.
.
Hia
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v

G
r
i
d
d
l
e
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Hig
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

I
n
d
u
c
t
i
a
n

C
o
o
k
i
n
g
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Hi
a
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v

V
e
n
t
i
a
t
i
o
n

H
o
o
d
s
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
75
.
0
%
0.
0
%
El
e
c
t
i
c

S
t
e
a
m

c
o
o
k
e
r
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
El
e
c
t
c

c
o
v
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
v
e
n
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Ele
c
t
r
i
c

c
o
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n

o
v
e
n
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.0
%
Hi
a
h

E
f
f
c
i
e
n
c
v

S
t
o
c
k

l
a
n
k
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
90
.
0
%
ut
o
m
a
t
i
c

M
i
l
k
e
r

T
a
k
e
o
f
f
s
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0,
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
90
.
0
%
Blo
c
k

h
e
a
t
e
r

t
i
m
e
r
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
n
a

f
a
n
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
Hi
a
h
-
e
f
f
i
e
n
c
v

v
e
n
t
i
l
a
t
i
o
n

s
Y
S
t
e
m
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
10
0
.
0
%
Pr
o
g
r
a
m
m
a
b
l
e

v
e
n
t
H
a
l
i
o
n

c
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
75
.
0
%
VF
D

o
n

d
a
i
r
v

v
a
c
u
u
m

o
u
m
o
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.
0
%
0.0
%
90
.
0
%
25
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
30
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
35
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
40
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
45
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
50
0
h
Mo
t
o
r
,

m
i
n

N
E
M
A
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
LE
D

C
a
s

U
a
h
t
i
n
a
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Es
c
a
l
a
t
o
r

M
o
t
o
r

C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
r
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Gro
u
n
d

S
o
u
r
c
e

H
P

O
D
e
n
15
.
0
%
15
.
0
%
15
.
0
%
15
.
0
%
15
.
0
%
15
.
0
%
15
.
0
%
15
.
0
%
15
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Gr
o
u
n
d

S
o
u
r
c
e

H
P

C
l
o
s
e
d
30
.
%
30
.
0
%
30
.
0
%
30
.
0
%
30
.
0
%
30
.
0
%
30
.
0
%
30
.
0
%
30
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Ph
o
t
o
l
u
m
i
n
e
s
c
e
n
t

E
x
i
t

S
i
a
n
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
8
l
a
m
o

T
5
H
O

l
a
m
o
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
Mu
l
l
i

L
a
m
p

H
a
r
d

W
i
r
e
d

C
F
L
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
%
10
0
.
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
0.
0
%
t.
1
N
l
X
a
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y
.

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
C-
6
2
.f::
.s
~~
MClu
=
?
~
~
~~
1
j
3
~::
~
I
!
-¡~
~ë
~
fki;
:¥
Q):2en
-g
~~
.. .. (0 (0 (0 in in in ~ ~ ~ ~ C' C' C' C'0000000000000000ooaaoooooooooaooóóooóóóóóóóóóoóó
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
C' ~ in (0 .. 00 O' 0 T' C\ C' ~ in (0 .. 00ooooC;oo~~~~~tn~~~C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\ C\
.!
-7f-
,i
~
~D-
B~
en~;:Q.Z~WC0:E~t-oe
IiüD2~I:g eni:;:(I C
'0 ~~
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x

C

M
o
d
e
l

In
p
u
t
s

Ta
b
l
e

C
-
2
5

I
n
d
u
s
t
r

M
a
k
e
t

P
e
n
e
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

R
a
t
e
s
Lo
w

I
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o
""
,
S
o
C
l
i
((
,
2
I
U
I
I
(
~0
1
~
(
,Z
U
U
(
21
1
4
(~
u
n
zU
l
I
r
~U
J
l
~u
~
U
~U
~
T
(
.~
u
~
,
~O
~
.
20
2
1
;
'~
o
~
t
~0
2
.
Da
t
a
C
e
n
t
e
r
1.
1
%
1.2
%
1.3
%
1.3
%
1.3
%
1.
3
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
Ele
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
s
25
.
7
%
27
.
2
%
28
.
6
%
29
.
3
%
30
.
0
%
30
.
6
%
31
.
2
%
31
.
4
%
31
.
6
%
31
.
7
%
31
.
9
%
32
.
0
%
32
.
2
%
32
.
3
%
32
.
4
%
32
.
6
%
32
.
7
%
32
.
8
%
32
.
9
%
33
.
0
%
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
1.
1
%
1.2
%
1.3
%
1.3
%
1.3
%
1.3
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
Fo
o
d

P
r
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
i
i
15
.
8
%
16
.
7
%
17
.
6
%
18
.
0
%
18
.
5
%
18
.
8
%
19
;
2
%
19
.
3
%
19
.
4
%
19
.
5
%
19
.
6
%
19
.
7
%
19
.
8
%
19
.
9
%
20
.
0
%
2Q
.
O
%
20
.
1
%
20
.
2
%
20
.
2
%
20
.
3
%
He
a
l
t
h
1.
9
%
2.
0
%
2.
1
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.
3
%
2.
3
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.
5
%
Lo
d
g
i
n
g
1.
1
%
1.
2
%
1.3
%
1.3
%
1.3
%
1.3
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
Ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
i
n
g
2.0
%
2.
1
%
2.
2
%
2.
3
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.5
%
2.5
%
2.5
%
2.
5
%
2,
6
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%
Of
f
c
e
22
.
9
%
24
.
3
%
25
.
5
%
26
.
1
%
26
.
8
%
27
.
3
%
27
,
8
%
28
.
0
%
28
.
1
%
28
.
3
%
28
.
4
%
28
.
6
%
28
,
7
%
28
.
8
%
28
.
9
%
29
.
0
%
29
.
1
%
29
.
2
%
29
.
3
%
29
.
4
%
Pu
b
l
i
c

A
s
s
e
m
b
l
v
1,
1
%
1.
2
%
1.3
%
1.3
%
1.
3
%
1.3
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
Pu
b
l
i
c

O
r
d
e
r

a
n
d

S
a
f
e
t
y
1.1
%
1.
2
%
1.
3
%
1.
3
%
1.
3
%
1.3
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
Wa
r
e
h
o
u
s
e
/
S
t
o
r
a
a
e
57
.
8
%
61
.
2
%
64
.
3
%
66
.
0
%
67
.
5
%
68
.
9
%
70
.
2
%
70
.
6
%
71
.
0
%
71
.
4
%
71
.
7
%
72
.
1
%
72
.
4
%
72
.
7
%
73
.
0
%
73
.
3
%
73
.
5
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
Wa
t
e
r

P
r
o
c
e
s
s
1.1
%
1.
2
%
1.
3
%
1.
3
%
1.
3
%
1.3
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.4
%
1.
4
%
1.
4
%
1.4
%
Co
m
b
i
n
e
d
13
.
2
%
14
.
0
%
14
.
7
%
15
.
1
%
15
.
5
%
15
.
8
%
16
.
1
%
16
.
2
%
16
.
3
%
16
.
4
%
16
.
4
%
16
.
5
16
.
6
%
16
.
7
%
16
.
7
%
16
.
8
%
16
.
9
'
l
16
.
9
%
17
.
0
%
17
.
0
%
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e

I
n
c
e
n
t
l
v
e

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o
.S
.
.
t
ó
i
20
0
1
l
0
20
1
20
.
1
2
20
U
20
'
4
20
1
5
,.
2
0
.
1
1
20
1
20
1
8
1I
..

~
0
~
1
20
2
2
2u
D
. Z
0
2
4
..
2
1
~
5
2U
2
1
1
20
2
2U
2
~
Da
t
a
C
e
n
t
e
r
1.
8
°
0
1.

%
2.
0
°
0
2.0
%
2.1
%
2.
1
%
2.
1
%
2.1
%
2.

%
2.2
%
2.
.2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
Y
o
.2
.3
%
2.3
%
El
e
c
t
r
m
c
s
40
.
1
%
42
.
5
%
44
.
6
%
45
.
8
%
46
.
8
%
47
.
8
%
48
.
7
%
49
.
0
%
49
.
2
%
49
.
5
%
49
.
8
%
50
.
0
%
50
.
2
%
50
.
4
%
50
.
6
%
50
.
8
%
51
.
0
%
51
.
2
%
51
.
3
%
51
.
5
%
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
1.8
%
1.9
%
2.0
%
2.0
%
2.1
%
2.1
%
2.
1
%
2.
1
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
Fo
o
d

P
r
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
a
24
.
6
%
26
.
1
%
27
.
4
%
28
.
1
%
28
.
8
%
29
.
4
%
29
.
9
%
30
.
1
%
30
.
3
%
30
.
4
%
30
.
6
%
30
.
7
%
30
.
9
%
31
.
0
%
31
.
1
%
31
.
2
%
31
.
4
%
31
.
5
%
31
.
6
%
31
.
7
%
He
a
l
t
h
3.
0
%
3.2
%
3.3
%
3.4
%
3.5
%
3.
6
%
3.
6
%
3.
6
%
3.7
%
3.7
%
3.
7
%
3.
7
%
3.
7
%
3.8
%
3.8
%
3.
8
%
3.
8
%
3.8
%
3.8
%
3.8
%
Lo
d

I
n
a
1.
8
%
1.9
%
2.0
%
2.0
%
2.1
%
2.1
%
2.
1
%
2.
1
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
Ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
i
n
o
3.
1
%
3.
3
%
3.5
%
3.6
%
3.7
%
3.8
%
3.
8
%
3.
8
%
3.9
%
3.9
%
3.
9
%
3.
9
%
3.
9
%
4.
0
%
4.0
%
4.0
%
4.
0
%
4.
0
%
4.0
%
4.0
%
Of
i
c
e
35
.
7
%
37
.
9
%
39
.
8
%
40
.
8
%
41
.
7
%
42
.
6
%
43
.
4
%
43
.
7
%
43
.
9
%
44
.
1
%
44
.
4
%
44
.
6
%
44
.
8
%
45
.
0
%
45
.
1
%
45
.
3
%
45
.
5
%
45
.
6
%
45
.
8
%
45
.
9
%
Pu
b
l
i
c

A
s
s
e
m
b
i
v
1.
8
%
1.
9
%
2.
0
%
2.
0
%
2.
1
%
2.1
%
2.1
%
2.
1
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.
3
%
2.3
%
Pu
b
l
i
c

O
r
d
e
r

a
n
d

S
a
f
e
t
v
1.
8
%
1.
9
%
2.
0
%
2.
0
%
2.
1
%
2.1
%
2.1
%
2.
1
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.
3
%
2.
3
%
Wa
r
e
h
o
u
s
e
/
S
t
o
r
a
o
e
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
Wa
t
e
r

P
r
o
c
e
s
s
1.
8
%
1.
9
%
2.
0
%
2.
0
%
2.
1
%
2.1
%
2.1
%
2.
1
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
~.2
%
2.¿
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
22
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.
3
%
2.3
%
Co
m
b
i
n
e
d
20
.
4
%
21
.
5
%
22
.
6
%
23
.
1
%
23
.
6
%
24
.
1
%
24
.
5
%
24
.
7
%
24
.
8
%
24
.
9
%
25
.
0
%
25
.
1
%
25
.
3
%
25
.
4
%
25
.
5
%
25
.
5
%
25
.
8
%
25
.
7
%
25
.
8
%
25
.
9
%
Ag
g
r
e
s
s
i
v
e

I
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o
~
~
~~
,
se
c
t
r
~O
"
I
I
.
~O
1
1
.2
0
1
2
20
J
t
~o
.
.
'
;ø
l
l
'
~u
~
u
.2
U
2
1
20
2
2
~U
~
f
¿U
~
~
Da
t
a

C
e
n
t
e
r
1.9
%
2.
1
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.3

Yo

.3
%
2.;
;
%
2.
3
%
2.
4
'
7
.
.
2.4
%
2.
4
%
2.

%
.4
¿.
4
'
.
2.
4
%
El
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
s
43
.
2
%
45
.
8
%
48
.
1
%
49
.
3
%
50
.
5
%
51
.
5
%
52
.
5
%
52
.
8
%
53
.
1
%
53
.
4
%
53
.
7
%
53
.
9
%
54
.
1
%
54
.
4
%
54
.
6
%
54
.
8
%
55
.
0
%
55
.
2
%
55
.
4
%
55
.
5
%
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
1.9
%
2.0
%
2.1
%
2.
2
%
2.
2
%
2.
3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
Fo
o
d

P
r
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
o
26
.
6
%
28
.
2
%
29
.
6
%
30
.
3
%
31
.
0
%
31
.
7
%
32
.
3
%
32
.
5
%
32
.
7
%
32
.
8
%
33
.
0
%
33
.
2
%
33
.
3
%
33
.
4
%
33
.
6
%
33
.
7
%
33
.
8
%
33
.
9
%
34
.
0
%
34
.
2
%
He
a
l
t
h
3.2
%
3.4
%
3.
6
%
3.
7
%
3.
8
%
3.
8
%
3.9
%
3.9
%
4.0
%
4.0
%
4.
0
%
4.0
%
4.0
%
4.0
%
4.
1
%
4.
1
%
4.1
%
4.1
%
4.1
%
4.
1
%
Lo
d
g
i
n
g
1.9
%
2.0
%
2.1
%
2.
2
%
2.2
%
2.
3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
Ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
i
n
o
3.4
%
3.6
%
3.8
%
3.
9
%
4.0
%
4.
1
%
4.1
%
4.2
%
4.2
%
4.2
%
4.
2
%
4.
2
%
4.3
%
4.3
%
4.
3
%
4.
3
%
4.3
%
4.3
%
4.4
%
4.
4
%
Of
i
c
e
38
.
5
%
40
.
8
%
42
.
9
%
44
.
0
%
45
.
0
%
45
.
9
%
46
.
8
%
47
.
1
%
47
.
3
%
47
.
6
%
47
.
8
%
48
.
1
%
48
.
3
%
48
.
5
%
48
.
7
%
48
.
8
%
49
.
0
%
49
.
2
%
49
.
3
%
49
.
5
%
Pu
b
l
i
c

A
s
s
e
m
b
l
y
1.9
%
2.0
%
2.1
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
3
%
2.
3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
Pu
b
l
i
c

O
r
d
e
r

a
n
d

S
a
f
e
t
y
1.9
%
2.0
%
2.1
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
Wa
r
e
h
o
u
s
e
/
S
t
o
r
a
o
e
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
Wa
t
e
r

P
r
o
c
e
s
s
1.9
%
2.0
%
2.1
%
2.2
%
2.2
%
2.
3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
2.
4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
Co
m
b
i
n
e
d
21
.
9
%
23
.
1
%
24
.
2
%
24
.
8
%
25
.
4

V
.
25
.
9
%
26
.
;
1
%
26
.
5
%
26
.
6
%
¿6
.
8
%
26
.
9
%
27
.
0
27
.
1
%
7.2
%
27
.
4
%
27
.
5
%
2f
.
5
27
.
6
%
û.
7
'
.
ü.
ö
%
Ma
x
i
m
u
m

I
n
c
e
n
t
i
v
e

S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o
./
..
,
5
è
C
l
r
I
.
¿
u
o
"
.
..~
U
w
2U
1
2
,
¿O
J
(
;ø
~
20
2
1
20
2
2
/
20
2
3
20
2
4
.
~
u
~
.
Da
t
a

C
e
n
t
e
r
2.
0
%
2.
2
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.4
%
2.
4
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.5
%
2.5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.5
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
2.
6
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
2.t
j
'
Y
o
El
e
c
t
r
o
n
i
c
s
46
.
3
%
49
.
1
%
51
.
6
%
52
.
9
%
54
.
1
%
55
.
3
%
56
.
3
%
56
.
6
%
57
.
0
%
57
.
3
%
57
.
5
%
57
.
8
%
58
.
1
%
58
.
3
%
58
.
5
%
58
.
8
%
59
.
0
%
59
.
2
%
59
.
4
%
59
.
6
%
Ed
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
2.
0
%
2.
2
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.5
%
2.5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
2.
6
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
Fo
o
d

P
r
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
o
28
.
5
%
30
.
2
%
31
.
7
%
32
.
6
%
33
.
3
%
34
.
0
%
34
.
6
%
34
.
8
%
35
.
0
%
35
.
2
%
35
.
4
%
35
.
6
%
35
.
7
%
35
.
9
%
36
.
0
%
36
.
1
%
36
.
3
%
36
.
4
%
36
.
5
%
36
.
6
%
He
a
l
t
h
3.
4
%
3.7
%
3.8
%
3.9
%
4.0
%
4.1
%
4.
2
%
4.
2
%
4.2
%
4.3
%
4.
3
%
4.
3
%
4.
3
%
4.3
%
4.4
%
4.
4
%
4.4
%
4.4
%
4.4
%
4.4
%
Lo
d
a
i
n
o
2.
0
%
2.
2
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.5
%
2.5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
2.
6
%
2.6
%
2.
6
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
Ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
i
n
a
3.
6
%
3.9
%
4.1
%
4.2
%
4.3
%
4.3
%
4.
4
%
4.
5
%
4.
5
%
4.5
%
4.5
%
4.
5
%
4.
6
%
4.6
%
4.6
%
4.
6
%
4.
6
%
4.
7
%
4.7
%
4.7
%
Of
f
i
c
e
41
.
3
%
43
.
8
%
46
.
0
%
47
.
2
%
48
.
3
%
49
.
3
%
50
.
2
%
50
.
5
%
50
.
8
%
51
.
1
%
51
.
3
%
5'.
5
%
51
.
8
%
52
.
0
%
52
.
2
%
52
.
4
%
52
.
6
%
52
.
8
%
52
.
9
%
53
.
1
%
Pu
b
l
i
c

A
s
s
e
m
b
l
v
2.
0
%
2.
2
%
2.
3
%
2.3
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.5
%
2.5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.
6
%
2.6
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
Pu
b
l
i
c

O
r
d
e
r

a
n
d

S
a
f
e
t
y
2.
0
%
2.
2
%
2.3
%
2.3
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.5
%
2.5
%
2.5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%
2.6
%
2.6
%
Wa
r
e
h
o
u
s
e
/
S
t
o
r
a
o
e
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
,
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
73
.
8
%
Wa
t
e
r

P
r
o
c
e
s
s
2.
0
%
2.
2
%
2.
3
%
2.3
%
2.4
%
2.4
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.5
%
2.5
%
2.
5
%
2.
5
%
2.
6
%
2.6
%
2.
6
%
2.
6
%
2.6
%
2.
6
%
2.6
%
Co
m
b
i
n
e
d
2;
,
.
4
%
24
.
7
%
25
.
9
%
26
.
6
%
27
.
1
%
27
.
7
%
28
.
2
%
28
.
3
%
28
.
5
%
28
.
6
%
28
.
8
%
28
.
9
%
29
.
0
%
29
.
1
%
29
.
3
%
29
.
4
%
29
.
5
%
29
.
6
%
29
.
6
%
29
.
7
°
0
c,
1
N
e
x
n
r
Id
a
h
o

P
o
w
e
r

C
o
m
p
a
n
y

-

D
e
m
a
n
d

S
i
d
e

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l

S
t
u
d
y

-

V
o
l
u
m
e

I
I
C-
6
4
Corporate Headquarters
101 Second Street, 10th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-3672
tel: [phone]
fax: [phone]
ww.nexant.com
AIC Cool Credit Survey
1 of 8
2of8
30f8
4 af8
Sof8
6of8
70f8
8 af8
IDAHO POWER
DEMAND RESPONSE ANALYSIS REPORT
2009 AIC Cool Credit Program
Prepared By:
Prepared For:
Mike Darrington
Idaho Power Company
January 2009
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 3
2009 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................................... 3
Data Collection......................................................................................................................................................3
Baseline Day Determination .................................................................................................................................4
Outdoor Temperature Data ..................................................................................................................................4
Load Management Model....................................................................................................................................4
Snapback...............................................................................................................................................................4
Energy Savings (kWh) ...........................................................................................................................................5
DEMAND REDUCTION ANALyS~S..................................................................................................................5
METHODOLOGy........................................................................................................................................................ 5
POPULATION SAMPLE.............................................................................................................................................. 6
DEMAND REDUCTION RESULTS............................................................................................................................... 7
OUTDOOR TEMPERATURE DATA...........................................................................................................................13
ENERGY SAVINGS ...................................................................................................................................................13
INDOOR TEMPERATURE ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................15
METHODOLOGy.............................................................................."..............................................."...."......"...........15
AGGREGATE HOURLY INDOOR TEMPERA TUREANALYSISAND RESULTS............................................................15
INDIVIDUAL INDOOR TEMPERA TURE ANALYSIS AND RESULTS - HOURLY AVERAGE DATA................................20
INDIVIDUAL INDOOR TEMPERATURE ANALYSIS AND RESULTS - 5-MINUTE DATA ............................................24
DUTY CYCLE ANALyS~S...............................................................................................................................28
METHODOLOGy......................................................................................................................................................28
DUTY CYCLE ANALYSIS RESULTS...........................................................................................................................29
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................33
ApPENDIX .................................................................................................................................................. 3S
ApPENDlxA - DEMAND REDUCTION CHARTS......................................................................................................36
CZ 2 - Charts .......................................................................................................................................................36
CZ 3 - Charts .......................................................................................................................................................40
CZ 3_Civil- Charts...............................................................................................................................................44
CZ 3_MHAFB - Charts .........................................................................................................................................48
ApPENDIX B -INDOOR TEMPERA TURE CHARTS ..................................................................................................52
Aggregate Hourly Indoor Temperature Results ..................................................................................................52
Individual Indoor Temperature Results - Hourly Average Data..........................................................................56
Individual Indoor Temperature Results - 5-Minute Data ...................................................................................67
ApPENDIX C - DUTY CYCLE CHARTS ..................................................................................................................... 71
CZ 2 Duty Cycle....................................................................................................................................................71
CZ 3 Duty Cycle....................................................................................................................................................72
CZ 3_CIVIL Duty Cycle..........................................................................................................................................74
CZ 3_MHAFB Duty Cycle .....................................................................................................................................76
ApPENDIX D - PROGRAM TARIFF...........................................................................................................................78
ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Idaho Power is addressing their growing energy demands with a robust portfolio of energy efficiency
and demand response programs. Idaho Power's A/C Cool Credit program specifically addresses this
growing residential HVAC demand imposed on the electrical system by a growing population. In the
summer of 2009, the program had over 32,000 participants. Of these participants, 3,594 are in cooling
zone 2 (Twin Falls area) and 28,465 are in cooling zone 3 (Boise/Mountain Home area).
The program's function is to shift some of the HVAC demand contributing to the utility's system peak
away from the peak hours by implementing curtailment strategies. The curtailment strategies limit the
time each HVAC unit may operate within each 30 minute period ofthe curtailment period.
In order to measure the program achievements during the 2009 season, Idaho Power collected runtime
and temperature data and contracted Paragon Consulting Services (Paragon) to perform the analysis of
the data.
The measured demand reduction of the main cooling zone populations, CZ 2 and CZ 3, was an average of
0.196 and 0.394kW, respectively for all curtailments. This results in an average demand reduction per
curtailment of 11,919 kW for the entire program. This was well below the expected demand reduction
of 0.8 - 1.2kW per unit found in other utilty studies. It is expected that this is due to a large number of
units naturally operating below the enforced duty cycle of the curtailments. The similarity between the
33% cycling and 50% cycling demand reduction also supports this assumption. The results for the CZ 3-
Mountain Home Air Force Base (MHAFB) sub group, however, do meet the expected demand reduction
levels of typical HVAC curtailment programs with an average demand reduction of 1. 164kW for all
curtailments. In fact, the demand reduction for this sub group was fairly constant over the outdoor
temperature range of the curtailments. This suggests that these HVAC units operate near a 100% duty
cycle when the outdoor temperature rises above 88°F.
Upon inspection of the demand reduction charts presented in Appendix A, it appears possible that the
curtailment events began one hour earlier than reported. If this is found to be true, making the
adjustment would result in greater demand reduction values.
The indoor temperature results corroborated the demand reduction results. On average, most
customers experienced a very modest temperature increase during a curtailment period. However, the
indoor temperature analysis was limited in that no correlations could be made between indoor
temperature fluctuations and demand reduction values. It would be valuable to compare these two
analyses to determine if those customers who had no change in demand are the same customers who
had the highest increase in indoor temperature. If this is the case, one could assume that these
customers had their A/C unit turned off.
The results of the duty cycle analysis show that on average for all curtailments, 52% of the customers
had an average natural duty cycle below the enforced duty cycle of the curtailment at the beginning of
the event. This means that the operation of the air conditioner was not altered by the curtailment.
These customers are therefore free riders.
1
Idaho Power has built a large residential demand reduction resource; however, the conservative results
for the 2009 summer season suggest the program may be operating below its potentiaL.
The low measured demand reduction, minimal indoor temperature drift, and duty cycle analysis all
support using a minimum of 50% cycling strategy in the future and even suggest testing 67% duty cycle
curtailments to improve program load reduction results. Indoor temperature analysis should be
continued along with customer surveys to maintain customer satisfaction with the program.
2
INTRODUCTION
As the number of residential HVAC systems increases in the U.S., so does summer-time energy use. Use
of HVAC systems greatly increases electrical demand, and places burdens on Power Supply, Power
Contracts, and T&D departments as the utility tries to match the need. Many utilities have embarked on
Demand Reduction programs that team the utilty and its customers to curtail HVAC use in times of
demand stress.
Idaho Power is addressing their growing energy demands with a robust portfolio of energy efficiency
and demand response programs. Idaho Powers A/C Cool Credit program specifically addresses this
growing residential HVAC demand imposed on the electrical system by a growing population. In the
summer of 2009, the program had 32,059 participants. Of these participants, 3,594 are in cooling zone 2
(Twin Falls area) and 28,465 are in cooling zone 3 (Boise/Mountain Home area).
The A/C Cool Credit program is a demand response program operated from June through August, which
offers a monthly bil credit to participants. The guidelines for the program are contained in the program
tariff, Schedule 81 (see Appendix D). The program is open to Idaho Power residential customers with
central air conditioning systems. The program's function is to shift some of the HVAC demand
contributing to the utilty's system peak off of the peak hours by implementing curtailment strategies.
The curtailment strategies limit the time each HVAC unit may operate within each 30 minute period of
the curtailment period. Curtailment periods typically last around three hours and begin around 4pm in
the afternoon. The utility places limits on the curtailment events for customer satisfaction. Two
examples of these customer satisfaction limits are that curtailments may only occur on non-holiday
weekdays and are limited to no more than 40 hours per month with the exception of a system
emergency.
2009 PROGRAM PERFORMANCE
In order to measure the program achievements during the 2009 season, Idaho Power collected runtime
and temperature data and contracted Paragon Consulting Services (Paragon) to perform the analysis of
the data.
Data Collection
Idaho Power placed runtime data loggers on 57 HVAC compressors, 30 units in cooling zone 2 and 27
units in cooling zone 3, at program participant homes to measure HVAC runtime. To measure the
program's effect on customer comfort, 42 of those homes also received a temperature data logger to
measure the indoor temperature during curtailments.
The sample of 27 HVAC units in cooling zone 3 included 10 units located at the Mountain Home Air
Force Base. Due to the unique nature of the Air Force Base homes and the fact that these homes are
not individually billed for their electricity use, Paragon analyzed these units separately from the
remaining units in cooling zone 3.
3
During either the logger installation or removal, technicians collected model number and some
nameplate data on each unit, including SEER, tonnage, volts, amps, and unit age. This data was used to
determine the kW load of each air conditioning compressor.
Idaho Power provided the exported runtime and temperature data along with the collected HVAC
nameplate data to Paragon for analysis. This report presents that analysis and discussion.
Baseline Day Determination
To estimate the load reduction achieved during load curtailments, the average hourly load from each
event day was compared against averaged hourly load developed from non-curtailment days selected
for the baseline.
Outdoor Temperature Data
Hourly outdoor temperature data was collected from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's (NOAA) historical weather archives. Weather data for both baseline and curtailment
days was incorporated into the averaged load profiles to provide an indication of the effect of ambient
temperature on the behavior of the air conditioning load. In addition, weather data shows the similarity
in weather profiles between baseline and test days. In order to effectively compare the baseline and
curtailment day load chart, the baseline load chart was adjusted using an offset factor. The offset factor
was calculated as the difference in kW between the baseline and performance load during the hour
prior to the start of the curtailment. This offset factor ensures that underlying differences in load due to
slight differences in outdoor temperature or other external factors were taken into account.
Load Management Model
All of this data was input into Paragon's load management model for demand reduction, energy savings,
snapback energy, and outdoor temperature comparisons. The HVAC nameplate data was used to
determine the kW load for each air conditioner unit. The load management model converted the
interval runtime data, compressor kW load data and temperature data into average load charts for each
sample, for each day. The charts present the hourly average kW load as a function of hourly bins. These
averaged load charts provide a composite representation of the entire air conditioner load profile for
each sample group included in the analysis.
Snapback
The purpose of most imposed curtailments is to limit the air conditioner duty cycle to a "not to exceed"
operating leveL. In this way, the operating time of air conditioners is reduced, the average kW demand is
reduced, and the energy consumption of the system is reduced for the duration of the curtailment
period. After the curtailment period ends, however, the air conditioner run-time and energy
consumption generally increase to make up for the cooling deficit incurred during the curtailment
period. This period generally lasts from one to three hours, depending on the time of day, length, and
severity of the curtailment. An analysis was performed to evaluate the energy reduction achievable
during curtailment periods, and the corresponding energy snapback occurring during the post-
curtailment period.
4
Energy snapback is defined as the additional energy, in kWh, required to recover from a utility
generated air conditioner curtailment event. Demand snapback was reviewed as welL. It is simply the
demand increase over the baseline demand once the event is completed.
The energy snapback percentage provides Idaho Power an indication of kWh sales recovery following
the end of a curtailment period. The equation used assumes most of the snapback is captured within the
2 hour period post-curtailment. As noted above, however, this snapback period may be shorter or
longer depending on the specific curtailment events imposed by Idaho Power.
Snapbacks are typically expressed between 0% and 100%. For example, if a customer saved 1.0 kWh
during a curtailment event, but then immediately after the event required 0.6 kWh above baseline
conditions to restore the desired temperature levels in the home, this would be considered a 60%
snapback. In other words, 60% of the energy saved during the curtailment was "lost" during the
snapback period.
Energy Savings (kWh)
In addition to reporting snapback energy, actual kWh energy savings is reported. To obtain the load
reduction and energy snapback resulting from a cycling event, air conditioner operating data for the
event day and average data from selected non-event baseline days is tabulated for comparison. Load
data in kW is averaged over one-hour periods and presented as average hourly demand for one hour
time bins for both the event day and non-event day conditions. The load data summed over the
duration of the curtailment event results in the kWh energy consumption for that period. The difference
between the baseline energy and event day energy results in the energy savings attributable to the
curtailment event. By taking into account the hours of the snapback period, the net kWh energy savings
for that curtailment day is calculated.
DEMAND REDUCTION ANALYSIS
METHODOLOGY
The HVAC compressor runtime data was collected using Dent Instrument's SMARTlogger™ series
CTlogger™ as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Dent Instrument's SMARTlogger™ series CTlogger™
These loggers record the state (on/off) of the measured device, in this case the HVAC compressor, by
continually monitoring the signal of a split core current transformer (CT) clamped around the electrical
5
supply wire to the HVAC compressor unit. The data loggers were set to record the on/off state with a
time stamp in internal memory at a specified 1-minute interval until the memory was full or the data
was collected.
In order to determine the demand (kW) reduction the HVAC compressor demand was also collected.
The compressor demand was calculated using current and voltage measured using a hand-held
multimeter and an assumed power factor of 0.89. If current and voltage measurements were not
available the unit's nameplate data was used. Equation 1 shows this calculation.
Equation 1: Nameplate Demand Calculation
Demand (kW) = 12/(SEER*0.9)
The demand reduction is calculated by first converting the logger data into hourly average demand data
for each HVAC unit. Then the hourly data of the group is averaged for each curtailment day to find the
test day average kW. The non-test day average kW, or baseline kW, is calculated as the average of the
three days with the greatest demand selected from the previous ten non-test weekdays. The three
baseline days are ranked by the greatest hourly demand that occurs during the curtailment period.
In order to make a proper comparison of the test day demand and the baseline demand the baseline
demand must be adjusted. The adjustment method used in this analysis was to scale each baseline hour
by the percentage difference of the test day demand and the baseline demand in the hour preceding
the curtailment. This adjustment helps to account for differences in weather and the number of HVAC
units operating.
POPULA TlONSAMPLE
The population sample consisted of 57 residential customers within Idaho Power's service territory. This
population was stratified by two cooling zones CZ 2 and CZ 3. Outdoor temperature data for Boise was
used to represent CZ 2 while the temperature data for Twin Falls was used to represent CZ 3.
The CZ 3 stratum was further divided into two groups expecting a difference in behavior from the units
located at the Mountain Home Air Force Base from the civilian population. These two groups are CZ
3_CIVIL and CZ 3_MHAFB. The stratum sizes are presented inTable 1.
Table 1: Count of Sample Population by Strata
Strata Number of Units
CZ2 30
6
DEMAND REDUCTION RESULTS
The measured runtime and demand was analyzed to determine the achieved demand reduction of the
sample. Two curtailment strategies were used during the measurement period, 33% and 50% cycling.
Cycling curtailment strategies disallow the HVAC compressor to operate for some percentage of every
half hour during the curtailment period. The 33% and 50% cycling strategies curtail 10 and 15 minutes
per half hour, respectively.
Idaho Power conducted seven curtailments during this measurement period. Table 2 shows these dates
and curtailment strategies.
Table 2: Curtailment Events
The following figures show the graphical representation of the hourly test day and baseline demand as
well as the average hourly outdoor temperature for both a 33% cycling curtailment day and a 50%
cycling curtailment day. The figures shown here clearly reveal the demand reduction during the
curtailment period. Charts for each group and curtailment event are shown in Appendix A.
7
Figure 2: Demand Reduction Chart for 33% Cycling Strategy
Group:cz 3_MHAFB
7/1612099 :mciline4.7PM
load impad Data Summary ¡Per Ale Unit!:
Peak Demand Reduction: 1,261kW
4.00
3.00
3.00
l 2.500
..c:
l 2.00
l
.i 1.51)(
t.oo
O.SO
0,00
11 U 13 14 lS 16 17 18 HI 20
12Q.O
105.()
90.0 ..
l..75.0 ~..
E
if
6(1.l0.ili45,(:l..!..
30.0 ~
15.0
(l.(l
ii21
HÐl
_T:(%t Oay Ä¥t:l'dßf' kW ~Non,-T~:$t O¥lyA:-'t'rrj$f~ kW -T4JSt Oay HOl,ldy Avg Temptlltuf€cl -N:othT-est: Oav Hourlv Ave. Tøniperalw:t.
8
Figure 3: Demand Reduction Chart for 50% Cycling Strategy
Group: CZ 3_MHAFB
7 12Sf2!!. SfCyi;ll!! 4-7PM
lóad Impact Data Summaiy jlte' Ale UnilJ:
Pe-ak Oemand R!luctioa 1.l67kw
4Jloo
3,500
120.0
1()$J)
3.000 9(W E
7S.t il~
i J.SOOe
-g
~
!: MOO
j~ 1.500
1000
OO,Q i
f45.0 _
llaOA'
0.500 15.
OAloo 0.0
11 12 H 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 n
HOW
The following two tables (Table 3 and Table 4) present the achieved demand reduction summarized in
increasing detail by group and strategy. The first, Table 3, presents the average demand reduction by
curtailment strategy and groups. The tables show the average demand reduction of each hour of the
curtailment as well as the average over the curtailment duration. The final column identifies the
demand reduction of the first hour following a curtailment. A negative value in this column is expected
and indicates the HVAC system's recovery to normal operation also known as snapback.
For all groups, the demand reduction achieved during the 7/23/2009 curtailment event was not included
in the averages. This was due to erratic weather during the curtailment period in which the
temperature dropped approximately 7 degrees.
9
Table 3: Cycling Strategy Average Demand Reduction (kW) by Group
10
Table 4Table 4 reveals an added level of detail by presenting the average demand reduction by date. It
can be seen there is very little consistency within any group, even with the same strategy. This is most
likely due to the limited number of curtailments and small sample sizes.
11
Table 4: Average Demand Reduction (kW) Data
12
OUTDOOR TEMPERATURE DATA
The temperature characteristics during the curtailment period for each curtailment date and cooling
zone is presented in Table 5. There is no correlation between outdoor temperature and load reduction.
Table 5: Curtailment Period Outdoor Temperature
ENERGY SA VINGS
In addition to demand reduction there may also be energy (kWh) savings attributable to each
curtailment. Because the energy consumption is typically greater than the baseline in the hours
following a curtailment, known as the snapback period, the gross energy savings is the energy saved
during the curtailment subtracted by the extra energy consumed during the snapback period. Also,
because the snapback period may differ from one site to the next, an average snapback period of two
hours following the curtailment was assumed for this analysis. Table 6 presents the average energy
savings for each curtailment strategy by group.
13
Table 6: Average Energy Savings (kWh) by Curtailment Group and Cycling Strategy
14
INDOOR TEMPERATURE ANALYSIS
During the 2009 AIC Cool Credit summer test season, indoor temperature data was collected on a
subset of customers sampled for M&V. A total of 42 customers in Cooling Zone 3 were sampled for the
indoor temperature analysis group. Data was unavailable for three customers, resulting in a total indoor
temperature sample of 39 customers.
Indoor temperature was recorded in an effort to determine how curtailment events affect the indoor
temperature of a home. This allows the utility to analyze the impact of various curtailment strategies on
indoor temperature in order to maximize load reduction while maintaining customer comfort levels.
METHODOLOGY
Indoor temperature was measured and recorded with a HOBO temperature logger (see Figure 4, below)
placed inside the home. The HOBO logger samples and records the temperature data at predetermined
intervals. For the 2009 summer season, the HOBO loggers were set to record the indoor temperature
with a time stamp at five minute intervals. The data is stored in the HOBO device until the time of
retrieval, at which point the data from each logger is downloaded into a comma separated values file.
Figure 4: Example of HOBO Temperature Data Logger
Indoor temperature was analyzed for each curtailment day in aggregate, to obtain average temperature
changes, and at the individual level, to obtain frequencies of temperature differentials and temperature
drift. Analyses include curtailment day versus baseline day comparisons, as well as within-customer
comparisons on a curtailment day. Each analysis approach is discussed in detail, below, with
accompanying charts and summary tables.
AGGREGATE HOURLY INDOOR TEMPERATURE ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
The indoor temperature data was aggregated across customers for each hour, resulting in average
hourly indoor temperature across the sample for the entire summer season. These hourly averages
were then examined for each curtailment day and compared to the same baseline days that were
determined from the load reduction analysis. Although there is little variation in indoor temperature
between curtailment days and baseline days, the data presented below was normalized in the hour prior
to the start of the curtailment to allow an equalized comparison.
15
Of the seven curtailment events, three consisted of 33% cycling, only. These events occurred on
7/16/2009, 7/17/2009, and 7/23/2009. The hottest 33% cycling curtailment day occurred on 7/17/2009,
with a maximum outdoor temperature of 99.9°F. The chart in Figure 5 shows the results for the indoor
temperature analysis for this curtailment day.
Figure 5: Average Hourly Indoor Temperature Profile for 7/17/2009 Curtailment versus Baseline Days*,_._-------_.__._-----_... . .._------~_._-i Group:CZ3
aiiwæ "" Cying4-lDm
Avera lncoorTernra Im lPerHOB Loger)
Test Da versus Norized Baline Da
Maximum Temperaure Dierential DuringCurtilment: 0.95 oi
78.5
Curtailmen
Period
78.0 .
77.5 .
g
~:i
i! 77.0.,..
E
~ 76.5
g~
'; 76.0
"C:io:i
g: 75.5 .
l!
~
75.0
74.5
74.0
12:00PM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM 7:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00 PM
. Test Day 00 Baseline Day(s)
*Note that the hourly bins in this and the following charts represent data for the hour beginning at that bin time. For example,
the 4:00 PM bin represents the average hourly data from 4:00 PM to 4:59 PM.
The average hourly indoor temperature during the three hour curtailment fluctuated between 77.14°F
and 77.98°F. On average, the greatest temperature differential during these hours between the
curtailment day and the averaged baseline days was 0.95°F, and occurred in the final hour of the
curtailment.
The curtailment on the previous day, 7/16/2009, had similar indoor temperature results. The day was
slightly cooler with a maximum daily temperature of 96.6°F, approximately 3°F cooler than 7/17/2009.
On average, the greatest temperature differential between the curtailment day and the averaged
baseline days between 4pm and 7pm was 1.12°F. As expected, this occurred in the final hour of the
curtailment. A copy of the indoor temperature profile for 7/16/2009 is included in Appendix B.
16
The coolest 33% cycling curtailment day occurred on 7/23/2009, with a maximum outdoor temperature
of 90.0°F. The maximum outdoor temperature during the hours of the curtailment was lower, at just
87.0°F. The combined effect of a cooler temperature day plus a conservative cycling strategy resulted in
a very low temperature differential between the curtailment and baseline days. The chart in Figure 6
shows the results for the indoor temperature analysis for this curtailment day.
Figure 6: Average Hourly Indoor Temperature Profile for 7/23/2009 Curtailment versus Baseline Days
Group:CZ3
07t13lfl. 33 Cying4-7pm
Average IndoorTemperature Impact (Per HOBO Lorl
Test Da versus Normlized Baeline Da
Maximum Temperature Differential During Curtilment: 0.08 OF
77.5
Curtailment
Perod
77.0
s
2!:J
ë 76.5
8-
E~
l 76.0;.;::Jo:i
gi 75.5 ..l!
~
75.0
74.5 ..
12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00 PM
. Test Day !! Baseline Day(s)
As shown in the chart, the average hourly indoor temperature during the three hour curtailment had
little temperature fluctuation, rising from 76.72°F to 77.21°F. On average, the greatest temperature
differential during these hours between the curtailment day and the averaged baseline days was only
0.08°F, and occurred in the final hour of the curtailment. This small difference is likely due to the
baseline days being hotter than the curtailment day, with a greater gain in indoor temperature than a
cooler day. However, examining just the curtailment day also shows a modest increase in average
hourly indoor temperature of approximately 0.5°F between the hour prior to and the final hour of the
curtailment.
Of the seven curtailment events, three consisted of 50% cycling, only. These events occurred on
7/20/2009, 7/21/2009, and 7/28/2009. The hottest 50% cycling curtailment day occurred on 7/21/2009,
with a maximum outdoor temperature of 96.9°F. The chart in Figure 7 shows the results for the indoor
temperature analysis for this curtailment day.
17
Figure 7: Average Hourly Indoor Temperature Profile for 7/21/2009 Curtailment versus Baseline Days
'I.................................................................._........................................._................................................................................................_._........_.............._................_................................................................................................................_.........................................1Group:CZ3I1 !j Cyjnc+7p I
Avra InilrTempera Impa IperHOBQ WUdTest Da vers Noriied Baline Da
Maximum Temperare Dirent DuñngCurlment: L34 OF II
78.5 CunenPerd
g
2! 710
~..
~ 76.5
~
~ 76.0
.s,."i
5 75.5:i
i 75.0
~
L.
78.0
77.5
74.5
74.0
73.5
12:00 PM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM 7:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00 PM
. Test Day II Baseline Day(s)
The average hourly indoor temperature during the three hour curtailment fluctuated between 76.94°F
and 78.08°F. On average, the greatest temperature differential during these hours between the
curtailment day and the averaged baseline days was L.34°F, and occurred in the final hour of the
curtailment. This indoor temperature difference was the greatest observed difference in the average
hourly curtailment versus baseline data.
The curtailments on 7/20/2009 and 7/28/2009 showed indoor temperature increases of l.2rF and
0.67°F, respectively.
The curtailment day on 7/27/2009 enforced both 33% (TWACS system) and 50% (Yukon system) cycling.
The outdoor temperature on this day reached 88.9°F.The indoor temperature analysis results are shown
in Figure 8.
18
Figure 8: Average Hourly Indoor Temperature Profile for 7/27/2009 Curtailment versus Baseline Days
Group:CZ3
07127/0.50 CvclinglYukon) and 33% CVclingIIWCS).4-7pm
Avera IndoorTemperaure Impa /PerHOBO Lor)
Test Day versus Normalized Baeline Days
Maximum Temperaure Differential DurlngCurtailment: 0.45 OF --l78.0
77.5
Curtailment
Period
5: 77.0
2!
~
8. 76.5
E
f!
l 76.0,.i:::
~ 75.5
i
~ 75.0
74.5
74.0
12:00PM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM 7:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00PM
. Test Day ¡¡ Baseline Day(s)
On average, the greatest temperature differential during the curtailment, between the curtailment day
and the averaged baseline days, was 0.4SoF, and occurred in the final hour of the curtailment. Within
the curtailment day data, the average hourly indoor temperature increased from 7G.38°F from the hour
prior to the curtailment, to 77.51°F in the final hour of the curtailment. This is an average increase of
approximately l.13°F.
The table below summarizes the aggregate indoor temperature analysis. Across all curtailment event
days, the average temperature drift from the hour prior to the curtailment to the final hour of the
curtailment was 1.18°F, with a range of O.5GoF on 7/23/2009 to 1.49°F on 7/21/2009. In comparing the
curtailment days to baseline days, the average maximum temperature differential was 0.83°F, with a
range of 0.08°F on 7/23/2009 to 1.34°F on 7/21/2009.
19
Table 7: Summary of Agregate Hourly Indoor Temperature Analysis
Average Hourly Indoor Temperature -
Curtai I ment Day
_cY.~Iy..~~~U7/16/200
7/17/200
7/23/200
¡::;¡:::::!!:¡i~~;~i!~BiU~c::-;:'
96.ó"F
99.S"F
'-:;-:X~,iili'j'i¡:¡¡~;l;j¡:r:t:tT;;;"t:,.
76.25
76.88
76.64
76.65
7714
76.71
77.16 77.52
7758 77.98
76.98 77.21
(33% Cyling):
76.13
76.94
76.73
76.68
77.54
77.31
7713
78.08
77.76
Average
Temperature Drift
v-ttir--'~~~"J;;i:' "11!;:~::'i)li¡iil1"~~1 !~I' w;~ ,'-.-.-.----, -----"::;:.,:ttJktI!ii,~il~¡:~¡!11
1.27
1.10
0.56
0.98
1.12
0.95
0.08
o.n
1.36
1.49
1.35
1.40-76.38 76.59 77.04 77.51Avee (33% and 50 Cyin):
1111_ 1111111111:1
1.13
1.U
0.45
0.45.-
INDIVIDUAL INDOOR TEMPERA TURE ANALYSIS AND RESULTS - HOURLY AVERAGE DATA
The indoor temperature data was averaged across each hour, by customer, resulting in average hourly
indoor temperature for each customer in the sample. These hourly averages were then examined for
each curtailment day hour and compared to the same hour on the baseline days. The same baseline
days determined from the load reduction analysis were used for the indoor temperature analysis.
Although there was not significant variation in indoor temperature between curtailment days and
baseline days, the data presented below was normalized in the hour prior to the start of the curtailment
for each customer.
As discussed above, the hottest 33% cycling curtailment day occurred on 7/17/2009, with a maximum
outdoor temperature of 99.9°F. The charts in Figure 9 through Figure 11 show the comparisons of
hourly indoor temperature between the curtailment and baseline days. The temperature difference
bins on the x-axis of each chart displays the upper-limit of each bin. For example, a bin with the value of
1.00 contains all of the customers that had a curtailment versus baseline temperature difference greater
than O.SO°F and less than or equal to 1.00°F. The exception is the O.OO°F degree bin, which includes all
customers that had a curtailment versus baseline temperature difference of SO.OO°F, including negative
temperature differences.
20
Figure 9: Averagt:~!?~ri.y.In~!?t?rT~~p'~!rr~r!:n~~'. 7/17/2009!.~~~~i~~~n~~~~~seline Days, 4-Spm
50% T-~-
45% .!
40%
35%
~ 30%
gi 25%.,
.k 20%
15%
10%
5%
0% .,.
Group:CZ 3
7/17/09. 33% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Difrence Between Baline and Test Day
During the Hor 4pm to 5pm
...1 I
...............1.
oC!o
o"1o ~..
o"1..~N
o'"N ~Nl
o'",.~..
o'"ui
o
C!'"
o'"~
o
C!'"
Temperature Differenc Bin ,oFI
L-..__.____._~~____...__.~___~_~~~_~
Figure 10: Average Hourly Indoor Temp Difference, 7/17/2009, Curtailment vs Baseline Days, S-6pm
~---- 7/17/09~i~~~;~g4-~pm ----I
Temperature Diffrence Between Baline and Test Day
During the Hor 5pm to 6pm
40%
35%
30%
~25%c..20%:i.,...i 15%
10%
5%
0%-rl ..
0 0 0
C!'"0'"ui IÒ
oo
ci
o'"
ci
.0'"N
o
C!..
o'"..8N
oo,.
o'",.
o
C!..
o'"~
Temperaure Difrence Bin ,OFI
Figure 11: Average Hourly Indoor Temp Difference, 7/17/2009, Curtailment vs Baseline Days, 6-7pm
i
Group:CZ 3
7/17/09. 33% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baline and Test Da
During the Hour 6pm to 7pm
30% T
25% 1
:
~20%1
c i..I:i 15% 1
I
.,...i
10%
5%
0%0 0 0 00'"0 '"ci ci ....
J1.J0000000000000q~o~o~o~o~o~oNNMm~~~~~~~~~
Temperaure Dierenc Bin ,oFI
IL-.____.__.~.~_.__.____
21
During each hour, a surprising number of customers had zero, or even negative, hourly temperature
differences between the curtailment day and averaged baseline days. A closer examination of the
individual data reveals that some customer experienced an overall decrease in average hourly indoor
temperature. This suggests that some customers may have had a natural duty cycle below the enforced
duty cycle (and therefore were not impacted by the curtailment), or did not receive the signaL.
The general cluster of individuals within each chart indicates that indoor temperature did increase, on
average, during the curtailment event. During the first hour of the event, the maximum increase over
baseline conditions was approximately 1SF, during the second hour it was approximately 2.soF (except
for an outlier, discussed below), and during the final hour it was approximately 3.0°F. In addition, the
frequencies in the lowest bins (under 1.00°F) decrease over the curtailment period.
One customer consistently showed extreme temperature changes, especially during the first few
events. In the 7/17/2009 charts in Figure 10, this customer is in the 6.00°F bin. There are a number of
reasons that could explain this extreme temperature fluctuation. The customer may have a poorly
insulated home, and when their unit responded to the event, they experienced a dramatic increase in
indoor temperature. However, another plausible explanation is that the customer had the A/e unit
turned off for all or part of the event. In this case, the HOBO logger would be capturing the natural
increase in indoor temperature on a hot day, and not the impact of a curtailment event.
The curtailment event on 7/21/2009 enforced a 50% cycling strategy on a relatively hot day, with a
maximum outdoor temperature of 96.9°F. The charts in Figure 12 through Figure 14 show the
comparisons of hourly indoor temperature between the curtailment and baseline days for 7/21/2009.
22
Figure 12: Average Hourly Indoor Temp Difference, 7/21/2009, Curtailment vs Baseline Days, 4-5pm..._......................................................................................................................................................................................................................".-...
Group:CZ 3
7/21/09, 50% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Diffrence Between Baeline and Test Da
During the Hour 4pm to 5pm
45%
40%
35%
30%r;c 25%!li:20%f..15%
10%
5%
0%
I
¡
i
J i,
0 0 0 0 0qOI0OIq0ci....N ~ §!N m o 0 0U" q U"rÓ v -:git
oOIit ~'"
oOI.,g,.
oOI,.g
oc
Temperature Dirence Bin (OF)
......_........._......_......_..... i
Figure 13: Average Hourly Indoor Temp Difference, 7/21/2009, Curtailment vs Baseline Days, 5-6pm
Group:CZ 3
7/21/09,50% Cycng 4-7pm
Temperature Direnc Between BaHne and Test Da
During the Hour 5pm to 6pm
30%
25%
20%
r;cQI 15%"i:QIil
10%
.1.....................................................................................................................................................................................................
i
I
I
.................................................i
5% 1
0% +.. "'r'"
L~~
,Li.".................................,............,.!
~..
oOI..~N
oOIN gm
oOIm ~..
oOI..
ooit
o"1OI ~'"
oOI.,
oq..
oOI,.
oo
oc
Temperature Dirence Bin (OF)
Figure 14: Average Hourly Indoor Temp Difference, 7/21/2009, Curtailment vs Baseline Days, 6-7pm
............................................................................................................................................................... .............~..... . ~...
Grou:CZ 3
7/21/09,50% Cycin 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baeline and Test Da
During the Hour 6pm to 7pm
20%
18%
16%
14%
r;12%cQI 10%:ii:QI 8%il
6%
4%
2%
0%lwii I
0 0 0 0 0 0
"1 0 OI 0 OI 0
OI .,.,,.,.oc
g~~~g~g~g~~ciò~~NNmm~~~
Temperature Dirence Bin (OF)
23
As with the event on 7/17/2009, the general cluster of individuals across the three charts indicates that
indoor temperature did increase, on average, during the curtailment event. During the first hour of the
7/21/2009 event, the maximum increase over baseline conditions was approximately 1.soF, during the
second hour it was approximately 3.0°F (except for the same outlier, discussed above), and during the
final hour it was approximately 4.5°F (with the exception of the outlier). In addition, the frequencies in
the lowest bins (under l.00°F) decrease consistently over the curtailment period.
The table below summarizes the results of the individual average hourly indoor temperature analysis. It
is apparent in this summary table that many customers experienced a lower temperature during the
curtailment day than they did during the baseline day. In some cases, enough customers had this
experience to result in a negative average difference for the hour (see 7/23/2009 at 4pm-Spm and Spm-
6pm)
Table 8: Summary of Individual Indoor Temperature Analysis- Hourly Average Data
The charts for all Individual Indoor Temperature Analyses using Hourly Average Data for each
curtailment event are included in Appendix B.
INDIVIDUAL INDOOR TEMPERA TURE ANALYSIS AND RESULTS - S-MINUTE DATA
The previous analyses normalized the data to baseline days to better ensure that the temperature
differences observed were a consequence of the curtailment events, and not some other external
factor(s). An additional analysis was performed using individual customer data in order to ascertain if
the conservative indoor temperature changes were simply an artifact of the comparison to baseline
days, or if they were good representations of what happened within a customer home. Therefore, the
raw S-minute indoor temperature data was analyzed for each customer to determine the temperature
drift during a curtailment event. The analysis examined temperature drift within a customer home on a
curtailment day. These data were not compared to other customers or to temperature data from a
baseline day. A customer's minimum indoor temperature, which is typically observed in the first hour of
24
a curtailment, served as the baseline temperature for that customer. The maximum indoor temperature
during a curtailment, which is typically expected in the second or third hour of the event, was then used
to determine the maximum temperature change, or drift, observed during an event.
The charts in Figure 15 and Figure 16 show the maximum indoor temperature drift for the first two 33%
curtailment events. Each customer was placed into a maximum temperature drift bin. As with the
previous analysis, each bin value indicates the upper limit of that bin. On 7/16/2009, the highest
frequency of customers fell into the 1.00°F drift bin, with a total of 12 customers (31% of the sample).
These customers experienced a maximum temperature drift of greater than O.sO°F but less than, or
equal to, i.OO°F. A number of customers experienced an indoor temperature drift between 1.01°F and
3.00°F, and only three customers experiencing a drift greater than 3.00°F. The maximum indoor
temperature drift on 7/16/2009 was 3.86°F. The curtailment event on 7/17/2009 in Figure 16 shows
similar overall results, with a maximum indoor temperature drift at 3.65°F.
Figure 15: Maximum Customer Temperature Drift During Curtailment, 7/16/2009--- _.- .-..
IGroup:CZ 3
7/16/09, 33% Cycing, 4-7pm
Maimum Within-Customer Temperature Drift Per HOBO Loger
During Test Day Curtlalment Perio
Maximum Customer Temperature Drif: 3.86 of
35%
30%
25%
it 20%c..:s..~15%..
10%
J5%
I ....................1.
0 0 0aLta0ci..
1 1,1 i
0 0 0 0 0 0 0"l 0 "l 0 Lt a Lt..N N Ni Ni o:.,~Lt
Maximum Temperature Drif Bin tFl
25
Figure 16: Maximum Customer Temperature Drift During Curtailment, 7/17/2009
35%
30%
25%
a-20%c..:i.,
~15%
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/17/09, 33% Cycing 4-7pm
Maximum Within-Customer Temperature Drif Per HOBO logger
During Test Da Curtialment Period
Maximum Cusomer Temperature Drif: 3.65 of
~a aU'ci
aa'"
aU',.
aaN
aU'N g..
a
"1to ~"'
aU'.¿~U'
Maimum Temperature Drift Bin (")
The following charts show the maximum indoor temperature drift for the first two 50% curtailment
events. As expected, the overall frequencies increased in the higher bins; however, the maximum
temperature drift increased approximately just one degree. As with the 33% cycling events, the highest
frequency of customers fell into the 1.00°F drift bins. However, there is also greater frequency in the
higher temperature bins. The maximum indoor temperature drift on 7/20/2009 was 4.39°F (Figure 17).
The curtailment event on 7/21/2009 in Figure 18 shows similar overall results, but with a higher
maximum indoor temperature drift at 4.84°F.
Figure 17: Maximum Customer Temperature Drift During Curtailment, 7/20/2009
30%
25%
20%
a-c..15%:i.,
~II
10%
5%
0%
Group:Cl3
7/20/09, 50%Cyd 4-7pm
Maximum Wlthinustomer Temperature Drif PerHOB logr
During Test Da Curtiaent Peri
Maximum Cusomer Temperature Drif: 4.39 of
gci
aU'ci ~..
aU',.
aaN
a"1N ~..g.¿
aU'
.¿gi.
aU'..
Maimum Temperature Drif Bin ¡OF)
26
Figure 18: Maximum Customer Temperature Drift During Curtailment, 7/21/2009¡- Group: CZ 3 --I 7/21/09, 50% Cyding, 4-7pm
I Maximum Within-Customer Temperature Drif Per HOBO LoggerDuring Test Day Curtialment Period
Maximum Customer Temperature Drift: 4.84 of
25% .
20%
~15%c..:i.,
E 10%..
5%
0%
"."'.w.~.~
J
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'1 q "l q "l 0 '1 q0....N N ni ni ..
.J
~o
o'1..g.,
Maximum Temperature Drift Bin I"F)
It is important to note that this analysis does not necessarily show the direct impact of the curtailment.
Because this comparison is within-customer, and does not look at the temperature drift on a
comparable baseline day, it is not possible to separate the effect of the curtailment event from what is
simply normal temperature drift in a house. For this reason, these charts should be interpreted in
conjunction with the previous baseline day analyses.
Table 9: Summary of Individual Within-Customer Temperature Drift During Curtailment Events
fll1i!' ûi.ftaiilm.entI
All of the above charts and the temperature charts for the remaining curtailment days are displayed in
Appendix B.
27
DuTY CYCLE ANALYSIS
Given the lower than expected demand reduction results, a duty cycle analysis was done in order to help
determine the cause. This duty cycle analysis looks at the frequency distributions of the average hourly
duty cycle of the HVAC units by curtailment event and group.
METHODOLOGY
The average hourly duty cycle was used to determine the amount of units operating at a natural duty
cycle that is below the curtailment event's enforced duty cycle. The hourly duty cycles were calculated
from the interval logger data by summing the runtime for each hour in minutes and dividing by sum by
the 60 minutes per hour. Frequency distribution tables for each group and curtailment event were then
created. Figure 19 and Figure 20 graphically present the tables for the CZ 2 group during the 7/16/2009,
33% cycling curtailment event. The values on the horizontal axis are the upper bound of the frequency
distribution bin. For example, in Figure 19, the first bin shows that 40% of the group is operating
between 0% and 10% duty cycle. This value decreases in Figure 20 to 29% of the group. That is stil a
relatively large percent of the group that is not providing demand reduction to the utility as program
participants.
Figure 19: CZ 2, 7/16/09, Frequency Distribution for Hour Preceding Curtailment
Group:CZ2,7/16/200, 33% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtilment
50%
i:40%::0..
C'30%-0..20%c
~..10%GIa.
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyc Percentage
28
Figure 20: CZ 2, 7/16/09, Average Frequency Distribution during Curtailment Period
Group: CZ 2,7/16/200, 33% Cycling
Curtailment Average
35%
g- 30%
e 25%\!
Õ 20%
1: 15%
l! 10%..
:. 5%
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cycle Percentage
All of the duty cycle charts, along with the charts shown in Figure 19 and Figure 20 can be found in
Appendix C.
DuTY CYCLE ANALYSIS RESULTS
Table 10 presents a summary of the frequency distribution of the duty cycles during the curtailment
period. The"% of Group" column shows the percentage of the group that is operating at a duty cycle
that falls within the corresponding value of the "Filter Range" column. This table reveals a large
amount, 52% on average, operating below the duty cycle enforced by the curtailment events. The
7/27/2009 curtailment is not presented in Table 10 because the population distribution of the 33% and
50% cycling strategies was unavailable.
Table 10: Duty Cycle Summary by Group and Curtailment Event
29
30
31
32
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Paragon considers the results of the 2009 A/C Cool Credit Program to be inconclusive regarding its
potential as a cost effective resource. There were several factors that resulted in modest demand
reduction results during 2009. The mild weather during the curtailment season contributed to these
modest demand reduction results. This type of demand program is generally most valuable during the
rare and unpredictable heat storms. The summer of 2009 did not fit this profile.
The results are also inconclusive in that the sample size netted results that approach, but do not quite
meet, 80% confidence with 20% precision. This means that there is a significant probabilty that the
actual results are different from the results obtained from this study.
Despite these caveats, the data did provide insight into obvious trends and provided the basis for the
following conclusions and recommendations.
The measured demand reduction of the main cooling zone populations, CZ 2 and CZ 3, was an average of
0.196kW and 0.394kW, respectively, for all curtailments. This was well below the expected demand
reduction of 0.8kW - 1.2kW found in other utility studies. It is expected that this is due to a large
number of units naturally operating below the enforced duty cycle of the curtailments. The similarity
between the 33% cycling and 50% cycling demand reduction also supports this assumption. The low
demand reduction and the minimal indoor temperature drift support using a minimum of 50% cycling
strategy (and perhaps testing 67% cycling) in the future.
The results for the CZ 3_MHAFB sub group, however, do meet the expected demand reduction levels of
typical HVAC curtailment programs, with an average demand reduction of 1.164kW for all curtailments.
In fact, the demand reduction for this sub group was fairly constant over the outdoor temperature range
of the curtailments. This suggests that these HVAC units operate near a 100% duty cycle when the
outdoor temperature rises above 88°F. Therefore, these customers should not be cycled greater than
50% duty cycle.
Upon inspection of the demand reduction charts presented in Appendix A, it appears possible that the
curtailment events began one hour earlier than reported. In addition, the duty cycle analysis shows that
a number of units began operating at 100% cycling one hour prior to the scheduled end of the
curtailment. This findings support the possibility that some units began and ended curtailment one hour
before schedule. If this is found to be true, making the adjustment in the analysis to normalize the
curtailment and baseline data one hour earlier could result in greater demand reduction values.
The indoor temperature results and duty cycle analysis corroborated the demand reduction results. On
average, most customers experienced a very modest temperature increase during a curtailment period.
However, the indoor temperature analysis was limited in that no correlations could be made between
indoor temperature fluctuations and demand reduction values. It would be valuable to compare these
two analyses to determine if those customers who had no change in demand are the same customers
who had the highest increase in indoor temperature. If this is the case, one could assume that these
customers had their A/C unit turned off.
33
As discussed above, the confidence and precision level approached, but did not quite meet, the
expected level of 80/20. Idaho Power should continue to treat cooling zones 2 and 3 as separate
sampling strata; however, they should increase the sample size within each cooling zone to increase the
precision of the results.
Idaho Power has built a large residential demand reduction resource; however, the conservative results
for the 2009 summer season suggest the program may be operating below its potentiaL. The mild
summer temperatures, 33% cycling strategy, and the probabilty that at least some data loggers were
one hour off of actual time contributed to lower than expected results. The low measured demand
reduction, minimal indoor temperature drift, and duty cycle analysis all support using a minimum of 50%
cycling strategy in the future, and even suggest testing 67% duty cycle curtailments, to improve program
load reduction results.
Because of all of these issues, some controllable, and some not, Paragon recommends that demand
reduction measurement be continued for the summer of 2010. In addition, indoor temperature analysis
should be continued along with customer surveys to maintain customer satisfaction with the program
and to monitor the impact of increasing the cycling strategy.
34
ApPENDIX
3S
ApPENDIX A - DEMAND REDUCTION CHARTS
CZ 2 - Chart
i 2$00~
1
i! 1.00
l_ 1500
Group:C22711Ji.mCyHPM
iood !mp,-i(: Data Summa IPe, Ale Unit):
Peal; Demand Reduction: Q,368kW40l
22
ljOO
105.0
90.0 _t.~
~
l
le
ll.i
Jti
7SA)
60.0
45.0
30.0
15.0
0.0
3.500
3.00
1,0l
0500
0.000
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 is 19 20 21-
- T im P'v Avera¡¡ kW _ Noo Tilt Pav ÁVlraR kW - Tll Pav Horlv AVl T ilpeaiur -Non-lll Da HOINVÁV¡ TCm¡ature
36
Group:CZ2
1l17l2. m.Cyçlini 4.7PM
Load imp;tl Dill" Summary (Pet AlC Unii);
P"ilk !kmarid RQduclion. O.Ml1kW
400
3500
3.00
!2 son
1
¡¡2.000~l!15(1
l!l
ns(l
(I.o",
11 12 13 14 15 16 11 18 19 2n ii
Hour
_r~~t £la, Averaile kIN _ Non4est Day A'Ier¡¡g(( kW - le~i Oay H""'ly Ä'Iil Tmmper.wre - NOI'Test Dav H"Uflv Ave T""per~ture
ii
11IHl
¡05A)
9(W E
l~
l"Q
!'
ì
l
7S.(J
00.0
4.'iJJ
300
is.O
OXI
Group:CZ2
W020,WtCltliniHPM
Load lmp;tl O"t¡ Summary (Per AlC Unil):
P"ilk Oemarid RC'uttlon: u.369kW
4,00
3500
3.000
!2500
1 2.000~
l!15(j)
1.00
l.5!)i
(i.(i00
II 1i 13 14 15 16 11 1918 20 ii
Hour
_k,Il)1l Ave.-g" kIN _ Nori.Te$l Day Averag(( kw - T,m D.V Ho-uiiy Avg Tempemture - Nori4e.i D.V H"urly Av¡; T""pemture
i2
120.11
¡05.0
9(1,0 ..
i!
lQ..
I
i'
J
7S.0
00.0
4S.(J
,00
ISeCl
fW
37
Grop:CZ2
7l1l2.50Cydjnc4.7PM
load Imp¡çt Data Summary (Per A/C Unítl:
Peak Demiloo R'!uctìo: 0.719kW
4J)(IO
3500
3.00
l ¡,$oo
1 i.ooo..0
l 1.$00,.
1.00
0.$00
0.00
U li 13 t4 is 16 17 t8 19 20
noXI
105.0
!11M)IL
f
1M lIe~
60,0 j
4$,0 l::ii
30,0 ..
15.0
0.0
2211II
_T,,;! D.v Aver~ge.W _Non.TMl Oay A_age ~W - Tesi Oil Hourly Avg Te",~ahtt" - Non.Tesl OãV Hourly Avl! Tl!P"a!"""
Group:CZ2
7l23l2. P?íCvcincHPM
Data Summary (Per AfC Unitl:
RedIlC!íon: O.711kW4.00
3500
3.r
i 2500e.."..E 2.000i!l
!1$00
1.000
0500
0.00
11 n 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20
nO.O
105.0
!1M ..
I
~s.)!Ie~
60.0 gJ0
45.0 1l..
30.0 ~
15.0
0,0
nn
II..'
- r"$l Day "'"",at".W _Noiier",! Oay "'.",at"lW - r",1 O~v Howdy A"g rl!tiiix,.hítl! -N_r"s! flay fldv Aílg Tmpwllllí"
38
Group:CZ 2
71271009. mHO! Yukon. 33% tor !WACS Çyç!ìne H!'
Load Impact Data Summary (Per Ale Unit!:
Peak Dtumd Reduction: O,17SkW
4.000
3500
3.00
!i500
..i:toE 2.00~
ll 1500
1.00
0.500
0,00
1l
120.0
12 13 14 15 16 17 is
10S.0
90.0 ¡:.:~
~
1M !LIi~
&0.0 ~
l
l"
4$.(1 li
~3M c(
1!i.(1
tl.
20 21 2219
Hour
_Test Day Äv"r,'gi: kW _ Nor..T"M thy A..,r.ig.. kW -Tm;t Day Hourly Avg '~"'pèrat"'f" -No".,,,' Oøv HouriyAvg ,,,,,p.f_tUft
Group:CZ 2
1m/2m. 5im~Iìni4.1I,M
Load impact Data Summary (Per Ale Unitl:
Peak ~arK Reduction: O.391kWkoo
3500
3.00
!2.500
..¡E ¿oo~..,1500c(
1.00
0500
0.000
11
120.,1
105.0
9Q.o
1$0
:-
l~
l
ii'"j
&(W
t
12 13 14 15
4$0
31J.
IS.0
0.0
16 17 1S 19 20 ii 22
Hour
_,est (lty Aver. kW _Non.Test Day A.ût\liie kW - te$t Dav Hourly Avg 'é",¡Xraiu", -Non.te$' Day !lowly Avg ,$l\íWtalu't1
39
CZ 3 - Charts
! 2.500i
I
f
-"'lOl
3.500
Group:CZ3
7/1612!!.n"Cydini4.7PM
load lmpatt Data Summry lPer Ale Un't)'
Peak Diimaod Redutlk10; 0567kW
12,1.0
lllS,Q
90.0 t
75.0 l
.¡¡
.l!.
~.iio,o""..._.~
'!..".0.f,.45.0.:i,~.,..
,t,~....."30.,...,.15.0-r-.,,.,.OJ)
18 11l 20 21 22
3.00
v:ioo
I
11
_,est Oily AverARe WI - "",n.Test Pay Awira¡c kW -Test Day HounV Atg T_peiluro -N;mTest Dav ¡'",urlyAvgTempeilturl
1.00
1,00
0.500
12 13 14 15 16 17
0.00
Ho
40
Group:CZ3
7/17/2009, U%Cydlng'.7PM
LQad Impt Datil 50mri¡¡iy (Pe' Ale Unit,:
Peilk Demand Reduction: ().3J2kW
4,00
...500
r¡OO
i 2.500e
1 1.00!
I iSoo
H¡oo
(),5oo
().oo
11 12 13 14 1~16
iiiw
105.()
!LIW FI
75.0 ëIIi~
1;0.0 j..
45,0 l
fi
30.0 ø:
15.0
n.o
18 19 2lJ 21 n11
Hour
_Tt%'t Dø¥ Ävøfag$ kWl1if!llirVltmxTl$f Day AvCtl1gú kW -Test Ð:.y H(UlfiyAv((Jørnp0f;tttl(. -Non~Tesl. Oay Houdy ,AvgTenltiCl~tUtf1
Group:CZ3
7l2. SQCyC!!iHPM
load lmpai:t Dita Summary (f'er Ale Unit):
Peal( Demand Reduction: u.242kW
4.000
U)oo
11 u 13 14 is 16
1200
ios.!)
90.G ..L.
75.0 jIe~
i;o.iJ l(I..~45,0 D:i
~
30,0 i
1,.0
(HI
18 19 20 21 22
3.500
3.00
~ 2500
1
t!il
7.000
1.500
0.500
0.00
17
"OU
_rc_,l)WAv",ag£'kW _l1cm,T"" O"Y AvNag£'k'N -1£";1 I);,y H"u'lyAv;t T£,"'p"'.lUf(' -~IQ".r"si f)y H"uiiyAvgT£'",¡i"'.lure
41
400
3.Soo
J.OO
I BOO
..i;
Ê 2.0008:.ei 1.500
1.000
0,500
0.000
11
Group:CZ3
7121200.50% ÇyIi!!4-1PM
Loocl lmp¡¡! Da!a S\lmiimiy Wl' Ale Volt):
Peak Demnd Reduction: 0.692k\'
.I.;t
.l"",I.I
J2(M)
Curtailiiiet
PeriOd
i..)1.,,,,,,,,.i~,,,,,,,I
"''' 105.0
9(Ul f.fi~IJ 15ß ii.r¡.l!.I
~.6OJ)....t....l,,,.if,l""1,,,,45.1)
!l.!.~.
I
30Al 00..I
II!.15.0.,,I,,.0.0
12 U 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 n
Ho
_It'S! Gav Av",ag" oW _ NOt). r\%t D.y AvélagC kW -lesl £M !'ooily Avg r"mlXr't..ic - Noo.T()lllay HOu'lv Avg T""!I".'r~Wrc
4.00
3500
J.OO
I ¿soo
1E lJ)Q(l~
li ¡,oo
1.000
0.50
0.000
11
Group:CZ3
Zl2l2, 33% Cydjni4-ZeM
Lod ¡mpa!;! I)ata Summary IPer Ale \Joitl:
Pea. tirnml Reduction: 0.688kW
I.
:E
i."..m).......I..
120,0
105.0
!1CU¡E
!!"
lS'¡¡!IE~
60,0 l
6if
45,0 lj:i
~~
3M ~
15.0
OJ.!
19 20 ii 22
Curtailment
Period
I.),.,
i
IiII..II.I.1-..Ii.III.1..iIiII.
11 13 14 1S Hi 17 18
Il""r
_Te-i(l&y Ave'",¡ie kW _No".Tt;1 (lw Ave",¡¡e kW -Te,i (My HQurlv Av¡¡T"mii.iu'" -Ntm.Te,tOay Hourly I\v¡¡T"tIp"I"lul~
42
Group:CZ3
7l71. SQ%for vukon, un for MAg Cyling HPM
t.oild Impact Oiltil Summilry (Per Ale. Unit);
Peak Demand Rediinkiri O.7ll2kW
4.00
3.500
3A1OO
l 2.500
1 2.00t.lj .1500
1.OC10
0500
O.()(J()
11 12 13 .l .1S 16 17 lS 19 io n
Ho
tlOll
105Jl
90J)..L..
g75.0 i
¡¡~
60.0 l21
45.0 j
~
300 ~
is.o
0.0
ii
_Test Oily Awr¡¡e kW - Nòl.,Teit Ow A",,,.go kW - T0$t Clay !iii"fly Avg TériipCrilW,e-!l"".TéSI Clay !i..lIlflV "'VS TmnP4MIlim
mixi
¡¡)SA)
90.0 f..i.
JS,O l
:!
6(tO jif
4S.()g:i
l
I
30.0 c(
:iS.O
0.0
is 19 20 21 i:
Group:CZ3
7l2im. !!O%Culiii4-7PM
toad Imp¡ii oillil Summaiy Wei AlC Unll!;
Peak Oemam:l Reduction: o.asslcw
4,OOQ
.3500
3.00Q
- 250Q~i
~
&l
~
2.(l)Q
15()0 .
1.0
il0500
Q.OOO
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Iiur
_Test Day Avenigù kW .. Non"Tt%t Day A¥êr~g¡) kW -Test DK)y IiQt.H'fy Avg Tcmp~r.¡turtt -NOt1,Ti?t 04Y' Hourfy Avg Tenwer-atufe
43
CZ 3_Civil - Chart
Group:CZ3_CIVIL
7116. 33'CVitl4.7PM
load Impart Data Summay (Per Ale Unlll:
Peak Demand Reductloo: O.09kW
4,000 120l)
3.500 10SJi
3.00 .90.0.......-T....
£:
¡
î 2.00 75.0 :!....E."IfIUlOO!ìO.O l&!I..0..~j "LSOQ 45.0 !
:iIi
1.000 30.0 !
(150(1 15,0
(1.00(1 OJ)
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Hor
_Test Day Awm!lkW _ Nan.Test Da AWN.il" kW -Tes tl~v Hou,IV Avg r"mp¡)iltu'Ø- Noo.T"st Oily Hoiily Avi TOlmp'Jnllutl'
44
¡ l8l
!
Group: CZ 3_C1Vll
7tH OOQ, i3%C¥d!ng4.7eM
l~ lmpat.l Oaia Summary ¡Per Ale Urüt¡,
Peak Demand lledu"üon,.O.139kW
4.0QO 120.0
105.0
9().()i:i"i;7S.0 i-
Ii
~
nO.O lQ~
45.0 I
~'"
30'¡1 ~
1.50
0.0
2:2
3$OQ
300Q
HOO
1.00
1500
1.00
0500
O.Qoo
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1Il 19 20 21
""'
_Ttnt Day AVOfo\gC kW _NOrtATC$t Pav Av~tage kW -Ti,'il DJy Houriy AvgTem¡mniluff. -Ncn.Trmt Døy Hourly AvgTö~t'øer;ìtUTe
- .i.5QOl1
~!!l
Group: CZ 3_ClVl
7('101'l0Q, 5lCycling.i 7PM
Load lmpai;l Pita Summa.y lper Ale. Unit):
Peak Dlmafld Reduction: .(.Oll3kW
4Ai0Q H(W
LOS.O
90.0 E
~
75J)~..Ii~
$00 ~i1!
45.0 2:i
l'""
30.0 00
15.0
OJ)
22
3.50Q
3.000
;tOO
1500
1.00 .,
MOO It1
0.000
11 12 13 14 15 1£17 is 19 20 21
Hour
_TI'I Day Av","iic kW _N"".T.,;I O,'y AVH.g~ kW -Tvst Day "m,rly Avg kmpiraio,,, -NOft.Tesl O.y HOurly Avg T"".'Iralu'l?
45
S 2.500~
1!
I
no.o
10Sf'
90A)F
i'
75.0 !LE~
60S)~l~
¡¡SAl ¡¡'"
~.."
~
3i),1 C(
1!'-)
ll.
20 21 n
Group: a 3_ClVIL
7I21/2.SimCyçiii4.ZPM
Load Impact Data Summary (Per Ale U,,¡t):
Peak Claod Reduction: O.16ìkW
4.000
3.500
3Jloo
4.000
3$00
3.000
i vwo
1
g 2.000!
I:E'"
A 1500
tOOO
0500
0.000
11
120.n
LOS.n
90.0 ff
75.0 !i¡¡~
600 !
6iI
45.0 ~:i
l
30.0 c
I 15.0
OS)
20 21 22
2900
1500
1.00
0.500
0.00
11 l2 13 14 is 16 17 is 19
Hou
- Te" n.y Average liW _tln.T.,1 Day Av.,all kW -'.$1 Day Hourly Avt TemiXiW,e -Non.Test Pay Houtll' ¡wg T""P')tMU"O
Group: a 3_CIVIL
7/23tiOO,3mCydi!!~7PM
Lnad imp¡¡n O¡¡J¡ Summary ¡P"'f Ale Um!):
Peak Demand Reduction: (UlISkW
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Ho
- Tè$t 00'1 ÂVCHlgë kW ~¡ Notl,T~1Kt Dav A¥(,~tJgn kW - T~$t: Oav Np~irly A\itt Tt'r'lpèt;~ltUti( -'Nöft,-TC$t OØ;¡ Hnutty Av~ T ernpØi1ltitC:
46
Group:CZ 3_CIVll
7lUZOO. 50% fo Yuko. 33% for !WAC Cydini 4tZPM
lQad lmp;ct Oata Summary ~I'e, Ale Unlt);
Peak Demand Reduction: O.39.8kW
4.00
3.500
3.00
~2.500
i 2.002:li 1.500
1.00
(¡.soo
0.000
n 11 13
U(W
105.0
00.0
75.0 îI
~
60.0 l0Jl
45.(1 Ii,e
JO,O !
15.0
0.0
18 19 20 2.2214151617
Hou.
- TeG' Oay Aw,,,/, kIN - Noii.r"" DJY À\ierilU, kW - Te.i nay Hnurly A"g réffI'ÓmIWt'-N"",TèSI nay Hnurly Avgrerpi;.nurt'
Group:CZ 3_CIVLL
Z12l2. 50% CydiniHeM
loo impact oata Sum."",,, Wer Ale Utiitl;
Peak Demand Reduction: 0.516kW
4.,00
3.500
3.00
~ 2$00
i 2.00li
~i
1.500
1000
0500
0,000
11 12 13 14 is 16 17 18 19 20 21
Hou
_,.,t n.W À"t',ag" kIN _ N,,,,.,,%I l) Ä\j(¡Jgó kW - ,,,sl OilV H"url., ÄVll ,,,mperal,,'" - Noo,1"$1 O~y Hourly Avg Tem¡l~h"~
120,0
105.0
90.0
iiE
t1
lJl
~
!!
75.0
w.o
45.11
JO.O
15Il
. 0.0
22
47
CZ 3_MHAFB - Chart
Group: a 3_MHAFB
U161.mcyt!íi¡HPM
luad lmp¡çt Dilta Summary (Per Ale Uoitl;
Peak Demand R!!lKtio: i.i61kW
4.00
3.000
11 12 13 14 15 16
120Jl
105.0
90,0
j75.0 :.
¡¡~
60.0 g
l3'545,0 ":i
~
30.0 l
15.0
0.0
18 19 20 21 2.2
3.500
i lsoo:
1
! HJoo
~
!1."00
1.000
(LSOO
0,00
17
Ho
_Test Oay Avr¡(age kW _ No,,-Tesi Oay Avi?"IW kW - T(",I Dày Hourly Avl( icm¡màtu((' - N"".i(',i D.v HOurly Avl( icmIX'tàturo
48
Group: CZ 3_MHAf8
UlZlIl. JDtevlíng4.1PM
toad Impact i)t¡¡ Summary O'er Afe Unit):
Pe¡¡kOemanrl ll"rluct¡ort 1.171kW
4.000
n 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
HlS.O
95.6
85.0 E
:!..
150 'e!E~
65.0 i
-!
55,0 g:i
l..,.
45.0 c
35,0
25.0
n
3.500
3.)00
l 2500
1
! 2,000
l I.S00
1.00
0500
0,00
n
llll
_T~t !Jy Áv"r"t* kW - No¡).Ti: n.y Av.,.ge ~W -Test Oa't Hourly Avg ¡..""¡)'at..r,, -NOn'¡est !,av HourlV Avg ¡e""P0ature
Group: CZ 3_MHAfB
l/20I2.mCydìIlHPM
Loodimpact Data Summary (Per Afe UrlÏt!:
PooL !Æmand Reduction: U:12kW4.00
n 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
120.
ll5j')
90.(1 ..i
7M !IE~
6(1,Q l
45,0 f::
~
s¡
30,0 c
15.0
0.n
3.500
3.00
l 2.500
1
! 2.00
f 1500
1.00
O~500
0.00
21
Hoot
_Test P.Y AV(!age kW _NM.Test Day Av~'age kIN -Test Piy Hom1y !we, Temperature -N"n.¡esi Pav Hourly Avg T"m¡)~lum
49
Group: CZ 3_MHAFB
71212.SQäCydjrHPM
loa Impact Data Summary (Per Ale Unit):
Peak Demand Reduction: 1.841kW
5,00
11500
4.00
).ao
!300..c:
~:.soo!'"
I z.oo
1.500
1.00
0.500
0.00
11 12 H ¡II is 16 17 18 19 20
105.0
95.0
8S.0
t'15.,1 ~!
C5t¡l~
$$,0 ~l
45:,0 l
35,0 ~
¡
25,0
153)
$.0
nii
Hor
- rest Oil¥ Average kW _No...T('IOay A."'age kW -Tes Day Houny Avg r..'''3tíW.. -N",,,.T,¡! Day Hôuì1y Avg re",,,crilure
Group: CZ 3_MHAFB
713l2. "?l0tIini4.ZfM
ioad Impac.t Data Summary (Per Ale Unit);
Peak Demand RedllIlQn; 1.339kW
11,00
).500
),00
!2500
..c:
~2.00!
l 1.500
1.00
0.500
0.00
11 ii 13 ¡II 15 16 17 18 19 20
100..
90,0
$0,0 E
2!::
70,0 !i
¡¡~
,,(l,0 ~"0
~
SO,(l f'"i
¡¡;:
4eW 'I
30,0
10.0
21
Curtailmet
period
11
Høur
_rèS! (lay Averag" kW _Non,r~stOay AVCfagt,kW -TKt n.v H""ì1yAvg rt'm¡lM3t",. -Non.T"S! D3V Hourly I\v~r"mperl¡iu'"
50
Group:CZ3_MHAFB
1/t1109.5Q%for Yuk. 33% for lW Cy!ing4=?P
load Impact Data Summiiy (Pe, Ne Unlll;
P&ak Demand R&duci;",.., 1.362kW
4.000
11 12 13
UQJ¡
10S.0
90.0
f1S.(I LIi
l!
61),jl
4S.11 l!l
30.0 l
15.0
0.0
15 16 17 1S 19 20 21 22
3.500
3.00
ç:. 2.Soo
~
1
! 2.00I
i 1.SOO
VJOO
0.500
0.00
14
Hor
_rmctD.w AIr"'¡¡~"kW _NOO.r~1 ¡);iyAIrnra¡whW -T"'10;iH"..rlyAvgT"",p"fai"", -N"".T'''l Day H""rI" Avg T"",p"fáium
Group: CZ 3_MHAFB
7/28J2. SimCylil!-i?P
load Imp¡tl Data Summary tper Ale Unit!'
Peak Demand R&duchon, 1.367kW
4.000
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 is 19 20
iiOJl
lllS,ll
90.0 ~
¡
75.0 !I
El!
60.0 il.i
45.0 il
So.~
15,0
t)
22
3.500
3.000
i 25001
~!
l
2.000
1500
1.000
050
0.000
21
Hor
_n$t D.. AIr",,,gø.w _No¡H&;1 D;v A"",.ge kW - TNi Day HoUfI" Alrg TemlWt.1íl" -No".TeM ¡M'! HOtid,! Alrg Tem¡""'.lut"
51
ApPENDIX B -INDOOR TEMPERA TURE CHARTS
Aggregate Hourly Indoor Temperature Results
78.0
77.5
77.0
S
~:i 76.5ËQICoE~76.0
~0'1
.E 75.5=-"C:i0:i
QI 75.0
æ'QI,.~
74.5
Group:CZ3
0716/09.33 Cydjng4-7pmAvera IndoorTemperare Impa (PerHOB Lor)
Test Da versus Nonnized Baline Da
Maximum Temperaie D1ffeiential During Curtlment: L12 of
74.0
Curtailmen
Period
73.5
12:ooPM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM 7:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00 PM
. Test Day II Baseline Day(s)
S2
Group:CZ 3
07117109 33 Cycling4-7pm
Averag Indoor Temperaure Impac (Per HOBO Lomr)
Test Day versus Normalized Baline Days
MaximumTemperare Differential DunngCurtlment:0.95 of
78.5
78.0
77.5
£
~::77.01!....
E
t!76.5
l50..S 76.0,.
"§0:i
m.75.5
I!01
~
75.0
74.5
Curailmet
Perod
74.0
12:00PM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM 7:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00PM
. Test Day I' Baseline Dayls)
Group:CZ3
0709 5l Cyling 4:7p
Avra IndoorTemoeratre Impact IPerHOBQ Lor)
Test Da versus Normalized Baline Days
Maximum Temperaure Differential DunngCurtilment: L22 of
77.5
Curtailment
Period
710
76.5
£
~
'! 76.0~
E
t!
8..s,.
L:i
~
~
75.5
75.0
74.5
74.0
73.5
73.0
12:00PM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM 7:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00 PM
. Test Day II Baseline Day(s)
53
g
l! 770
~
l'
E
l!
g"0.5,."I"o:i
:.l!
~
Group: CZ 3
07/!!. 5O Cyjng+ipm
Avera Ini!rTenirare Imp lPer HOBO Lo..r)
TestDay versus Normized Baeline Da
Maximum Tempraure Differential DurlngCurtlment: L34 OF
78.5
78.0
Cuailment
Penod
77.5
76.5
76.0
75.5
75.0
74.5
74.0
73.5
12:00PM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00 PM6:00PM 7:00PM
. Test Day !I Baline Day(s)
77.0
g
l!"76.5
1!....
E
l!
~0 76.0"0.5,.
L:i
~75.5
~
75.0
Group:CZ3
Cl!! 33 Cyjng+7pm
Avera !ni!rTemperare Impa IPerHQ8 Loger!
Test Day versus Normlized Baseline Days
Maximum Temperare Differentia! During Curtlment: 0.08 OF
77.5
74.5
12:00PM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00 PM5:00PM 6:00PM 7:00PM
. Test Day li Baseline Day(s)
54
Group:CZ3
CTtDtæ. 50 Cvcling(Yukon! and 33 CyclingI1AÇs!. 4-7000
Average IndoorTemoerature Impac (Per HOBO Lor!
Test Day versus Normlized Baseline Day
Maximum Temperaure Differential Durlng Curtilment: 0.45 OF
78.0
77.5
S 77.0
l!
!OJ 76.5..
E
f!
!50 76.0...5,.
"§0 75.5:i
~
~75.0
74.5
Cuailment
Period
74.0
12:00PM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM 7:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00 PM
. Test Day l! Baseline Day!s)
S 77.0
l!
~OJ 76.5
~
f!
8...5,.
"§o:i
i
~
Group:CZ3
C1 50 CVling4-Zpm
Average Indoor Temperare Impa (PerHOBQ Lod
Test Day versus Normalized Baseline Days
Maimum Temperaure Differential DurlngCurtilinnt: 0.67 OF
78.0
Curtailment
Period
77.5
76.0
75.5
75.0
74.5
74.0
12:00PM 1:00PM 2:00PM 3:00PM 4:00PM 5:00PM 6:00PM 7:00PM 8:00PM 9:00PM 10:00PM
. Test Day '" Baseline Oay(s)
ss
Individual Indoor Temperature Results - Hourly Average Data
60%
50%
I
40%~uC i
CI 30%
j
:JgoCI..LI 20%i
I
10%
0%
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00Lf0Lf~Lf 0 Lf 0 LfÒÒ....N N m m e¡e¡
Group: CZ 3
7/16/09,33% Cycling 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour 4pm to Spm
8
ul
oLf
ul
ooI.
Temperature Diference Bin (OF)
45%
40%
35%
30%~c 25%CI:J
CT 20%CI..LI
15%
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/16/09,33% Cycling 4-7pm
Temperature Differenæ Between Baline and Test Day
During the Hour Spm to 6pm
o~o
oLfÒ
o~..
o
LI..
o~N
o
LIN
o~l'
o
LIl'
o~"'
o
LI"'
o~Lf
o
LILf
o~U)
Temperature Differenæ Bin (OF)
56
Group:CZ 3
7/16/09,33% Cycling 4-7pm
Temperature Diference Between Baeline and Test Day
During the Hour 6pm to 7pm
25%
20%
~15%c
GI:ii:
GI 10%..i.
5%
0%-,J ,L-a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a aqliqliqliqliqliqliqliqliqaaMMNNtvtv"'"'LI LI U)U)l'l'co
Temperature Difference Bin (OF)
Group:CZ 3
7/17/09,33% Cycling 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour 4pm to Spm
50%
45%
40%
35%
~30%c
GI 25%:ii:
GI 20%..i.
15%
10%
~L5%
0%
a a a a a a 0 a aaLIqliqliqliaÓÓMMNNtvtv.,
oLI.,
aqLI
aliLI
aa
u)
Temperature Diference Bin (OF)
57
Group:CZ 3
7/17/09, 33% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour Spm to 6pm
40%
35%
30%
~25%c(I 20%:Ji:(I..15%u.
10%
5%
¡
I
0%
0 0 0qLtq00.-
IL.
JJ ---
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lt q Lt q Lt 0 in q Lt 0.-N N rr rr ....in in \Ò
Temperature Difrence Bin (OF)
25%
20%
~.c(I 15%:ii:(I..u.10%
Group:CZ 3
7/17/09,33% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Diference Between Baeline and Test Day
During the Hour 6pm to 7pm
30%
5%
0%..
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0qLtqLtqLtqLt0inqLtqLtqLtq00.-.-N N rr rr ....in in 1.1.!'!'co
Temperature Difference Bin (OF)
58
45%
40%
35%
30%~c 25%QI::
CT 20%QI....15%
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/20/09,50% Cycling 4-7pm
Temperature Diference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour 4pm to 5pm
oqo
oiro
oq..
oir..
oqN
oirN
oqtv
oirtv
oq"'
oir"'
oqir
oirir
oq\0
Temperature Difference Bin (OF)
30%
25%
20%~c
QI 15%::
CTQI....
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/20/09,50% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Diference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour 5pm to 6pm
oqo
.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0irqirair0irairq..N N tv m -.-.ir ir \0
oiro
oq..
Temperature Diference Bin (OF)
59
~ 15%
GI:sgoGI~ 10%
Group:CZ 3
7/20/09,50% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Diferenæ Between Baeline and Test Day
During the Hour 6pm to 7pm
25%
20%
5% 1
0% 1 ,I.oao
o 0IJ ao ~
o 0IJ a~ N
oIJN
oart
o 0 0IJ a irrt q- -:oair
o 0IJ air II
o 0IJ aII "
oIJ"
oa
00
Temperature Diferenæ Bin (OF)
45%
40%
35%
30%~c 25%GI:sgo 20%GI..u.15%
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/21/09,50% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Diferenæ Between Baline and Test Day
During the Hour 4pm to 5pm
oo
c:
o 0ir ac: ~
o 0IJ a~ N
oIJN
o 0 0 0a IJ 0 irrt rt -: -:
oair
o 0IJ 0ir \D
o 0ir a\D "oIJ"
oa00
Temperature Diference Bin (OF)
60
Group:CZ 3
7/21/09,50%Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour 5pm to 6pm
30%
25%
20%
a-c
QI 15%:Ji:QI..i.
10%
5%~0%i -J,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0aL/a II a II a II 0 L/a II a II a II a0ci...-N N m m .,.,L/L/\0 \0 ,.,.00
I Temperature Diference Bin (OF)
I
Group:CZ 3
7/21/09,50% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour 6pm to 7pm
20%
18%
16%
14% -
a-12%c
QI 10%:Ji:
QI 8%..i.
6%
4%
2%
0%
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00IIaIIaIIaII0IIaII0IIaII0ci0.-.-N N m m .,q-L/L/\Ò \0 ,.,.oò
Temperature Difference Bin (OF)
61
70%
60%
50%
~40%c
CI:iC"30%CI..LL
20%
10%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/23/09,33% Cycing 4-7pm
Temperature Diference Between Baline and Test Day
During the Hour 4pm to 5pm
-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0qU1qU1qU1qU1qU1qU1qU1qU1q00.-.-N N m m -.-.in in ID ID ,.,.00
Temperature Diference Bin (OF)
50%
45%
40%
35%
~30%c
CI 25%:iC"CI 20%..LL
15%
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/23/09,33% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Dierence Between Baline and Test Day
During the Hour 5pm to 6pm
.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00U1qU1qU1qU10inqU10U1qU10c:0 .-.-N N m m o:o:in in u:ID ,.,.oò
Temperature Diference Bin (OF)
62
50%
45%
40%
35%
~30%c
CI 25%:si:CI 20%..u.
15%
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/23/09,33% Cycling 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour 6pm to 7pm
lu.o 0 0o L/ aci ci .-o 0 0 0 0U:aU:aU:.-NNMM o 0 0 0a L/ a u:-. -: L/ L/
oo
\Ò
ou:U)
o 0 0a ir a.. .. co
Temperature Difference Bin (OF)
60%
50%
40%~c
CI 30%:si:CI..u.20%
10%
Group:CZ 3
7/27/09,33% and 50% Cycling 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour 4pm to 5pm
0%li,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00u:a u:a ir a u:a u:a u:ci 0 .-.-N N M M -.-.L/L/
o 0 0 0 0a L/ a u: 0U) \Ò .. .. oó
Temperature Difference Bin (OF)
63
Group:CZ 3
7/27/09,33% and 50% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Diference Between Baline and Test Da
During the Hour 5pm to 6pm
40%
35%
30%
~25%c
Gl 20%::go
Gl..15%i.
10%
5%
0%.,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00ira"1 a "1 a ir 0 II a ir a "1 a ir aci0....N N m m ....II II \0 \0 ""00
Temperature Diference Bin (OF)
Group:CZ 3
7/27/09,33% and 50%Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Diffrence Between Baline and Test Day
During the Hour 6pm to 7pm
30%
25%
20%~c
Gl 15%::goGl..i.
10%
5%
0%,
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0aIIa"1 a ir a ir 0 II a ir a ir a "1 a0ci....N N m m ....II II \0 \0 ""00
Temperature Difference Bin (OF)
64
50%
45%
40%
35%
~30%c
Q)25%:Ji:Q)20%....
15%
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/28/09,50% Cycling 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour 4pm to 5pm
oo6
o 0LI a6 ..o
Lt..
o 0a LtN N
o 0a Ltm m
oa'o
o 0LI a
.: LI
o 0Lt aLI u:
o
Ltu:
o 0 0a Lt a.. .. co
Temperature Difference Bin (OF)
35%
30%
25%
~20%c
Q):Ji:
Q)15%....
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/28/09, 50% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Difference Between Baseline and Test Day
During the Hour 5pm to 6pm
,...,.-,.~ ,
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00LIaLtaLtaLt0LIaLt0Lt0Lta66....N N m m .:.:LI LI u:u:,...co
Temperature Diference Bin (OF)
6S
Group:CZ 3
7/28/09,50% Cyding 4-7pm
Temperature Difrence Between Baline and Test Day
During the Hour 6pm to 7pm
25%
20%
~15%cQI:Jcr
QI 10%..u.
5%
0%
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0ai.a i.a i.a i.a i.a i.a i.a i.a00.-..N N m m 0:0:i.i.1.1.,.,.00
Temperature Difrence Bin (OF)
66
Individual Indoor Temperature Results - 5-Minute Data
35%
30%
25%
~20%c
CI:JC"
CI 15%....
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/16/09, 33% Cycling, 4-7pm
Maximum Within-Customer Temperature Drift Per HOBO Logger
During Test Day Curtialment Period
Maximum Customer Temperature Drif: 3.86 of
oqo
oiro
oq.-
oir.-
oqN
oirN
oqm
oirm
oo.,
oir-.
oqi.
Maximum Temperature Drif Bin (OF)
67
35%
30%
25%
~20%c
Ql::D"
Ql 15%..u.
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/17/09, 33%Cyding, 4-7pm
Maximum Within-Customer Temperature Drif Per HOBO Logger
During Test Day Curtialment Period
Maximum Customer Temperature Drif: 3.65 of
oqo
oiro
oq..
oir..
oqN
oirN
olI
o:
oqlI
oqlY
oirlY
oq-.
Maximum Temperature Drif Bin (OF)
Group:CZ 3
7/20/09, 50% Cyding, 4-7pm
Maximum Within-Customer Temperature Drift Per HOBO Logger
During Test Day Curtialment Period
Maximum Customer Temperature Drif: 4.39 of
30%wmu""".".."m__",,,,,._
25%
20%
~c
Ql 15%::
D"
Ql..u.
10%
5%
0%I,J.,
ooci
oiro
oq..
oir..
oqN
oirN
oqlY
oirlY
oq-.
olI
o:
oqlI
Maximum Temperature Drif Bin (OF)
68
25%
20%
~15%c
GI:icr
GIi.10%L&
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/21/09, 50% Cycling, 4-7pm
Maximum Within-Customer Temperature Drift Per HOBO Logger
During Test Day Curtialment Period
Maximum Customer Temperature Drif: 4.84 of
oao
oi.o
oa..
oi...
oaN
oi.N
oam
oi.m
oao:
oii.,
oaii
Maximum Temperature Drif Bin (OF)
60%
50%
40%
~c
GI 30%:icr
GIi.L&
20%
10%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/23/09, 33% Cycling, 4-7pm
Maximum Within-Customer Temperature Drift Per HOBO Logger
During Test Day Curtialment Period
Maximum Customer Temperature Drif: 3.30 of
u..........._.mu~._....._.._..n._._m_..".._nnn_'_........_..._._._~ ........_nnn_._.._._..~n_.._m__......................._ ...............,'__.......... ...........,....__~
~~_1-
0 0 0ai.a00..
oi...
oaN
oi.N
oam
oi.m
oao:
oii.,
oaii
Maximum Temperature Drif Bin (OF)
69
40%
35%
30%
a-25%
c
QI 20%::
CT
QI..u.15%
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/27/09, 50% Cycling (Yukon) and 33% Cycling (TWACS), 4-7pm
Maximum Within-Customer Temperature Drif Per HOBO Logger
During Test Day Curtialment Period
Maximum Customer Temperature Drif: 3.85 of
oqo
oi.o
oq.-
oi.rt
oi...
oqN
oi.N
oqrt
oqo;
oi.o;
oqir
Maximum Temperature Drif Bin tF)
30%
25%
20%
a-c
QI 15%::
CTQI..u.
10%
5%
0%
Group:CZ 3
7/28/09, 50% Cycling, 4-7pm
Maximum Within-Customer Temperature Drift Per HOBO Logger
During Test Day Curtialment Period
Maximum Customer Temperature Drif: 4.17 of
-l00000000 0 0 0qi.q i.q i.q i.0 i.q00.-.-N N rt rt ~o;ir
Maximum Temperature Drif Bin tF)
70
ApPENDIX C - DUTY CYCLE CHARTS
The following charts present the frequency distribution ofthe hourly duty cycle of the HVAC units within
each group. The hourly duty cycle is the quotient of the HVAC runtime in minutes divided by 60 minutes
in an hour. For each curtailment event the chart on the left presents the frequency distribution of the
hour preceding the curtailment which represents the natural duty cycles. The charts on the right
present the average frequency distribution enforced during the curtailment period hours. The
horizontal axis values are the upper bound of the distribution bins.
CZ 2 Duty Cycle
Group:CZ2,7/16/20,33 Cycling Group:CZ2,7/'J/'1,33%Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtilment Curtilment Averae
50%~.~._~~-~-_.~-~._---_._._.__.~~~-_._--~~~~35%""---_.~~~~~--,-~-~."~-~~_.._~.._._.._-,,._~-------,,_...--_.-
a.a.30%
l~~~j~:
"40%i-----"0 0 25%is 30%----~~~----~-isbb 20%
1:20%
:I
"15%
~!!10%..10%...a.......5%
0%,,-0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Duty Cyc Peræntage DulyCyde Percentag
Group:CZ2, 7/17/20, 33% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtilment
Grop:CZ2, 7/17/'1, 33% Cycling
CurtailmentAverae
t ~~~ -1--2 25% '..
j ¡~: -=~=. ~. )-1 ~;--0% , , ,-, __ , , i~,-I
35% T....
nHI~~~--~==~-l--:: 5% l - ---~ _a-- ----_L - d=:0%1 .'T---'.. -- .
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duly Cyc Percenl_~Duty Cye Percenl_
Grop: CZ 2, 7/2l/2,50 Cycling Group:CZ 2, 7/2l/'1,50 Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtilment Curtilment Average
50%40%
a.a."40%"30%--~--~_..._--_.0 2is30%..b b 20%
-_..it=:===1:20%....................................................................................,........................._-.....1:
~10%-:i:__:,=.:=-.:-l-,~~.__-i:=:_~:
!!10%........
0%0%,,-_...._ ";~ T---_--r.~..~.
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Duiy Cyc. P.rcent_Duly Cyc Percentag
Grop: CZ 2, 7/21/'1, 50 Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtilment
Grop: CZ 2, 7/21/'1, 50 Cycling
Curtailment Averae
t ~~~ r-i.----..---.----.-..------....-..
~ ~~~ t -:-- -~~~_ --=- - -=__ _~_______
~ 15% IS 10% f ------~- __ ~ _ _________.___: 5% ¡ I. ...............1...........................1....O%~ -- .,-_, ,L._¡_ _.~ _.
40%.."30%~b 20%"
~10%....
0%t:~l=~-~j~~~ !
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% I
Duty Cyc. Percntag
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyc. P.rcentage
71
Grop:CZ2,7/23/2O,33%Cycling Group:CZ 2, 7/23/20,33%Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtilment Curtilment Averae
25%----_.~~_.35%....30%"20%
r--~-_r---
i:2 25%................_.....'"15%
.~ ==¡£r ~_~J
~20%-----_..._.._---1;1;:
_.-
~10%~15%
~~10%......._...._....
=,~.~I--:I~~~:.,-:.=,
..5%..5%-_._---....
0%0%.........-...'!.....
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Duty Cy Percent..Duy Cyde Peræntag
Group:CZ2,7/2/20,33%&50 Cycing Grop: CZ 2, 7/2/2.33%&50 Cying
Hour Preceding Curtilment CurtilmentAverage
35%r'50%........................._.....
..30%
ltiii~~."
..""40%
~25%~
1;20%1;30%
c 15%~20%~-----~.".._~-
~10%~:.5%..10%
:===~~~t:~
....-.....................-.........._......~I,........r.-'0%0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Duty Cyc Percent..DuCy Percentag
Group:CZ 2, 7/2B/'l.50 Cycling Grop:CZ 2, 7/2'l,50 Cyling
Hour Prceding Curtilment Curtilment Avera
50%.__...._-~-...~.._.._--_.._-,,---40%
tI. ..... .. ...- -
--_._--
..40%.."................................................._....."30%-i-~._.._-
~30%~
1;1;20%...................._.....~20%~
~~10%_._._-~~..10%~.:~~~=~:i=-~i:i ......--,0%0%--..
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Duty Cyc Percent..Duy Cye Percentag
CZ 3 Duty Cycle
GroupCZ3.7/16/2, 33% Cycing
Hour Preceding Curtilment Group CZ 3. 7/16/20. 33% Cycling
Curtailment Average
35%
.. 30%
~ 25%
1; 20%
ë 15%
~ 10%
:. 5%
0%
25%r;.." 20%
~
1;ë
~:.
10%
-15%--.~:~. . - - .-' ~~~~5%.....................~::
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyc Percentage Duty Cyc Percentage
72
Group CZ 3, 7/17/200, 33% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
30%
l 2250%% 1-------.; ------~--'l 15% --
ë.. 10% --1---e:. 5% - -- _.-----0%.. ___.__ L =1_--_i~
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyce Percentag
Group CZ 3, 7/17/2009, 33% Cycling
Curtailment Average
f ~C~~~it=-
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyde Percentag
Group CZ 3, 7/20/200, 50 Cycling Group CZ 3, 7/20/2009, 50% CyclingHour Preceding Curtailment Curtailment Average
40%-'~~--'--.-_.50%r ... ...............................................................-........~.... .............................. .......~.....i:i:IJ-¡¡30%..........................................................................................................................._....."40%.;&30%t------'l 20%..............................................................................................................................................._.....'lë
--arl---_-ë 20%t------- ---..-~-_.._~~..
~~10%10%
II . 1.1. ,_
.................- ......................... . ....-.~.......:.A--..........T-'....,0%0%...........t
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Duty Cyc Percentage Duty Cyce Percntag
Group CZ 3, 7/21/2009, 50% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
25% !
f~~l-~1
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyce Percentage
Group CZ 3, 7/21/2009, 50% Cycling
Curtailment Average
fêt-~.~~~.-_~~-
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyc Percentage
Group CZ 3, 7/23/200, 33% Cycling Group CZ 3, 7/23/200, 33% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailmen Curtailment Average
30%.~~.35%,-i:25%.............~.................................................................................i:30%+----""0 0 25%C:::====:........................................:
---.;20%.;'l 'l 20%15%~~:l i~~-=i:i ë 15%
!:...........21 10%1-
m,mmm!_!mm!~ :: m,~,=i:i:
~10%~5%+..5%A-A-,-----l~~0%.4....0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Duty Cyce Percentage Duy Cyc Percentage
73
Group CZ 3, 7/27/2009. 33% and 50% Cycling Group CZ 3, 7/27/200, 33% and 50% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment Curtailment Average
25%.._---~
'"ig~-i '""20%"
: - '=E- "'--".
~15%~
'õ 'õ~10%-~20% -- ---
~5%I 1: tbu _~IL:.
0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Duty Cy Percentag Duty Cyde Percentag
Group CZ 3, 7/28/2009, 50% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
30% i
f¡~li.=~-
'" 0% -,, -..~ .::,..~(
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty c:yc Percntag
CZ 3_CIVIL Duty Cycle
Group CZ 3_CIVLL, 7/16/200, 33% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
f~~~.~I 1,1
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyc Percnta
Group CZ 3, 7/28/200, 50% Cycling
Curtailment Average
f ~ fE..jJ.-.~~_..
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cy Percentag
GroupCZ 3_CIVI1, 7/16/'l. 33% CYdling
Curtlment Averae30% --"'25%,- ~- -- I¡ 20% ¡
j :ËI...- .' , -~=:~E I
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duy Cyce Percentag
74
Group CZ 3_CIVIL, 7/17/2009, 33% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailmen
~ ~:: r~ - ~ ~- --- -
i :~ I l~ Iiiil-lii
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duy Cycl Percentage
Group CZ 3_ CIVIL, 7/20/200, 50% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
40%
JI..
a."
l 30%Õë
~:.il~=-:==
20%
10%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cycl Percentag
._._............1Group CZ 3_CIVIL, 7/21/2009, 50% Cycling i
Hour Preceding Curtailment !
25% I-~-- _...-...~-..._~_._-...~.-...~.~.~....~....~
~ 20% l
i ::: jjl_ ~.-~.~-J~=.i_~~~_._0% - i :1=1, 0___' .
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cycl Percentag~----
Group CZ 3_CIVIL, 7/23/200, 33% Cycling L
Hour Preceding Curtailment ...... I
f ~ ij~1-r-.-~~ . . III0% ~- '- - .~ ~~..=:"",-c~-,
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% I
i
Duty Cycl PercentageL-_~~____~____~_
Grop CZ3_CIVIL, 7/17/2, 33%Cycling
Curtailment Avera
a. 30% L-_-==~__
~ ~~: +------~--~--~
õ 15% .l ........................................._....ë i~ 10% Tll---
:. 5% J -~-0%' -~-_._----_.=:=. ._~
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cy Percntag
Grop CZ 3_CIVIL, 7/20/2, 50 Cycling
Curtilment Avera
40% I--a. i~ 30% +--
Õë
~:.
20%
-~-----~ ~--~--~
-
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
0%
Duy Cycl Percentag
Grop C2 3_CIVIL, 7/21/, 50 Cycling
Curtilment Averae
40%
i30% ..~j:::~- -- ~~0% l~-~~ --,~
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cycl Percentag
Grop CZ3_CIVIL, 7/2/2, 33% Cycling
Curtilment Averag
25%
._..-1
a." 20%
~
'õë
~
of
15%
10%
5% +.
0% 1
10%20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cycl Percentag
75
Group CZ 3_CIVIL, 7/27/2009, 33% & 50% cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
35%
a. 30%
~ 25%\:
'l 20%
ë 15%
~ 10%
:. 5%
0%~I~:.:I=~~:=~::
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100
Duty Cyc
Group CZ 3_CIVIL, 7/28/2009, 50% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
50% .j.................... .. ........................... .......................................... .............. .................
f :: Ii=~==- .. =-~ ==~=:~:. 1:: IE~~~~1 ~=i J.
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90 100
Duty Cyc Percentag
CZ 3_MHAFB Duty Cycle
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/16/2009, 33% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
50.0% ¡.
a.~ 40.0% I ..
'l 30.%'" -----
i :~:~:. ,-~..~-..-...-.i):...
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cy Percnt..
35.0%
a. 30.0%
~ 25.0%
'l 20.0%
"l 15.0%
~ 10.%
:. 5.0%
0.0%
..........................__..._.....J
ii
II..-..---~.._-- I
I10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% i!
_J
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/17/200, 33% Cyclng
Hour Preceding Curtailment
.. - -1- -I~~=t.. ~-~ ---..~--....~..-~ -¡ ~ ï -~-r- ..-- -
Duy Cyce Percentae
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/20/20, 50% Cycling
Hour Preceding CurtaHmen
50.0%
a.,.40.0%
~30.0%'l
"l 20.0%
~10.0%:.
0.0%... .... "_._._'.~~~- '-'~~~-"'i~-'-',."., ..'.,.: ............, ........
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cycl Percentage
GroupCZ 3_CIVIL, 7/27/200, 33% & 50 Cying
Curtilment Averaa.~~~~!..~-
ilê' ==~.
:. 05%%, - . 1--... ~..
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cy Pecent..
GropCZ3_OVIL, 7/2/', 50 Cycling
Curtlment Avera
............................1!
........ 1
..1
100%' i
I
35% .
r~Er .Øíi-:.-.
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Duy Cy Percentag
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/16/', 33% Cycling
Curtilment Average
35%
a. 30% ., ........................................ ................................................
l¡êb~íiii
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cy Percentag
GroCZ3_MHAFB,7/17/'. 33 Cycling
Curtlment Average
.._..1
I
60% ,.-_..._...__....,...
I ~ ~ --.: =r.. .-0% ---...,...~.,~ ~......_...,....~.,
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duy Cy Percentag
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/2, 50 Cycling
Curtlment Averae
60%
t 50%
.~_ 40%
'l
"l
i
30%
20%
10%
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duy Cy Percentage
IL.... .......................__...._
76
50.0%.."40.0%eii 30.0%'t
1:20.0%
~10.0%..Go
0.0%
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/21/2009, 50"Ai Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
tl~-~~~Il~
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyde Percntage
50.0%.."40.0%eii 30.0%'t
1:20.0%
~10.0%..Go
0.0%
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/23/2009, 33% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
~~-E-=~il
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyce Percntage
50.0%.."40.0%
~30.0%'t
1:20.0%
~10.0%..Go
0.0%
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/27/2009, 33% & 50% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
~- lID:~=~~:a-i~.::~--~=~~ -
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyc Percentage
25.0%.."20.0%eii 15.0%'t
1:10.0%
~5.0%..Go
0.0%
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/28/2009, 50% Cycling
Hour Preceding Curtailment
~~1/ä~
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyde Percentaie Duty Cyde Percent.
70%
.. 60%
¡ 50%
't 40%
1: 30%
~ 20%
:. 10%
0%
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/21, 50 Cycling
Curtilment Averae
-------
. ...._...J...~....__...~.
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cyc Percntage
50%..40%"00 30%'t
1:20%
~10%..Go
0%
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/23/l, 33% Cycling
Curtilment Averae
~--y_-J::i=I=:
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Duty Cy Percent.
60%
t 50%
~ 40%
't 30%
1:
8 20%
j;_ 10%
0%
Group CZ 3_MHAFB, 7/2/2, 33% & 50 Cying
Curtilment Averae
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Duty Cyc Percentage
60%
.. 50%
S 40%
'ë 30%
1:8 20%
~~_ 10%
0%
77
GroupCZ3_MHAFB,7/2/l, 50 Cyling
Curtlment Average
f--~~.~...=i ----~~;~~=
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ApPENDIX D - PROGRAM TARIFF
Schedule 81- Residential Air Conditioner Cycling Program is the optional tariff that covers the rules and
guidelines for the AlC Cool Credit program.
78
Ductless Heat Pump Market
Research and Analysis
~
%JJ?"i~ wMarket Research Report ;' l: 'I"
~ ~. ~
PREPARED BY
NAHB Research Center
REPORT #08-190
JUNE, 2008
~¡)
NORTHWEST
EI i
ALLIANCE
www.nwaillanc:e.org
529 SW Third Avenue, Suite 600
Portland, Oregon 97204
(tel) 503-827-8416 (fax) 503-827-8437
DUCTLESS HEAT PUMP MARKT RESEARCH
AND ANALYSIS
NAHB
RESEARCH
CENTER
w
NAHB Research Center
400 Prnce George's Boulevard
Upper Marlboro, MD 20774-8731
800.638.8556
June 2008
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 7
Market Characterization ....... ....... ....... ...... ..... ......... .... ........ ............ ... .... ..... ... .... ...... ............ ... ..... ..... ... ..... 7
DHP Awareness and Perceptions.............................................................................................................. 7
Characteristics of Decision Makers with High Likelihood of Adoption ..... ........... .................. ..... ............. 8
Compellng Value/Sellng Propositions for Decision Makers ................................................................... 8
Barriers to DHP Adoption......................................................................................................................... 8
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 10
Project Methodology................ .......... ........... ..... ................ ...... ....... ................... ............. .................. ...... 10
Secondary Literature Review...................................................................................................................10
1n-Depth 1nterviews .............. .... ............. .......... ............................... ....... .......................... ..... ..... .............. 10
Expert and trade ally in-depth interviews. ...................................................................................... .... 10
DHP distributor in-depth interviews. .................................................................................................. 11
Active DHP manufactuer in-depth interviews. .................................................................................. 11
Third part DHP manufactuer in-depth interviews............................................................................ 11
Telephone Dyads/Triads or Telephone Focus Groups of DHP Users..................................................... 11
Builder telephone dyads/triads. ........................................................................................................... 11
HV AC contractor telephone dyads/triads. .......................................................................................... 11
Consumer telephone dyads/triads. ................................. ............................................ ................ ......... 12
In-Person Focus Groups of Non-Users ................................................................................................... 12
Builder focus groups. .......................................................................................................................... 12
HVAC contractor focus groups........................................................................................................... 12
Consumer focus groups....................................................................................................................... 12
Detailed Findings ........................................................................................................................................ 13
Introduction to DHPs ............ .................... ............................ ............................. ...... ............. ....... ........... 13
DHP Market Characterization ................................................................................................................ 13
Overseas DHP market......................................................................................................................... 13
U.s. DHP Market Structure..................................................................................................................... 14
Market size.......................................................................................................................................... 14
Selected models. .............................................................................. ...................... ................. ............ 15
Active manufacturers. .................................................................................................... ............ ......... 17
Third party manufactuing. ......... ................................................... ........................ ...... ....................... 17
DHP Distribution and Retail Channels ................................................................................................... 17
Distribution channels. .......... .......................................................................... ....... .............................. 17
Retail channels. ................ ..... ........................................................ ....................... ............................... 17
Typical mark-up.................................................................................................................................. 17
DHP Standards and Test Procedures......................................................................................................18
History of selected DHP manufacturers. ........ ........................................ ............... ....... ........ ............... .... 18
Daikin ................................................................................................................................................. 18
Carrer ................................................................................................................................................. 18
Trane...........................................................:.......................................................................................19
Fujitsu ................................................................................................................................................. 19
Market Trends.... ........ ...... ...... ................. ... ... ..... ......... ...... ......... ... ..... ... ........ ... .................. ... ....... '" ...... ... 19
In-depth interviews with market actors............................................................................................... 19
Page 2
Findings from telephone focus groups of builders using DHPs. ......................................................... 20
Findings from telephone focus groups of contractors using DHPs. ............................................ ........ 20
New Products........................................................................................................................................... 20
Homeowners Likely to Adopt OHPs ......................................................................................................... 22
Findings from Secondary Literature Review ....................... .............. ... .......... ......... ... ............. ... ...... ....... 22
Homeowners looking to heat and cool single rooms ....................................................... ................... 22
Homeowners in coastal areas. ............................................................................................... ........ ...... 22
Consumers in moderate climates. ....... ..... ......... .... ........ ...................................... ................................ 22
Unconventional spaces. .......................................................................................................... ............. 22
Findings from In-Depth Interviews with Industr Experts ...................................................................... 22
Homeowners looking to heat and cool single rooms ............................................................. ............. 22
Unconventional spaces........................................................................................................................23
Findingsfrom Telephone Focus Groups of Consumers Living with DHPs............................................. 23
Electric bill savings. .......................................................................................................... .................. 23
Energy conscious. .................... ...... ..... ... ........ ...... .................... .......... .............. ..... ... ........................... 23
Homeowners looking to heat and cool single rooms. ................................................................. ........ 23
Combined heating and air conditioning system. .................................................................. ............... 23
Findings from Focus Groups of Consumers Not Living with DHPs........................................................ 24
Electrc bill savings.. ....................... ... ... .......... .... ....... ........ ............. .................... .... ... ......................... 24
Energy conscious. ............................................................................................................................... 24
Combined heating and air conditioning system. ................................................................... .............. 24
Additional consumer characteristics. ...................................... ........... ........................................... ...... 24
Findingsfrom Telephone Focus Groups of Builders and Installers Using DHPs................................... 24
Compelling Value Propositions for Consumers.......................................................................................25
Findings from Secondary Literature Review ........................................................................................... 25
Energy efficiency. ........... ........... ....... ............ ......... ..... ......... .......... .......................... ........................... 25
Increased comfort....................... ........... ........ ......... ................ .......................... ................................... 26
Air quality. ..........................................................................................................................................26
Noise reduction. .................................................................................................................................. 26
Safety ..................................................................................................................................................26
Corrosion reduction. ................................................................................................................. .......... 26
Findings from In-Depth Interviews with Industr Experts ...................................................................... 27
Energy efficiency. ...............................................................................................................................27
Add-on capability................................................................................................................................ 27
Air quality. ..........................................................................................................................................27
Findingsfrom Telephone Focus Groups of Consumers Living with DHPs............................................. 27
Energy efficiency. ...............................................................................................................................27
Utility bill savings. .............................................................................................................................. 27
Increased comfort....................... ........................................................................................ .......... ....... 28
Air quality. ..........................................................................................................................................28
Noise reduction. ........................... ....................................................................................................... 28
Safety ..................................................................................................................................................28
Resale value of home. ......................................................................................................................... 28
Maintenance and service. ................................................................... ....................................... .......... 28
Installation time .................... .......................................................... ................................. .............. ..... 28
Reduction of greenhouse gases. ................................................. ...... ................................................... 29
Findings from Focus Groups of Consumers Not Living with DHPs........................................................ 29
Environmentally friendly. ...................................................................................................................29
Utility bill savings. ..............................................................................................................................29
Page 3
Increased comfort.............................................................................. ...... ............... ................ ..... ........ 29
Air quality. ..........................................................................................................................................29
Noise reduction. ..................................................................................................................................29
Safety. .................................................................................................................................................29
Resale value of home. ......................................................................................................................... 29
Installation .................................................................................................................... ...................... 30
Livable space. ......................................................... ..... .................................................... ................... 30
Barriers to Consumer Adoption................................................................................................................31
Findings from Secondary Literature Review ......... ............ '" ................ .......... ............................ ............. 31
Aesthetics............................................................................................................................................3 i
Cost.....................................................................................................................................................3 i
Awareness of product. ....... .... ............ ........................................... ...... ..... ................................... ........ 3 i
Room tye and size. ............................................................................................................. ............... 3 i
Findings from In-Depth Interviews with Industr Experts ...................................................................... 32
Aesthetics............................................................................................................................................32
Low temperature heating. ................................................................................................................... 32
Findingsfrom Telephone Focus Groups of Consumers Living with DHPs............................................. 33
Cost.....................................................................................................................................................33
Awareness of product. ........................................................................................................................33
Lifestyle .............................................................................................................................................. 33
Aesthetics............................................................................................................................................33
Findingsfrom Focus Groups of Consumers Not Living with DHPs........................................................ 34
Resale value of home. .........................................................................................................................34
Aesthetics............................................................................................................................................34
Supplemental heating. ......................................................................................................................... 34
Awareness of product. ........... .................. ................. ........................... ........................................ ....... 34
Fuel preference. .................................................................................................................................. 34
System operation............................................................................. .......... .............................. ............ 34
Terminology........................................................................................................................................ 35
Trusted Sources of Information for Consumers.......................................................................................35
Consumers in telephone focus groups................................................................................................. 35
Consumers in in-person focus groups. ................................................................................................ 35
Compelling Value Propositions for Builders............................................................................................36
Findingsfrom Telephone Focus Groups of Builders Using DHPs.......................................................... 36
Green building programs. ................................................................................................................... 36
Differentiation..................................................................................................................................... 36
Customer satisfaction. ............................ ........................................................ ........ ............................. 36
Supplemental heating.......................................................................................................................... 36
Cost.....................................................................................................................................................37
Space constraints.................................................................................................................................37
Findingsfrom Focus Groups of Builders Not Using DHPs .................................................................... 37
Installation ..........................................................................................................................................37
Customer satisfaction. .......... .............................................................. ..... .................. ........... .... ..... ...... 37
Builder characteristics....................... ................................................. .................................. ..... .......... 37
Barriers to Builder Adoption..................................................................................................................... 38
Findingsfrom Telephone Focus Groups of Builders Using DHPs.......................................................... 38
New technology. ................................................................................................................................. 38
Finding a DHP installer ...................................................................................................................... 38
Aesthetics............................................................................................................................................38
Page 4
Product awareness...............................................................................................................................38
Noise...................................................................................................................................................38
Heating durng construction................................................................................................................39
Humidity .......... ................................................................................................................................... 39
Findingsfrom Focus Groups of Builders Not Using DHPs ....................................................................39
Aesthetics...............................................:............................................................................................ 39
New technology. ................................................................................................................................. 39
Product awareness. .............................................................................................................................. 39
Colder climates. ................................................................................................................ ............... ... 39
Humidity ............................................................................................................................................. 39
Fuel choice. ............................................................................................................................. ............ 40
System operation. ............................................................................................................... ................. 40
Learning About DHPs................................................................................................................................41
Trusted Sources of Information. ...... ....... ......... ... ... ......... .......... ....... .... ............... ..... ....... .... ........ ..... ... ..... 41
Builders in telephone focus groups. ............................................................................................. ....... 4 i
Builders in in-person focus groups. ....... .... .... ..... ......... .... ................. .......... .... ....... ...... ....................... 4 i
Learning Process.... ..... ..... ... ............ ................ ................................... ....... ..... ......... ........... ... .... ........ ...... 41
Builders in telephone focus groups ..................................................................................................... 41
Builders in in-person focus groups. .................................................................................................... 4 i
Compelling Value Propositions for HV AC Contractors.........................................................................42
Findings from Secondary Literature Review ........................................................................................... 42
Installation .......................................... .......................................................................... ...................... 42
System maintenance............................................................................................................................42
Findings from In-depth Interviews with Industr Experts ....................................................................... 42
Installation education. .........................................................................................................................42
System Maintenance. ............................................................................................................. ............. 43
Option.................................................................................................................................................43
Findingsfrom Telephone Focus Groups of Contractors Using DHPs.................................................... 43
Installation ..........................................................................................................................................43
System maintenance. ...................................................................................................................... ..... 43
Application. ........................................................................................................................... .............. 43
Differentiation.....................................................................................................................................44
Green building programs. ........... ........................................................................................................ 44
Contractor characteristics........................... ............................... ............................................ ....... ....... 44
Findingsfrom Focus Groups of Contractors Not Using DHPs............................................................... 44
Installation .......................................................................................................................................... 44
System maintenance.................................................................................................................... ........ 44
Application................................................... ................................................... ............................... ..... 44
Rebate .................................................................................................................................................44
Barriers to Contractor Adoption .............................................................................................................. 45
Findings from Secondary Literature Review .... ..... .................... .............. .............. ............ .......... ..... ....... 45
Installation ..........................................................................................................................................45
Cost.....................................................................................................................................................45
Refrigerant leakage. ............................................................................................................................ 45
Findings from In-Depth Interviews with Industr Experts ...................................................................... 45
Number of components. ...................................................................................................................... 45
Findingsfrom Telephone Focus Groups of Contractors Using DHPs.................................................... 45
Awareness...........................................................................................................................................45
Page 5
Application specific ....... ..................................................................................................................... 46
Aesthetics............................................................................................................................................ 46
Condensate pump ...... ......... ................................................................................................................. 46
Supplemental heating. ................................................................. ........................................................ 46
Findingsfrom Focus Groups of Contractors Not Using DHPs...............................................................47
Installation ..........................................................................................................................................47
Awareness. ................................... ............................................. ............................................. ............. 47
Application specific. ............................................................................................................................47
Aesthetics....... .......................................... ...................................................................................... ..... 47
Supplemental heating..........................................................................................................................47
Cost.....................................................................................................................................................47
Components ........................................................................................................................................47
System operation.................................................................................................................................48
Trusted Sources of Information....... ... ... ... ......... ...... ................ ...... .......... ... ... .... ..... ............ .... ......... .... .... 48
Contractors using DHPs. ..................................................................................................................... 48
Contractors not using DHPs..........................,..................................................................................... 48
Importance of brand ...................... ......... ............ ......... ... ....... ..... .... ..... ...... ........ .................... ....... ........... 48
Compellng Value/Sellng Propositions and Potential Barriers for Distributors................................. 49
Findings from In-Depth Interviews with Industr Experts ....... ......... ....... ............... ....... ... ....... ...... ......... 49
Price....................................................................................................................................................49
Materials handling. .......................................................................................................,.....................49
Findings from In-Depth Interviews with Industry Experts ........................ E"or! Bookmark not defined.
Curent housing practices............. .............................. ......................................................................... 49
Location ....................................................................................... ....................................................... 49
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................. 50
Page 6
Executive Summary
Market Characterization
The U.S. DHP market differs significantly from overseas markets. Almost all residential
HVAC systems in Asia and a vast majority of systems in Europe are ductless, while only
a small percentage of homes in the U.S. utilize DHP technology. Slower U.S. adoption
rates can be explained partly by cultul differences and partly by differences in home
architecture--U.S. homes are generally designed with ducted systems in mind and allow
for more livable space. Energy costs are much higher in Asia and systems with increased
energy efficiency are more desirable. Lastly, refrgerant handling is not as strctly
regulated overseas as it is in the U.S.
Many companies curently manufacture DHPs for the U.S. market including Mitsubishi
Electrc, Fujitsu, Daikin, Sanyo, LG, Samsung, EMI/etroaire, Goodan, Heil, and
Unionaire. Trane, Carrer, and Lennox do not manufacture DHPs for the U.S. market.
Instead, a third part manufacturers the product for them and privately labels the systems
for distrbution in the U.S. DHP models range from single-zone to multi-zone units with
differences in price, SEER, and HSPF ratings.
Two main distribution channels exist for DHPs in the U.S. Many manufacturers use
independent distrbutors, such as wholesale, plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and
refrigeration distributors thoughout the countr. Others manufacturers use company-
owned dealer distribution oftheir DHPs. DHPs are not sold through retail channels
because of the restrcted refrgerant used in the systems.
Approximately 250,000-300,000 ductless systems were sold in the U.S. last year, with
the ductless industr growing steadily each year for the past few years. This growth,
despite a slow residential constrction market, is likely due to the remodel and retrofit
application of DHPs, along with their high level of energy effciency.
Single zone units are curently more popular than multi-zone units, with Mitsubishi
Electric, Fujitsu, and Sanyo dominating the ductless market.
DHP Awareness and Perceptions
DHP awareness is limited among consumers and builders, with more awareness among
HV AC contractors. Paricipants in the qualitative phases of this study perceived these
systems to be best used in retrofit and remodel applications, while only a handful
believed them to be appropriate for whole-house heating and cooling. Qualitative
participants also believed that with more awareness on the part of consumers, builders,
installers, engineers, and architects, the DHP industr would grow. As of now, only 5%
of the American public knows that DHPs are even an option.
Most participants in the qualitative phases of research perceived the notion of "ductless"
to be valuable in situations where ducted systems were impossible or improbable. Brand
Page 7
was perceived to be important according to HV AC installers, as many were wiling to
pay more money for a better system.
Characteristics of Decision Makers with High Likelihood of Adoption
Various market experts, manufacturers, and consumers living and not living with DHPs
speculated as to the tyes of homeowners and builders who may have a high likelihood of
adopting these systems. Consumer characteristics included homeowners with electric
heating systems, those living in moderate or coastal climates, people looking to condition
a single room or unconventional space, and homeowners wanting a combination heating
and cooling system. Consumers who are energy conscious and concerned about their
electric expenses might also adopt minisplit systems. Builders considered likely to adopt
these systems included those constrcting or remodeling smaller attached apartents,
condominiums, and smaller homes.
Compellng Value/Sellng Propositions for Decision Makers
Many compelling advantages of DHPs existed for consumers. Participants and experts
believed the system's ability to use energy more efficiently, thus translating into lower
electric bils, was an important benefit of DHPs. Greater personal control of a home's
climate, improved air quality, and noise reduction were also highly regarded
characteristics. Corrosion reduction, a DHP's capability to be added onto a ducted
system, and perceived safety benefits were also considered valuable. Other consumer
advantages included the potential for increased resale value of a home, reduced system
maintenance/service when compared to other systems, relatively easy installation ofDHP
units, reduction of greenhouse gas emission, and increased livable space.
Utilization ofDHPs to gain points in green building programs was viewed by builders as
a huge benefit of these systems. The ability to differentiate themselves from other
builders by offering DHPs, coupled with a relatively easy installation process, was also
extremely compelling for builders. Increased customer satisfaction through DHP
technology was also suggested as a benefit of the system.
For HVAC contractors, minisplits offer easy installation and limited system maintenance,
both of which were consistently perceived as valuable selling propositions. DHPs were
regularly regarded as a unique solution to certain installation challenges. DHPs were
another option to offer clients, allowed for company differentiation, and were a means of
meeting green building criteria-all of which were considered secondary sellng
propositions to HV AC contractors.
From a distrbutor point of view, DHPs were considered a more profitable product than
unitary systems because of their price premium. Handling of ductless systems is much
easier for distributors when compared to traditional units because DHPs are smaller and
easier to inventory. Both variables were considered valuable propositions for distrbutors.
Barriers to DHP Adoption
Barrers to widespread DHP adoption were discovered during multiple phases of this
research project. Higher system cost and unattactive indoor and outdoor aesthetics were
Page 8
substantial drawbacks of these systems from a consumer point of view. A general lack of
consumer awareness and low temperature heating concerns were also considered
substantial barriers to adoption. In addition, preferences related to fuel tye, and
questions about overall system operation and product terminology were viewed as
slightly less significant impediments to consumer adoption, though barrers nonetheless.
Substantial barrers to builder adoption included trouble finding a qualified DHP installer,
general wariness towards any new technology not commonly found in the building
industr, and a DHP's unsightly appearance. Less significant barrers included issues
with humidity, the necessity of another heat source during home constrction, fuel
preferences, and overall confusion about system operation.
Significant barers to contractor adoption included concerns about installation and a
pervasive mindset that DHPs were solely application specific. Other considerable barrers
included a perceived lack of awareness on the part of contractors and the need for
supplemental heating. Less significant hindrnces to contractor adoption included
possible refrgerant leakage, unpleasant aesthetics, higher cost, and problems with
condensate pumps.
Since traditional, ducted systems are tyical practice in the U.S., distributors might not be
as likely to offer DHPs. Additionally, certin geographic areas, such as the Pacific coast,
may be more receptive to the idea ofDHPs. In other areas where energy efficiency is not
top of mind, distributors might not be as likely to offer DHP technology.
DHPs represent only a fraction of the U.S. HVAC market. For widespread adoption, the
first obstacle that must be overcome is lack of awareness and practical knowledge of
DHPs. Once some familiarity is established, DHPs may be well received based on their
energy effciency, compatibility with green building programs, and ease of installation.
Page 9
Introduction
The Northwest Energy Efficiency Allance (NEEA) sought to better understand the
potential for ductless heat pump (DHP) market adoption within the United States. NEEA
identified seven core objectives for the scope of this project. The objectives are
summarized as follows:
1. Deliver a comprehensive characterization of DHP market strcture
2. Identify characteristics of decision-makers (builders and homeowners) with high
likelihood of adoption
3. Estimate potential market size-US and Northwest
4. Identify awareness, perceptions, and barrers to adoption ofDHPs among key
market stakeholders
5. Identify most compellng value/selling propositions for decision makers
6. Understand how to speak to decision makers about HV AC in their own language
7. Understand initial experiences of early participants in both supply and demand
side markets
Project Methodology
The research design for this project included a secondary literature review, in-depth
interviews, telephone dyads/trads, and in-person focus groups. Information gathered in
each research phase addressed the stated objectives of the project.
Secondary Literature Review
In the secondary literature review, the Research Center uncovered and synthesized
information already available about the DHP market including advantages and
disadvantages ofDHPs, manufacturers ofDHPs and their current product offerings, as
well as notions of pricing. This data came from searches of previously published
information available on the internet, in journals, and in periodicals. This secondary
literature review also identified experts in the field for the puroses of conducting in-
depth interviews in the next phase of research.
In-Depth Interviews
The first tye of qualitative data collection the Research Center conducted involved in-
depth interviews with thought leaders earlier identified in secondary research. These in-
depth interviews allowed for greater insight into DHP market characterization and
strcture. A total of 13 market actors were interviewed during February and March 2008.
Interviewees included experts in the field ofDHPs, distrbutors ofDHPs, representatives
from active U.S. DHP manufacturers, and representatives from third part DHP
manufacturers. Interviewer guides differed among each group.
Expert and trade ally in-depth interviews. A total of five expert and trade ally in-
depth interviews were conducted. Participants included those from the following
companies or organizations:
1. Heating, Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Distributors International (2)
Page 10
2. Air Conditioning and Refrgeration Institute
3. Air Conditioning Contractors of America
4. Home Energy Sciences
DHP distributor in-depth interviews. Thee active U.S. DHP distrbutors interviews
were conducted. Partcipants were from the following companies:
1. CFM Distrbutors
2. Thrft Supply
3. Thermal Supply
Active DHP manufacturer in-depth interviews. Three active DHP manufacturer
interviews were conducted by the Research Center. Representatives from the following
companies were interviewed:
1. Fujitsu
2. DaikinAC
3. Mitsubishi Electrc
Third party DHP manufacturer in-depth interviews. Two third part DHP
manufacturer interviews were conducted for this project. Representatives from the
following companies were interviewed:
1. Carrer Corporation
2. Trane
Telephone Dyads/Triads or Telephone Focus Groups of DHP Users
The second type of qualitative data collection involved telephone focus groups of two to
three participants, also known as dyads and trads. The purose of these dyads and trads
was to collect in-depth information regarding barers and facilitators to adoption, levels
of awareness, influences, and motivators in the decision to use DHPs, and characteristics
of decision makers with a high likelihood ofDHP adoption. The Research Center
conducted a total of six telephone dyads and trads involving two groups of builders who
built or remodeled homes with DHPs, two groups of HVAC contractors who installed
DHPs, and two groups of consumers who lived with DHPs in their homes. Topics
covered in moderator guides differed among each of the three groups.
Builder telephone dyads/triads. Five builders paricipated in two dyads/triads.
Participants in these groups were aged 18-55, characterized themselves as a builder,
contractor, or remodeler, were involved primarily in residential constrction for a
minimum of three years, and used at least one DHP in home constrction. Current HV AC
systems used
HVAC contractor telephone dyads/triads. Seven HVAC contractors participated in
two telephone dyads/triads. Participants in these groups were aged 18-55, characterized
themselves as an HV AC installer or one who performs HV AC system maintenance, were
involved primarily in residential constrction for a minimum of thee years, worked
primarily in the Pacific Northwest, and installed at least one DHP system.
Page 11
Consumer telephone dyads/triads. Five consumers living with DHPs participated in
two telephone dyads/trads. Participants in these groups were aged 18-55 and had at least
one DHP in their home.
In-Person Focus Groups of Non-Users
The final qualitative research phase consisted of eight in-person focus groups.
Audience not familar Location Total number of
withDHPs 2:roups
Homeowners Portland, Eugene, Spokane 4
HV AC Contractors Portland, Spokane 2
Builders Portland 1
Hybrid of HV AC/Builders Spokane 1
Four groups consisted of consumers unfamiliar with DHPs while two groups consisted of
HVAC contractors who did not install DHPs. One group consisted of builders who did
not use DHPs. The final group was a blend ofHVAC installers, builders, and architects
who did not implement DHP technology. The purpose of these focus groups was to gauge
initial participant reaction to DHPs, identify compellng value/selling propositions, key
messages to emphasize, and potential barrers to overcome, as well as to identify levels of
awareness and motivators in the decision to install or use DHPs. Moderator guides
differed among groups and covered a variety of topics. The groups were exploratory in
nature and were intended to provide input for future quantitative research.
Builder focus groups. Partcipants in builder and blended builder-contractor focus
groups did not use DHPs.
HVA C contractor focus groups. Participants in HV AC contractor and blended
builder-contractor focus groups were those who did not use DHPs.
Consumer focus groups. Participants in consumer focus groups were unfamiliar with
DHPs.
Page 12
Detailed Findings
Introduction to DHPs
Ductless heat pumps (DHPs), or minisplits, are heating and cooling systems that combine
the climate control advantages of window air conditioners with the entire house cooling
and heating capabilities of central, ducted systems. Minisplit systems include a single
outdoor unit comprised of a compressor and condenser and one or more indoor, wall-
mounted units containing individual coils within air handlers. In DHP systems,
refrigerant is piped from the outdoor unit, through small diameter insulated refrgerant
lines directly to indoor wall units. Cooled or heated air is then blown into the room by a
fan located in the evaporator unit. One outdoor unit can be linked to one or more indoor
units.
DHP Market Characteriation
Through an existing literature review and multiple in-depth interviews with market
actors, the Research Center determined varous characteristics of the DHP market.
Overseas DHP market. Minisplit technology dominates Asian and European
HVAC markets but has yet to significantly penetrte the U.S. market. While ducted
systems are the norm in the U.S., minisplits and other tyes of ductless systems account
for 98% of all air conditioning in Asia. In Europe, ductless systems, in general, account
for 50-70% of air conditioning systems (Fujitsu, unpublished interview). Though U.S.
DHP sales have increased over the past few years, Asia and Europe remain the leaders in
ductless system sales (lEA Heat Pump Centre Newsletter 2003). In 2003, China had the
largest minisplit market and production center in the world, while East Asia and Southern
Europe were the fastest growing regions for DHP sales (lEA Heat Pump Centre
Newsletter 2003). Slower U.S. adoption rates can be explained partly by the evolution of
heating and cooling in Asia and in the U.S., differences in system architectue, energy
consciousness, space constraints, and refrgerant handling.
Ductless systems are a direct evolution from the hibachi (CFM Distrbutors, unpublished
interview), a traditional Japanese heating device consisting of a heat-proof open container
designed to hold hot charcoaL. Hibachis were carred from room to room to heat only
rooms that were occupied. This mindset remains as the Japanese continue to only heat,
and now cool, rooms in use with minisplits. This mIndset has not trsferred to the U.S.
Conversely, in the U.S., the warm air heating market emerged from coal-fired, solid-fuel,
and gravity-flow furnaces with large gravity set ductwork (CFM Distrbutors,
unpublished interview). DHPs were not introduced into mass production in Japan until
the 1940s or 1950s, and by that time, the U.S. had already committed to ducted systems
(Air Conditioning Contractors of America, unpublished interview). According to Daikin
AC, the market in the U.S. for ductless systems was first established in the mid-1980s
(Daikin AC, unpublished interview). Around that same time, there was backlash against
putting Japanese technology in homes, so Japanese manufacturers were forced to build
Page 13
their air conditioning framework around US manufacturers (Fujitsu, unpublished
interview).
Central ducted systems are rarely installed overseas due to limited residential space and
close proximity to other buildings (Mitsubishi Electric, unpublished interview). u.s.
builders generally do not have such tight space constraints, making it easier to install
ductwork and conventional central systems. Therefore, DHP popularity overseas is a
direct result of residential architecture and design (Roth, Westphalen, and Brodrick
2006). If ducts are not present, minisplits provide an alternative for effective heating and
cooling. Also, many residences in Europe are older and built before the concept of central
heating and cooling. Instead of installng invasive ductwork, it is often easier to use
minisplits to preserve the original structure of the home (Wardlaw Fuels).
Increased energy costs is another factor for Asia's widespread adoption ofDHPs. Energy
costs are reportedly five times higher than those in the U.S. (Mitsubishi Electrc,
unpublished interview). Minisplits provide a way in which to combat high energy prices
by leveraging their strong energy efficiency ratings. Rising U.S. energy costs and
increased energy conservation awareness among consumers may encourage DHP
adoption in the U.s.
Also, Asia does not regulate refrigerant handling. Installng DHPs in Asia does not
require training or certification. In fact, manufacturer's installation instrctions are
intended for the non-technical person to install DHPs (CFM Distributors, unpublished
interview). According to CFM Distrbutors, only the u.s. and Western Europe are
concerned with refrgerant usage (CFM Distributors, unpublished interview). The ease of
installation by non-certified installers is another reason for the large DHP market
overseas.
u.s. DHP Market Structure
Market size. It is diffcult to discern actual DHP sales because DHPs represent a
small percentage of overall HV AC equipment sales as noted in Table 1. Additionally,
many manufacturers do not wish to disclose annual sales figures. However, in 2005,
Sanyo estimated that Americans only purchased about 125,000 ductless systems annually
(Wardell 2005) and according to manufacturers interviewed, data provided to them by the
Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) showed that approximately 250,000-
300,000 ductless units were sold last year. Currently, the U.S. commercial and residential
market amounts to approximately $15 bilion, yet ductless system purchases account for
less than 1 % (Daikin AC, unpublished interview). Mitsubishi, Fujitsu, and Sanyo account
for approximately 80% of the market share of ductless systems (Daikin AC, unpublished
interview).
Page 14
a e .. .a es ipmen so s
2005
Total U.S. manufactuer shipments of 9,246,559
unitary air conditioners and air-source
heatpumpsa
Estimated number of ductless systems 125,000
sold in the U.S.
T bl 1 U S S I ISh.t fDHP
a Source: Air Conditioning, Heating, and Refrgeration Institute 1ittp:ii",'ww.ab.nc;t.,'RIiinilisho":QQi;,m:(lQQ.,,:=§J9.
b Source: (Wardell 2005)
Leading industr experts believed sales and implementation of residential DHPs were on
the rise in the U.S. (Mitsubishi Electrc, unpublished interview and Home Energy
Sciences, unpublished interview). However, a Mitsubishi Electrc representative
cautioned that only 5% of the U.S. population knows that DHPs are even an option,
which may also explain low sales numbers when compared to Europe and Asia
(Mitsubishi Electric, unpublished interview).
Selected models. Mitsubishi, Fujitsu, Daikin, and Sanyo are considered the leaders
in DHP technology (Home Energy Sciences, unpublished interview) but exact sales
numbers for each DHP manufacturer are not publicly disclosed. Table 1 offers a glimpse
at select minisplit models from larger U.S. manufacturers. Included in the table are each
model's cooling and heating capacity, zone capability, seasonal energy efficiency ratio
(SEER) and HSPF ratings, and price (if available). Models found in this table include
single units for small rooms, single units for larger rooms, and multiple units for more
than one room.
Table 2. U.S. DHP Manufacturers and Select Models
Heating/cooling Zones (or
capacity number of
DMH09SB-0
SMH24SA-1
DMH24DB-l
DMH36TB-l
9,800/9,800
24,000/24,000
11,800/11,800
1
Single
Single
Dual
Tri
FTXS09DVJUIR09DVJU
FTXS24DVJUIRS24DVJU
9,000
24,000
Single
Single
1111.50
2341.01
13.0
16.0
UNK
UNK
Page 15
Zones (or
number of
M09YF
M24YF
M24DYF
M36TY2
M36 YF
9,600/9,700
27,600/24,200
28,000/24,000
38,100/35,100
38,000/35,200
LA091HNP 9,000/9,000 Single 1245.00 13.0 UNK
LA121HNM 12,000/12,000 Single 1375.00 13.0 UN
MSLG 12IHP/MSLG 12IHP 24,000/24,000 Dual 2565.00 13.0 UN
MSLGO l2IHP/MSLGO 12IHP/
MSLG012IHP 36,000/36,000 Tri 3825.00 13.0 UN
MSZ-A09NA 10,900/9,000
MSZ-A24NA 23,200/22,000
MXZ-3A30NA (17+ 1 7)28,000/26,900
MXZ-3A30NA 09+09+ 17)28,600/28,400
9,500/9,000 Single
09KHS71 12,000/9,000 Single 1409.57 16.0 7.7
26KHHS72R 23,000/27,600 Single 3749.00 15.9 10.3
KMHSI872-2 36,000 Dual 6161.42 13.0 UN
KMHS1272-3 36,000 Tri 6383.69 13.0 UN
KMHS0972-4 36,000 Quad 6712.90 13.0 UN
KFIHP-09 9,500/9,000 Single 690.00 16.0 UN
KFHHP-22 24,200/22,000 Single 1248.00 14.0 UNK
a All non-price information taken from manufacturer websites.
b Price information taken from distrbutor websites including ductlessdepot.com, http://ww.ajrndison.com/.
http://www .amroyaI.com/, http://www.smarterwayinc.com, ww.ductlessdepot.net, ww.qualitymatter.com.
c Unknown value
Page 16
Active manufacturers. Mitsubishi, Fujitsu, Daikin, Sanyo, LG, Samsung,
EMI/Retroaire, Goodman, Heil, and Unionaire are curently manufacturing DHPs in the
United States.
Third party manufacturing. Trane, Carrer, and Lennox do not manufacture DHPs in
the U.S. Instead, a third part manufacturers the product under contrct and privately
labels the systems for distrbution in the U.S. (Fujitsu, unpublished interview).
Companies like Trane and Carrer partcipate in this fashion because, as a major OEM,
they want to be able to supply a full line of HV AC products (Air Conditioning
Contractors of America, unpublished interview).
DHP Distribution and Retail Channels
Distribution channels. In the U.S., two primary distrbution methods exist for
ductless systems. Companies such as Fujitsu and Daikin mainly use independent
distributors, such as wholesale, plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and refrgeration
distrbutors throughout the countr. One company, for example, has 2,500 points of sale
throughout US and Canada.
The second distribution method involves company-owned dealer distrbution. For
instance, one-half of Trane's business in the U.S. comes from such company-owned
dealer distrbution channels (Trane, unpublished interview).
It is also possible to purchase ductless systems directly off the internet. However, the
systems must stil be installed by a licensed professional or the manufacturer warranty
could be in jeopardy (Air Conditioning Contrctors of America, unpublished interview).
Retail channels. DHP retail chanels do not exist in the U.S. due to the refrigeration-
charged system imbedded in the product. These systems require installation by licensed
contractors according to the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) refrgerant
handling regulations (Fujitsu, unpublished interview). Conversely, big-box retail stores
such as The Home Depot and Lowe's sell central systems at kiosks (Air Conditioning
Contractors of America). Associates schedule appointments for a contractor to visit a
home and provide an estimate. According to the Air Conditioning Contractors of
America (ACCA), manufactuers use the store as another sales venue. ACCA believes
that something similar could be done with ductless systems, but DHPs would never be
sold directly off the shelves (Air Conditioning Contractors of America, unpublished
interview). Overseas, ductless systems can be purchased from retail channels. One can
visit an electronics store in Asia and see a section of ductless minisplits available for
purchase (Daikin AC, unpublished interview).
Typical mark-up. Various distrbutors report the average mark-up for DHPs is similar
to other HV AC systems. One distrbutor explained that the wholesaler needs to make
about 26%-27% gross margin, which equates roughly to a 34-36% markup, figuring in
the costs of shipping, damage in shipping, technical support, and marketing. Another
distributor interviewed indicated their DHP mark-up ranged from 18-20%.
Page 17
DHP Standards and Test Procedures
Currently, equipment testing for ductless systems occurs under the Air Conditioning and
Refrigeration Technology Institute's (ARTI) Standard 210.240, which includes a broad
range of unitary, small equipment (Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute,
unpublished interview). For the past year, ARTI has been working with various DHP
manufacturers to create equipment standards and test procedures solely applicable to
DHPs. ARTI speculates that once ductless equipment has its own standards and test
procedures, the systems will have increased visibility and recognition in the industr, as
well as heightened consumer and contractor awareness (Air Conditioning and
Refrigeration Institute, unpublished interview). Under these test procedures,
manufacturers can voluntarily have their equipment evaluated in order to determine the
accuracy of the product's efficiency claims. These tests wil enable a ductless
manufacturer to promote the system as a certified product that meets its stated efficiency
claims. Additionally, consumers wil have the advantage of knowing that a third part
verifier has tested the efficiency ratings of the product without having to rely solely on
the manufacturer's claims (Air Conditioning and Refrgeration Institute, unpublished
interview). When this standard is approved, it can easily be incorporated into a green
building program which may add to its visibility in the marketplace (Air Conditioning
and Refrigeration Institute, unpublished interview).
History of selected DHP manufacturers
Qualitative research conducted by the Research Center involved in-depth interviews with
representatives of select DHP manufacturers. These interviews provided insight into the
history of DHPs within these companies, popular products, and product costs.
Daikin. Daikin began designing minisplit systems in the 1950s and was the first
manufacturer to introduce a multi split system (Daikin AC, unpublished interview). In
1996, Daikin was the first ductless manufacturer in the world to switch to non-R22
products. According to Daikin, they are the current top HV AC company in the world,
both commercially and residentially, but are relatively new to the U.S. marketplace.
Daikin established a sales company in the U.S in 2005.
Currently, the one to two-ton capacity single-zone, wall mounted systems are the biggest
selling products for Daikin (Daikin AC, unpublished interview). One manufactuer
representative we spoke to reports that equipment cost remains relatively constant across
the country. The cost ofa unit is approximately $1300 to $1500 per ton, with installation
running $1500 or more. These installation prices, however, can vary greatly depending
on region of the country.
Carrier. Carrer designed their first minisplit system in the mid 1980s (Carrer,
unpublished interview). By the late 1980s, Carrer ceased manufacturing these systems
due to poor sales and other logistical issues. Since that time, Carrer has been
manufacturing all over the world. Currently, they are not manufacturing any DHPs in the
U.S., but have manufacturing parters abroad. According to Carrer, the majority of the
world uses ductless systems for residential applications, but over 90% of Carrer's
ductless sales are in commercial applications. Carrer indicates their most popular
Page 18
residential product is a high-wall style system ranging from 9,000-18,000 BTUs and is
primarily used for add-ons and retrofits. Carer's residential ductless systems account for
less than 5% of its U.S. sales.
Trane. Trane has been involved in ductless products for over 20 years, primarily
overseas (Trane, unpublished interview). At this time, Trane sells a very limited range of
minisplits in the u.s. due to current product changeovers. Trane indicated their high
wall, single-zone systems are the most popular with the price of these systems varying
greatly by region.
Fujitsu. Almost 85% of Fujitsu's product line is heat pump inverter technology which
allows for higher SEER products (Fujitsu, unpublished interview). Fujitsu's product line
ranges from systems with 9,000 BTUs to 42,000 BTUs. Fujitsu remarked that their
multi-zone systems are more popular than single-zone systems in the residential industry.
Market Trends
Market trends were determined through in-depth interviews with market actors and
telephone and in-person focus groups with users and non-users.
In-depth interviews with market actors. Over the past few years, DHPs have been
installed in a wide range of applications. According to a Fujitsu representative, the
ductless industr has grown 28-32% a year for the past five years, and in the past year,
unitary, ducted systems were down almost 19% while ductless systems were up 28%
(Fujitsu, unpublished interview). Fujitsu reasoned that unitary systems have been more
affected by the current housing market and economy, while minisplits have been able to
differentiate themselves in the marketplace (Fujitsu, unpublished interview).
Ductless minisplits have not yet impacted the sales of traditional residential systems, but
have the potential to do so in the near future according to a leading U.S. distrbutor (CFM
Distributors, unpublished interview). Other manufacturer representatives disagree and see
the DHP market completely separate from the trditional ducted market since DHPs have
more targeted applications. According to a Mitsubishi Electrc representative, DHPs are
more commonly used for spot heating and cooling-not whole house heating and
cooling-so it would be diffcult to forecast the extent to which DHPs could compete
with ducted systems (Mitsubishi Electrc, unpublished interview).
Curently, single-zone units outsell multi-zone systems but distrbutors have started to
notice increased adoption of multi-zone units (CFM Distrbutors, unpublished interview).
As inverter technology becomes sophisticated, the amount of heat a ductless system
produces increases, which may enhance the applicabilty of DHPs (Fujitsu, unpublished
interview). Additionally, as more national advertising and DHP education occur, the
residential DHP market will increase (Mitsubishi, unpublished interview). If the cost of
ductless systems were also reduced, the ACCA speculates ductless manufacturers could
substantially increase their market share (ACCA, unpublished interview).
Page 19
Findingsfrom telephone focus groups of builders using DHPs. When builders in a
telephone focus group were asked if they would be building or remodeling more or fewer
homes with DHPs in the future, two builders replied they would be building fewer
homes. One reasoned that ducted systems prevailed in the industr, while another
mentioned that a combination heating and air conditioning system was not necessary
where he built homes. Builders in another telephone focus group hoped to build and
remodel more homes with DHPs in the future but wanted more consumer feedback
regarding the product before they implemented it in more homes.
Findings from telephone focus groups of contractors using DHPs. One DHP
installer interviewed during a telephone focus group believed that residential DHP sales
were dependent upon the retrofit and remodel market, since DHPs are often used in
retrofit and remodel situations. This installer believed if the retrofit market went up,
residential DHP sales would increase as well.
New Products
New products are constantly being developed by producers within the HVAC industr.
According to Daikin AC, various manufacturers are currently improving a ducted-style
unit for their ductless product line. Instead of a wall mount in the occupied space, a
ducted-style unit is installed in a closet or dropped ceiling. The product is essentially out
of sight of the consumer, leading to improved aesthetics.
In early 2008, Mitsubishi introduced its new hyper-heating inverter (H2i™) technology
for select Mr. SlimQl and CITY MULTlOO VRFZ units. This new technology allows the
system to run at full capacity in extremely cold temperatures unlike traditional heat
pumps which require supplemental heat. A Mitsubishi representative said this new
technology has the capability of functioning at 100% heating capacity at 5 degrees
Fahrenheit and wil operate effectively down to -13 degrees Fahrenheit. According to
Mitsubishi Electric, the "patent-pending flash process cools the compressor which allows
for higher compressor speeds at lower temperatures without overheating" which helps to
overcome common heat pump issues like "decreases in low-side pressure, refrigerant
mass flow rate, and operational capacity" (Mitsubishi Electric Press Release 2008).
Mitsubishi's website mentions that this new technology is currently offered for "light
commercial or institutional renovations or new construction projects." However, a
Mitsubishi representative boasted this new system was placed in a public housing unit
and when the outside temperature dropped down to near zero degrees Fahrenheit, the
discharge temperatures were close to 100 degrees Fahrenheit with all residents reporting
they were comfortable.
One HV AC installer interviewed during a telephone focus group reported using a product
called AireShare to help heat and cool multiple rooms without adding a large number of
DHP systems. AireShare consists of a fan motor mounted inside a 2x4 wall. With the flip
of a switch, the systems can take heating or cooling from the main room, where the DHP
indoor unit is located, and pump the air into another room. Aireshare systems are meant
to complement a ductless minisplit system and can condition an entire house with only 3-
4 units (HV AC Solutions Direct). This installer reported that manufactuers of this
Page 20
product are currently tring to work with Mitsubishi to bring AireShare to the residential
marketplace.
Page 21
Homeowners Likely to Adopt DHPs
Findings from Secondary Literature Review
, Homeowners looking to heat and cool single rooms. Many homeowners remodel
attics or rooms above garages in order to make them into livable space. Home offices,
increasingly popular home theaters, and other residential room additions are often the end
result of such home improvement projects, yet in many instances the existing central
system might not extend to these rooms (Skaer 2005). DHPs offer an alternative to
ductwork extensions and lower capacity central systems while maintaining the
pedormance of the original system. These ductless systems are easier to retrofit because
they are only using small refrgerant lines instead of ducts (Roth, Westphalen, and
Brodrck 2006)
Homeowners in coastal areas. Consumers living in coastal areas might also
benefit from minisplit systems. Condenser motors situated horizontally prevent the
system from catching water and debris, and plastic fan blades built to resist corrosion
make DHPs suitable HVAC systems for coastal residences or homeowners worred about
corrosion (Wardell 2005). Those living in humid climates would also benefit from DHPs,
as these systems dehumidify the air regardless of temperature setting (Wardell 2005).
Consumers in moderate climates. Homeowners in moderate climates where the
outside temperature does not regularly drop below freezing might be more likely to
install DHPs. Since backup electrc resistance heating or an additional separate heating
system is necessary, homeowners in extremely cold temperatures might adopt these
systems (Roth, Westphalen, and Brodrick 2006).
Unconventional spaces. Minisplits also provide an alternative for heating and
cooling unconventional homes or homes where ducted systems are impossible,
impractical, or too expensive to install (Skaer 2005). For example, DHPs should appeal to
consumers living in historic or older homes without central ducts, since minisplit systems
allow for cooling and heating capabilities through less invasive installation procedures.
Owners of other residences where ductwork might be difficult to install like vacation
homes and cabins should also consider DHPs (Skaer 2005).
Findings from In-Depth Interviews with Industry Experts
Homeowners looking to heat and cool single rooms. Industr experts agreed with
existing literature and believed and homeowners looking to heat or cool a single room
would benefit from minisplits. Home improvement projects and retrofits can be
considered opportnities to implement DHP technology. In fact, Fujitsu believed retrofits
were the primary market for DHP manufactuers (Fujitsu, unpublished interview) while
Trane considered room additions as the principle market (Trane, unpublished interview).
A representative from Thermal Supply, a distrbutor in the Pacific Nortwest, found that
most of their ductless residential sales were for both add-ons and retrofits (Thermal
Supply, unpublished interview).
Page 22
Furthermore, problems with ducted systems might occur when retrofitting or adding on to
a home because the curent system might not be large enough capacity to heat or cool the
additional room (Trane, unpublished interview) or the additional room might cause
performance in the central system to diminish (Thrft Supply, unpublished interview).
Using DHPs solves these problems with the added benefit of having a single location for
maintenance work and installation (Heating, Air Conditioning and Refrigeration
Distributors International, unpublished interview).
Unconventional spaces. With real estate prices increasing dramatically, many
people are turning to smaller homes (e.g. apartents turned into condos). Such residences
do not necessarily have central cooling and DHPs offer a small and compact solution to
heating and cooling (Thermal Supply, unpublished interview). Additionally, applications
for homeowners living in smaller residences like lofts or bungalows where simplicity is
valued is another way DHPs are useful according to CFM Distrbutors (CFM
Distrbutors, unpublished interview).
Findings from Telephone Focus Groups of Consumers Living with DHPs
Electric bil savings. Durig telephone focus groups, consumers mentioned that
people looking to save money on their electrc bil might be interested in DHP
technology. Many of these consumers living with DHPs reasoned that they initially
agreed to have a system installed in their home because they were told it would save them
money on their electrc bil. With the potential to save hundreds of dollars each year,
according to consumers interviewed, homeowners looking to save money on their electrc
bil would likely embrace such a product.
Energy conscious. Consumers interviewed in telephone focus groups believed an
ideal DHP consumer would be someone who is educated about the product and
concerned about energy efficiency. When first learning about DHPs, they were extremely
interested in the energy effciency ratings of the systems.
Homeowners looking to heat and cool single rooms. Many consumers who
participated in telephone focus groups were motivated to install a DHP in their home as a
solution to a problem. Their curent HV AC system could not effectively heat or cool
certain rooms which caused these rooms to go unused durng extremely hot summer
months and cold winter months. Since installation of their DHPs, they reported these
rooms as more comfortable because of the zonal heating and cooling capabilities.
Consumers looking to make a single room more comfortable may be interested in this
product.
Combined heating and air conditioning system. Simply the notion of a non-ducted
system that heats and cools was motivation to install these ductless systems according to
consumers who participated in telephone focus groups. Their previous systems did not
include air conditioning which made for extremely hot indoor temperatures during the
summer months. Consumers looking for a combination product might be likely to adopt
this product.
Page 23
Findings from Focus Groups of Consumers Not Living with DHPs
Electric bil savings. Participants in in-person focus groups believed saving
money on their energy bils each month was a crucial benefit of DHPs. They indicated
consumers tring to save money would benefit from these systems since they seemed
economical to run and cost-effective to install.
Energy conscious. Consumers participating in in-person focus groups also
reported that homeowners interested in energy effciency who were environmentally
conscious would likely use this product. Since DHPs offer extensive energy efficiency
benefits, a person concerned with this issue may have a higher likelihood of using this
product in his or her home.
Combined heating and air conditioning system. Participants in focus groups liked
the idea of having a combined heating and air conditioning system and believed this to be
a benefit ofDHPs.
Additional consumer characteristics. Consumers in in-person focus groups
presented a wide array of additional characteristics of those they thought were most likely
to adopt DHP technology. Participants noted that people of all age ranges might consider
this product. Additionally, consumers indicated that potential DHP customers would be
educated, wiling to comprehend how the system functioned, financially able to invest
upfront, and wiling to embrace new technology. Homebuyers who have seen these
systems in hotels or hospitals, or those who have previously installed extensive ductwork
during major home renovations or remodels, may also see the benefit of these systems.
Additional consumer characteristics include homeowners looking for a HV AC system
that operates quietly, requires low maintenance, and a system where the indoor
temperature can easily be programmed.
Findings from Telephone Focus Groups of Builders and Installers Using DHPs
Builders and installers who participated in telephone focus groups agreed that
homeowners who were energy conscious would most likely adopt DHPs. These
participants believed that consumers interested in energy efficiency and thus wanted to
save money on their utility bils each month would likely adopt this product.
Page 24
Compelling Value Propositions for Consumers
Findings from Secondary Literature Review
Energy effciency. Minisplit systems boast high energy effciency ratings with
distribution losses ranging from 1-5%, compared to 30% losses for central systems
(Toolbase Services). More conditioned air trvels to the desired area ofthe home,
increasing energy efficiency because the unit is not ruing for an extended period of
time.
Most DHPs use R-41OA, an ozone frendly refrgerant that absorbs and releases heat
more effciently than other refrigerants that deplete the ozone (Honeywell). Previously
installed ducted systems that use other tyes of refrigerant cannot be updated to use R-
410A due to design changes needed in compressors and piping (Toolbase Services). With
a national trend towards energy efficiency, DHPs offer an ozone-frendly advantage over
existing ducted systems which can add to its marketing value.
DHPs have the added benefit of only heating and cooling necessar areas of the home.
F or instance, ducted systems often have ductwork that runs in unconditioned spaces like
attics and basements which sometimes lack suffcient insulation (Roth, Westphalen, and
Brodrck 2006). This layout can drve up energy consumption within the home. DHPs
only heat or cool occupied spaces which makes the units more energy effcient. Some
manufacturers, such as Daikin, have a function that allows the system to adjust the
temperature when no one is detected in the room (Grasso 2007). This provides heating
and cooling only to occupied rooms, adding to the energy efficiency of the system.
SEER ratings are very high because no air has to be moved through any ductwork.
Furhermore, DHPs cool smaller rooms more effciently than ducted systems. The
cooling capacity ofDHPs starts as low as 9,000 BTU while the smallest cooling capacity
for ducted systems generally starts at 18,000 BTU (Wardell 2005). This type of ducted
central system is inefficient for an area smaller than 1,000 square feet (Wardell 2005), but
a smaller conditioned area is ideal for a minisplit system. Consumers wishing to heat or
cool smaller rooms more efficiently might value DHPs over more traditional central
systems.
Outdoor units with modulating condenser motors also allow DHPs to condition a room
more efficiently. Instead of turning on and off to maintain the temperature set by a central
thermostat like ducted systems, ductless systems with modulating condenser motors vary
the speed gradually to sustain the desired temperature. Less energy is used and wear and
tear on the unit is reduced (Wardell 2005).
Since ductless minisplits have high energy effciency ratings, governent organizations
are beginning to offer tax credits for qualifying homeowners. For instance, Oregon offers
a Residential Tax Credit for homeowners using DHPs with variable speed compressors
(Oregon Department of Energy Conservation Division 2008). The credit is approximately
$200-$300 and the consumer supplies the ARI certificate.
Page 25
Increased comfort. The ability of minisplits to precisely control the air
temperature for each unit might add to the systems' value. DHPs are extremely effcient
at providing spot cooling and heating to desired rooms since each wall unit uses a
separate thermostat (Contractor 2006). Zone control features on the indoor wall units
allow consumers to enjoy different temperatures in all rooms with mounted units (Roth,
Westphalen, and Brodrick 2006). The systems' ability to moderate varying temperatures
can provide consumers personal comfort and was the most compelling feature of the
system according to one consumer interviewed.
Air quality. Improved air quality is another advantage ofDHPs. Some systems
include anti-allergy enzyme fiters that improve air quality within the conditioned space
(Grasso 2007). For instance, Mitsubishi Electrc uses an artificial blue enzme catalyst
on the filter fiaments in order to trap harmful microbes and reduce the proliferation of
harmful allergens, germs, and other bacteria (Grasso 2007). Minisplit systems also boast
lower air volumes which allow for greater dehumidification (Wardlaw Fuels).
Additionally, an auto-louver function on the remote distributes and sweeps conditioned
air around the room increasing the quality of the air (Siegel 2001).
Noise reduction. Minisplit systems offer greater noise reduction when compared
to ducted systems. DHPs are designed to be as quiet as possible and as of2001, DHP
manufacturers reported decibel (dB) levels in the low 30s (Siegel 2001), while typical
ducted systems rate around 80dB and ultra-quiet ducted systems only rate 69dB (Wardell
2005). Since DHPs do not have indoor air compressors or air traveling through ceiling
ducts, noise is not created by air being pushed through ductwork (Grasso 2007).
Also, DHPs use quieter indoor and outdoor fans (Roth, Westphalen, and Brodrick 2006).
In residential areas where propert lines are close to each other, the outdoor unit of these
ductless systems may also offer a quieter solution. DHP outdoor units are less noisy than
outdoor central units making them less of a disturbance to nearby neighbors (Wardlaw
Fuels). Concentrated residential areas would benefit from these quieter systems.
Safety. DHPs are safer than in-window units. In minisplit systems, small holes are
drlled in walls for refrigerant lines and electrcal wires to pass, while in-window units
require an open window that provides an easy entry point for intrders to enter the home
(Ductless Depot).
Corrosion reduction. Coastal consumers may view corrosion reduction as an
added benefit of minisplit systems. Friedrich offers DHPs with several features that
prevent system corrosion from salty outdoor air including condenser motors oriented
horizontally in order to prevent water and debris from entering the unit (Wardell 2005).
The outdoor units also have plastic fan blades as opposed to tyical metal blades found in
ducted systems, as well as painted or powdered-coated base pans to prevent corrosion
(Wardell 2005). Such product attributes would be of high value to those consumers trying
to combat corrosion or living in a salty air environment.
Page 26
Findings from In-Depth Interviews with Industry Experts
Energy effciency. These ductless systems simply discharge air directly into the
room which leads to better isolated effciencies (CFM Distrbutors, unpublished
interview). Additionally, the inverter technology found in DHPs allows the systems to
reduce the amount of draw upon the electrcal grd when compared to systems that are
continuously turning on and off, according to a Mitsubishi Electrc representative
(Mitsubishi Electric, unpublished interview). Moreover, the electricity brought into the
DHP system to provide heating and cooling is almost entirely used for the end purpose
according to a Mitsubishi Electrc representative.
Add-on capabilty. DHPs provide an easy way to add on to existing ducted
systems. Curently, many builders are inappropriately making their ducted air
conditioners larger than necessary to handle a 50-person load (Air Conditioning
Contractors of America, unpublished interview). This tye of load would only be most
likely necessary a couple of times per year for the consumer, rendering it extremely
inefficient for the remainder of the year. Adding a DHP as a secondary system for such
larger events within the home would be a much more efficient option (Air Conditioning
Contractors of America, unpublished interview).
Air quality. Daikin AC reported that these units are helpful in keeping dust out of
the air stream in order to reduce allergy issues (Daikin AC, unpublished interview). This
was seen as a compellng featue of the system.
Findings from Telephone Focus Groups of Consumers Living with DHPs
Energy effciency. In addition to tax credits, rebate programs are also in effect
because ofDHP's energy effciency capabilties. According to customers in telephone
focus groups, a program was offered by the Bonnevile Power Administration (BPA) in
Oregon which gave qualified homeowners a $2,000 rebate towards the cost of DHP
installation. According to customers participating in the program, qualifications included
a designation as a large user of electrcity with a low efficiency heat source. Consumers
in the program who were interviewed mentioned that they are extremely satisfied with
their DHPs and happy they participated in the rebate program. One consumer
participating in the program commented that she wished she had known about these
systems ten years ago. Many believed that offering more rebate programs and greater
public dissemination of these financial incentives might promote increased DHP usage
and adoption.
Utilty bil savings. Consumers participating in telephone focus groups stated they
saved money each month on their electric bil when compared with their bil using
previous systems. One consumer participating in the BP A rebate program reported her
electric bil dropped from $360 a month down to $60 a month after installing a DHP in
her main living room. Other customers paricipating in the program who were
interviewed reported a range of $60-$150 in monthly savings.
One consumer paricipating in the BPA DHP rebate program explained that when buying
a home, the heat source is not usually a top priority for homebuyers. If consumers
Page 27
upgraded their systems soon after purchase, they would very easily make a return on their
investment from electric bil savings, according to this consumer. She reasoned it may
cost more initially, but that money can easily be recouped in electricity bil savings over a
period of time. When speaking with consumers living with DHPs, each person
interviewed reported utility bil savings as a significant advantage ofDHPs over other
systems.
Increased comfort. Many consumers who participated in telephone focus groups
who lived with DHPs agreed that these systems added quality comfort to their rooms and
home. Their previous systems-like ceilng radiant heating, baseboard heating, and Cadet
electrc heaters--id not effectively heat the home. DHPs distribute the heat more evenly
across a certain area when compared to these previous systems.
Air quality. One customer in Oregon reported that one of the top advantages of
DHPs is the improvement of the indoor air quality within her home. Running a business
out of her residence with different people constantly fitering in and out, this consumer
appreciated her system's capability to reduce allergen levels and particles.
Noise reduction. Consumers living with DHPs who participated in telephone
focus groups reported that the systems were quiet with one participant describing them as
producing "background, white noise." One consumer joked that her refrigerator was
louder than her DHP and believed it to be quieter than any forced air system she
previously had in her home.
Safety. DHPs could be considered safer than other tyes of heating systems like
Cadet heaters. One consumer living with a DHP system reported a fire had started in her
home as a result of a child placing a box against a Cadet heater. She felt that DHPs were
safer because they were out of reach of children.
Resale value of home. Two consumers living with DHPs believed that their
system would add to the resale value of their home. The notion of removing an older
system and replacing it with a DHP was thought to increase the technical heating and
cooling capability of one's home and therefore improve the condition of the home. This
enhancement would then increase the resale value according to these consumers.
Maintenance and service. Consumers living with DHPs reported few maintenance
problems with their systems. Most commonly, consumers provided simple filter cleaning
and washed the coils every few months, according to builders in telephone focus groups.
Many consumers in these groups had not even performed this service with their system
stil performing effectively. Service issues that had arisen for these consumers included
problems with temperature regulation, trouble setting the timer overnight, and thermostat
issues.
Installation time. Consumers living with a single DHP system who participated in
telephone focus groups indicated that it took less than a day for a contractor, two HV AC
installers, and an electrcian to install the system. One consumer living with multiple
Page 28
units in his home said it took a week to install with two installers present but noted that
this was the first residential DHP project for his installers. This shorter time frame for
installation might be a compelling benefit of the system when compared to lengthier
installation times of ducted systems.
Reduction of greenhouse gases. When asked to respond to a statement that DHPs
reduced greenhouse gases more than other HVAC systems, most consumers in the
telephone focus groups agreed. However, many were unclear as to the actual meaning of
the statement. One consumer in Oregon responded that greenhouse gases originated from
the generation of energy and since her system used less energy, her personal greenhouse
gas usage was reduced.
Findings from Focus Groups of Consumers Not Living with DHPs
Environmentallyfriendly. Consumers participating in in-person focus groups who
were not currently using DHPs in their homes consistently indicated energy effciency as
a compellng reason to use these systems. The notion that DHPs were better for the
environment because they used less energy was an extremely persuasive benefit
according to these participants-they concluded that using DHPs would be
environmentally responsible.
Utilty bil savings. Consumers partcipating in in-person focus groups who did
not own a DHP agreed with the DHP owners who participated in telephone focus groups.
Consumers in all in-person groups consistently raned saving money on utility bils as a
top benefit ofDHPs.
Increased comfort. In-person focus group participants not currently using DHPs
in their homes regarded a DHP's ability to control heating and cooling in different areas
or zones of the home to be a benefit of the product. This comfort customization feature,
allowing homeowners to determine where and when to heat and cool a room, was highly
regarded in these groups.
Air quality. Participants in in-person focus groups indicated that improved air
quality and mold reduction were indeed added benefits of the system.
Noise reduction. Consumers participating in in-person focus groups also indicated
quiet heating and cooling to be a valuable featue of these systems.
Safety. In-person focus group paricipants indicated safety was an added benefit of
DHPs as well. Since DHPs are hung on walls, they would be out of reach of not only
children, but also pets and would not be disturbed by furniture.
Resale value of home. Some in-person focus group participants not owning DHPs
speculated that if product awareness was well entrenched among consumers, these
systems would increase the resale value of the home. Another participant suggested
DHPs were a way to modernize a home since windows would not be blocked by air
conditioning units-a fact which might then increase the desirability of the home.
Page 29
Installation. Consumers in in-person focus groups believed DHPs had advantages
during the installation process as well. The idea that DHPs could be quickly and easily
installed with less interrption to the homeowner was extremely attactive to participants.
Additionally, some consumers in in-person focus groups thought that if installation was
easier than other systems, perhaps DHPs could be installed by DIYers. Ifthis was tre,
one participant mentioned this would be extremely beneficial since the homeowner
would be able to install and maintain the system and would not have to call people at odd
hours to service the equipment.
Livable space. Consumers participating in in-person focus groups regarded the
idea that DHPs did not compromise the livable square footage of a home to be a
compellng benefit of the product. Participants stressed the importance of having a
HVAC system that did not impede on one's livable space like other systems might. Since
DHPs could satisfy this preference, this may be a benefit to stress to potential consumers.
Page 30
Barriers to Consumer Adoption
Findings from Secondary Literature Review
Aesthetics. Minisplit systems have an indoor unit that mounts to the wall of a
room. Even though these units are meant to be discrete and blend with home décor
(Grasso 2007) and are less obtrsive than PTAC or window units (Ductless Depot), they
are not invisible like traditional ducted systems (Contractor 2006). Based upon
secondary research, aesthetics are stil considered a primary problem among consumers.
Refrigerant lines installed on the outside of the home can be aesthetically unpleasing as
well. Varying colors and tyes of siding can cause diffculty when tring to hide
refrgerant lines (Wardell 2005). Some contractors use white vinyl channels to encase the
lines, making them less conspicuous than traditional copper piping (Wardell 2005).
However, the lines are stil readily apparent. With both the outdoor and indoor units
potentially causing visual concerns, consumers may not opt for mini split systems.
Cost. For an HVAC system in a new home, DHPs are tyically more expensive
than central ducted systems. Most systems cost about $1,500-$2,000 per ton of cooling
capacity, which is 30% more than central systems and double the cost of similar capacity
window units (Ductless Depot). Additionally, DHPs are stil not considered tyical
practice in the US, so installation costs can be higher because of the limited number of
qualified installers and smaller volumes of the product sold (Roth, Westphalen, and
Brodrck 2006).
Minisplit systems may require the use of either a separate heating system or backup
electrc resistant heating in instances where ambient air drops below a certin
temperature-although some partcipants in this project reported sufficient heating
without a backup source. The requirement of an additional system can increase start-up
costs and the use of backup electrc heating in colder temperature increases operating
costs (Roth, Westphalen, and Brodrck 2006). When retrofitting a home, the cost
premium increases noticeably with a minisplit system (Roth, Westphalen, and Brodrck
2006). Existing ducted systems would only need new indoor and outdoor units while a
new minisplit system would need refrgerant lines installed as well (Roth, Westphalen,
and Brodrck 2006). Consumers might then choose to simply add on to existing ductwork
instead of adding anew, ductless system.
Awareness of product. In the past, ductless manufacturers promoted their products
exclusively to trade contractors. Therefore, consumer awareness of these products is stil
considerably low (Air Conditioning Contractors of America, unpublished interview).
Manufacturers have begun to market these systems to consumers in an attempt to make
the product demand consumer-driven instead of contractor-driven (Thermal Supply,
unpublished interview).
Room type and size. Ductless systems are not designed for every room in a residence.
Rooms that need consistently low temperatures like wine cellars are not ideal for DHP
Page 31
usage (Wardlaw Fuels). Additionally, Samsung cautions that DHPs should be placed in
computer rooms only with the addition of a low ambient kit (Wardlaw Fuels). These
exceptions could prevent consumers from choosing this tye of ductless system for either
their entire home or rooms within their home.
Samsung also stresses the importance of choosing the correct capacity DHP for the
desired space. Short cycling due to air recirculation can occur when a large capacity unit
is placed in a small room and can lead to system reliability problems (Wardlaw Fuels).
Consumers must be sure that they are choosing an appropriate system for the size of the
room. If reliability problems arise due to issues in sizing, DHP's reputation might be
diminished.
Findings from In-Depth Intervews with Industry Experts
Aesthetics. Ifprice were equivalent, aesthetics would probably be the biggest
disadvantage ofDHPs to consumers according to CFM Distrbutors (CFM Distributors,
unpublished interview). Many consumers spend a large amount oftime and money on
their homes and do not want such a large unit on their wall (CFM Distributors,
unpublished interview).
In an attempt to approve the aesthetics, manufacturers have begun making the indoor
units much smaller. Currently, these units are approximately half the size of what they
were five years ago, which eases the impact to the consumer (Fujitsu, unpublished
interview). Regardless, minisplit systems are substantially more visible than their ducted
counterparts-a fact which might be a significant barrer to widespread u.s. DHP
adoption.
It is necessary to note that many DHP consumers are extremely satisfied with the
aesthetics of the system according to some industr experts. A Mitsubishi Electric
representative noticed that mini split customers often complained at the sight of their
system at first, but gradually grew accustomed to the look within a month of installation
(Mitsubishi Electric, unpublished interview). A Home Energy Sciences representative
emphatically agreed that consumers did not mind the look of their minisplit systems
(Home Energy Sciences, unpublished interview).
Low temperature heating. Homeowners living in colder areas may choose not to
implement DHP technology. A representative from Carrer stated that DHP systems wil
most likely be unable to compete with ducted systems because the U.S. is a gas heat
market (Carrier, unpublished interview). Currently, ductless systems are not nearly as
effcient as gas in cold weather because minisplits have rarely been engineered
worldwide for low temperature heating (below 24 degrees Fahrenheit) (Carrer,
unpublished interview). In temperatures below 24 degrees Fahrenheit, a supplemental
heat source is needed to effectively heat the space.
Page 32
Findings from Telephone Focus Groups of Consumers Living with DHPs
Cost. Consumers who participated in telephone groups speculated that systems
tyically cost anywhere from $2000-$4000. One consumer participating in a BP A rebate
program mentioned that she might have reconsidered purchasing the system or might
have saved more money to purchase the system if the rebate had not been offered. One
consumer in a telephone focus group hypothesized that if systems eventually became
more popular and were installed more frequently, the cost of these systems might
decrease due to manufactuer competition. Otherwise, consumers may choose traditional
ducted systems based on installation costs alone.
Awareness of product. Consumers living with DHPs who were interviewed
agreed that these systems are not in widespread use. Most of these consumers were first
introduced to the systems when they were picked to participate in a rebate program
offered by their electric company. Others first heard about DHPs from friends in the
residential heating and cooling business.
Consumers owning DHPs who paricipated in telephone focus groups mentioned that
when new visitors first see their units, many do not know what the product is. After
seeing and experiencing the capabilities of DHPs, their visitors often inquire about
purchasing and installng a system of their own. Consumers living with DHPs who were
interviewed also mentioned that the public needs to be better educated about these
systems. They argued that ifmore consumers knew about DHPs in general, they would
ask contractors to install them in their homes or remodeling projects. One consumer in a
telephone focus group mentioned builders should be made more aware of these systems
since they are often the people that decide which heat source to install in homes.
Another participant in BPA DHP rebate progrm suggested these systems should be
available at local big-boxes and home and garden shows in order to guarantee maximum
public exposure. These consumers believed monetary savings, convenience and comfort
of the system, as well as the environmental benefits should be stressed to the public.
Lifestyle. Another type of lifestyle change may be necessary when using the
remote control. One consumer in a telephone focus group mentioned that it was diffcult
at first to use a remote control for a heating and air conditioning system. She reported the
remote must be pointed directly at the register in order to adjust the temperature. She
believed this sensitivity to be a disadvantage of the system.
Aesthetics. Though a thorough review of existing literature detailed negative
perceptions regarding aesthetics ofDHPs, many consumers who participated in telephone
focus groups living with DHPs did not agree. Many mentioned that they noticed the
system at first but grew accustomed to the indoor aesthetics within a month, while
another consumer believed it to be more aesthetically pleasing than her previous air
conditioning unit. An Oregon consumer mentioned that when other people entered the
room, their first comment referred to the warmth of the room, not to the appearance of the
unit. However, other consumers in these telephone focus groups reported that visitors to
their home often commented negatively on the outward appearance of their DHP system.
Page 33
Findings from Focus Groups of Consumers Not Living with DHPs
Resale value of home. It is important to note that some participants in in~person
focus groups questioned the prospect of DHPs adding to the resale value of the home.
One consumer was uncertain every homeowner could keep up with the new technology
of the system and believed there was risk associated with using a technology that was not
widespread. Another participant flatly stated that a home with DHPs would never have
the same value as a home with a forced air system.
Since these consumers viewed DHPs as more expensive than other systems because of
initial costs, they regarded DHPs as an investment. When viewed in this manner, these
consumers indicated that the investment might not be recouped since homeowners are
often transient. One consumer wondered if a homeowner could break even after 3-5 years
of purchasing DHPs. Other consumers in an in-person focus group mentioned that if they
were to invest as much as $10,000 on their home, they would not put that money towards
a DHP system. They reasoned there were better options on which to spend their money
like kitchen or bathroom renovations. If this opinion is widespread, it may prove a barrier
to widespread DHP adoption.
Aesthetics. Consumers participating in in-person focus groups, who had never
seen DHPs before, consistently disliked the concept of a visible indoor unit hanging on
the wall inside the home. They indicated the indoor unit seemed large and would rather it
be invisible. They thought it would not fit in with the décor of most rooms. However, it
was noted during in-person consumer focus groups that the outside unit blends well into
the landscape and some appreciated the small size of the outdoor units.
Supplemental heating. Consumers in in-person focus groups disliked the idea of
needing a supplemental heating system when using DHPs. They believed this would be a
large barrer to widespread adoption of these systems and were confused as to why
exactly an additional system would be necessary in bathrooms and bedrooms.
Awareness of product. Consumers in in-person focus groups also indicated a lack
of awareness among the general public regarding DHPs and suggested HV AC
contractors, realtors, and other stakeholders need to be better educated about the product.
Fuel preference. Some consumers in in-person focus groups believed that most
homeowners have a preference for gas heating and not electrc. One consumer believed
gas to be more prestigious than electrc heating especially when thinking about gas
stoves. Consumer preference for gas may hinder adoption rates for DHPs.
System operation. Consumers participating in in-person focus groups who did not
own DHPs were confused as to how the system operated. Many questions arose regarding
how the system worked in general and more specifically, how it actually heats, cools,
filters, and moves air throughout the entire house. Other questions centered on placement
of the unit. Many participants were confused when they saw a picture of an indoor DHP
unit placed high on a wall above a television. Many wondered if the unit had to be placed
high on a wall, and if so, questioned how this could efficiently and effectively heat a
Page 34
room if warm air rises. Also, participants speculated that every room in the house might
not have an ideal DHP location and questioned the possibility of changing the location of
DHPs post- installation.
Participants in these groups were also confused as to how the piping was run through
walls, what coolant was used, and how the system was cleaned. Others questioned DHPs
track records regarding maintenance. They wanted to know how long the product would
last, the average period of warrnty, and what maintenance schedules to expect.
Terminology. In-person consumer focus group participants were confused by
terms related to DHP technology. The term "minisplit" was confusing for a few
participants as was the term "energy efficient." For example, when given a list ofDHP
benefits, participants questioned which systems DHPs were compared with in order for
DHPs to warrant the distinction as "more energy effcient."
Trusted Sources of Information for Consumers
Consumers in telephone focus groups. Consumers living with DHPs who
participated in telephone focus groups reported trsting a variety of sources when
learning about DHPs. Consumers overwhelming agreed that they trsted their HV AC
contractors and those involved in rebate programs trsted their DHP consultant. One
consumer mentioned she went to the Departent of Energy's website to learn about
DHPs and also read the DHP brochure three times. Another consumer reported Consumer
Reports as a trsted source of information for this product. DHP manufacturer's websites
were also trsted.
Consumers in in-person focus groups. Consumers participating in in-person focus
groups also trsted Consumer Reports, HV AC contrctors, and manufacturers such as
Mitsubishi Electrc, Lennox, Trane, and Carrer. Utility companies, builders, electricians,
Better Business Bureau, and current DHP users were also viewed as trstworthy sources.
Google was a trsted search engine while Wikipedia and websites focusing on green
building and energy effciency were also trsted. Information found in Builder Magazine,
home shows, segments heard on the radio, specifically National Public Radio, were also
trsted.
Page 35
Compelling Value Propositions for Builders
Findings from Telephone Focus Groups of Builders Using DHPs
Green building programs. One builder in a telephone focus group reported
building a model luxury home with 14 DHP units as a way of gaining LEED program
certification for indoor air quality and energy effciency. This builder speculated that
DHPs wil playa pivotal role in the future of green building. He hypothesized that DHPs
would help residential developments become self-providing, net-zero communities
because of the energy efficiency of the systems. If builders increased participation in
green building programs, perhaps DHPs wil gain more popularity. Another builder in a
telephone focus group reported he was an Energy Star builder and implemented these
systems for indoor air quality and energy effciency purposes as well. Certification in
various green building programs might compel other builders to use DHPs.
Diferentiation. Builders in telephone focus groups reported that offering
residential DHPs in homes allowed their companies to stand-out from competition.
DHPs, like other new technology, can differentiate one builder from another. One builder
mentioned that he offered DHPs as an option to give customers design flexibility while
another builder in a telephone focus group mentioned that he did not market DHPs
specifically to customers but instead marketed them as a piece of the Energy Star
package. Potential homebuyers were then specifically educated about the product by a
sales agent further along in the buying process. The LEED builder interviewed used
DHPs as a marketing tool in his model home. He reported that he hoped to have tours of
the model home to teach members of the building community like architects, engineers,
and realtors about DHPs with the hope the information would be passed along to
consumers.
Customer satisfaction. Many builders who participated in telephone focus groups
liked the ability to offer a quiet product that added even heating and cooling comfort to a
person's home. DHPs allowed customers to have a more effcient heating and cooling
system with zone control and also cut down on their electric bil each month. Many
builders in telephone focus groups who built and/or remodeled homes with DHPs
mentioned that by satisfying their customers and providing these DHP benefits, they get
more business through customer referrals. Builders in telephone focus groups did not
report any delays associated with DHP installation which contributed to the satisfaction
of their consumers.
Supplemental heating. A few builders who paricipated in telephone focus groups
reported that supplemental heating was not an issue as with other heat pumps because the
effciency of the systems did not drop off until around 17-15 degrees. One builder
continued saying that backup, Cadet heating could be used on days or nights where the
temperature would dip below that temperature. He stressed that this does not affect, in his
mind, the overall benefits of the system. Another builder disagreed with the need for. a
backup system in colder temperatures. He reasoned that if the home's building envelope
boasted less than one air exchange per 24 hour period through passive air, once the
Page 36
envelope was heated to the desired temperature, passive air heat loss would not be an
issue. If it did become an issue, he considered propane fireplaces located throughout the
house to be sufficient to heat the home.
Cost. A few builders interviewed in telephone focus groups believed that
installation costs were similar to those of trditional systems. One builder reasoned that
higher installation costs were a result of inexperienced HVAC installers who were less
educated about DHP systems.
Space constraints. Builders who participated in telephone focus groups also
mentioned these systems were beneficial for areas with space constraints like condos.
This was seen as a compellng reason to use these systems.
Findings from Focus Groups of Builders Not Using DHPs
Installation. Many builders participating in in-person focus groups believed the
quick installation of DHPs to be a top reason to use these systems in residential
construction. These builders believed that using DHPs would make scheduling other
subcontractors easier and would allow for less time in the field. A one-day installation
was viewed as much more desirable than installation that took a week.
Customer satisfaction. Builders paricipating in in-person focus groups agreed
with builders in telephone focus groups and indicated that satisfying their customers was
a compellng reason to use DHPs.
Builder characteristics. Builders in in-person focus groups believed builders
constrcting or remodeling smaller attached apartents, condominiums, and smaller
homes would most likely adopt this product. One builder indicated that their customers
do not choose what type of HV AC system is installed. Instead, this builder makes the
decision for customers. Targeting these tyes of builders may be beneficial towards
greater residential DHP adoption.
Page 37
Barriers to Builder Adoption
Findings from Telephone Focus Groups of Builders Using DHPs
New technology. Builders in telephone focus groups commented that new
technology is often difficult to introduce to those in the homebuilding industr because
stakeholders are often fearful of change. Oftentimes, builders rely on dependable and
proven techniques in residential homebuilding. Though DHPs have been around for over
two decades, some builders interviewed believed that ducted systems were more reliable
and proven from both a builder and consumer standpoint.
A builder who participated in a telephone focus group mehtioned that it might be risky to
introduce this product to consumers, thereby straying from something proven like a
traditional system and aligning oneself with a questionable product. Another builder who
participated in a telephone focus group speculated that even HVAC installers were wary
of tring this new product because it deviates from the norm. These builders argued that
because DHPs were a new product with new technology, widespread adoption might be
hindered.
Finding a DHP installer. Builders interviewed in telephone focus groups reported
diffculty finding installers who were wiling to stand by their DHP product. When
looking for a DHP installer, these builders often first approached their standard HV AC
installer and inquired about the product. One builder in the group mentioned that his
HV AC installer who uses DHPs and traditional systems often tres to talk him out of
putting DHPs in homes because the installer doesn't believe they are as reliable.
Aesthetics. Builders in one telephone focus group believed appearance to be a
disadvantage of these systems. Outside condensate lines are hard to hide according to
these builders which made the outside of the house less appealing. Some builders
interviewed also believed there is an economic stigma attached to these units whereas
they would be more accepted in a condo than in a custom home. Ducted systems can be
hidden and are more accepted by consumers according to these builders.
Product awareness. Some builders in telephone focus groups believed that there
was a lack ofDHP awareness. One builder in a telephone focus groups believed that
architects, mechanical engineers, and design professionals should be the focus of
marketing. He stressed a paradigm change was necessary because designers are so
accustomed to designing homes with central systems. Other builders suggested
manufacturers also need to target more HVAC installers. They also mentioned that
consumer awareness regarding DHPs was low and would offer more DHPs if requested
by customers.
Noise. Though some consumers living with DHPs who participated in telephone
focus groups and information found in the secondary literature phase of this project
suggested that DHPs offer noise reduction, it is important to note that some builders
interviewed during telephone focus groups disagreed and believed that consumers
Page 38
sometimes mentioned their DHP was louder than their previous systems because the DHP
was located on a wall inside the room and not hidden. This might prevent builders from
implementing DHP technology.
Heating during construction. One builder in the telephone focus group mentioned
the need to provide an outside heat source during constrction. When he builds condo
units during the winter, the units need to be heated in order for the dryall to dr
properly. When he uses forced air systems, they are functioning during this timeframe.
When he uses DHPs in condo units, he incurs an added expense because he needs a heat
trailer to run heat to each condo unit to help with the dring.
Humidity. One builder interviewed in a telephone focus group mentioned a
problem with humidity. For instance, in humid climates like Florida and Texas, he
noticed a problem with some DHPs causing humidity build-up in the room and leaving
the room damp and sticky. This builder hypothesized that build-up may occur because the
system may not have been designed correctly or because installers were not aware of the
set point. Though dehumidification was previously stated as a sellng point of the system
for consumers in coastal areas, such discrepancy may deter builders from implementing
DHP technology in humid climates.
Findings from Focus Groups of Builders Not Using DHPs
Aesthetics. Builders participating in in-person focus groups who did not build or
remodel homes with DHPs also disliked the aesthetics of the indoor unit. They regarded
the indoor units as unattractive after seeing a pictue of the units hung on the wall and
believed them to be bigger than air vents tyically seen with traditional systems.
New technology. Some builders in in-person focus groups indicated that
traditional systems work very well and require few callbacks. These builders did not see a
reason to switch to a different system that incorporated fairly new technology.
Product awareness. Builders in in-person focus groups agreed that more
education on the par of residential builders, architects, and decision-making customers is
necessary in order to successfully bring this product to market. By introducing the
product to these players within the homebuilding industry, product adoption may become
more widespread. Increasing media coverage of this product would also increase public
awareness according to this builder.
Colder climates. Additionally, some builders who paricipated in in-person focus
groups indicated that heat pumps were more effcient in moderate climates while gas was
more effcient in colder temperatures, lending credibility to the notion that homeowners
living in milder climates might be more likely to adopt DHPs.
Humidity. One builder who participated in an in-person focus group mentioned
that humidity is necessary in certain circumstances within a home. For example, some
hardwood floors and furniture require humidification. If DHPs boast lower
Page 39
dehumidification levels, builders may choose not to use these systems in homes that
require certain levels of constant humidity.
Fuel choice. Some builders in in-person focus groups indicated that customers
prefer gas to electrc heating. Builders in these groups indicated that almost all
homebuyers expect gas and very few actually request electrc. Natural gas is cheaper and
associated with luxury according to these builders. A few builders in these groups
mentioned that when customers do request electrc, they do so with the intention to
implement solar technology. Customer preference for gas may hinder builder adoption of
these ductless systems.
System operation. Like consumers, builders paricipating in in-person focus
groups had questions regarding how DHPs worked. Specifically, these builders
questioned how air was distributed, where the condensation traveled, and whether DHPs
were self-contained units. Some builders in these groups questioned and even doubted
the dissolution of hot and cold spots during the system's operation. When reacting to the
DHP concept description during in-person focus groups, builders simply wanted more
information and data regarding the product.
Page 40
Learning About nHPs
Trusted Sources of Information
Builders in telephone focus groups. Builders in telephone focus groups reported
trsting a variety of sources when learning about DHPs. Many trsted their HV AC
professional installing the product. Others mentioned trsting their supplier, the National
Association of Home Builders (NAHB), manufacturer's websites, buildingscience.com,
and trade magazines such as the Journal of Light Construction. Builders in these groups
mentioned they spent time researching the product before introducing it in homes.
Builders in in-person focus groups. Builders in in-person focus groups also
trsted manufacturers as well trade magazines such as Builder Insight, Builder Magazine,
Green Builder, Custom Builder, and Spokane Home Builder.
Learning Process
Builders in telephone focus groups. Builders with DHP experience reported an
easy learing process when first gathering information about DHPs. Many said it was a
simple technology to learn and most gained information from their installer. One builder
in a telephone focus group reported a slight learning cure because of the newness of the
technology (e.g. the remote, learning how to adjust the system, etc.). They were
motivated to learn about the product because of its ties to green building progrms, dual
heating and cooling features, and in some instances, they simply needed such a product to
fit a specific application.
Builders in in-personfocus groups. If they wanted to learn more about DHPs,
builders in in-person focus groups who had never used DHPs indicated they would go to
their HV AC contractor. If their contrctor did not recommend the system, these builders
would choose not to use DHPs in the homes they build and remodeL. These builders also
said they would go to governmental and energy rating websites and if they were trly
interested in using them, they would go to various manufactuer's websites.
Page 41
Compelling Value Propositions for HVAC Contractors
Findings from Secondary Literature Review
Installation. DHPs are ideal for residences that have limited installation space
. (Grasso 2007). Central systems require extensive ductwork throughout the home, while
minisplit systems require only wire and piping to be run between the outdoor and indoor
units (Grasso 2007). DHPs are relatively easy to install for those suffciently trained
(Toolbase Services), and installed systems seldom need callbacks (Smith 2007).
Installation time typically ranges from 3-4 hours with two installers (Siegel 2001).
Another added benefit ofDHPs involves the fact that an electrcian must only visit once
to install the outside electrcal box since the system uses low voltage connections
between the indoor and outdoor units (Skaer 2005). HV AC contractors can also complete
the installation since fuse disconnects and conduits are rarely used (Skaer 2005).
System maintenance. Minisplits require simple maintenance tasks including a
filter and condenser coil cleaning every three months in order to prevent system problems
(Smith 2007). This task can easily be conducted by consumers without needing to call
upon HV AC contractors; another added benefit of these ductless systems.
In order to better understand problems if they do arise, technologically advanced DHP
systems are often equipped with self-diagnostic functions. Sensors embedded within the
system are constantly monitoring humidity and temperature changes and sending
information to the logic module. If problems with the system occur, the logic module
displays a fault code that consumers can use to try to resolve the problem. If service does
need to be called, technicians with diagnostic equipment can use the fault code to
evaluate the problem more effectively (Contractor 2006). These self-diagnostic functions
could be a sellng point to contractors since they offer technicians an immediate
understanding of the problem at hand.
Findings from In-depth Interviews with Industry Experts
Installation education. Manufacturers often offer training programs for
contractors installng their DHP systems. Mitsubishi Electric's Diamond Dealer program
offers accreditation to contractors who complete their certification course (Mitsubishi
Electric, unpublished interview). Offered in multiple locations across the United States
over a two-day period, this cöurse introduces installers to the residential and light
commercial Mr. Slim series, features of the systems, and installation and troubleshooting
procedures (Mitsubishi Electric, unpublished interview). Mitsubishi Electrc says this
program provides contractors superior knowledge regarding minisplit systems and
dramatically reduces installer callbacks (Mitsubishi Electric, unpublished interview).
Mitsubishi also offers continuing education courses. Many HV AC installers who
participated in telephone focus groups had participated in Mitsubishi Electrc's training
classes and were satisfied with the programs.
Page 42
According to a Fujitsu representative, Fujitsu also offers 52 national training classes with
an average of 60-1 00 attendees at each session (Fujitsu, unpublished interview). At the
completion of the training, these installers can be considered qualified to install the
manufacturer's product.
System Maintenance. DHPs are considered one of the most sophisticated types of
HV AC systems in the world and are simple to troubleshoot, maintain, and install
according to Home Energy Sciences (Home Energy Sciences, unpublished interview).
Option. Most contractors would view DHPs as a relatively new option within the
HV AC industr according to the ACCA (Air Conditioning Contractors of America,
unpublished interview). Contractors cannot surive on just one method or system, so
many would welcome another method to sell to their clients. Contractors in telephone
focus groups agreed and indicated that having an extra option was beneficial when you
cannot put in ductwork. Therefore the ACCA believes that contractors would provide no
real barrer to DHP adoption (Air Conditioning Contractors of America, unpublished
interview).
Findings from Telephone Focus Groups of Contractors Using DHPs
Installation. HV AC installers intervewed in telephone focus groups mentioned a
shorter installation timeframe when implementing DHP technology when compared to
the time it takes to install a ducted system. A few installers also indicated that limited
tools were needed for proper DHP installation. Necessary tools include HVAC tubing
cutters, set of binders, crescent wrench, allen wrench, set of gauges, vacuum pump, and
microngauge. HV AC installers in telephone focus groups reported a basic, 2-ton minisplit
residential unit with electrcal ranges from $3500-4500.
System maintenance. Though outdoor coil cleaning is needed occasionally,
HV AC contractors who currently install DHPs and who participated in telephone focus
groups reported rarely having serious problems with DHPs and on the uncommon
occasion they do, there is a fudamental problem with that individual system. One
contractor described the system as "either workig or not." One builder in a telephone
focus group who had used about 50 residential DHPs only had one system with a
problem. When maintenance and service is needed, it is often a part of a maintenance and
service agreement according to installers interviewed.
Application. HV AC contractors who install DHPs who participated in telephone
focus groups believed that DHP systems help alleviate or solve a problem, and many
reported that they first learned about DHPs because a situation arose where they needed a
different tye of system. These systems can be employed in areas where traditional
ducted systems cannot go-a fact which could be considered a huge sellng point when
installers are faced with such a problem.
A minisplits outdoor unit can also help alleviate problems. In the City of Seattle and in
Portland, outdoor units must be at least 5 feet away from the propert line. Two HV AC
Page 43
installers in telephone focus groups mentioned that Mitsubishi Electric's ductless system
can easily be applied to meet this criterion which is another advantage of the system.
Diferentiation. HV AC contractors who currently offer residential DHPs who
took part in telephone focus groups believed they were in the minority. That is, they
believed most HVAC contractors do not know about this technology. Like builders, this
offering allows their companies to differentiate themselves from others while offering a
product that meets a certain need. This also allowed installers to satisfy their customers
which was imperative since, according to one participant, 50-70% of his DHP business
was based upon customer referrals.
Green building programs. Similar to builders, HV AC installers in telephone focus
groups also mentioned LEED's residential green building program as motivation to use
DHPs. One installer in Idaho reported gaining extra points towards certification for using
DHPs in homes. This was considered an advantage ofDHPs according to this installer.
Contractor characteristics. A typical DHP installer, according to one installer
who participated in a telephone focus group, would be an employee of a company that
was interested in satisfying the needs of the customer and who had time for training. He
hypothesized that a DHP installer would not be an employee of a "mom and pop"
business who primarily answered service calls.
Findings from Focus Groups of Contractors Not Using DHPs
Installation. Contractors in in-person focus groups who had never installed DHPs
reported that an easy installation that was not labor intensive would be an extremely
attractive benefit of the system.
System maintenance. Some HV AC contractors in in-person focus groups who
were unfamiliar with DHPs also believed system maintenance was a compellng reason to
use these systems. However these contractors predicted that if maintenance were required
on DHP systems, costs would be the same as traditional systems, or higher because DHPs
sometimes require multiple air handlers throughout the house and thus generate greater
revenue.
Application. Contractors in in-person focus groups liked having another option for
HV AC. This was perceived to be an attactive benefit of the system because this
technology would make it possible to positively respond to the heating and cooling needs
of customers where ductwork was impossible.
Rebate. Contractors in in-person focus groups liked the idea of a rebate for using
DHPs. One contractor mentioned that an EnergyStar rebate would be a compelling reason
to use these systems.
Page 44
Barriers to Contractor Adoption
Findings from Secondary Literature Review
Installation. Installation ofDHPs differs from ducted system installation and,
consequently, DHP installers require specialized trining. DHP installers must properly
size each indoor unit and install each in an ideal location. Various issues can arise if
ductless systems are improperly installed, including problems with temperature and
humidity control and wasted energy due to incorrectly positioned air handlers that short-
cycle (Ductless Depot). Qualified DHP installers are not nearly as prevalent as those
trained to install ducted systems (Roth, Westphalen, and Brodrck 2006). Additionally,.
HV AC contractors are more comfortble working with ducts than refrgerant lines and
wil shy away from ductless systems (Heating, Air Conditioning and Refrgeration
Distrbutors International, unpublished interview). The average HV AC contractor knows
about ductless systems, but less than half of contrctors have actually installed them (Air
Conditioning Contractors of America, unpublished interview). Many contractors view
DHPs as a last-resort option (Contractor 2006). Instead of installng DHPs based on their
virtes, contractors wil only install ductless systems if there are space limitations within
the house or if there severe problems with the ductwork (Siegel 2001).
Cost. Higher DHP costs are also a factor. Often, residential contractors see
minisplits as an added expense they are unwiling to pass onto their customers (Siegel
2001).
Refrigerant leakage. Another downside to ductless systems is the possibility of
refrigerant leakage. In ductless systems, refrgerant is piped from an outdoor unit through
small insulated refrigerant lines directly to each wall unit. These long, extended
refrgerant lines increase the potential for refrgerant leaks which can lead to refrigerant
volume loss and problems with the system's effectiveness (Roth, Westphalen, and
Brodrck 2006). If contractors see this as a frequent problem in previously installed
minisplit systems, they may choose not to install these ductless systems in other
residences.
Findings from In-Depth Interviews with Industry Experts
Number of components. Ductless systems require multiple units to heat or cool an
entire home, a fact that creates the potential for numerous refrgerant leaks or drain
overfows. In contrast, ducted systems with one A-coil in the basement have only one
potential leakage area. The decentralized nature of ductless systems creates the
opportity for multiple units needing servicing, as opposed to just one central unit (Air
Conditioning Contractors of America, unpublished interview).
Findings from Telephone Focus Groups of Contractors Using DHPs
Awareness. Current HVAC installers offering residential DHP installation
believed that other installers, in general, were not familiar with the product. Some
believed that other installers are not aware of it because they are scared of technology or
did not want to spend money on trining. Though many current installers interviewed
reported enjoying the ability to differentiate themselves by offering the product, they
Page 45
believed manufacturers should advertise by emphasizing energy efficiency and offer
more training classes to HV AC installers.
Another HV AC contractor in a telephone focus group believed that oftentimes other
installers were aware ofDHPs but install them infrequently. This could cause problems
with installers unable to gain proficiency in DHP installation. Better technical support
should be available to those who install these systems infrequently according to this
installer.
Application specifc. Though residential DHP application can be considered an
advantage or selling point in that they can be installed to solve a problem, the same
reasoning can be used as a disadvantage of the system. Many HV AC installers in the
telephone focus groups believed DHPs to be solely application specific. These installers
first learned ofDHPs during specific applications where traditional systems could not be
used. Many commented these systems were appropriate in retrofits, add-ons, and historic
applications but few had used them in new construction.
One installer in a telephone focus group believed this was a custom-tye product only
installed when the end-user was involved since the homeowner would be the person
using the system and seeing the viability of it. He reported that production builders would
not put these systems in their spec homes because it would not be cost-effective and
because builders think the systems look cheap. However, this installer said he has
returned to these homes once the owner has moved in and installed DHPs.
Aesthetics. HVAC installers who participated in telephone focus groups also
reported aesthetics to be a disadvantage of DHPs. They mentioned customer resistance
when first viewing the indoor wall unit with resistance fading away with time. Installers
in the telephone groups also mentioned the unsightly aesthetics on the outside of the
home, adding that it was diffcult to conceal the condensate lines. One installer
interviewed mentioned he tred to hide the lines in order to better satisfy his customers.
However, these techniques can often add time and cost to the job.
Condensate pump. HV AC contractors who install DHPs and participated in
telephone focus groups reported issues with condensate pumps when these systems are
installed on inside walls. In traditional ducted systems, condensate pumps are located in
the air handler away from the conditioned space. In DHPs, the condensate pump is also
located in the air handler but inside the conditioned space and are therefore noisier than
traditional systems. One HV AC installer who participated in a telephone focus group also
mentioned that condensate pumps were often more challenging to install especially if the
installer was inexperienced. Operating manuals for these condensate pumps are often
written in non-English languages according to one installer, adding to the problem.
Supplemental heating. One contractor who installed DHPs reported that he did not
sell DHPs as an energy-savings system because it cannot operate in all temperatures. This
contractor indicated that at 19 degrees or below, baseboard heat was stil necessary.
Page 46
Findings from Focus Groups of Contractors Not Using DHPs
Installation. Some HV AC contractors who participated in in-person focus groups
who had never installed a DHP system doubted the claims of easy installation. Some
believed that quick and easy installation would only occur if one was installing them on
outside walls. Another HV AC contractor doubted the system took a half-day to install.
Instead, this contractor speculated installation would actually take two installers per day
and per zone plus the cost of an electrcian ifhigh voltage wiring was necessary between
indoor and outdoor units. Another HVAC contractor also questioned DHP's advertised
easy installation and believed that contrctors must be certain of proper DHP installation
before even attempting installation. Regardless, these participants speculated that DHP
installers would need practice in order to gain confidence to install such systems.
Awareness. Contractors in in-person focus groups also believed that more product
awareness was necessary. These contractors also wanted free training including how
DHPs are built and reasons for using the systems. They requested to speak directly with
engineers to completely understand the fuctionality of the system in order to fully
exploit the benefits. Contractors who participated in in-person focus groups suggested
that manufacturers and distrbutors educate inspectors, architects, and designers as well
as custom builders. Another contractor indicated that once other HV AC installers were
aware of the product, they could push the product to builders.
Application specifc. HVAC contractors participating in in-person focus groups
believed retrofits to be the ideal application for these systems as well as historic homes,
nursing homes, townhomes, home offices, computer rooms and bonus rooms.
Aesthetics. HV AC contrctors who participated in in-person focus groups and
who were unfamiliar with these systems reported the systems to be obtrsive and too
large upon first glance. They also mentioned that consumers do not like "jun" going up
the side of their homes. With possible unattctive visual characteristic of the system's
appearance, HV AC installers may be less likely to offer these systems to customers or
builders.
Supplemental heating. Many HV AC contractors who participated in in-person
focus groups disliked the notion that supplementary heating was necessary in cold
temperatures.
Cost. Some contractors in in-person focus groups doubted these systems were
inexpensive in residential settings. They hypothesized that the cost of several consoles
would be more expensive than the cost of trditional ductwork. Additionally, some of
these contractors reported extr costs would be incurred due to redeveloping and
redesigning homes with these systems.
Components. Some HVAC contractors in in-person focus groups worred that
with so many indoor units comprised of blowers and coils, the system would be
extremely fragile. The frailty of components coupled with potential system fragility may
deter some contractors from installing the system.
Page 47
System operation. Contractors who participated in in-person focus groups doubted
some elements of the system's operation. For example, they still believed DHPs would
produce uneven heating and cooling and doubted claims that the system used 75% less
energy to produce the same heating and cooling results as baseboard heating and window
unit air conditioners.
Trusted Sources of Information
Contractors using DHPs. Current HV AC installers offering DHPs who
participated in telephone focus groups trusted their distributors and manufacturers of the
product. The internet was also mentioned as a source of information. One installer
mentioned he would type in "ductless heat pump" into a search engine in order to learn
more about them. They expressed a wish for more continuing education classes and in-
house training sessions with manufactues in order to learn about new products and
technology within the DHP product category.
Contractors not using DHPs. HV AC contractors who do not curently install
DHPs who participated in in-person focus groups also trsted a variety of sources
including distributors, brand name suppliers, and utility commissions. Some of these
contractors also trsted the Energy Trust of Oregon and believed that this organization
inspired consumer confidence because it offered independent third part credibility.
Importance of brand
Brand was important according to HV AC installers in telephone focus groups. Many
were wiling to pay more money for a better system. One installer in a telephone group
who had used multiple DHP brands, commented that certain manufacturers have parts
that are harder to obtain while others had warranty issues. He reported that one must be
selective when choosing a brand because ofthese problems. Participants in telephone
focus groups were mixed as to whom chooses the brand of minisplit system. Some
telephone focus group participants believed that customers often found installers on a
manufacturer's website and therefore knew they wanted a certain brand. Others reported
the decision regarding brand was made by the installer.
Page 48
Compelling Value/Selling Propositions and Potential Barriers
for Distributors
Findings from In-Depth Interviews with Industry Experts
Price. DHPs can be considered a more profitable product for distrbutors than unitary
systems because of the price premium associated with them. Ductless systems provide
more gross profit for distributors according to HARDI (Heating, Air Conditioning and
Refrigeration Distributors International, unpublished interview).
Materials handling. HARD I notes that the handling of ductless systems is much
easier for distributors when compared to traditional units (Heating, Air Conditioning and
Refrigeration Distrbutors International, unpublished interview). Distributors are often
concerned with limited warehouse space and delivery of large products like central,
ducted systems. Smaller, compact DHPs may have material handling advantages for both
distrbutors as well as installers (Heating, Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Distributors
International, unpublished interview).
Current housing practices. In the U.S., most homes are typically built with central air
conditioning. Ducted systems are part of the basic product offering and the home's
HVAC system usually doesn't enter into consideration when consumers decide upon new
home features (Trane, unpublished interview). Houses are tyically built with a central
air conditioner and one outdoor unit. According to Trae, this may change as VRF
technology, which allows for multiple indoor units on a singular outdoor unit, increases
in popularity.
Location. Certain geographic areas are more suitable for DHPs according to HARD!
(Heating, Air Conditioning and Refrgeration Distrbutors International, unpublished
interview). The Pacific coast, which is subject to an intense energy effciency effort,
would be a primary example of where distrbutors should sell DHPs. In areas such as the
Midwest and parts of the South, where homes are more spread out, DHP distrbution may
be less widespread (Heating, Air Conditioning and Refrgeration Distrbutors
International, unpublished interview).
Page 49
Bibliography
Air Conditioning and Refrgeration Institute. Interview by Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording.
Upper Marlboro, MD., 21 February 2008.
Air Conditioning Contractors of America. Interview by Eric Rowe. Tape Recording.
Upper Marlboro, MD., 22 February 2008.
Carrer Corporation. Interview by Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording. Upper Marlboro, MD.,
25 February 2008.
CFM Distributors. Interview by Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording. Upper Marlboro, MD., 21
February 2008.
Contractor. 2006. On the spot. 1 October. (ed. note: this is a newsletter)
Daikin AC. Interview by Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording. Upper Marlboro, MD., 25
February 2008.
Ductless Depot. Ductless, mini-split heat pumps.
http://www.ductlessdepot.net/standart- 51.html
Fujitsu. Interview by Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording. Upper Marlboro, MD., 20 Februry
2008.
Grasso, P. 2007. A comfort alternative. Contracting Business, November.
Heating, Air Conditioning and Refrgeration Distributors InternationaL. Interview by
Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording. Upper Marlboro, MD., 19 February 2008.
Home Energy Sciences. Interview by Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording. Upper Marlboro,
MD., 22 February 2008.
HoneywelL. What makes R-410A a better refrigerant?
http://www51.honeywell.com/sm/41 Oa!about-us!refìigerant.html
HV AC Solutions Direct. Tjernlund Aireshare(ß room to room ventilator
http://www.hvacsolutionsdirect.com/catalog/T JERNLUND- AIRESHAREreg
ROOM- TO-ROOM- VENTILATORS-p-246.html
lEA Heat Pump Centre Newsletter. 2003. World air conditioning market. 21, no.l: 1-26.
http://209.85.215.104/search?g=cache:1MlirhFNYlli\J:apec.fivevision.com/www/
UploadFileIN21 01.pdf+IEA+Heat+Pump+Centre+Newslettcr+ 1/2003+ Tcst+Proc
edures+and+Encrgy+Effci ency+- Labe1s&hl:::=en&ct=::clnk&cd::: 1 &gl::ous
Page 50
Mitsubishi Electrc. Interview by Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording. Upper Marlboro, MD.,
20 March 2008.
Mitsubishi Electrc Press Release. 2008. New hyper-heating inverter redefines heat
pump. January 17. http://www.mrslim.comípressRoom/main.asp
Oregon Department of Energy Conservation Division. 2008. Ductless heat pumps.
http://egov .oregon.gov/ENERGY /CONS/RES/tax/HV AC- DuctlessHP .shtml
Roth, K., D. Westphalen, and J. Brodrck. 2006. Ductless split systems. ASHRAE Journal
48, no. 7 (July): 115-117.
Siegel, J. J. 2001 Don't overlook the benefits of ductless mini-splits. ACHRNews, June
13.
htt:/ !www.achrnews.com/Aiticles/Feature Article/650ec2879995aO 1 OV gnVCM
100000ßl32a8cO
Siegel, J. J. 2004. Ductless systems continue to evolve. ACHRNews, February 13.
Skaer, M. 2005. The key featue of mini-splits? Flexibilty. ACHR News, June 20.
http://www.achrnews.comí Articles/Featue Articlelbdf904c4a006aO 1 OV gn VCMl
OOOOOßl32a8cO
Smith, L. 2007. History lesson: Ductless has come a long way. ACHR News, April 30.
Toolbase Services. Ductless (mini-split) heat pumps.
http://www . toolbase.org/Techinventory!TechDetails.aspx?ContentDetailD=7 46&
BucketID=6&CategoryID=6
Thermal Supply. Interview by Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording. Upper Marlboro, MD., 19
February 2008.
Thrfty Supply. Interview by Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording. Upper Marlboro, MD., 22
February 2008.
Trane. Interview by Sarah Lewis. Tape Recording. Upper Marlboro, MD., 26 February
2008.
Wardell, C. 2005. Chiling at home. Coastal Contractor Online, Summer.
http://www.coastalcontractor.net/cgi-bin/article.pl?id= 33
Wardlaw Fuels. Samsung ductless air conditioners. Frequently asked questions.
http://www.wardlawfuels.comísamsung.htm
Page 51
Appendix A: Examples of topics addressed during qualitative
phase.
Expert and trade ally in-depth interviews.
Examples of topics addressed during expert or trade ally interviews:
1. Success of overseas DHP markets
2. Challenges the U.S. DHP industr faces
3. Advantages and disadvantages ofDHPs over other HVAC systems
4. DHP consumer characteristics
5. Primary manufacturers ofDHPs and those not manufactung DHPs
6. U.S. DHP trends
7. Primary distrbution methods and channels used for DHPs
8. Barrers and challenges with selling DHPs directly to consumers
DHP distributor in-depth interviews.
Examples of topics addressed during distributor interviews included:
1. Length of time in DHP distrbution
2. Benefits of a ductless system compared to trditional systems
3. Total DHP market size
4. DHP brands distrbuted
5. Price ranges of systems
6. Barrers to sellng DHPs directly to customers
7. DHP consumer and builder characteristics
8. Compellng DHP benefits for customers
9. DHP sales trends
10. Challenges in bringing DHPs into the mainstream market
Active Us. DHP manufacturer in-depth interviews.
Examples of topics addressed during active manufacturer interviews included:
1. Current products offered
2. Price ranges of systems
3. DHP sales
4. Primary manufacturers ofDHPs and those not manufacturing DHPs
5. Distribution channels
6. DHP consumer characteristics
7. Challenges faced by the DHP industr in the u.s.
8. New DHP products
Third party DHP manufacturer in-depth interviews.
Examples of topics addressed during third party manufactuer interviews included:
1. Current products offered
2. Price ranges of systems
Page 52
3. DHP sales
4. Distrbution chanels
5. Advantages and disadvantages ofDHPs over other HVAC systems
6. Compelling DHP benefits for customers
7. DHP consumer and builder characteristics
8. Success of overseas DHP markets
9. Challenges in bringing DHPs into the mainstream market
10. New DHP products
Telephone Dyads/Triads or Telephone Focus Groups of DHP Users
Builder telephone dyads/triads.
Examples of topics covered in builder telephone focus groups included:
1. Current HV AC systems used
2. Advantages and disadvantages of DHPs when compared to traditional systems
3. Barrers to widespread DHP adoption
4. DHP awareness
5. Motivations to use DHPs
6. Learning about DHPs
7. Trusted sources of information
8. Applications best suited for DHPs
9. Cost
10. Compelling customer features ofDHPs
HVAC contractor telephone dyads/triads.
Examples of topics included in the moderator guide included:
1. Current HV AC systems installed
2. Experiences with DHPs
3. Advantages and disadvantages ofDHPs
4. Barrers to widespread DHP adoption
5. DHP awareness
6. DHP usage
7. Learning about DHPs and DHP installation
8. Trusted sources of information
9. Importance of brand
10. Applications best suited for DHPs
Page 53
Appendix B: Concept Description for Consumer In-Person Focus
Groups.
Ductless Heat Pump (DHP)
How it works:
A DHP is a heating and cooling system that does not require duct work in a home. The DHP
consists of two components - An outdoor unit and an indoor unit. Additionally, an outdoor unit
can support several indoor units (also called air-handlers) for different areas of the house. The
outdoor unit sits on blocks or a small concrete slab outside of your home and is about the size of
a large suitcase. This outdoor unit delivers power and coolant to the indoor unit/s that in a
typical installation hangs on a wall or is recessed in a ceiling. The indoor unit is typically about
the size of a computer printer (lO"x8"x35")
What it does:
DHPs can be configured to heat and cool an entire house. Each unit can heat and cool the main
living area of your house. Bedrooms and bathrooms may need supplemental heating. DHPs
typically use 75% less energy to produce a higher quality of heating and cooling than traditional
baseboard heating and window unit air conditioners. DHPs also save resources by letting home
owners heat and cool only the spaces being used as opposed to central systems that maintain
the temperature in the entire house.
Page 54
Appendix C: Concept Description for Builder In-Person Focus
Groups.
Ductless Heat Pump (DHP)
How it works:
A DHP is a heating and cooling system that does not require duct work in a home. The DHP consists of
two components - An outdoor unit and an indoor unit. Additionally, an outdoor unit can support several
indoor units (also called air-handlers) for different areas of the house. The outdoor unit sits on blocks or
a small concrete slab outside ofthe home and is about the size of a large suitcase. This outdoor unit
delivers power and coolant to the indoor unit/so In a typical installation the indoor unit hangs on a wall
or is recessed in a ceiling. The indoor unit is typically about the size of a computer printer (lO"x8"x35")
DHPs are an economical heating and cooling choice for a new or existing home. They operate without
ducts, thus do not require expensive ductwork installation so homes can be built less expensively. Their
simple, unobtrusive installation makes scheduling with other subs (drywall and insulation) much easier,
thus homes can be built faster. DHPs require one power supply to the outdoor unit only (the outdoor
unit supplies power to the indoor unit). Installation is easy; a team of two can do an installation in about
a day.
What it does:
DHPs can be configured to heat and cool an entire house. Each unit can heat and cool the main living
area of the house. Bedrooms and bathrooms may need supplemental heating. Additionally, DHPs are
relatively inexpensive and give builders the benefit of being able to offer home buyers air conditioning.
Page 55
Appendix D: Concept Description for HV AC Installer In-Person
Focus Groups.
Page 56
Installer
How it works:
DHPs have two main components: an outdoor compressor/condenser and an indoor air
handling unit. Additionally, an outdoor unit can support several indoor units (also called air-
handlers) .Like central systems, a conduit, which houses the power cable, refrigerant tubing,
and a condensate drain, links the indoor and outdoor unit. DHPs require 1 power supply to
the outdoor unit only (the outdoor unit supplies power to the indoor unit). Installation is
easy; an experienced team of two technicians can do an installation in about half a day.
What it does:
A mid-size DHP is designed to cool and heat up to 600 sq ft of an average insulated space or
up to a 750 sq ft with a well insulated space. DHPs typically use 75% less energy to produce
the same heating and cooling results as baseboard heating and window unit air conditioners.
General Specifications: (for one specific brand/model, but communicates general ideal
Cooling Capacity: 17,600 btu
Heating Capacity: 18,400 btu
Heating Operating Range 19 F to 75 F
CdolingOperating Range 64 F to 109 F
Seer:13
Moisture Removal: 3.17 pints per hour
Power Supply Voltage/Phase/Hz: 230 Volt / 1PH /60Hz
Running AMPS: 6.5
Fuse or Circuit Breaker Capacity: 20
Operation Sound Indoor Unit, Hi 43 (dB-A) Low 39
Operation Sound Outdoor 54 (dB-A)
Refrigerant Type: R-410A ODP (Ozone Depletion Potential) =0 of HFC refrigerant is used
Refrigerant Piping Type: Flare Type
Refrigerant Piping Discharge (0/0 Inches) : 3/8"
Refrigerant Piping Suction (O/D Inches) : 5/8"
Refrigerant Piping Max (Ft.) : 49'
Piping Elevation Difference Outdoor (Ft.) : 16'
Page 57
Appendix E: Benefit Statements for Consumer In-Person Focus
Groups.
DHP Benefits for Consumers
Rank Benefit Rate
1 DHPs let you get rid of the 1 2 3 4 5
existing electric heat in your
home.1= not at all
appealing
5 = very appealinQ
2 DHPs include both heating and
air conditioning in one system.1 2 3 4 5
3 DHPs help lower monthly utility
bils.1 2 3 4 5
4 DHPs do not compromise the
livable square footage of your 1 2 3 4 5
home.
5 With DHPs, you can control the
heating and cooling in different 1 2 3 4 5
parts of your home to your
liking.
6 DHPs are better for the
environment because they use 1 2 3 4 5
less energy.
7 DHPs provide both heating and
cooling without ducts.1 2 3 4 5
8 DHPs provide quiet heating
and cooling (inside and 1 2 3 4 5
outside).
9 DHPs provide you evenly
distributed heating and cooling 1 2 3 4 5
for better comfort.
10 The climate of your home can
be adjusted with a remote 1 2 3 4 5
control.
Page 58
Appendix F: Benefit Statements for Builder In-Person Focus
Groups.
DHP Benefits for Builders
Rank Benefit Rate
1 DHPs do not require 1 2 3 4 5
expensive ductwork
installation.1 = not at all appealing
5= very appealing
2 DHPs are easy to install
because they do not require 1 2 3 4 5
ductwork.
3 DHPs allow you to build
homes faster.1 2 3 4 5
4 DHPs allow you to build
homes for less cost.1 2 3 4 5
5 DHPs provide both heating
and cooling within one 1 2 3 4 5
system.
6 DHPs are more energy
effcient than traditional 1 2 3 4 5
electric heat.
7 DHPs can be installed
without the hassle of 1 2 3 4 5
ductwork or duct sealinQ.
8 DHPs do not compromise
the livable square footage of 1 2 3 4 5
the home.
9 DHPS are better for the
environment because they 1 2 3 4 5
use less enerQV.
10 DHPs provide evenly
distributed heating and 1 2 3 4 5
cooling for better comfort.
Page 59
Appendix G: Benefit Statements for HV AC Installer In-Person
Focus Groups.
DHP Benefits for Installers
Rank Benefit Rate
1 DHPs include both heating and 1 2 3 4 5
cooling capability in one system.
1 = not at all appealing
5= very appealinQ
2 DHPs are easy to install
compared to ducted systems.1 2 3 4 5
3 DHPs require less time to install
than ducted systems.1 2 3 4 5
4 DHPs are more energy effcient
than traditional electric heat.1 2 3 4 5
5 DHPs are less expensive to
instalL.1 2 3 4 5
6 DHPs are better for the
environment because they use 1 2 3 4 5
less enerav.
7 DHPs do not compromise the
livable square footage of the 1 2 3 4 5
home.
Page 60
Customer ENERGY HOUSE CALLS Survey
1of6
2 af6
30f6
4of6
50f6
60f6
2009 Energy House Calls Customer Survey
10f2
2of2
309 SW 6'" Ave #1000
Portland OR 97204
T 503 525-2700 info!.ecosconsulting.com
F 503 525-4800 ecosconsuitrig.com
SITE INSPECTION SUMMARY REPORT
HOME ENERGY HOUSE CALL PROGRAM
Inspectors: Dallen Ward, Mike Spradlin, Detrick King, Tom Brodbeck, and Shane
George
Inspection analysis support: Andres Morrison
Contractors' work inspected: Gale Contractor Services; Energy Solutions, LLC; and
HEET
Inspection Dates: Inspections conducted from March 18 - December 23,2009
Summary of the Period
Pass/Fail and rewards
Total homes inspected: 51
Total homes that passed, whether or not the contractor wil be asked to return to the
home for some reason: 42
· Total homes that passed with rewards: 13
. 5 for Gale Contractor Services
. 5 for Energy Solutions, LLC
. 3 for HEET
Total homes that failed: 9 (five for Gale Contractor Services, four for Energy
Solutions, LLC)
Total homes determined to be Pass/Fail inconclusive: 0
Breakdown of 51 total homes inspected:
Count by Contractor:
· Gale Contractor Services - 24
· HEET - 6
· Energy Solutions, LLC - 21
Count by Individual Inspector:
· Mike Spradlin - 13
· Dallen Ward - 22
· Detrick King - 8
Tom Brodbeck - 2
Shane George - 6
Count by County:
· Ada - 17
· Bannock - 0
· Bingham - 6
· Canyon - 7
· Cassia - 0
· Elmore-8
· Gem-O
· Gooding - 0
Making a World of Difference
· Jerome - 0
· Malheur - 13
· Power - 0
· Twin Falls - 0
Count by Occupant Type:
· Owners - 48
· Renters - 3
Average Year Manufactured Home was Built:
· 1988
Count of Super Good Sense Homes Correctly Identified:
Yes-48
No - 3
Count of Leave Behind Packets Received:
· Yes -46
· No-2
· Couldn't remember - 3
Count of Customers Who Received CFLs:
· Yes -48
· No - 3
Count of Furnace Filter Recipients:
· Yes (or it was washable and didn't need to be provided) - 50
· No (or yes but it was the wrong size) - 1
· Can't remember - 0
Count of Furnace Sticker Recipients:
· Yes -46
· No - 5
Count of Hot Water Temperature Results that Matched (or were lower than) the
Contractors' :
· Yes -48
· No-2
· Unreported by Inspector - 1
Count of Non-allowed Combustion Appliances Present:
· Yes-2
· No-49
Making a World of Difference
Count of any Wood-fired Appliances:
· Yes - 6
· No-45
Count of Unreported Wood-fired Appliances:
· Yes-1
· No - 5
Count of CAZ Tested Homes, When Needed:
· Yes-7
· No- 0
Count of Missed CAZ Test Results Greater Than -3:
· Yes - 0· No-4
Count of QA Reduction Difference Being Greater than 20%:
· Yes -10
· No-40
· N/A - 1 (inaccurate/missed data)
Count of Approved Material Used to Seal Duct System:
· Yes -44
· No-O
· N/A-7
Count of Good Faith Effort to Remove Existing Tape:
· Yes -41
· No-1
· Unknown - 6
· N/A- 3
Count of Plenum Sealed:
· Yes -41
· No-1
· N/A - 9
Count of Rodent Barrier Repaired:
· Yes -13
· No-2
· Unknown - 2
· N/A- 34
Making a World of Difference
Count of Boots Sealed:
· Yes -40
· No-3
· N/A - 8
Count of Crossover Wrapped with R-8:
· Yes -16
· No-O
· N/A- 35
Count of Crossover Attached per Spec:
· Yes -13
· No-2
· N/A- 36
Count of Crossover Not in Contact with Soil:
· Yes -12
· No-4
· N/A-35
Count of Outside Closet Built to Spec:
· Yes - 0
· No-O
· N/A - 51
Count of Ceiling/Belly Return, Closet Door Grile Installed to Spec:
· Yes - 0
· No-O
· N/A - 51
Count of Positive Experience for the Customer:
· Yes -47
· Unknown - 3
· No-1
Making a World of Difference
Idaho Power Heating &. Cooling Efficiency Program Contractor Survey
1 of 8
20f8
3 af8
40ta
50t8
60f8
70ta
8ot8
Idaho Power Heating and Cooling Efficiency Program Customer Survey
1 of 7
2 of?
3 of?
4of7
5 of?
60f7
? of?
~ECCTCPE 4056 9TH AVENUE NE SEATTLE, WA 98105
(206) 322-3'753 FAX: (206) 325-'72'70
Mem
To: Shelley Martin, Idao Power
From: David Baylon, Ecotope, Inc.
Bob Davis, Ecotope, Inc
Date: 9/16/2008
Re: Heat Pup Measures for Retrofit and Heating System Upgres in the Idao Power Serce
Terrtory
1. Introduction
Over the last five years, Ecotope and the Regional Technical Forum (RTF) have developed
substantial expertise in predicting and designing heat pump programs to provide utilities with
options for meeting conservation goals in the residential sector. The structue of this approach
was derived from an extensive review of heat pump performance and installation practice over
the entire region. The report was published in 2005 and became the basis for several changes to
the heat pump program sponsored by the BP A and other regional utilities. The installation
procedures and protocols developed for this effort were called the PTCS installation guidelines
and the PTCS commissioning guidelines.
The 2005 study attempted to understand how installation and operational decisions impact the
overall efficiency of heat pumps. In addition, the project predicted the levels of savings that
were realized from various utility programs. Using this information, a new simulation and
thermal analysis method was developed for the region by Ecotope to describe the impact of the
heat pump selection and controls on heating energy loads in several climates of the Pacific
Nortwest. This memo develops savings based on this model (SEEM) and the PTCS installation
standards in an effort to provide a realistic and defensible savings estimates for heat pump
programs used in retrofit applications in the Boise market. Note the savings estimates would be
expected to be somewhat greater in most other parts of the Idaho Power service terrtory (Twin
Falls, Pocatello, etc.) since these areas have more heating degree days.
2. Methodology
To develop savings estimates for the proposed heat pump progrm, a series of prototypes used by
the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC) were modified and used to evaluate the
Ecotope. Inc.1
savings potentiaL. For this analysis, three such prototyes were used. The prototyes selected
were designed to include moderate levels of insulation and window performance that might
characterize a somewhat weatherized home in the Boise market.
The heat pumps themselves were specified using four separate performance levels. In all cases,
the options were designed around an HSPF specification; however, the SEEM model itself uses
actual load curves from manufactured products so that the impact of these heat pumps in the
Boise climate is modeled directly. These heat pumps include an HSPF 7.7 heat pump which
meets the curent federal minimum standad for heat pumps, and three other steps beyond this
level: HSPF 8.2, HSPF 8.5, and HSPF 9.0.
In these cases, the cooling effciencies were taken to be of relatively minor significance since
Boise is, by and large, a heating climate with approximately eight times as much heating energy
as cooling energy. The Federal standard requires at least SEER 13 for the cooling performance
of the heat pump. That standard was use for the three lower performing heat pumps. Only the
high performance HSPF 9.0 heat pump uses a SEER 14.
The three prototyes selected include
1. A small house, 1,350 ft2, meant to represent small existing homes and existing
manufactured homes throughout Idaho.
2. A 2,200 ft2 prototype meant to characterize newer homes in the Boise market built
around a crawl space with 1 ~ stories on a somewhat larger living area.
3. A 2,688 ft2 house, representing a ranch style home with a full conditioned basement of
1,350 ft2.
Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of these prototyes as used in developing the savings
estimates.
Table 1: Prototype Building Definitions
1350 1344 32 x 42 1 Crawl S ace 494 0.25
2200 2200 36 x 44 s lit Crawl S ace 811 0.25
2688 2688 32 x 42 2 Basement 836 0.50
* Note no improvements to the duct system were assumed in any of the upgrade cases.
3. Heat Pump Measures
For the final heat pump replacement analysis, the individual prototyes were weighted in
accordance with a preliminary estimate of how representative they would be for an existing
Boise area heat pump program. For the electrc furnace retrofit analysis, only the 1350 ft2
prototype was used. This was thought to best represent the region's older manufactured homes.
The heat pumps themselves were modeled with two sets of assumptions:
1. A base case standard installation practice for comfort maintenance as generated from the
regional surveys;
Ecotope, Inc.2
2. A PTCS controls and commissioning package as the primary measure for the installation
of the heat pump.
The assumptions associated with this analysis are based on RTF assumptions for installation
practice under the PTCS program. This represents a significant improvement in the performance
of the heat pump The PTCS controls specifications offer an improved installation approach
especially in the Boise market since it reduces the use of auxiliary electrc resistance heat.
The saving shown in these tables were developed from the SEEM program directly. A
realization rate was not included. There are several evaluation of heat pump programs in the
region. They vary between about 65% and about 85% realization. The 2005 study included
about 1100 heat pump installations in Oregon and Washington and observed about an 80%
realization rate using a savings estimates derived from a precursor of the SEEM algorithms. The
program proposed here would differ from those early programs in that a specific control
specification was not used. Given such a specification and a quality control program, 80%
would be a conservative estimate.
Tables 2, 3, and 4 shows the savings potential for a heat pump retrofit in the Boise market:
Table 2 ilustrates the four heat pump options which could replace a house previously heated
with an electric forced-air furnace. (Note the base case home does not have any sort of
mechanical cooling.). In this analysis the added cooling capability of the heat pump is taken as a
reduction in the overall savings (since cooling is being supplied that is not present in the initial
conditions).
This table is designed to characterize conversions from an electrc furnace and especially
manufactured homes to a higher performance heat pump alternative. This has the potential of
being fairly problematic, many of these customers use wood or other supplemental heat and this
could reduce the net savings available. Nevertheless, the savings potential from such a measure
is also extremely promising and could easily provide an important resource to the utility.
Table 2: Savings Over Electric Furnace (No Cooling) Base for 1,350 ft2 Prototype
Electric Furace
(19,942 kWh)
7.7
8.2
8.5
9.0
1943
1940
1874
1871
6830
6986
7400
7596
8773
8927
9274
9467
Table 3 uses the same analysis for electrc furnaces except in this case it assumes that a SEER 10
cooling system is part of the base case analysis and thus the cooling energy required by the heat
pump actually adds to the savings of the installation. In this case, the benefits of commissioning
remain the same, but the additional savings from the cooling-and from the lack of cooling
offset-increase the equipment savings by 25%. In general we would expect the actual
Ecotope, Inc.3
conditions in this market to include some cooling in all cases but not a complete central system.
As a result the savings would be between these two options in most cases.
Table 3: Savings Over Electric Furnace With Cooling Base for 1,3502 Prototype
Electric Furace
with cooling
(21,449 kWh)
7.7
8.2
8.5
9.0
1943
1940
1874
1871
8337
8493
8907
9103
10280
10434
10781
10974
Table 4 illustrates the case where a heat pump is being used to upgrade an existing heat pump at
the time the owner selects. In this case, it is assumed that whatever the current performance of
the heat pump is, the analysis is based on the curent minimum federal standard which the
customer would have to use to replace any existing heat pump. Given the relatively high federal
minimum HSPF, the impact of higher HSPF on the overall savings is relatively small and the
importance of commissioning and controls is relatively large. Even in cases where a 9.0 HSPF
heat pump is substituted for the base case heat pump, 2/3 of the savings are due to installation
practice and controls specification.
Table 4: Savings Over 7.7 HSPF Heat Pump Weighted for An Three Prototypes
Heat Pump HSPF 7.7 7.7 2531 0 2531
no commssioning 8.2 2520 237 2757
no controls 8.5 2433 813 3246
(18,077 kWh 9.0 2424 1091 3515
4.Conclusions
As can be seen from reviewing these tables, a carefully designed heat pump program offers
significant savings for homes heated with electrc forced-air furnaces or older heat pumps.
Ecotope, Inc.4
2009 Idaho Power Heating and Cooling Efficiency Program Contractor Survey
1of6
20f6
30f6
40f6
50f6
60f6
2009 Idaho Power Heating and Cooling Efficiency Program Survey
1 of 9
20f9
30f9
4of9
50f9
6of9
7of9
8of9
90f9
."
ECOTCPE 4056 9TH AVENUE NE SEATTL.E, WA 98105
[phone] F'AX: [phone]
Mem
To: Shelley Mart, Idao Power
From: David Baylon, Ecotope, Inc.
Bob Davis, Ecotope, mc.
Date: December 11, 2009
Re: Heat Pup Sizing Specifications and Heat Pup Meas Savigs Estimates
1. Introduction
In September 2008, Ecotope reviewed a series of heat pump retrofit measures for potential use
by Idaho Power in existing buildings in the Boise market. This review assumed two things: first,
that one possible retrofit would be for an existing house with an electrc furnace; and that the
other retrofits would be for a, relatively low-performance heat pump that might be incented to be
replaced with a higher performance heat pump. The purpose of this report is to examine several
issues that were not developed in that previous analysis.
2. Home Weatherization
The amount of savings available from homes can var considerably based on the insulation and
weatherization in the house. Inthe previous analysis, the heat pump retrofit was assumed to be
in a relatively well-weatherized house, with insulation and some improvements in windows and
doors. In this analysis we have described three different scenarios, each evaluated with separate
simulation runs:
1. "Old": relatively uninsulated buildings that have not seen significant weatherization;
2. "Weatherized": houses that were typically fully-weatherized (which means some
insulation in the floors, walls and ceilings in addition to a modest window upgrade);
and
3. "New": houses built to the mid-1990s residential stadards, with relatively large
amounts of insulation and well-performing windows.
These three insulation scenarios were weighted using data collected in the 2009 program year
and combined to calculate a revised overall estimate of program savings.
Ecotope, Inc.1
3. Heat Pump Sizing
This review is also extended in another way: in the previous analysis, the PTCS standards for
both control systems and sizing were assumed to be applied to the equipment that was installed.
Furter, savings were predicted based on homes in which the heat pump was sized and selected
based on the balance method and using a 30° F outside temperatue. This means that the listed
capacity of the heat pump at an outdoor temperature of 30° F could fully heat the house to 70° F
without electrc resistance (auxiliary) heat.
In general, this sizing criterion is noticeably larger than what is typically installed in the Idaho
markets under the current Idaho Power heat pump program. The exact reasons why these heat
pumps are undersized is unclear; however, a partial explanation would be that, typically, the
Boise installers size to the cooling load (or 125% of the cooling load), or that they size based on
the size of the air conditioner already there, thereby typically undersizing for the heating load.
This has a fairly large effect on the overall energy savings that might be achieved by any heat
pump measure.
4. Analysis Methods and Assumptions
4.1. Previous Analysis
In the previous analysis, SEEM runs were done to simulate various combinations of house heat-
loss rate, heat pump HSPF, and duct location/performance. Runs were done both for base case
and program homes in order to determine savings from following progrm rules. Simulations for
program homes include three levels of heat pump effciency, beginning with current federal
standards (HSPF=7.7, HSPF=8.2, HSPF=8.5, HSPF=9.0). The savings calculations were based
on a heat pump that met minimum federal standards (HSPF=7. 7) and an electrc furnace. In
cases including the higher-performing heat pumps, the PTCS specifications (including sizing and
control specifications) were assumed to apply. All runs were developed using TMY3 Boise
climate data.
The prototypes were assigned a level of insulation consistent with a moderate level of
weatherization. This level included some wall, ceiling, and floor insulation and a storm window
or a double-glazed window with non-thermally-broken frames. These prototyes also were
assumed to include ducts in unheated buffer spaces (attics or crawl spaces) that were not sealed.
In the original analysis, sizing for all the heat pumps was the same for both the base case heat
pumps and the PTCS heat pumps. This specification required a balance point sizing of between
25° F and 30° F. This allowed a direct comparison between different efficiencies but also
ignored the issues of sizing that have developed in the program. The sizing used was slightly
smaller than the PTCS criteria for the base case heat pumps, but all the heat pumps analyzed in a
given prototype were the same size regardless of heat pump performance.
4.2. Current Analysis
For this analysis, the prototype houses were the same size as in the previous analysis: a 1350 sq.
ft. house and a 2200 sq. ft. house, both over crawl spaces; and a 2688 sq. ft. house with a full
Ecotope, Inc.2
conditioned basement. The main change was the addition of an "old" prototye which contains
only minimal insulation and poorly-performing windows and a "new" prototye with insulation
typical ofpost-1992 energy codes. The UA ofthese homes in this analysis is summarized in
Table 1. (The VA expresses heat loss in Btu/h OF, where the OF refers to temperature difference
between inside and outside the house.) The "Weatherized" prototye is directly comparable to
the prototypes used in the previous analysis. In general, the relatively un-weatherized house has
a heat-loss rate about 30% greater than the weatherized home used in the previous analysis, and
the "new" house shows about a 40% reduction in heat loss rate relative to the prototye house
used in the previous analysis.
Table 1: Heat Loss Rates (UA) for Prototypes
1350
2200
2688
494
811
849
296
492
672
The SEEM rus used in this analysis were based on the same prototypes and duct assumption as
the previous runs. A new set of runs was generated for each vintage shown in Table 1.
Two sets of heat pump sizing criteria were used for these rus. The first corresponded with the
sizing analysis used in the previous savings memo. The second criterion assumes a heat pump
sizing method that is meant to correspond to the prevailing approach employed by the installers
in the Boise market. This means that the heat pump is undersized by one ton of capacity versus
what would be indicated by the 30° F balance point method.
The size of the IPCO Heating and Cooling Progrm heat pumps was varied based on home
prototype heat loss. That is, for a house with greater heat loss, a larger heat pump is included in
the simulation. The exception is for the runs in which the progrm heat pump is also undersized
(as indicated in tables, below).
To preserve comparability with the previous analysis, a weighting scheme was used based on the
actual experience in the 2009 program year. The program recorded home vintage and size; the
fraction of homes in each category could be assigned to each combination of vintage and house
size. Table 2 shows the ratings used to summarize the results of this analysis.
Ecotope. Inc.3
Table 2: Case Weightings
All
1350 0.059 0.126 0.370
2200 0.034 0.071 0.210
2688 0.067 0.143 0.420
All 0.160 0.340 1.000
5. Results
The impact of sizing was reviewed for several cases and for each combination of prototype and
vintage. The results from this analysis are presented in comparison to the previous analysis. In
the tables presented here an effort was made to re-run the program savings to account for the
experience in the current program to date. Thus, the runs include various levels of insulation that
were not included in the previous runs and also heat pump capacity undersizing which is
prevalent in the Boise market.
In Table 3, an electrc furnace is assumed in the base case. Like the previous analysis, this table
is limited to the small (1350 sq. ft.) prototye. The savings from the previous analysis is listed in
the first column while the remaining tables are drawn from the current analysis. The large
savings difference between the "Previous" column and the "Revised" column is due to the use of
multiple levels of insulation and moderate differences in the PTCS heat pump sizing used in the
current runs. In this prototype the reduction in savings from the use of undersized equipment is
about 23%.
Table 1: Savings Over Electric Furnace With Cooling Base 1350 sq. ft. Prototype
Electric Furnace 7.7 10280 9148 7385 -1763
with basecase cooling 8.2 10434 9513 7790 -1723
8.5 10781 9638 7841 -1797
9.0 10974 9926 7997 -1929
Table 4 expands Table 3 to include all the prototypes and all the vintages. The weightings in
Table 2 are used to generate the values in this table. The previous analysis did not include this
table, but because the program replaces electrc furnaces regardless of house size, we have
included an analysis of the effects of undersizing in this context. Furtermore, these savings
estimates can be applied to the part of the program which focuses on electric furnaces. With this
combination the impact of undersizing across all prototypes is a 19% reduction in energy
savings.
Ecotope, Inc.4
Table 4: Savings Over Electric Furnace Weighted for All Three Prototypes
7.7 *12677 10337 -2340Electric Furnace
w/o base case cooling 8.2 *13208 10736 -2472
8.5 *13401 10833 -2568
9.0 *13823 11083 -2740
*Previous analysis was not included for this case.
Table 5 is also a new table added to this analysis. In this case the analysis uses a standard HSPF
7.7 heat pump as the base. The assumption here is that the utility incentive is improving the heat
pump that would otherwise be installed with a combination of installation standards and
commissioning as well as improvement in the HSPF. In addition, the base case heat pump in
both tables 5 and 6 is undersized. This sizing is consistent with the heat pumps represented by
the "Undersized" analysis throughout these tables. In this table, only the 1350 sq. ft. house is
used so that it is directly comparable to the electrc furnace rus in Table 3. In this prototype the
aggregate impact of equipment undersizing is a 52% reduction in savings.
Table 5: Savings Over Standard HSPF 7.7 HP 1350 sq. ft. Prototype
7.7***2951 1261 -1690
7.7 HSPF heat pump 8.2 *3316 1593 -1723
8.5 *341 1622 -1819
9.0 *3728 1800 -1928
** Includes PTCS installation and sizing.
*Previous analysis was not included for this case.
Table 6 summarzes all prototypes using the weightings from Table 2. As with the previous
table the base case uses a standard heat pump installation. There, savings for the PTCS program
with correct sizing actually increases from the previous analysis since the base case heat pump is
undersized in the absence of the Idaho Power specifications. In addition, new weightings give
more credit for larger homes with less insulation. The overall impact of these two effects is to
increase the savings by about 50%. When these same heat pumps are undersized, these effects
are cancelled and the overall savings are reduced by 30%. When compared to the new runs the
reduction is 53%, canceling out the improved savings from the new analysis.
Ecotope, Inc.5
Table 6: Savings Over Standard HSPF 7.7 HP Weighted for AU Three Prototypes
7.7*2531 4060 1627 -2433
HSPF 7.7 heat pump 8.2 2757 4590 2119 -2471
8.5 3246 4784 2216 -2568
9.0 3515 5206 2465 -2741
** Includes PTCS installation and sizing.
In a heat pump upgrade program, particularly in houses with little or no weatherization, the
impact of undersizing heat pumps substantially decreases the potential savings and thus
substantially decreases the predicted savings that might accrue from the heat pump program as
operated by Idaho Power. The exact degree to which this occurs depends in large part on the
number of unweatherized homes that are included in the program and on the success in enforcing
the program's requirement to size to the dominant load (which is heating in about 85% of the
2009 program year homes). It should also be pointed out that savings, especially in the electrc
furnace cases, are probably reduced fuher by the use of wood heat. In that event, the effects of
heat pump sizing might be less than observed here, as some substantial fraction of the base case
space heating use is provided by wood or other supplemental fueL.
Ecotope, Inc.6
Ecolope Analysis
Received: November 20, 2008
From: Ecolope Inc.
5 Ton 3 Ton 3 Ton
Cooling Savings, Attic Insulation Cooling Savings, Atic Insulation Cooling Savings, Atic Insulation
Load Savinas Load Savinas Load Savinas
Measure Ducl (kWh)kWh)Measure Duct kWh)(kWh)Measure Oucl (kWh)(kWh)BaselR11)SId 3765 0 BaserR1fí SId 3425 0 Base R25 SId 3318 0R30SId23181447R30SId22321193R30SId22321086
R49 SId 2271 1494 R49 SId 2191 1234 R49 SId 2191 1127
R30 Sealed 2147 1618 R30 Sealed 2071 1354 R30 Sealed 2107 1211R49Sealed2100166R49Sealed20291396R49Sealed20711247
BaselR11 No Ducl 1995 0 BaselR11 No Duct 1926 0 Base R25 No Duct 2029 0
R30 No Ducl 1794 200 R30 No Duct 1739 187 R30 No Ducl 1739 290
R49 No Ducl 1755 240 R49 No Ducl 1702 225 R49 No Ducl 1702 328
Email from David Baylon, Ecolope Inc., November 20. 2008:
The attached file is the revised attic runs. The two new tables are using the sam assumptions as the previous
runs except they were rerun with smaller cooling equipment. The impact of this smaller AC unit is that more
hours of the year the cooling equipment cannot meet the specified cooling load. This is particularly true in the
base case but it is true in other runs as well as a result there is somewhat lower savings comared to a larger
piece of equipment that can meet the load in more cases. Th R2S base case is an interesting anoly but the
effect of the 3 ton capacity on the better house with the bigher attic insulation is to cancel some of the hours
where the equipment is inadequate. As a result the savings are not as badly impacted as they would be with a
larger piece of equipment that was better matched to the pick-up load.
Customer REBATE ADVANTAGE Survey
1 of?
2of7
3 of?
4 of?
5 of?
6of7
7of7
Dealer REBATE ADVANTAGE Survey
1 of 8
20f8
30f8
40f8
50f8
60f8
70f8
a ofa
$
An IDACORP Company
Weatherization Assistance
for Qualified Customers
2008 Annual Report
April 1, 2009
.-y'-I
This document printed on recycled paper.
Idaho Power Company Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents............................................ ................................................................................. i
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... i
List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. i
Description.............. ....... ... ............ .......... ....................................... ... .............................. .................1
Background ......................................................................................................................................1
Review of Weatherized Homes and Non-Profit Buildings by County............................................2
Review of Measures Installed..........................................................................................................5
Overall Cost-Effectiveness .............................................................................................................. 7
Customer Education, Advocacy, and Satisfaction...........................................................................9
Plans for 2009 .... ................... .......... .......... .................... .......... ...... .... .............................................10
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1
2008 Weatherization Activity-Homes and Non-Profit Buildings ..............................................3
Table 2
Base and Carrover Funding.........................................................................................................5
Table 3
2008 kWh Savings and Home/Non-Profit Measure Expenses, Excluding Administration..........6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1
SIR Frequency Distribution ......................................... .................................... .............................8
2008 Annual Report Pagei
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers Idaho Power Company
This page left blank intentionally.
Page ii 2008 Annual Report
Idaho Power Company Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers
DESCRIPTION
The Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers (W AQC) program provides financial
assistance to regional Community Action Partership (CAP) agencies in the Idaho Power service
area. This assistance helps cover weatherization costs of electrcally heated homes belonging to
qualified customers with limited income. The W AQC program also provides a limited pool of
funds for weatherization of buildings occupied by non-profit organizations serving primarily
special-needs populations, regardless of heating source, with priority given to buildings with
electrc heat. Weatherization improvements enable residents to maintain a more comfortable,
safe, and energy-effcient home while reducing their monthly electricity consumption.
Improvements are available at no cost to qualifyng applicants who own or rent their homes.
These customers also receive educational materials and effciency ideas for fuher reducing
energy use in their homes. Local CAP agencies determine program eligibilty according to the
same federal and state guidelines that are used to determine eligibility for energy assistance.
BACKGROUND
In 1989, Idaho Power began offering weatherization assistance in conjunction with the State of
Idaho Weatherization Assistance Program. Though the W AQC program, Idaho Power provides
supplementary fuding to state-designated CAP agencies for the weatherization of electrcally
heated homes occupied by qualified customers and buildings occupied by non-profit
organizations that serve special-needs populations. Idaho Power enters into an agreement with
each CAP agency that specifies the fuding allotment, biling requirements, and program
guidelines. Currently, Idaho Power administers the program in Idaho though five regional CAP
agencies, including Canyon County Organization on Aging, Weatherization, and Human
2008 Annual Report Page 1
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers Idaho Power Company
Services (CCOA); Eastern Idaho Community Action Partnership (EICAP); EI-Ada Community
Action Partership (El-Ada); South Central Community Action Partership (SCCAP);
and Southeastern Idaho Community Action Agency (SEICAA).
With the following sections, this report satisfies the reporting requirements set out in the Idaho
Public Utilities Commission's (IPUC) Order No. 29505:
· Review of Weatherized Homes and Non-Profit Buildings by County
· Review of Measures Installed
· Overall Cost-Effectiveness
· Customer Education, Advocacy, and Satisfaction
. Plans for 2009
REVIEW OF WEATHERIZED HOMES AND NON-PROFIT
BUILDINGS BY COUNTY
In 2008, Idaho Power provided a total of $1 ,306,587 to Idaho CAP agencies with $1,143,312
directly funding audits, energy-efficient measures, and health and safety measures for qualified
customers' homes (production costs),.$44,494 directly fuding energy efficient measures and
health and safety measures for non-profit buildings, and $118,781 funding the administration
costs incurred by the CAP agencies. The total number of homes weatherized during the year
was 434. Five non-profit buildings were also weatherized during 2008. Table 1 reviews
the number of homes and non-profit buildings weatherized, production costs, average cost per
home or non-profit building served, administration payments, and total payments made by Idaho
Power per county.
Page 2 2008 Annual Report
Idaho Power Company Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers
Table 1
2008 Weatherization Activity-Homes and Non-Profit Buildings
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers
2008 Weatherization Activities and Expenditures By Agency and County
Total Payment
Proucton Average Cost per Administration Includes
Agency County # of Jobs Costs Home Served Payment Administration
CCOA
Canyon 80 $220,981 $2,762 $22,098 $243,080
Gem 7 $22,320 $3,189 $2,232 $24,552
Payette 9 $20,662 $2,296 $2,066 $22,728
Washington 3 $10,743 $3,581 $1,074 $11,818
CCOATotal 99 $274,707 $2,775 $27,471 $302,177
EICAP
Lemhi 6 $11,625 $1,938 $1,163 $12,788
EICAPTotal 6 $11,625 $1,938 $1,163 $12,788
EL.ADA
Ada 203 $565,549 $2,786 $56,555 $622,103
Elmore 9 $30,727 $3,414 $3,073 $33,800
Owyhee 2 $7,061 $3,530 $706 $7,767
EL.ADA Total 214 $63,33 $2,819 $60,334 $663,670
SCCAP
Blaine 2 $2,895 $1,448 $290 $3,185
Camas $2,191 $2,191 $219 $2,410
Cassia 5 $11,668 $2,334 $1,167 $12,835
Gooding 7 $13,511 $1,930 $1,351 $14,862
Jerome 10 $29,275 $2,927 $2,927 $32,202
Lincoln 5 $13,554 $2,711 $1,355 $14,909
Minidoka 1 $4,172 $4,172 $417 $4,589
Twin Falls 32 $74,920 $2,341 $7,492 $82,412
SCCAPTotal 63 $152,186 $2,416 $15,219 $167,405
SEICAA
Bannock 31 $63,462 $2,047 $6,346 $69,808
Bingham 16 $31,324 $1,958 $3,132 $34,457
Power 5 $6,671 $1,334 $667 $7,338
SEICAA Total 52 $101,457 $1,951 $10,146 $111,603
Homes Total 434 $1,143,312 $2,634 $114,331 $1,257,643
2008 Annual Report Page 3
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers Idaho Power Company
Table 1
2008 Weatherization Activity-Homes and Non-Profit Buildings (Continued)
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers
2008 Weatherization Activities and Expenditures By Agency and County
Total Payment
Production Average Cost per Administration IncludesAgencyCounty# of Jobs Costs Home Served Payment Administrtion
Ada $5,402 $5,402 $540 $5,942
Bannock $2,179 $2,179 $218 $2,397
Gem $22,994 $22,994 $2,299 $25,294
Gooding $6.88 $6,588 $659 $7,247
Twin Falls $7,332 $7,332 $733 $8,065
Non-Profit Buildings Total 5 $4,494 $8,899 $4,449 $48,94
Grand Total 2008 439 $1,187,807 $2,706 $118,781 $1,306,587
In an effort to help the CAP agencies maximize the number of customers served under W AQC,
Idaho Power includes in its agreements with the agencies a provision allowing a maximum
annual average cost per home to an amount specified in the agreement. The average cost per
home served is calculated by dividing the total annual Idaho Power production cost of homes
weatherized per agency by the total number of homes weatherized that the CAP agency biled to
Idaho Power during the year. The maximum annual average cost per home by CAP agency
allowed under the 2008 agreement was $2,826. Overall, in 2008, the CAP agencies had a
combined average cost per home served of $2,634. There is no average cost limit for
weatherization of non-profit buildings.
During 2008, Idaho Power provided administrative payments totaling $118,781 to CAP agencies
to cover their program administration costs. Administration fees are based on 10% of the Idaho
Power production costs. The average administration cost per home weatherized in 2008
was $263, and the administration costs for non-profit buildings weatherized averaged $890.
Page 4 2008 Annual Report
Idaho Power Company Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers
Additionally, Idaho Power staff labor, marketing, and support costs for the W AQC program
totaled $69,956 for the year.
In compliance with IPUC's Order No. 29505, weatherization assistance funds are tracked, and
unspent funds are carred over and made available to CAP agencies in the following year.
In 2008, a total of $96,030 was carred forward from 2007. Table 2 details the funding base
amount, any carrover funding, and the total amount of anual funding.
Table 2
Base and Carryover Funding
Agency
CCOA
EICAP
EL.ADA
SCCAP
SEICAA
Non-Profit Buildings
Totals
Base
$302,259
$12,788
$568,479
$167,405
$111,603
$50,000
$1,212,534
2008 Year
(1/1/0~12131/08)
Carrover
From 2007
$256
$0
$95,191
$0
$0
$583
$96,030
Total 2008
Allotment
$302,515
$12,788
$663,670
$167,405
$111,603
$50,583
$1,308,564
2008 Spending
$302,177
$12,788
$663,670
$167,405
$111,603
$48,944
$1,306,587
REVIEW OF MEASURES INSTALLED
Table 3 details the measure counts, the production costs of those measures, and the kilowatt-hour
(kWh) savings by measure during 2008. The measure counts column represents the number of
times each measure was biled to Idaho Power during the year. In reality, measure counts are
higher when considering each home. In some homes, the measure was actually installed and
biled 100% to the state weatherization progrm and not to Idaho Power. Consistent with
the State of Idaho Weatherization Assistance Progrm, Idaho Power offers several measures that
2008 Annual Report PageS
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers Idaho Power Company
have costs, but do not save energy or savings cannot be measured. Included in this category are
such elements as health and safety, vents, furnace repair, and home energy audits. Health and
safety measures are necessary to ensure weatherization activities do not cause unsafe situations
in a client's home or compromise a household's existing indoor air quality. Other non-energy
savings measures are allowed under this program in order to help facilitate the effective
performance of those measures yielding energy savings.
Table 3
2008 kWh Savings and Home/Non-Profit Measure Expenses, Excluding Administration
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers
2008 Measure Cost and kWh Savings
1/1/08-12131/08
Windows 294 $405,598 1,882,095
Doors 276 $163,476 711,749
Wall insulation 10 $5,332 22,938
Ceiling insulation 208 $116,668 225,868
Vents 17 $1,154 0
Floor insulation 148 $116,339 200,400
Infiltration 34 $108,727 416,648
Ducts 59 $16,237 65,760
Health & Safety 7 $966 0
Water Heater 27 $2,199 10,292
Pipes 21 $724 416
Furnace Modify 6 $11,145 23,723
Furnace Repair 9 $2,032 0
Furnace Replace 82 $155,209 325,373
CFL 336 $6,718 49,133
Audit Investment 352 $30,788 0
Total Home Measures 2,196 $1,143,312 3,934,395
Page 6 2008 Annual Report
Idaho Power Company Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers
Table 3
2008 kWh Savings and Home/Non-Profi Measure Expenses. Excluding Administration (Continued)
Weatheriation Assistance for Qualified Customers
2008 Measure Cost and kWh Savings
1/1/08-12131/08
Windows 1 $4,835 30,155
Doors 1 $6,099 8,698
Wall insulation 0 $0 0
Ceiling insulation 3 $5,448 20,370
Vents 1 $313 0
Floor insulation 2 $11,633 27,926
Infiltration 1 $3,978 9,446
Ducts 3 $9,767 31,064
Health & Safety 2 $169 0
Water Heater 2 $51 1,425
Pipes 3 $327 387
Fumace Modify 0 $0 0
Fumace Repair 1 $378 0
Fumace Replace 1 $119 435
CFL 0 $0 0
Audit Investment 5 $1,378 0
Total Non-Profit Measures 26 $44,494 129,905
Total Home and Non-Profit 2,222 $1,187,806 4,064,300Buildings
Idaho Power's total kWh savings in 2008 for weatherized homes was 3,934,395. The total kWh
savings in 2008 for weatherized non-profit buildings was 129,905. The total energy savings
within Idaho from W AQC during 2008 was 4,064,300 kWh.
OVERALL COST-EFFECTIVENESS
Idaho Power monitors overall cost-effectiveness by requiring each CAP agency to ensure that
each project has a savings to investment ratio (SIR) equal to or greater than 1.0. The total
2008 Annual Report Page 7
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers Idaho Power Company
project's SIR reflects all the measure costs associated with the project, including measure costs
that have no kWh savings, and compares that total cost to the benefit ofthe total kWh savings of
the project. Under this standard, projects with an SIR greater than 1.0 are deemed to be
cost-effective by the energy audit program used by the State of Idaho.
Figure 1
SIR Frequency Distribution
60
..50c:J0U..40ua..õ"-30Q"
20
10
0
0
80 I2008 SIR Summary
Minimum SIR = 1.04
Maximum SIR = 12.40
Average SIR = 2.95
Median SIR = 2.77
I
70 I
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) Values
Figure 1 shows the SIR frequency distrbution of the 2008 projects funded through W AQC.
During 2008, SIR values ranged between 1.04 and a high project value of 12.40 with a mean SIR
of 2.95. The 25-year levelized cost of saved energy in 2008 for the W AQC program is
$0.025/kWh from a utility cost perspective and $0.032/kWh from a total resource cost
perspective.
Page 8 2008 Annual Report
Idaho Power Company Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers
CUSTOMER EDUCATION, ADVOCACY, AND SATISFACTION
Idaho Power provides materials to each CAP agency to assist in the education of special needs
customers who receive weatherization assistace. Included in this material are the Idaho Power
brochures Practical Ways to Manage Your Electricity Bil, and Energy Saving Tips, which
describe energy conservation tips appropriate for both the heating and cooling seasons.
Included in the materials is a two-sided card describing the energy-saving benefits of using
compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs and helpful hints about using the bulbs. The educational
information is available in Spanish and in large print versions.
In addition to the materials provided to the CAP agency weatherization offces and energy
assistance offces, each autumn Idaho Power distrbutes to all customers Energy Assistance
brochures describing eligibility guidelines and application locations. Idaho Power also actively
informs customers about the program through energy, health, and senior fairs.
In order to stay current with new programs and services, the Idaho Power program specialist
overseeing W AQC attends state and federal energy assistace/weatherization meetings and other
weatherization-specific conferences, such as the National Energy and Utility Affordability
Conference. Idaho Power is also active in the Policy Advisory Council, helping advise and direct
Idaho's state weatherization application to the United States Deparment of Energy, and the
Idaho State Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) Collaborative
Workgroup.
During 2008, the WAQC program's Idaho customers were surveyed to measure their opinion of
how the program would help keep their homes comfortable, how much they learned about saving
electricity during the weatherization process, and about their energy-saving behavior changes.
2008 Annual Report Page 9
Weatherization Assistance for Qualified Customers Idaho Power Company
Survey respondents were categorized into age groups. Results indicated 21 % of the respondents
were between 18 to 40 years-old, 44% were between 41 to 70 years-old, and 35% were over
70 years-old.
Of357 surveys mailed in 2008, 104 Idaho customers returned questionnaires. Over 92% reported
thinking the program would help keep their homes a lot more comfortable or somewhat more
comfortable. Eighty-six percent reported learning a lot or some about saving electricity during
the weatherization process. Over 97% responded that they had tred a lot or some ways to save
electrcity in their home.
PLANS FOR 2009
Idaho Power will continue working in partership with the Idaho Departent of Health and
Welfare (IDHW), Community Action Partership Association of Idaho (CAPAI), and individual
CAP agency personnel to maintain the targets, guidelines, and cost-effectiveness of the W AQC
program. In so doing, Idaho Power wil provide a valuable service to its special-needs
population.
Idaho Power estimates343 homes and 5 non-profit buildings wil be weatherized in 2009 with an
annual average cost of$3,055 per home. In 2009, Idaho Power expects to fund $1,214,511 in
weatherization measures and administration fees, of which $51,640 wil be used to weatherize
buildings housing non-profit agencies who serve primarily special needs customers. Idaho Power
plans to continually evaluate the need for additional program changes. As in years past,
a minimum of 5% of all weatherized homes submitted for reimbursement wil be audited.
Page 10 2008 Annual Report
Fall 2008 Energy Effciency and Green Living Series
1 of 6
2of6
30f6
4of6
50f6
60f6
Fall 2008 Energy Efficiency and Green Living Series
10f6
Fall 2008 Energy Efficiency and Green Living Series
1of6
20f6
30f6
40f6
50f6
60f6
2of6
30f6
4of6
50f6
60f6
Fall 2008 Energy Efficiency and Green Living Series
1of6
2of6
30f6
4of6
50f6
6of6
Fall 2008 Energy Efficiency and Green Living Series
1of6
20f6
30f6
4of6
50f6
6of6
09 Energy Efficiency & Green Living Series
10f6
2of6
30f6
40f6
50f6
6of6
09 Energy Efficiency & Green Living Series
10f6
2of6
30f6
4of6
50f6
60f6
09 Energy Efficiency & Green Living Series
10f6
2of6
30f6
4of6
50f6
60f6
09 Energy Efficiency & Green Living Series
10f6
2of6
30f6
40f6
50f6
6of6
09 Energy Efficiency & Green Living Series
1ot6
20f6
30f6
4of6
50f6
60f6
09 Energy Efficiency. Green Living Series
1of6
2of6
3 af6
4of6
50f6
6of6
BetterBricks Energy Savings
~w,Evaluation Report "Wt~
30
PREPARED BY
The Cadmus Group, Inc
REPORT #09-206
APRIL 24, 2009
..¡)
NORTHWEST
N
I IE CY
ALLIANCE
www.nwailiance.org
529 5W Third Avenue, Suite 600
Portland, Oregon 97204
(t1l1) 503-827-8416 (fax) 503-827-8437
C.ADMUS
"
Final Report
BetterBricks Energy Savings
Evaluation
Report
Prepared for:
Northwest Energy Effciency Alliance
April 24, 2009
I¡
I ~¡ iI ..~
IquanteC!c...___.._._..._.._~___J
CADMUS
GROUP, INC.
Prepared by:
Rick Ogle, P.E.
Jeff Cropp
Corporate Headquarters:
57 Water Stret
Watertown, MA 02472
Tel: 617.673.700
Fax: [phone]
An Emloyee-Owned Company
www.Cãdmusgroup.com
720 SW Wahìngton St.
Suite 400
Portland, OR 97205
Tel: S03.228.2992
Fax: [phone]
Table of Contents
Executive Summa.ry .............................................................................................. 1
1. Int'roduction .................................................................................................... 3
Target Markets .....................................................................................................................3Vertical Markets 3Cross Cutting Markets 4
Study Objectives ..................................................................................................................4
2. Energy Savings Evaluation Methodology .............................................. 5
Step 1: Define Evaluation Levels ........ ................................................................................5
Step 2: Determine Sample ...................................................................................................6
Step 3: Select Evaluation Method......................................................................................10Design and Construction 10Building Operations 14
HMG Evaluation Methodology .............. ...........................................................................15
Summary of Design and Construction Memo 15Summary of Real Estate Memo 16Summary of Building Operations Memo 16Summary of Grocery Stores Memo 16
3. Findings ................................................................................................... '17
All Energy Savings.... ................................... .................................................. ........... ...... ..17
Validated Energy Savings..... ........................ .......................................... ...................... .... .19Design and Construction 19Building Operations 20
Pending Energy Savings................................................................................................... .23
Cadmus Design and Constrction 24Cadmus Building Operations 24HMG Pending Savings 25
Committed Energy Savings .................. .............................................................................26Design and Constrction 27Building Operations 28
Planned Energy Savings .......................... .................................................................... ..... .28Design and Constrction 28Building Operations 29
4. Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................... 31
Data Collection and Quality...............................................................................................31
Recommendations for Future Study ..................................................................................31
8etter8ricks Energy Savings Accounting
TifE
CADMUS
Recommendations for the Curent Progrm ......................................................................32
Appendix A: Design and Construction Sampling and Evaluation
Methodology ............................................................................. ... ..................35
Appendix B: BetterBricks Staff Design and Construction Project
Sel.ecti.on Meth.odology... ... .......... ......... ..... ..... .... .............. a....................... .......... 36
Appendix C: Realization Rate Development .............................................. 39
Appendix D: Detailed Savings Tables......................................................... 40
Appendix E: Additional New Construction Studies ..................................46
BetterBricks Energy Savings Accounting ii
Executive Summary
The Nortwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) retained the Cadmus Group (Cadmus) to
complete an initial evaluation of the projects and energy savings associated with BetterBricks,
NEEA's commercial initiative. BetterBricks is a comprehensive commercial sector energy
efficiency initiative designed to stimulate demand for energy effciency within three vertical
markets (Hospitals, Real Estate, and Grocery) and supply of energy efficiency services from two
cross-cutting markets (Design and Constrction, and Building Operations) which, respectively,
focus on new and existing building stock. NEEA' s cross-cutting activities also take place in
buildings outside the three vertical markets such as schools, universities, and retail businesses.
The primary objective of this effort was to collect and review available data from BetterBricks
activities between 2005 and 2008, develop a methodology to estimate those savings, and
quantify the energy savings associated with those specific activities using a high level of rigor. A
secondary objective was to develop recommendations to improve evaluability ofthe initiative's
energy savings. It is important to note, however, that the estimates in this report do not include
energy savings from the broader market impacts of BetterBricks. Future reports wil examine
this topic in detaiL.
This report includes findings from both Cadmus' own work as well as validation work from the
Heschong Mahone Group (HMG). The total validated savings from the two evaluation efforts
amounts to 2.08 aMW of electrical energy savings and 592,217 therms of natural gas savings. In
addition, the evaluation contractors identified an additional 0.55 aMW and 97,088 therms of
well-documented savings from effciency measures already in place that are pending further
review. Looking forward, evaluation contractors have identified plans and commitments for
measures that amount to 5.74 aMW and 1,922,513 therms of additional savings that initiative
staff expect to be realized in the next three to five years.
Tables 1 and 2 provide details of energy savings by vertical and cross-cutting markets.
Table 1. Validated Electric Savings
Real Grocery
Hospitals Estate and Total
(aMW)(aMW)Other (aMW)
(aMW)
Design & Construction
(evaluated by Cadmus)0.66 0.40 0.30 1.36
Design and Construction
(evaluated by HMG)0 0.02 0.21 0.23
Building Operations
(evaluated by Cadmus)0.34 0.15 0 0.49
Total:0.99 0.57 0..51 2.08
SetterSricks Energy Savings Accounting
Table 2. Validated Gas Savings
Real Grocery
Hospitals Estate and Total
(therms)Other (therms)(thenns)(therms)
Design &
Construction
(evaluated by
Cadmus)367,505 28,421 114,366 510,293
Design and
Construction
(evaluated by
HMG)0 16,447 1,729 18,176
Building
Operations 47,130 16,618 0 63,748
Total:414,635 61,486 116,095 592,216
Energy savings from planned efficiency measures and other energy goal/commitments are
described in this report on pages 27 to 32.
BetterBricks intends for its activities to result in secondary market effects, as market actors
among the target audiences become more educated regarding potential energy-effciency
improvements. These stakeholders include architects, engineers, contractors, consultants,
building owners, and facilities managers who may choose to implement similar measures in the
future, even without direct support from BetterBricks. According to the initiative's theory of
market transformation, high-profile BetterBricks projects should also serve as learning tools for a
wider pool of stakeholders who do not engage in direct contact with BetterBricks. The effort to
quantify these secondary market effects was outside the scope of this study, but wil be examined
in future reports.
In addition, Cadmus reviewed the evaluabilty of the BetterBricks project in terms of energy
savings. Cadmus was unable to validate more than a small frction of potential projects due to a
lack of data. Comprehensive data collection on BetterBricks projects by Initiative staff combined
with consistent follow-up would improve this situation. Furthermore, NEEA support of
additional post-occupancy and post-installation evaluation would provide greater reliability in
the calculation of realization rates for various projects and measures, which in turn would
increase the accuracy of savings estimates for completed and in-process projects.
8etter8ricks Energy Savings Evaluation 2
1. Introduction
The Northwest Energy Effciency Allance (NEEA) retained the Cadmus Group (Cadmus) to
complete an initial evaluation of the projects and energy savings associated with BetterBricks,
NEEA's commercial initiative. BetterBricks is a comprehensive commercial sector energy
efficiency initiative approach to stimulate demand for energy efficiency within three vertical
markets (Hospitals, Real Estate, and Grocery) and building supply of energy effciency goods
and services from two cross-cutting markets (Design and Constrction, and Building Operations)
which, respectively, focus on new and existing building stock. NEEA's cross-cutting activities
also take place in buildings outside the three vertical markets such as schools, universities, and
retail businesses (classified as "Other" for the purpose of this study).
Figure 1. BetterBricks Target Markets Evaluated by Cadmus
Target Markets
The BetterBricks initiative provides support to a limited number of vertical and cross cutting
markets, impacting each market as described below.
Vertical Markets
· Hospitals: Assists hospitals to develop and implement Strategic Energy Management
Plans (SEMP), a strctured approach to improve energy effciency throughout
organizations and facilities. The SEMP focuses on best practices to achieve energy
efficiency in capital improvements, design and construction, operations and maintenance,
and purchasing.
THF
BetterBricks Energy Savings Accounting 3CADM
· Real Estate: Supports companies in the development and implementation of a high
performance portfolio frmework, addressing best practices similar to those mentioned
above, but within the business context of general offce space.
· Grocery: Offers grocery store chains support in the development and implementation of
energy action plans that primarily address refrgeration and lighting. Best practices, in
this context, include benchmarking refrgeration systems, system optimization service
and general energy awareness materials for employees.
Cross Cutting Markets
· Design and Construction: Offers a number of tools, resources, advice and assistance to
Northwest architects and engineers to assist in the design of energy effcient buildings.
The five Integrated Design Labs (IDLs) provide educational and technical support that
includes day lighting modeling, as well as support for "whole-building" integrated design.
The main delivery method is though the Firm Focus (FF) approach, where progrm staff
work closely with selected architecture firm, influencing their business practices and
increasing their technical capabilities to deliver integrated design, specifically in the
BetterBricks vertical markets.
· Building Operations: Provides technologies and consulting to building operators, in
order to improve regional building performance by facilitating the adoption of improved
operations and maintenance strategies, both on the demand and supply side of the market.
BetterBricks activities towards this goal include (1) technical training and (2) business
development support to select mechanical and controls service providers (i.e., the "Firm
Focus" approach.) NEEA's expectation is this will expand the breadth and quality of
energy efficiency-focused building operations and maintenance services offered in the
Pacific Northwest.
Study Objectives
The primary objective of this study was to collect and review available data from the initiative
activities between 2005 and 2008, and estimate the energy savings associated with those
projects. A secondary objective was to develop recommendations to improve evaluability of the
initiative's energy savings impacts.
MUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 4
LiH1.HI1-'
2. Energy Savings Evaluation Methodology
At the beginning of the study, Cadmus met with BetterBricks staff to define the evaluation
levels, develop a sampling plan, and select appropriate evaluation methods. The study
methodology is outlined in the four stages shown in Figure 2 below.
Figure 2. Energy Savings Accounting Stages
Step 1: Define Evaluation Levels
Cadmus and HMG worked with BetterBricks staff to determine appropriate evaluation levels.
The selected evaluation levels are consistent with those used by Cadmus to report savings for
NEEA's Industrial Initiative. Cadmus defined the five levels as follows:
· Validated: Savings that have been evaluated through a site visit and a review of
calculations or a professional assessment. Generally, the evaluation contractor reviews
energy savings based on data and calculations provided by the implementation team. In
many northwest service terrtories, NEEA' s validation requirements are on par with
utility measurement and verification (M&V).
· Pending: Savings quantified by the implementation team or end-user but not yet verified
or validated by the evaluation contractor due to budget or time constraints.
· Committed: Savings the implementation team expects wil be achieved within the next
two years based on the schedule for constrction or measure implementation. Projects are
either in progress or have a defined budget allocated by the customer.
· Planned: Similar to committed savings above, except that the customer has not allocated
a project budget, and the implementation team does not expect the project wil be
completed within two years.
CADM BetterBricks Energy Savings Accounting 5
-'inJE~~='~~.
Step 2: Determine Sample
Phase 1: Identify Universe of Potential Projects
The first phase of the project involved collecting data on potential evaluation sites. These
included all buildings contained in NEEA's Commercial Tracking System (CTS), as well as
buildings participating in NEEA's Kilowatt Crackdown and HVAC Service Assistant programs.
This resulted in an initial sample frame of 588 buildings.
Table 3. Composition of Sample Frame
Design &Building OperationsConstruction
All Hospital Real Estate Grocery Total
Buildings from CTS 359 23 41 0 423
Buildings from Kilowatt 47 47Crackdown
Buildings from HVAC 107 107Service Assistant
Buildings from BetterBricks 3 4 0 4 11staff, not in CTS
TOTAL SAMPLE FRAME 362 27 195 4 588
Phase 2: Filter Universe to .Identify Those With Likely Savings and Suffcient Data
Once the total sample frme was determined, Cadmus worked with BetterBricks staff and
contractors to reduce the number of projects that would be evaluated as follows:
· NEEA staf or contractor selection: Cadmus coordinated with NEEA staff and
contractors to identify design and constrction projects that met the following criteria:
1. Utilize the most comprehensive integrted design
2. Have the highest savings potential (known actual or estimated).
3. In the target markets.
4. Have data available or data are easily obtainable.
5. High profie (project has received, or wil receive, publicity)." - i.e. good
documentation.
This exercise yielded 70 potential projects to evaluate out of the total of 362. This
process is explained in greater detail in Appendix B.
· Data Suffciency: Some sites chosen for evaluation were subsequently found to have
insuffcient data for Cadmus or HMG to conduct a savings analysis and were excluded
from this analysis.
· Redundancy: One project previously evaluated by the Heschong Mahone Group (HMG)
was evaluated separately by Cadmus at the request of NEE A staff, and subsequently
excluded to prevent redundancy. The project was a hospital designated W A-15.
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 6
.t'¡¡E~--~
CAD
NEEA's work with commercial design projects in the Northwest predates all other commercial
sector interventions. However, BetterBricks has only recently begu to systematically collect
energy savings data. As a result, Design & Constrction projects constitute the largest number of
both total projects and highest rate of attrition due to lack of sufficient data.
The complexity of Cadmus's decision making process related to our evaluation of the Design &
Construction sites is shown below in Figure 3. Further detail about the process is located in
Appendix B: BetterBricks Staff Design and Constrction Project Selection Methodology. The
decision making process for Building Operations projects was somewhat less complex, so no
decision tree was developed.
SetterSricks Energy Savings Accounting 7
Figure 3. Design and Construction Decision Tree
No
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 8
The following tables ilustrate the filtering process from the sample frame to the final sample.
Table 4. Filtering from Sample Frame to Preliminary Sample
Design &Building OperationsConstruction
All Hospital Real Estate Grocery Total
TOTAL SAMPLE FRAME 362 27 195 4 588
Buildings filtered due to 292 9 27 0 328self-selection/missing data
Preliminary Sample
identified by Cadmus,70 18 168 4 260HMG, and NEEA
staff/contractors
Table 5. Filtering from Preliminary Sample to Final Sample
Design &Building OperationsConstruction
All Hospital Real Estate Grocery Total
Preliminary Sample
identified by Cadmus,70 18 168 4 260HMG, and NEEA
staff/contractors
Buildings Cadmus or HMG 13 4 6 0 23unable to evaluate
Final number of buildings 57 14 162 4 237evaluated
Phase 3: Collect Data on Preliminary Sample and Determine Evaluabilty
After establishing a preliminary sample, Cadmus collected the necessary data to evaluate the
selected sites. For the majority of the sites Cadmus collected information from CTS, data
provided by NEEA staff and contractors, building energy models, biling data, lighting and
engineering calculations, scoping reports, site visits, phone and email interviews with facility
staff, Internet data related to each project, and data from architectural and engineering firms.
For each site, Cadmus reviewed the following:
· Type and quality of available data,
· Status of constrction and occupancy, and
· Achievement of LEED certification.
Based on information available for the site and project, Cadmus then conducted:
· Analysis of building energy models,
. Site visits,
· Calculation review, or
CADMUS SetterSricks Energy Savings Accounting 9
· A phone or e-mail interview with a knowledgeable source regarding installed measures.
Durng this process Cadmus found a number of buildings unfit for further analysis and
evaluation. Typically these projects had either not incorporated suggestions from IDL into their
final design or lacked sufficient data for analysis. Therefore, the final number of buildings
Cadmus reviewed was 237.
Step 3: Select Evaluation Method
Design and Construction
Evaluation of Design and Constrction projects were based on the quality and quantity of
available data, and applied one or more of five methods commonly used for evaluating
commercial buildings. Specifically, Cadmus employed the following methods for all savings
estimates, whether validated, pending, committed or planned:
· Third-part post-occupancy evaluations (n=3)
· Application of a calculated realization rate to LEED-certified projects and new
constrction( n=34)
· Cadmus post-occupancy evaluation (n=l)
· Review of lighting calculations (n=7)
· Analysis of building energy simulation models (fenestration model) developed by other
contractors and IDLs. (n=l)
A brief description of each method follows.
Third-Part Post-Occupancy Evaluation
The first evaluation method involved analysis of savings for three projects with post-occupancy
evaluations (POE) performed by either Paladino & Associates, Berkeley Center for Built and
Environment or Interface Engineering. These POEs were for Design and Constrction projects
that achieved LEED-certification. Cadmus reviewed the POE reports to determine if sufficient
data had been obtained and the methodology was sound. In all three cases, Cadmus included the
revised energy savings from the POEs as validated savings.
Calculated Realization Rate
Energy savings estimates are initially determined by a contractor, engineer, architect, or
consultant through engineering calculations and/or building energy simulations. In most, if not
all, cases the predicted (or ex-ante) energy savings are different from that actually achieved (ex-
post). The difference commonly results from a number of factors, including:
· Value engineering may eliminate measures or key components between the design phase
and final construction
· Actual building characteristics may differ from final design
· Commissioning of building equipment may not achieve full operating potential
· Design changes may not be communicated to building modeler
· Occupant use or actual building operation may vary from original expectation
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 10
THE
The ratio of the actual to predicted estimates of savings, known as the "savings realization rate"
is commonly used in impact evaluations of energy effciency and conservation programs to
gauge their performance. It is standard practice in impact evaluations to calculate a savings
realization rate for a sample of participants and apply it to the population of participants to
estimate actual savings for a program.
Cadmus used as-designed estimates of savings as a basis for calculating savings realization rate,
using the following steps:
1. Obtain the original energy efficient design model and one year of post-occupancy utility
bils.
2. Modify the model to reflect as-built design and operating characteristics per available
documentation.
3. Calibrate the original design model energy use to the actual, biled energy use by
adjusting plug loads and other variables as appropriate.
4. Create a code model by removing energy effcient measures included in the design model
and replacing them with the building code or standard practice equivalent, if applicable.
5. Calculate actual energy savings difference between code model (from step #4) and actual
energy use.
6. Calculate the realization rate by dividing the actual energy savings by difference between
the original design and code models.
Cadmus followed this procedure to calculate the savings at one new constrction (not LEED
certified) building. However, there were insufficient data to perform this analysis for all
buildings because the "as built" information (e.g. actual installation data) was not available.
Therefore, Cadmus used four buildings which had undergone POE's using the aforementioned
process, to estimate a realization rate for other Design and Constrction projects. These
realization rates are shown below in Table 6. Further detail can be found in Appendix C:
Realization Rate Development.
Table 6.Realization Rate for Projects with Post-Occupancy Evaluation
Modeled Design
Actual Energy Energy Savings Realization
Proiect 10 Savings (MBTU)tMBTU\Rate
OR-07 34,417 43,463 79%
OR-08 1,281 13,176 10%
WA-07 2,600 4,455 58%
WA-11 8,100 12,062 67%
Total:46,399 73,156 63%
The realization rate observed in the above examples led Cadmus to apply a realization rate to all
LEED projects in order to quantify validated energy savings when actual data was not available.
Cadmus determined an average realization rate of 63% based on the ratio between the sum of
CADMUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Accounting 11
TNE~~'~-
actual energy savings and modeled design energy savings for the four projects, as shown in
Table 6. This average realization rate was applied to all LEED projects to validate savings.
In our judgment, four projects represent a very small a sample for developing program-level
savings. To augment this calculation, Cadmus searched other sources to find additional POEs on
other BetterBricks projects which had achieved LEED certfication. This was unsuccessful, so
Cadmus then searched for other secondary data regarding POEs on LEED-certified projects in
general, but was unable to find additional information to further inform this rate.
Given the small sample size, additional data from energy-effcient building POEs wil be
required to develop a more comprehensive realization rate. While the rate of realization Cadmus
calculated may be revised as additional data becomes available, it is important to note that the
Idaho Integrated Design Lab reported! applying a 50% realization rate to expected energy
savings for new constrction projects. This realization rate was reported2 as a conservative value
based on anecdotal evidence, but is reasonably close to the value derived in this section.
To further augment the process, Cadmus reviewed a number of studies which examined a
savings "realization rate" by comparing actual energy savings to that from the initial,
uncalibrated code model (which mayor may not reflect additional design changes during
constrction), as listed in Appendix D. However, none of these studies reflected the previously
discussed methodology acceptable for determining a net realization rate. The need for post-
occupancy evaluations with accurate net realization rates represents a significant opportnity for
NEEA to explore the issue and better determine energy savings in the region.
Applying the Realization Rate to Calculate Savings
Once the realization rate for buildings with limited data was established, Cadmus needed to
collect sufficient information to calculate energy savings. The information required to determine
savings includes:
· Square footage
· Total Building Energy Use Intensity (EUI)
· Establishment of the baseline used in the LEED analysis and point system, which could
be either ASHRAE Standard 90.1 or local energy codes.
Cadmus obtained information on total building energy use intensity (EUI), and square footage
from the architecture and engineering firms involved in the project. Where Cadmus could not
obtain this data from the firms involved in the original project, Cadmus utilized secondary data
sources on square footage and savings relative to energy code.
For the purpose of this analysis, the baseline for energy savings is local energy code. However,
sometimes LEED certification uses ASHRAE Standard 90.1 as the baseline, and other times the
local code. Cadmus found that neither LEED certification documents nor information from the
i Integrated Design Lab - University ofIdaho 2007 Annual Progress Report, page 8
2 Email from Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg, Integrated Design Lab - Boise, Director, March 24, 2009
CADMUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 12
T,rI'S
IDLs provided definitive data on whether an energy code or ASHRAE Standard 90.1 was
applied as the baseline. Therefore, Cadmus reviewed secondary sources for each project to
determine the relevant baseline. Where Cadmus found that ASHRA Standard 90.1 was the
baseline, Cadmus engineers adjusted the savings percentages from those certified by the LEED
points to reflect the greater stringency in local codes. In the case where an Internet search did not
produce information on the relevant baseline, the baseline was assumed to be the state or local
code.3
LEED certification requires the adjustment of energy models throughout the design process to
reflect any changes. The percentage difference in energy use between code and design
determines the amount of energy savings and corresponds to a certain number of points in the
LEED system. Cadmus did not have access to these LEED building simulation models and
therefore could not examine them for savings and accuracy. Therefore, Cadmus calculated the
energy savings using the percentage savings from each project's LEED certification and data
supplied to the Integrated Design Labs by architects and engineering firms who pedormed the
building energy modeling. That information included either the building's modeled baseline EUI
or modeled energy savings in terms of kilowatt-hours and therms. Cadmus applied the previously
calculated realization rate to the LEED project energy savings to determine validated savings.
In addition, Cadmus applied the same realization rate to new and recently occupied buildings
that could not have savings validated (meaning they were categorized as pending, committed or
planned). For those projects, it was unclear which energy efficiency measures had been
implemented or might be included in the final as-built design. This meant Cadmus could apply a
conservative estimate of savings via the derived realization rate.
NEEA also requested that energy savings be provided in terms of kilowatt-hours and therms.
This information could not be accurately determined for those projects where only EUI data (in
kBTU per square foot) was available. NEEA supplied the following conventions to apply to the
energy savings4, as shown in more detail in Appendix D:
. Offce buildings: 70% electrc, 30% gas
· Hospitals: 40% electrc, 60% gas
· Schools: 40% electric, 60% gas
3 December 8, 2008, e-mail from the University of Washington IDL Director: "We asked what the code base was for
the data that they sent us, and I believe in every case they used the state or municipal code as baseline, which as you
referenced is a bit more stringent than the appropriate ASHRAE 90.1 per date of project permitting. I'm sure that
there is some individual variability there, but generally the question we asked them was, 'What was the code
baseline, and what was the as designed baseline?' Without doing a great deal of checking, we have assumed they
answered our questions to the best of their ability."
4 This convention was derived by NEEA staff and contractors from the 2003 Commercial Buildings Energy
Consumption Survey and the Baseline Characteristics of2002 - -2004 Nonresidential Sector. This derivation is
curently under review by NEEA and its evaluation contractors.
BetterBricks Energy Savings Accounting 13
Cadmus Post-Occupancy Evaluation
Cadmus conducted a post-occupancy evaluation for one building, ID-03, to verify installation of
proposed energy-efficient measures and determine actual operating schedules and building
control system settings. The University of Idaho Integrted Design Lab provided code and design
eQuest models of the facility. The site visit findings were combined with actual energy use from
biling data to modify the proposed design eQuest model to represent the as-built design and
operation of the facility. The code model was adjusted to reflect the correct baseline usage,
which allowed derivation of the validated energy savings.
Lighting Calculations
Seven buildings had lighting projects with energy savings calculations performed by either the
local utility or the University of Oregon Energy Studies in Buildings Laboratory (ESBL). Those
calculations were reviewed for sufficient data to achieve savings validation, completion or
design status, and amount of savings based on EUI and square footage. Cadmus could not obtain
sufficient data from building owners to validate any of these projects. ESBL estimated savings
for the project design that assumed all recommended measures would be implemented. As with
new construction, Cadmus expected not all measures wil be installed as designed. Therefore,
Cadmus chose to apply the derived energy savings realization rate noted in previous subsections
because a lighting savings realization rate was not available.
Fenestration Model Review
Cadmus performed adjustments to a fenestration model developed by the Montana State
University Integrated Design Lab for MT -02. The IDL provided code and design models for
MT -02, for which they had conducted a study of energy savings related to various types of
windows. Cadmus contacted the project architect to determine which window was actually
installed, and also received the specification sheet for that window tye. Specifications were
entered into the design model to determine the improvement over baseline, which yielded less
than 0.01 aMW of savings. Cadmus only reviewed this one fenestration model because the
window replacement was the only measure implemented through this project, and no other
design and constrction project had this specific scope.
Bu ildina.erations
The evaluation of Building Operations projects followed some of the same methods as Design
and Constrction, although the details are not portyed in a graphical decision tree.
Hospitals
Hospital projects tyically involved the adoption of a strategic energy management plan
(SEMP), installation of energy conservation measures, commissioning or retro-commissioning,
and HV AC system tune-ups. Cadmus applied the following principle evaluation methods:
· Conduct site visits to confirm measure installation and facility operating hours.
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 14
· Review of engineering calculations employed by implementation contractors.
· Analyze scoping reports with projected savings.
Real Estate
Cadmus used two methods to evaluate savings for real estate projects:
· Review of on-line HV AC tune-up data, which was automatically uploaded by the HV AC
Service Assistant tool following a site visit by one of the BetterBricks contractors.
· Analysis of scoping reports with projected savings.
HMG Evaluation Methodolo~
The Heschong Mahone Group (HMG) previously evaluated elements of the BetterBricks
initiative, including samples of Design and Constrction, Building Operations, Grocery Store,
and Real Estate kW Crackdown projects. HMG later provided the relevant findings to the
Cadmus Group, along with methodologies, data, and calculations. Cadmus lacked sufficient time
to analyze all the submitted data prior to the completion of this report, but has included many of
HMG's findings where appropriate.
In this process, HMG worked with BetterBricks personnel to determine evaluation samples and
obtain data. HMG then developed and applied appropriate evaluation methods for four target
markets. The methodology was reported to NEEA in four separate memos in December 2008,
which are summarized below.
Summary of Design and Construction Memo
For Design and Constrction projects, HMG conducted on-site surveys and data collection at
fifteen sites to confirm information from CTS and other documentation sources. HMG obtained
sufficient data to analyze nine of those fifteen projects. On-site data collection included:
· Equipment and building characteristics
· Interviews with building operators
· Installation of data loggers for end-use metering
HMG collected biling data and, where available, existing energy efficient measure monitoring
data. They also obtained the original energy simulation input and output fies for both the code
and proposed design conditions. HMG then modified the energy simulation models for each
project to reflect as-built conditions, and recorded the resulting energy savings. These savings
are included under "Pre-2008 Validated Savings."
BetterBricks Energy Savings Accounting 15 4
.,
Summary of Real Estate Memo
HMG validated energy savings for 47 Real Estate projects as part of the BetterBricks Kilowatt
Crackdown program. HMG obtained total site energy use for all the buildings from January 2007
through August 2008, which represents one full year before the Kilowatt Crackdown program
and two-thirds of the implementation period. HMG analyzed the energy use data, examined
energy use intensity comparisons, and conducted surveys with building managers. Through this
effort, HMG was able to validate the difference in anual energy use through August 2008 as a
lower bound for energy savings.
Summary of Building Operations Memo
HMG attempted to evaluate eleven Building Operations projects through biling analysis. They
examined electrc and natural gas bils, when available, for projects both before and after project
implementation, and considered any differences to result from installed measures. HMG reported
savings on seven projects. This method of evaluation has limitations, particularly when measure
installation occurs at the same time as substantial changes in building size or use. Energy savings
less than 10% of total building load are often diffcult to discern from the normal ebb and flow of
energy use. This is particularly tre with hospitals, and HMG reported that all four hospital
Building Operations projects could not be analyzed because no quantifiable improvement was
observed in biling data or insufficient information was available. Cadmus recommends that
NEEA provide funding to examine these projects in further detail to obtain additional
information and complete analyses where necessary.
Summary of Grocery Stores Memo
Grocery Store refrigeration tue-ups were evaluated though biling analysis by examining
electrc utility bills both before and after project implementation. The resulting consumption
differences were considered as energy savings attbuted to the installed energy efficient
measures. Mechanical service contrctors also pedormed short-term metering to predict energy
savings, which was available for two of the four projects. This analysis possesses the same
limitations outlined above for Building Operations. In addition, the projects had less than one
year of billng data, which Cadmus views as the minimum for a higher degree of accuracy. In
mid-2008, HMG sought to offset concerns about the length of monitoring by developing a
weather-normalized correction to the data based on projected statewide differences in heating
degree days. However, a review of full 2008 weather data for the installation region indicated no
correction was actually necessary. Cadmus recommends that NEEA provide funding to examine
these projects in further detail to obtain additional biling information and refine analyses where
necessary.
CADMUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 16
''VJ:JE
Gi\cn:H),
3. Findings
Cadmus reviewed all projects not only for validated savings, but also for those that met pending,
committed, and planned criteria. This section first presents the total current and potential savings,
before offering detailed findings for the validated, pending, committed, and planned savings, in
that order.
All Energy Savings
Based on our analysis, this report accounts a total of:
· 2.63 aMW in validated and pending electric savings and 689,147 therms in validated gas
savings. (Table 7 and Table 8).
o 2.08 aMW validated (1.85 aMW validated by Cadmus plus 0.23 aMW validated
byHMG).
o 592,217 therms validated (574,041 validated by Cadmus plus 18,716 therms
validated by HMG).
o 0.55 aMW in pending electrc savings
o 97,388 therms in pending gas savings
· 0.99 aMW in committed electric savings and 224,890 therms in committed gas savings
(Table 9 and Table 10).
· 4.74 aMW in planned electric savings and 1,697,623 therms in planned gas savings
(Table 9 and Table 10).
The total of 8.36 aMW in electric savings and 2,613,531 therms in gas savings quantifies only
the realized savings and conservation opportnity that could be identified to date. These savings
do not include broader market effects. Note that totals below reflect the effects of rounding, and
therefore may differ slightly from the summation of results presented in tabular form.
CADMUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 17
THlX
Table 7. Number of Validated and Pending Projects and Electric Savings
(in aMW) by Market
Hospitals Real Estate Grocerv Other Total
Evaluation total total total total total
Level projects aMW project aMW projects aMW projects aMW projects aMW
Validated
(Cadmus)2 0.66 9 0.40 0 0 10 0.30 21 1.36
Validated
Design &(HMG)0 0 5 0.13 2 0.02 3 0.08 10 0.23
Construction Pendinçi 0 0 3 0.06 0 0 4 0.04 7 0.11
Building Validated 5 0.34 154 0.15 0 0 0 0 159 0.49
Operations Pendinçi 3 0.20 4 0.16 4 0.07 1 0 12 0.44
Total:10 1.21 175 0.90 6 0.09 18 0.42 209 2.63
Note. Due to rounding, total values may appear to differ from the sum of components
Table 8. Number of Validated and Pending Projects and Gas Savings
(in therms) by Market
Grocery and
Hosi itals Real Estate Other Total
Evaluation total total total total
Level projects therms projects therms projects therms projects therms
Validated
(Cadmus)2 367,505 9 28,421 10 114,366 21 510,293
Validated
Design &(HMG)0 0 5 16,447 5 1,729 10 18,176
Construction Pendinçi 0 0 3 3,366 4 3,677 7 7,043
Building Validated 5 47,130 154 16,618 0 0 159 63,748
Operations Pending 3 (9,141)4 3,192 1 96,294 12 90,345
Total:10 405,494 175 68,04 24 216,066 209 689,607
Note. Due to rounding, total values may appear to difr frm the sum of components
Table 9. Number of Committed and Planned Projects and Electric Savings
(in aMW) by Market
Hospitals Real Estate Grocerv Other Total
Evaluation total total total total total
Level projects aMW proiects aMW projects aMW projects aMW projects aMW
Design &Committed 2 0.12 7 0.35 1 0 5 0.11 15 0.58
Construction Planned 2 0 0 0.00 0 0 1 0.00 3 0.47
Building Committed 2 0.41 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 2 0.41
Operations Planned 13 4.16 5 0.12 0 0 0 0 18 4.27
Total:19 5.16 12 0.47 1 0 6 0.11 38 5.74
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear different from the sum of components
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 18
Table 10. Number of Committed and Planned Projects and Gas Savings (in therms) by
Market
Hospitals Real Estate Grocery Other Total
Evaluation total total total total total
Level projects therms projects therms project therms projects therms projects therms
Design &Committed 2 53,763 7 44,338 1 4,113 5 47,447 15 149,660
Construction Planned 2 211,302 0 0 0 0 1 1,425 3 212,727
Building Committed 2 75,230 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 75,230
Operations Planned 13 1,472,771 5 12,125 0 0 0 0 18 1,484,896
Total:19 1,813,066 12 56,463 1 4,113 6 48,872 38 1,922,513
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear diferent from the sum of components
Validated Energy Savings
Validated energy savings represent those confirmed with a site visit, a calculation review, and/or
a professional savings assessment. For the BetterBricks study, Cadmus validated savings of 1.85
aMW in electrc savings and 574,041 in gas savings.
Design and Construction
Design and Construction Validated Savings
Cadmus calculated energy savings for the majority of validated Design and Constrction projects
by applying a realization rate, as discussed in the previous chapter and Appendix C: Realization
Rate Development. Cadmus applied the average realization rate of 63 % to 17 of the 21 projects,
summarized in the table below. Cadmus used POE data to validate savings for the other four
projects. Design and Construction projects accounted for validated annual electrc savings of
1.36 aMW and 510,293 therms of gas savings, as shown in Table 11. Under the "Source of
Savings" column, the LEED percentage refers to design energy savings above the relevant state
or local building energy code. More detailed information is available in Table 25 in Appendix D:
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 19
THE
CADMUS
Table 11. Validated Energ Savings for Design and Construction Projects
Project Source of Total Realized Total Realized
105 Savings Electric Savings Gas Savings
(% Above Code)(aMWl (therms)
10-01 LEEO (35%)0.001 960
10-02 LEEO (45%)0.07 8,866
10-03 Cadmus POE 0.00 3,450
OR-01 LEEO 40%0.09 12,071
OR-02 LEEO 39%0.04 18,031
OR-03 LEEO 30%0.01 1,744
OR-04 LEEO 30%0.02 10,266
OR-05 LEEO 45%0.13 56,953
OR-06 LEEO 28%0.03 4,082
OR-07 Secondary POE 0.64 359,819
OR-08 Secondary POE 0.02 7,686
WA-01 LEEO 26%0.04 5,322
WA-02 LEEO 42%0.003 1,376
WA-03 LEEO 45%0.001 72
WA-04 LEEO 38%0.01 5,443
WA-05 LEEO 18%0.02 3,190
WA-06 LEEO 10%0.03 4,355
WA-07 Secondary POE 0.12 (8,400)
WA-08 LEEO 27%0.02 9,318
WA-09 LEEO 36%0.005 586
WA-10 LEEO 43%0.04 5,103
Total:1.36 510,293
Building Operations
Hospitals
Cadmus validated energy savings for six BetterBricks hospital projects. The resulting validated
annual electrc savings are 0.34 aMW and annual gas savings equal 47,130 therms, as shown in
Table 12. More detail on the specific energy savings can be found in Table 26 in Appendix D:
For the most part, the validated measures involved the installation of energy conservation
measures (ECMs) as capital projects undertken as part of the Strategic Energy Management
Plan. Retro-commissioning or tune-up projects were implemented at two sites. Cadmus validated
most sites through site visits that verified measure implementation and recorded relevant
operating parameters. This site visit data enabled us to develop or verify energy savings
calculations.
5 Project codes represent the state where the building is or wil be constructed, along with a numeric identifier.
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 20
Cadmus employed a different validation method for OR-09. In that case, the Market Specialist
provided calculations to Cadmus from the facility and installation contractor. Cadmus validated
these calculations through an e-mail interview.
THE
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 21CAD
Table 12. Validated Energy Savings for Hospitals
Project 10 Source of Savings Total Realized Electric Total Realized Gas
Savinas (aMW)Savinas (therms)
OR-09 Capital Projects ECMs 0.07 25,150
OR-10 Capital Project ECMs 0.05 5,525
OR-11 Capital Projects ECMs 0.02 0
OR-12 Capital Proiects ECMs 0.05 16,455
10-07 Capital Projects (ECMs) I
Retro-Commissionina 0.16 0
Total:0.34 47,130
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear diferent frm the sum of components
Real Estate - HVA C Service Assistant
The HV AC Service Assistant by Field Diagnostic Services, Inc. identified energy savings
opportnities and documented improvements for rooftop commercial HV AC units. BetterBricks
provided support to train three service contractors. Data from 107 sites were recorded by the
Service Assistant tool and automatically uploaded to the Internet. The resulting validated annual
electrc savings equal 0.02 aMW, as shown in Table 13. Each Project ID may represent multiple
sites for each client. More detail on the specific energy savings can be found in Table 27 in
Appendix D:
Table 13. Validated Energy Savings for HVAC Service Assistant Projects
Project 10 Total Realized Electric
Savinas (aMW)
FOSI-01 0.004
FOSI-02 0.002
Miscellaneous 0:0.001
FOSI-03 0.002
FOSI-04 0.001
FOSI-05 0:0.001
Miscellaneous 0.000
FOSI-06 0.001
FOSI-01 0.006
Total:0.02
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear different from the sum of components
The results represent a large number of diagnostic checks and minor improvements to HV AC
systems during the first summer of this tool's implementation. Increased savings are expected to
be achieved during summer 2009 by following up on these initial results.
Real Estate - Kilowatt Crackdown
HMG evaluated energy savings for 47 real estate projects through the Kilowatt Crackdown
program. This program was implemented jointly by NEEA and the Building Owners and
Managers Association (BOMA) of Seattle, and represented a contest for energy efficiency
achievements among office buildings run by BOMA members.
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 22
HMG obtained total site energy use for all the buildings from January 2007 through August
2008, which represents one full year before the Kilowatt Crackdown program and two-thirds of
the implementation period. HMG analyzed the energy use data, examined energy use intensity
comparisons, and conducted surveys with building managers. Through this effort, HMG was
able to validate the difference in annual energy use through August 2008 as a lower bound for
energy savings. The lower bound of savings represent 0.13 aMW in electrc savings and 16,618
therms in gas savings.
Grocery Stores
No completed projects were available for evaluation under this category.
Savings Validated by HMG
Prior to 2008, HMG evaluated 15 sites to determine Design and Constrction savings and
obtained data through data logging, biling analysis, and existing metering on energy effcient
measures. Using this data, HMG either modified existing building energy simulation models or
developed new ones. HMG reported validated savings for nine of the 15 sites. The resulting
electrc savings are 0.23 aMW with 19,589 therms in gas savings, as shown in Table 14. More
detail on the specific energy savings can be found in Table 28 in Appendix D:.
Table 14. Pre-2008 Validated Savings for Design and Construction Projects
Total Realized Electric Total Realized Gas
Project 10 Savings (aMW)Savings (therms)
HMG-WA-01 0.02 4,203
HMG-OR-01 0.07 (8,698)
HMG-OR-02 0.01 6,224
HMG-ID-01 0.001 0
HMG-WA-02 0.08 5,116
HMG-ID-02 0.04 12,082
HMG-ID-03 0.004 (414)
HMG-ID-04 0.001 0
HMG-ID-05 0.00 1,076
Total:0.23 19,589
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear different from the sum of components
Pending Energy Savings
Pending energy savings are those quantified by the implementation team, which could not be
validated. These savings involved primarily Hospitals and Design and Constrction projects,
resulting in 0.26 aMW of electrc savings and 15,202 therms of gas savings.
Cadmus noted areas in which further analysis could potentially improve the accuracy of energy
savings on projects previously evaluated by HMG. These include projects for Building
Operations and Grocery refrigeration tue-ups. The additional information and analysis
necessary to perform additional evaluation of these projects was outside the scope ofthis study.
Cadmus categorized these HMG results as "pending" until further evaluation can be performed.
MUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 23
The pending electric savings from HMG projects is equivalent to 0.28 aMW, with gas savings of
82,186 therms.
Cadmus Design and Construction
Pending energy savings for the Cadmus Design and Constrction accounting resulted in electrc
savings of 0.11 aMW and 7,043 therms in gas savings. The energy savings data is detailed in
Table 15 for these 7 projects. More detail on the specific energy savings can be found in Table
28 in Appendix D:.
Table 15. Pending Energy Savings for Design and Construction Projects
Project 10 Source of Savings Total Projected Electric Total Projected Gas
Savinas (aMWl Savinas (therms)
10-05 Model 0.03 18
10-06 Model 0.001 0
MT-01 Liahtina Calculations 0.04 0
MT-02 Fenestration Model ..0.001 40
OR.13 Model 0.01 3,659
WA-12 Model 0.03 3,326
WA-13 Liahtina Calculations 0.002 0
Total:0.11 7,043
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear diferent from the sum of components
Four projects involved new constrction and have only recently been occupied. These buildings
are stil in the process of commissioning systems and installng significant measures. Cadmus
applied the LEED realization rate derived in the Energy Savings Accounting Methodology
section to these LEED-registered projects, which Cadmus expect to achieve certification.
Two buildings possessed lighting calculations for installed projects. However, Cadmus could not
get confirmation of installation details from either the facilities manager at MT -01 or the
architect for W A -13. The calculations for MT -01 were performed through the local electrc
utility, and included suffcient detail for fixtues and operating hours that a realization rate was
deemed unecessary. The calculations for W A - i 3 only included design EUI information, not
final installation details. Due to the uncertinty regarding final installation, Cadmus applied a
realization rate equal to the 63% LEED realization rate.
Cadmus Building Operations
Hospital
Two hospitals reported energy savings for implemented measures that could not be validated by
Cadmus. The savings resulted from installation ofECM capital projects and HVAC tune-ups, as
shown in Table 16. Facility or installation contractors reported savings to the relevant Market
Specialist, but Cadmus could not obtain calculations or suffcient data to validate those savings.
These pending savings are 0.15 aMW in electrc savings and 8,159 therms. More detail on the
specific energy savings can be found in Table 30 in Appendix D:.
CADMUS SetterSricks Energy Savings Evaluation 24
TktE
;;iaJ(:'
Table 16. Pending Energy Savings for Hospitals
Project 10 Source of Savings Total Projected Electric Total Projected Gas
Savings (aMW)Savings (thermsl
10-07 Capital Proiects (ECMs)0.09 0
WA-15 Capitals Projects (ECMs) /
Tune-Ups 0.07 8,159
Total:0.15 8,159
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear different from the sum of components
Real Estate
No completed projects were available for evaluation under this category.
Grocery Stores
No completed projects were available for evaluation under this category.
HMG Pending Savings
HMG submitted four memos to NEEA in December 2008 that detailed preliminary evaluation
results for Design and Construction, Building Operations, Grocery Stores, and Kilowatt
Crackdown. NEEA provided the memos to Cadmus so results could be incorporated into the
BetterBricks energy savings accounting. Cadmus reviewed HMG's methodology for each
program and analyzed the resulting data. The savings from the Kilowatt Crackdown are included
under the Validated Building Operations category of this study. HMG's evaluation of Design and
Construction savings is included under the "Savings Validated by HMG" section. Cadmus noted
areas in which fuher analysis could potentially improve the accuracy of energy savings on
Building Operations and Grocery refrigeration tune-up projects previously evaluated by HMG.
The additional information and analysis necessary to pedorm additional evaluation of these
projects was outside the scope of this study.
Building Operations
Real Estate and Hospitals
HMG attempted to pedorm biling analyses on eleven Building Operations projects in the Real
Estate and Hospitals verticaL. HMG reported savings on seven projects. This method of
evaluation has limitations, particularly when measure installation occurs at the same time as
substantial changes in building size or use. Energy savings less than 10% of total building load
are often diffcult to discern from the normal ebb and flow of energy use. This is particularly tre
with hospitals, and HMG reported that all four hospital Building Operations projects could not
be analyzed because no quantifiable improvement was observed in biling data or insuffcient
information was available.
Of the projects analyzed by HMG, Cadmus had conducted a site visit at one hospital project,
WA-15. That project was therefore excluded from this accounting to prevent double counting,
particularly since HMG noted they were unable to complete their analysis on this project. The
resulting savings for the remaining projects which HMG could evaluate are 0.21 aMW in electric
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 25
savings and 82,186 therms, as shown in Table 17. More detail on the specific energy savings can
be found in Table 31 in Appendix D:. Cadmus recommends that NEEA provide funding to
examine these projects in further detail to obtain additional information and complete analyses
where necessary.
Table 17. HMG Pending Savings for Building Operations Projects
Project 10 Total Realized Electric Total Realized Gas
Savings (aMW)Savings (therms)
HMG-OR-03 0 96,294
HMG-OR-04 0.05 (17,300)
HMG-WA-03 0.02 (1,102)
HMG-WA-04 0.02 0
HMG-WA-05 0.01 4,294
HMG-WA-07 0.11 0
Total:0.21 82,186
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear diferent from the sum of components
Grocery Stores
HMG performed billng analyses on four refrgeration tue-up projects in the Grocery Store
vertical market. This analysis possesses the same limitations outlined above for Building
Operations. In addition, the projects varied in the amount of post-installation biling data
available, including three months for two projects, seven months for another, and more than one
year for a fourth project. At least one year of post-installation data is recommended for a higher
degree of accuracy. In mid-2008, HMG sought to offset concerns about the length of monitoring
by developing a weather-normalized correction to the data based on projected statewide
differences in heating degree days. However, a review of full 2008 weather data for the
installation region indicated no correction was actually necessary. The electrc savings are 0.07
aMW, as shown in Table 18. More detail on the energy savings can be found in Table 32 in
Appendix D:. Cadmus recommends that NEEA provide fuding to examine these projects in
further detail to obtain additional billng information and refine analyses where necessary.
Table 18. HMG Pending Savings for Grocery Stores
Total Realized Electric
Project 10 Savings (aMW)
HMG-OR-04 0.04
HMG-OR-05 0.01
HMG-OR-06 0.01
HMG-WA-06 0.01
Total:0.07
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear diferent from the sum of components
Committed Energy Savings
Committed energy savings involve projects to be implemented within the near future, usually in
the next two years. These projects are either in the constrction or final design process, or have a
SetterSricks Energy Savings Evaluation 26
defined budget allocation. Cadmus found 17 Design and Constrction and Hospital projects with
committed energy savings, which should result in electrc savings of 0.99 aMW and gas savings
of 224,890 therms.
Design and Construction
Committed energy savings for Design and Construction generally involved projects under
constrction with available projected savings data, as shown in Table 19. Resulting electrc
savings are estimated to be 0.58 aMW with 149,660 therms in gas savings, estimated generally
by applying a realization rate. More detail on the specific energy savings can be found in Table
33 in Appendix D:
Projects with committed savings were evaluated similarly to those described in previous
subsections, particularly buildings evaluated using building energy model data. Cadmus also
analyzed several incomplete projects that employ lighting calculations developed by the
University of Oregon ESBL. Most of these projects are not expected to achieve their full
projected savings, as outlined in the Energy Savings Accounting Methodology section.
Therefore, Cadmus applied the 63% realization rate derived in the Validated Savings subsection
to all the projects, except two from Montana. Those two projects possessed comprehensive data
and were further along in progress; Cadmus determined full savings were likely to be achieved.
Table 19. Committed Energy Savings for Design and Construction Projects
Total Projected Electric Total Projected Gas
ProiectlD Source of Savinas Savings (aMW)Savings (therms)
MT-03 Model 0.001 329
MT-04 LiQhting calculations 0.01 0
OR-14 Lighting calculations 0.01 6,116
OR-15 LiQhtinQ calculátions 0.01 2,635
OR-16 Model 0.001 4,113
OR-17 Model 0.04 19,278
OR-18 LiohtinQ calculations 0.01 5,821
WA-14 Model 0.03 3,682
WA-16 Model 0.04 17,380
WA-17 Model 0.03 13,597
WA-18 Model 0.02 2,268
WA-19 Model 0.21 26,847
WA-20 Model 0.01 1,005
WA-21 Model 0.08 36,383
WA-22 Model 0.08 10,206
Total:0.58 149,660
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear different from the sum of components
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 27
TiiE
CADMUS
INf':
Building Operations
Hospital
For Hospitals, two facilities had energy savings for budgeted projects. Savings wil result from
installation ofECM capital projects and HVAC commissioning, as shown in Table 20. More
detail on the specific energy savings can be found in Table 34 in Appendix D:. Cadmus reviewed
the savings estimates, which appear reasonable. The committed projects should result in electric
savings of 0.41 aMW and gas savings of 75,230 therms. Cadmus lacked sufficient data to
determine whether it would be appropriate to apply a realization rate to these committed
estimates or what that rate would be. Cadmus chose not to apply a realization rate at this time.
Table 20. Committed Energy Savings for Hospitals
Total Projected Electric Total Projected Gas
Proiect 10 Source of Savinas Savinas (aMW)Savinas (thermsl
WA-15 East Tower CommissioninQ 0.35 0
OR-12 Capital Proiects (ECMs)0.06 75,230
Total:0.41 75,230
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear diferent frm the sum of components
Real Estate
No completed projects were available for evaluation under this category.
Grocery Stores
No completed projects were available for evaluation under this category.
Planned Energy Savings
Planned energy savings involve projects expected to be implemented over a longer time frame,
typically more than two years. These projects usually have a defined plan associated with them,
often a final design or measure implementation strategy, but no specific budget allocation. The
Design and Constrction cross-cutting market had projects with sufficient data to evaluate for
planned energy savings, as well as the Hospital and Real Estate vertical markets. Planed
electric savings are expected to total 4.75 aMW with gas savings of 1,697,623 therms.
Design and Construction
The Design and Construction sample base for evaluation included several projects early in their
conceptual design phases, as shown in Table 21, which were evaluated under the Planned
category. More detail on the specific energy savings can be found in Table 35 in Appendix D:.
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 28
TlfF
CADMUS
Cadmus does not expect that most of these projects wil achieve their full projected savings, as
outlined in the Energy Savings Accounting Methodology section. Therefore, Cadmus applied the
63% realization rate derived in the Validated Savings subsection to all the projects. These
projects should result in annual electric savings of 0.47 aMW and gas savings of212,727 therms.
Table 21. Planned Energy Savings for Design and Construction Projects
Total Projected Electric Total Projected Gas
Proiect 10 Source of Savings Savinas (aMW)Savings (therms)
ID-08 Model 0.33 147,042
WA-23 Lighting Calculations 0.003 1,425
WA-24 Model 0.14 64,260
Total:0.47 212,727
Note. Due to rounding, total values may appear different from the sum of components
Building Operations
Hospital
For Hospital projects, Cadmus identified 13 existing facilities with significant potential energy
savings through scoping reports. The savings wil result from installation of ECM capital
projects, HVAC commissioning or retro-commissioning, and operations and maintenance
improvements, and are shown in Table 22. More detail on the specific energy savings can be
found in Table 36 in Appendix D:. Cadmus reviewed the savings estimates in various scoping
reports and studies and concluded the projects to have a reasonable payback. Projects resulting
from Hospitals could result in electric savings equal to 4.16 aMW and gas savings of 1,472,771
therms.
Cadmus lacked sufficient data to determine whether it would be appropriate to apply a
realization rate to these committed estimates or what that rate would be. Because of this, Cadmus
chose not to apply a realization rate at this time. Additionally, much of the proposed savings may
involve measures or processes that impact the same end use. The resulting measure interaction
wil further reduce potential savings. For example, a new boiler can be specified that would
produce a certain percentage of energy savings to the hospital's hot water end use. Additional
measures, such as pipe insulation, might also have savings estimates, but the final energy savings
wil not be additive among all measures applied to each end use. In the future, it might be
possible to further analyze the projected savings reports for each hospital and provide a rough
estimate of reduced savings due to measure interaction, but that falls outside the scope of this
evaluation.
Table 22. Planned Energy Savings for Hospitals
Project 10 Source of Savings Total Projected Electric Total Projected Gas
Savings (aMW)Savings (therms)
MT-05 Capital Projects (ECMs)0.30 191,250
O&M/Tune-up 0.20 127,500
Capital Projects (ECMs)0.13 38,150
MT-06 O&M/Tune-up 0.07 21,800
Retro-Commissionina 0.40 103,100
CADMUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 29
OR-10 O&MlTune-Up 0.14 24,800
Retro-Commissionina 0.21 37,200
Capital Projects (ECMs)0.21 96,306
OR-19 O&MlTune-Up 0.19 34,720
Retro-Commissioninii 0.20 90,642
OR-12 Capital Projects ECMs 0.03 0
OR-11 Capital Projects ECMs 0.01 0
OR-09 Capital Projects ECMs 0.03 0
WA-15 Capital Projects ECMs 0.03 (398)
Capital Projects ECMs 0.57 241,900
10-09 Commissioning /
Retro-Commissionina 0.21 180,500
10-04 Lighting 0.06 (7,167)
O&M / Retro-Commissioninii 0.16 140,347
WA-27 O&MlTune-up 0.77 65,029
WA-26 O&MlTune-up 0.18 10,344
WA-25 O&MlTune-up 0.04 76,748
Total:4.16 1,472,771
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear diferent from the sum of components
Real Estate
F or the Real Estate market, Cadmus identified five buildings with potential energy savings
through Building Operations scoping reports. Savings wil result from HV AC commissioning or
retro-commissioning, as well as operations and maintenance improvements. Energy-saving
projections are shown in Table 23. More detail on the specific energy savings can be found in
Table 37 in Appendix D:. Cadmus reviewed the savings estimates in the various scoping reports
and studies, which appeared to have appropriate payback periods. The planned projects should
result in electric savings of 0.12 aMW with 12,125 therms in gas savings.
Table 23. Planned Energy Savings for Real Estate Projects
Project 10 Source of Savings Total Projected Electric Total Projected Gas
Savinas laMWl Savings (therms)
10-10 O&M / Tune-up 0.01 375
10-11 O&M / Tune-uD 0.01 0
WA-28 O&M / Tune-up 0.02 11,750
WA-29 O&M / Tune-uD 0.01 0
WA-30 O&M / Tune-up 0.07 0
Total:0.12 12,125
Note: Due to rounding, total values may appear diferent from the sum of components
Grocery Stores
Cadmus could not account for planned energy savings for any grocery store projects under the
Building Operations cross cutting market because no buildings with planned savings were
evaluated under this category.
CADMUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 30
'rLrE~"
4. Conclusions and Recommendations
Based on the available data, Cadmus was able to validate 1.85 aMW in electrc savings and
574,041 therms associated with NEEA's Better Bricks initiative as of December 2008. HMG
validated 0.23 aMW in electrc savings and 19,589 therms in gas savings prior to 2008. Another
0.55 aMW in electric savings and 97,388 therms in gas savings are expected based on
documentation for which validation is pending. End users, particularly hospitals, have goals and
projects in development expected to achieve an additional 5.74 aMW in electrc savings and
1,922,513 therms in gas savings.
Data Collection and Quality
Cadmus found that only a small portion of projects in the CTS database included energy savings
and measure data. Types of data that were frequently missing from CTS include measure
information, baseline and design EUls, square footage information, scoping reports, contact
information, and sometimes entire projects. As a result, Cadmus was only able to evaluate a
limited number of projects associated with BetterBricks activites. The savings cited in this study
likely represent a small fraction of the total savings that could be linked to the BetterBricks
initiative.
Recommendations for Future Study
Cadmus found several areas requiring additional study that could strengthen the BetterBricks
program and reporting of savings. These include:
· Development of a realization rate for Hospitals: Hospitals represent a large portion of
projected BetterBricks energy savings. Most of these projected savings rely on
implementation of recommendations from scoping reports. Cadmus notes that those
recommendations either may not be implemented or partially implemented, and therefore
the full projected savings may not be achieved. BetterBricks may want to determine a
realization rate based on the energy savings implemented compared to the amount
projected in scoping reports.
· Creation of a methodology to determine savings for Hospitals resulting from
changes in purchasing decisions: Cadmus noted that there was no methodology
available to adequately capture savings based on future purchasing decisions, such as a
policy to only purchase Energy Star equipment. These savings could substantially impact
the Buildings Operations savings rate in the future.
· Improving the realization rate for LEED Projects: Cadmus estimated a realization rate
for LEED and new constrction projects based on two post-occupancy evaluations
(POE), which indicated that 63% of the projected savings were achieved. The availability
of publicly-available POE data is very limited, but obtaining further data would improve
the confidence of realization rates calculated for LEED projects. Currently LEED for
CADMUS SetterSricks Energy Savings Evaluation 31
THH"-~~~'
New Constrction relies on modeling data to estimate energy savings, and no publicly-
available studies have been undertaken to evaluate the actual realization rate of a large
number of projects. Appendix E: provides more information on related studies of new
constrction project savings.
· Post-Occupancy Evaluations: POE data are a valuable tool for building owners to
continuously improve system operation. For example, the project identified as OR-08
received a LEED rating based on 26% modeled savings over code and was projected to
have an EPA Portfolio Manager score greater than 75. The building owner commissioned
a POE which indicated actual savings only 3% above code and a Portfolio Manager score
of25. The POE data provided suffcient feedback on building system issues that the
owner was able to improve operations and increase the Portfolio Manager score to 39, as
of November 2008. The owner's representative projected continued improvement in the
future.
· Secondary Market Effects: BetterBricks support wil most likely result in secondary
market effects as practitioners become more educated regarding potential energy
effciency improvements. These practitioners include architects, engineers, contractors,
consultants, building owners, and facilities managers who may choose to implement
similar measures in the futue, even without direct support from BetterBricks. A number
of high-profie BetterBricks projects also serve as learning tools for a wider pool of
stakeholders who do not engage in direct contact with BetterBricks. Efforts could be
made in the future to quantify these secondary market effects.
· Attribution: Due to time and budget considerations, Cadmus did not engage in the
complex process of determining proper attbution of energy savings, particularly in
Design and Construction projects. The design and constrction process involves
architects, engineers, consultants, and contrctors who could potentially provide elements
of their previous energy effciency design experience. Therefore, it's possible that
BetterBricks support is not directly responsible for all energy savings in these projects,
although the secondary market effects cited previously could impact decision-making.
Building owners and facilities managers for projects in the Building Operations markets
may also have previous experience with energy efficiency measures that they would
choose to install even without BetterBricks support.
Recommendations for the Current Program
Cadmus offers the following recommendations:
1. Improve data quality: Two items were observed in need of additional attention to detail
by NEEA staff and contrctors: detailed completion of data collection requirements as
outlined in the CTS database, and consistent follow up to record project implementation
and as~built details.
2. Develop refined methodology for capturing Hospitals savings: As Hospitals savings
account for much of BetterBricks savings, Cadmus recommends refining the
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 32
methodology for determining these savings. Specifically, estimating a realization rate
would increase the accuracy of planned and committed savings estimates, as would
developing a method for integrating changes in purchasing decisions of energy
consuming products.
3. Collect additional data in order to improve accuracy of the LEED realization rate:
The current realization rate is based on two data points from post occupancy evaluations.
Accuracy could be improved by collecting additional data on LEED buildings through
future post occupancy evaluations.
4. Improve support of Post-Occupancy Evaluations: BetterBricks is well positioned to
assist building owners with POEs, ensuring expected savings are realized.
5. Complete evaluation of results reported by HMG: Cadmus noted areas in which
further analysis could potentially improve the accuracy of energy savings on Building
Operations and Grocery refrigeration tune-up projects previously evaluated by HMG. A
comprehensive follow-up review to obtain additional information and validate the
pending savings is recommended.
CADMUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 33
Tl:I.E~~~
C~H.(JC1.F_ F0lC;
Appendix A: Design and Construction Sampling
and Evaluation Methodology
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 35
Appendix B: BetterBricks Staff Design and
Construction Project Selection Methodology
There are now over 400 projects in the CTS database. In an effort to keep the level of work of
the labs to a manageable level, the number of projects selected for detailed data gathering had to
be limited. The process to select a set of projects followed the outlined sequence below and used
the criteria identified:
1. Assembled preliminary lists for each lab from the CTS database
2. Requested labs to review and add any missing or correct key identifying data
3. Requested each lab to highlight the top 10-15 projects in terms of highest savings potential
Rationale and Criteria for Selecting Projects for Savings Analysis
Message to the Labs early October:
"We need the project savings data for several reasons:
1) to generate some data on energy savings for a manageable set of projects (instead of
all your projects).
2) to help determine what the highest level of energy effciency we can deliver is.
Criteria for selection, in priority order, are:
1. Projects that utilize the most comprehensive integrated design
(i.e., the full wheel and addresses both lighting and mechanical systems).
2. Have the highest savings potential (known actual or estimated).
3. Projects in target markets.
4. Have a lot of data available or data are easily obtainable.
5. High profie (project has gotten, or wil get, a lot of publicity)." - i.e. good
documentation.
F or the selected subset:
4. Determine key data to collect for each project
5. Assemble data from CTS on top projects
6. Return to labs to fill in missing data
7. Add or subtract projects based on new information:
- limited lab involvement
-limited measures (one small measure or small area)
- limited or no data on savings
- difficult to obtain data (unwiling architect or owner)
CADMUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 36
'T'~IF:
--(~HIJ\JI~,
8. Suggest to Cadmus to move projects to definite or to estimation group
- to estimation if not complete yet
- to definite if complete.
Note: In addition to these steps, Cadmus has its own method of project selection or removal- see
project decision tree.
CADMUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 37
ern,it.IT'. IJ%YC:~
Appendix C:Realization Rate Development
Cadmus calculated energy savings for the majority of validated Design and Constrction projects
(17 out of2l) by applying a realization rate, as discussed in the previous chapter. This realization
rate was also applied to a variety of new constrction projects, whether pending, committed, or
planned. The projects that formed the basis of this realization rate are described below:
· In the case ofOR-07, the initial LEED design model indicated savings of 49% above
code. A recently-completed POE for this building indicated ongoing work to bring the
heat recovery system up from 1/3 of its projected potentiaL. The POE provided two
estimates for system performance, based on no and full heat recovery, as indicated in
Table 24 below. Cadmus conservatively assumes the repair work wil be at least parially
successful and achieve 50% of full heat recovery. Therefore, the evaluation team applied
gas energy savings halfway between the two values proposed in the POE. The resulting
energy savings equal 34,417 MBtu, 79% of the 43,463 MBtu savings originally predicted
and 38% above code.
· For OR-08, the POE indicated a 3% savings above Oregon energy code, but only 9.7% of
the value predicted by the LEED modeling. An examination of reasons behind the low
realization rate was outside the scope of this evaluation.
· In the case ofWA-07, the POE revealed a 17% savings with respect to Seattle.energy
code and only 57% of the savings predicted by the LEED modeling.
· POE data were also available for W A-II, which did not receive support from the
Integrated Design Lab and therefore no program energy savings were associated with this
project. W A-II is a LEED-certified building with a POE performed contemporaneously
with WA-07, by the same firm. It is included to provide an additional data point upon
which to base a realization rate.
Table 24.Ener2Y Savin!! s for OR-07 BuildiOl! imulation ermutations
Total Total
Gas Electric Energy Energy Percent of
Usage Usage Usage Savings Energy
Model (therms)(kWh)(MBtu)(Mbtu)Saved
Calibrated LEED
Baseline 491,614 11,845,774 89,591 --
Calibrated Design with
no Heat Recovery 416,023 5,623,104 60,794 28,797 32%
Calibrated Design with
Full Heat Recovery 303,615 5,623,104 49,553 40,038 45%
Calibrated Design with
50% Full Heat
Recoverv 359,819 5,623,104 55,174 34,417 38%
S p
8etter8ricks Energy Savings Evaluation 39 4
THf:
CADMUS
fNt';,"
Appendix D:Detailed Savings Tables
Table 25. Detail for Validated Savings for Design and Construction Projects
Square Electric Gas Energy Total Realized
Project 10 Source of Savings Savings Savings Savings Energy SavingsFootage(kWh)(therms)(MBTU)6 (MBTU)7
ID-01 LEED (35%)11,000 12,820 960 140
ID-02 LEED (45%)174,000 619,290 8,866 3,000
ID-03 Site Visit / Model 240,000 559 3,450 347
OR-01 LEED (40%)212,888 825,276 12,071 6,387 4,024
OR-02 LEED (39%)265,000 352,195 18,031 4,770 3,005
OR-03 LEED (30%)41,000 119,263 1,744 923 581
OR-04 LEED (30%)97,000 200,537 10,266 2,716 1,711
OR-05 LEED (45%)153,000 1,112,477 56,953 15,067 9,492
OR-06 LEED (28%)120,000 279,098 4,082 2,160 1,361
OR-07 LEED (61%)400,000 5,623,104 359,819 55,174
OR-08 Secondary 183,000 150,132 7,686 1,281 1,281Evaluation
WA-01 LEED (26%)185,269 363,861 5,322 2,816 1,774
WA-02 LEED (42%)9,453 26,876 1,376 364 229
WA-03 LEED (45%)1,700 4,910 72 38 24
WA-04 LEED (38%)60,000 106,323 5,443 1,440 907
WA-05 LEED (18%)125,000 218,110 3,190 1,688 1,063
WA-06 LEED (10%)360,000 297,704 4,355 2,304 1,452
WA-07 Secondary 198,000 1,013,000 (8.400)2,617Evaluation
WA-08 LEED (27%)170,000 182,004 9,318 2,465 1,553
WA-09 LEED (36%)10,000 40,056 586 310 195
WA-10 LEED (43%)50,000 348,872 5.,103 2,700 1,701
Total:3,066,310 11,896,466 510,293 47,428 91,632
6 This energy savings column tyically refers to differences in End Use Intensity (EUI) between the design and
baseline building energy models, usually presented in kBtu/ft2. These energy savings were not differentiated
between electric and gas savings.
7 This column contains the sumation of the previous thee colums for electrc, gas, and undifferentiated energy
savings, multiplied by the applicable realization rate.
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 40
Table 26. Detail for Validated Savings for Hospitals
Electric Gas Total Realized
Project 10 Source of Savings Savings Savings Energy Savings
(kWh)(therms)(MBTU)
OR-09 Capital Projects (ECMs)642,000 25,150 4,706
OR-10 Capital Projects (ECMs)403,416 5,525 1,929
OR-11 Capital Projects (ECMs)143,676 490
OR-12 Capital Projects (ECMs)400,295 16,455 3,012
ID-07 Capital Projects (ECMs)1,413,000 4,823I Retro-Commissioning
Total:3,002,387 47,130 14,960
Table 27. Detail for Validated Savings for HVAC Service Assistant Projects
Project 10 Contractor Realized Electric Realized Energy Potential Remaining
Savings (kWh)Savings (MBTU)Electric Savings (kWh)
FDSI-01 Contractor 1 38,574 132 22,601
FDSI-02 Contractor 1 21,270 73 16,814
Miscellaneous Contractor 1 410 1 21,402
FDSI-03 Contractor 1 21,632 74 39,949
FDSI-04 Contractor 2 6,270 21 21,939
FDS1-05 Contractor 2 1,705 6 31,862
Miscellaneous Contractor 2 1,920 7 123,809
FDSI-06 Contractor 2 5,045 17 36,128
FDSI-01 Contractor 3 53,563 183 84,793
Total:150,389 513 399,296
Table 28. Detail for Pre-2008 Validated Design and
Construction Projects
Electric Gas Total Realized
Project 10 Savings Savings Energy Savings
(kWh)(therms)(MBTU)
HMG-WA-01 191,208 4,203 1,073
HMG-OR-01 609,980 IQ gain 1,212
HMG-OR-02 100,170 6,224 964
HMG-ID-01 5,260 18
HMG-WA-02 696,700 5,116 2,889
HMG-ID-02 345,420 12,082 2,387
HMG-ID-03 32,780 (414)70
HMG-ID-04 6220 21
HMG-ID-05 21,410 1,076 181
Total:1,948,738 18,927 8,816
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 41
Table 29. Detail for Pending Savings for Design and Construction Projects
Projected Projected Projected Total Projected
Project 10 Source of Square Electric Gas Energy Energy
Savings Footage Savings Savings Savings Savings
(kWh-)(therms)(MBTU)(MBTÙ)
10-05 Model 56,689 284,048 18 971
10-06 Model 20,000 7,413 25
MT-01 Lighting
Calculations 324,317 1107
MT-02 Fenestration 28,320Model 2,570 40 13
OR-13 Model 80,000 71,473 3,659 968 610
WA-12 Model 40,000 227413 3,326 1,760 1109
WA-13 Lighting 15,213Calculations 14952 81 51
Total:240,222 932,186 7,043 2,809 3,886
Table 30. Detail for Pending Savings for Hospitals
Projected Projected Projected Total
Projected
Project 10 Source of Savings Electric Gas Energy EnergySavingsSavingsSavingsSavings(kWh)(therms)(MBTU)(MBTU)
10-07 Capital Proiects (ECMs)744,600 2,541
WA-15 Capitals Projects 609,762 8,159 2,897(ECMs) I Tune-Ups
Total:1,354,362 8,159 5,438
Table 31. Detail for HMG Pending Savings for Building Operations Projects
Electric Gas Total Realized
Project 10 Savings Savings Energy Savings
(kWh)(therms)(MBTU)
HMG-OR-03 96,294 9,629
HMG-OR-04 430,000 (17,300)-262
HMG-WA-03 179,150 (1,102)501
HMG-WA-04 214,750 733
HMG-WA-05 66,292 4,294 656
HMG-WA-07 979,059 3,342
Total:1,869,251 82,186 14,598
SetterSricks Energy Savings Evaluation 42
Table 32. Detail for HMG Pending Savings for Grocery Store Projects
Electric Total Realized
Project 10 Savings Energy Savings
(kWh)(MBTU)
HMG-OR-04 366,700 1,252
HMG-OR-05 58,500 200
HMG-OR-06 84,700 289
HMG-WA-06 101,050 345
Total:610,950 2,085
Table 33. Detail for Committed Savings for Design and Construction Projects
Projected Projected Projected Total Projected
Project 10 Source of Square Electric Gas Energy Energy SavingsSavingsFootageSavingsSavingsSavings(MBTU)(kWh)(therms)(MBTU)
MT-03 Model 28,320 9,250 329 64
MT-04 Lighting 75,000 64,145 0 219calculations
OR-14 Lighting 200,000 119,466 6,116 1,618 1,019calculations
OR-15 Lighting 57,000 51,463 2,635 697 439calculations
OR-16 Model 158,500 5,606 4,113 429
OR-17 Model 255,000 376,560 19,278 5,100 3,213
OR-18 Lighting 338,000 113,706 5,821 1,540 970calculations
WA-14 Model 47,500 251,705 3,682 1,948 1,227
WA-16 Model 65,868 339,495 17,380 4,598 2,897
WA-17 Model 109,000 265,586 13,597 3,597 2,266
WA-18 Model 40,000 155,054 2,268 1,200 756
WA-19 Model 947,000 1,835,454 26,847 14,205 8,949
WA-20 Model 76,000 68,741 1,005 532 335
WA-21 Model 175,000 710,665 36,383 9,625 6,064
WA-22 Model 270,000 697,744 10,206 5,400 3,402
Total:2,842,188 5,064,640 149,660 50,060 32,250
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 43
Table 34. Detail for Committed Savings for Hospitals
Projected Projected Total Projected
Project 10 Source of Savings Electric Gas Savings Energy Savings
Savinas (kWh)(therms)(MBTUl
WA-15 East Tower Commissionina 521,225 75,230 9,302
OR-12 Capital Projects (ECMsl 3,066,386 10,466
Total:3,587,611 75,230 19,768
Table 35. Detail for Planned Savings for Design and Construction Projects
Projected Projected Projected Total
Projected
Project 10 Source of Square Electric Gas Energy EnergySavingsFootageSavingsSavingsSavingsSavings(kWh)(therms)(MBTU)(MBTÙ)
10-08 Model 500,000 2,872,195 147,042 38,900 24,507
WA-23 Lighting 66,780 27,836 377 238Calculations1,425
WA-24 Model 200,000 1,255,201 64,260 17,000 10,710
Total:766,780 4,155,231 212,727 56,277 35,455
Table 36. Detail for Planned Savings for Hospitals
Projected Projected Projected Total Projected
Project 10 Source of Savings Electric Gas Energy Energy
Savings Savings Savings Savings
IkWh-)(therms)(MBTU)(MBTÙl
MT-05 Capital Projects (ECMs)2,636,250 191,250 28,123
O&MlTune-up 1,757,500 127,500 18,748
Capital Projects (ECMs)1,130,500 38,150 7,673
MT-06 O&M/Tune-up 646,000 21,800 4,385
Retro.Commissioning 3,465,000 103,100 22,136
OR-10 O&MlTune-Up 1,213,000 24,800 6,620
Retro-Commissioning 1,819,500 37,200 9,930
Capital Projects (ECMs)1,881,160 96,306 16,051 16,051
OR-19 O&MlTune-Up 1,698,200 34,720 9,268
Retro-Commissioning 1,770,524 90,642 15,107 15,107
OR-12 Capital Projects (ECMs)290,775 0 992
OR-11 Capital Projects (ECMs)127,378 0 435
OR-09 Capital Projects (ECMs)254,053 0 867
WA-15 Capital Projects (ECMs)240,150 (398)780
Capital Projects (ECMs)4,974,000 241,900 41,166
10-09 Commissioning / Retro-24,330Commissioning1,840,000 180,500
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 44
Projected Projected Projected Total Projected
Project 10 Source of Savings Electric Gas Energy Energy
Savings Savings Savings Savings
(kWh)(therms)(MBTU)(MBTU)
Lighting 504,315 (7,167)1,005
10-04 O&M I Retro-18,940Commissioning1,437,099 140,347
WA-27 O&MlTune-up 65,029 29,5166,742,714
WA-26 O&MlTune-up 10,344 6,5321,610,707
WA-25 O&MlTune-up 8,963377,333 76,748
Total:36,416,159 1,472,771 31,158 271,565
Table 37. Detail for Planned Savings for Real Estate Projects
Projected Projected Total Projected
Project 10 Source of Savings Electric Gas Savings Energy Savings
Savings (kWh)(therms)(MBTU)
10-10 O&M I Tune-up 76,000 375 297
10-11 O&M I Tune-up 45,000 154
WA-28 O&M I Tune-up 215,000 11,750 1,909
WA-29 O&M I Tune-up 61,403 210
WA-30 O&M I Tune-up 626,984 2,140
Total:1,024,387 12,125 4,709
CADMUS BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 45
71TH
Appendix E:Additional New Construction Studies
As noted previously, Cadmus experienced diffculty determining a reliable realization rate for
energy savings associated with LEED-certified new constrction projects. Cadmus could only
acquire four POEs performed to our standards of accuracy. The Cadmus procedure follows
impact evaluation standard practice to determine the realization rate, which is a ratio of actual
savings determined by the evaluation contrctor to initial savings projected by the design modeL.
Cadmus recommends the following process to develop the realization rate for an occupied new
constrction building:
· Obtain the original energy effcient design model and one year of post-occupancy utilty
bils.
· Modify the model to reflect as-built design and operating characteristics.
· Calibrate the as-built model to the POE biled energy use by adjusting plug loads and
other variables as appropriate.
· Develop an adjusted baseline model by replacing data values used for the installed energy
effcient measures with associated data values from the appropriate state energy code or
standard practice equivalent, as applicable.
· Determine actual energy savings as the difference between the adjusted baseline model
energy use and actual energy use.
· Calculate the realization rate by dividing the actual energy savings by the savings as
claimed through a utilty program or as projected by the design team.
A.number of studies and evaluations have examined savings associated with LEED new
constrction projects. However, several of those studies determine savings by comparing actual
energy use from biling data with the original model built to code. One study author provided a
cautionary note that claims "the comparisons in this report between actual energy usage and
initial baseline modeling give only a very approximate initial estimate of energy efficiency
savings8." As a result, Cadmus did not consider these study results for use in determining a
realization rate to validate or estimate savings in this study.
Studies that provide approximate estimates cited above include:
· "Energy Performance ofLEEDiI for New Constrction Buildings," by Cathy Turer and
Mark Frankel, New Buildings Institute, March 4, 20089
8 "LEED Building Performance in the Cascadia Region: A Post Occupancy Evaluation Report" by Cathy Turner for
the Cascadia Region Green Building Council, Januar 30, 2006.9 oCww.newbuildings.org/downloadsÆnergy_Performance_oC LEED-NC _ Buildings-Final_ 3-4-08b.pdf:
BetterBricks Energy Savings Evaluation 46
· "LEED Building Pedormance in the Cascadia Region: A Post Occupancy Evaluation
Report" by Cathy Turner for the Cascadia Region Green Building Council, January 30,
2006
· "Operating Experiences at the CK Choi and Liu Centre Buildings at the University of
British Columbia," by Blair McCarr and Rosamunde Hyde
Cadmus recommends NEEA provide funding to pedorm more extensive post-occupancy
evaluations, similar to those described in Section 3 of this study. The POEs wil produce
additional information on the performance of LEED-certified buildings, provide more accurate
realization rate data for predicting future building and program pedormance, and determine the
validity of approximations developed in the above studies.
'¡-d-i,rE-~~~~~.,~~_
CADMUS SetterSricks Energy Savings Evaluation 47
RIGHTSIZING
OF ROOFTOP HVAC SYSTEMS
Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Prepared By:
Djunaedy, E.
Van Den Wymelenberg, K.
Acker, B.
Thimmanna, H.
DESIGN LAB
b 0 í s e
COL.L.EGE()fART and ARCHITECTURE
&.
I-0:o0-
Wri..
c(o-zi:o
Wt-
31, December, 2009
Date
20090208-01
Report No.
Prepared By:
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise
108 N 6th S1. Boise 10 83704 USA
ww.uidaho.edu/idl
Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Director
Ery Djunaedy
Project Manager
1-Ery Djunaedy
2-Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
3-Brad Acker
4-Harshanna Thimanna
Authors
C09410-P03
Contract No.
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Bilie Jo McWinn
Project Manager
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by
Idaho Power Company. It does not necessarily represent the
views of Idaho Power Company or its employees. Idaho
Power Company, its employees, contractors and
subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and
assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor
does any party represent that the uses of this information wil
not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not
been approved or disapproved by Idaho Power Company nor
has Idaho Power Company passed upon the accuracy or
ade uacy of the information in this report.
Please cite this report as follows:
Djunaedy, E., Van Den Wymelenberg, K. Acker, B. Thimmana, H. 2009. Right Sizing of
Rooftop HVAC Systems, Task G - Advanced Energ Effciency Projects, Technical Report,
IDL-2009-012-G, Integrated Design Lab, University ofIdaho, Boise, ID.
This page left intentionally blank.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page üi
Table of contents
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1 .............. ..... ........................ ...... .... ...... ..........TABLE OF CONTENTS
......................................................................................................IV
CHAPTER 2 .... ... ....... .......... ... ..... ..... ... ....... ....... ..............EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
....................................................................................................VIII
CHAPTER 3 .......................... ...... ........................... ................ ..INTRODUCTION 1
........................ ......................................................................... ..... 1
BACKGROUND 1.1 .. ....... ..... ....... ........ ..................... ..... ....... ... ......... ... ........ 1
OBJECTIVES 1.2....................................................................................... 1
THE SCOPE AND LIMITATION 1.3.............................................................. 1
METHODOLOGY 1.4..................................................................................2
SURVEY AND INTERVIEW 1.4.1 .................... ........ ................... .... ...2
SURVEY 1.4.1.1 .......................................................... ..........................................2
INTERVIEW 1.4.1.2...............................................................................................3
MEASUREMENT 1.4.2.....................................................................3
SIMULATION 1.4.3..........................................................................3
THE BUILDINGS 1.4.4................. ............. ...... ......... .......................4
DELIVERABLES AND REPORT STRUCTURE 1.5.......................................5
CHAPTER 4 ............ ... ...RTU OVERSIZING AND PART-LoAD DEGRADATION: A
LITERATURE REVIEW2.................................................................7
INTRODUCTION2.1 .............. ....... ...................... .......... .... ... ....................... 7
RTU MARKET POTENTIAL2.2.................................................................. 7
PREVIOUS STUDIES ON RTUs2.3............................... ......... ...................7
How RTUs ARE SIZED2.4...... ........... ....... ......... ...... ...... .........................8
THE RULES OF THUMBS2.5.................................................................. 10
BASIC TERMINOLOGIES2.6...................................................................14
RUN-TIME FRACTION VERSUS CYCLING RATE 2.6.1 ..................14
PART-LOAD DEGRADATION2.6.2................................................ 16
How TO QUANTIFY OVER-SIZING2.7....................................................19
How TO QUANTIFY THE PENALTY ASSOCIATED TO OVERSIZING2.8. .22
CHAPTER 5 ........................................................ .SURVEYS AND INTERVIEWs3
...................................................................................................26
INTRODUCTION3.1 ... ......... ..... .......... .... .............. .......... .......... ...............26
THE RESPONDENTS3.2.........................................................................26
THE SURVEY3.3.....................................................................................26
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page iv
CHAPTER 6
THE SURVEY RESULT3.4.......................................................................28
THE INTERVIEws3.5.............................................................................29
LESSONS LEARNED: FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO OVERSIZING3.6..30
GENEROUS LEVEL OF INTERNAL LOAD3.6.1 ...........................30
SHADING IS NOT INCLUDED3.6.2..............................................31
SAFETY FACTOR3.6.3.................................................................31
COMMUNICATION WITH ARCHITECT OR OTHER DESIGNERS3.6.4
......................................................................................................31
.................................................THE SIGNATURE OF OVERSIZING4
...................................................................................................33
INTRODUCTION4.1 ...................... .... ............... .............. ....... ... ..... ..........33
THE MEASUREMENT4.2........................................................................33
M ETHODOLOGY4. 2. 1 .................................................................33
DATA ANALYSls4.2.2..................................................................34
THE MAXIMUM CYCLING RATE4.2.2.1 ..............................................................34
PART-LOAD RATIO (PLR) AND PART-LOAD FACTOR (PLF)4.2.2.2...............38
THE PENALTY OF OVERSIZING4.2.2.3.............................................................40
CHAPTER 7
ENERGY PENAL TV................................. ............ .....................40
PEAK DEMAND PENALTY............. ....... ..................... .... ..........43
MEASUREMENT RESULTS4.3................................................................46
THE CYCLING RATE AND RTF4.3.1............................................48
PART-LOAD RATI04.3.2..............................................................49
ENERGY PENALTY 4.3.3... .... ............ ..... .......... ......... ... ............ .... 50
PEAK DEMAND PENALTY4.3.4....................................................51
.................................................................................SIMULATION5
...................................................................................................52
INTRODUCTION5.1 ... ......... ........................... ...... ........ ......... ....... ...........52
SIMULATION SElTINGS5.2...................................................................52
BUILDING A5.2.1 .................... ... ................. ....... ...... ........... ........52
DESCRIPTION5.2.1.1 .......................................................................................52
CONSTRUCTION5.2.1.2..................................................................................53
INTERNAL GAINS5.2.1.3..................................................................................53
HVAC SYSTEM5.2.1.4.....................................................................................53
BUILDING B5.2.2........................................................................55
DESCRIPTION5.2.2.1 .......................................................................................55
CONSTRUCTION5.2.2.2...................................................... ......... ...................55
INTERNAL GAINS5.2.2.3.................................................................................55
HVAC SYSTEM5.2.2.4....................................................................................55
BUILDING C5.2.3........................ ................. ..... ....... ....... ....... .....55
DESCRIPTION5.2.3.1 .......................................................................................55
CONSTRUCTION5.2.3.2..................................................................................55
INTERNAL GAINS5.2.3.3..................................................................................55
HVAC SYSTEM5.2.3.4....................................................................................55
BUILDING 05.2.4........................................................................55
DESCRIPTION5.2.4.1 .......................................................................................55
CONSTRUCTION5.2.4.2....... .... ........... ............................................................55
INTERNAL GAINS5.2.4.3.................................................................................55
HVAC SYSTEM5.2.4.4....................................................................................55
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01) Page v
SIMULATION RESUL Ts5.3....... ... ....... ....... ... ..................... ... ....... ......... ..56
CALIBRATION5.3.1 .....................................................................56
BUILDING A5.3.1.1 ...........................................................................................56
HEADING LEVEL 25.4..... ........... ....... .......... ........................ ................. .56
HEADING LEVEL 35.4.1 .............................................................56
HEADING LEVEL 45.4.1.1 ................................................................................56
HEADING LEVEL 45.4.1.2.. .............................................................................56
ApPENDIX A............................................. ..................................................
SURVEY AND INTERVIEW RESULTA...............................................62
INTRODUCTIONA.l................................................................................62
SURVEY RESULTA.2..............................................................................62
INTERVIEW RESULTA.3.........................................................................64
ApPENDIX B..............................................................................................
MEASUREMENT RESUL TsB................................. .................... ... ....71
INTRODUCTIONB.l................................................................................71
THE OUTDOOR TEMPERATURE COMPARISONB.2................................71
MEASUREMENT RESUL TsB.3. ....... ...... ........ ............... .... ..... ................. 77
BUILDING AB.3.1........................................................................77
BUILDING AND RTU DESCRIPTION: BUILDING AB.3.1.1 ...............................77
MEASUREMENT RESULT: BUILDING AB.3.1.2.................................................77
DATA ANALYSIS: BUILDING AB.3.1.3...............................................................78
BUILDING BB.3.2........................................................................80
BUILDING AND RTU DESCRIPTION: BUILDING BB.3.2.1 ...;..........................80
MEASUREMENT RESULT: BUILDING BB.3.2.2................................................80
DATA ANALYSIS: BUILDING BB.3.2.3..............................................................83
BUILDING CB.3.3.......................................................................85
BUILDING AND RTU DESCRIPTION: BUILDING CB.3.3.1..............................85
MEASUREMENT RESULT: BUILDING CB.3.3.2................................................85
DATA ANALYSIS: BUILDING CB.3.3.3..............................................................89
BUILDING OB.3.4........................................................................90
BUILDING AND RTU DESCRIPTION: BUILDING DB.3.4.1 ..............................90
MEASUREMENT RESULT: BUILDING DB.3.4.2................................................90
DATA ANALYSIS: BUILDING DB.3.4.3..............................................................94
BUILDING E - RTU7B.3.5.........................................................96
BUILDING AND RTU DESCRIPTION: BUILDING EB.3.5.1 ..............................96
MEASUREMENT RESULT: BUILDING EB.3.5.2................................................96
DATA ANALYSIS: BUILDING EB.3.5.3..............................................................99
BUILDING E - RTU6B.3.6.......................................................100
BUILDING AND RTU DESCRIPTION: BUILDING E - RTU6B.3.6.1............. 100
MEASUREMENT RESULT: BUILDING E - RTU6B.3.6.2.............................. 100
DATA ANALYSIS: BUILDING E - RTU6B.3.6.3.............................................102
BUILDING FB.3.7......................................................................103
BUILDING AND RTU DESCRIPTION: BUILDING FB.3.7.1.............................103
MEASUREMENT RESULT: BUILDING FB.3.7.2..............................................103
DATA ANALYSIS: BUILDING FB.3.7.3............................................................104
BUILDING GB.3.8.....................................................................105
BUILDING AND RTU DESCRIPTION: BUILDING GB.3.8.1 ............................105
MEASUREMENT RESULT: BUILDING GB.3.8.2.............................................105
DATA ANALYSIS: BUILDING GB.3.8.3........................................................... 1 06
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page vi
BUILDING HB.3.9..................................................................... 106
BUILDING AND RTU DESCRIPTION: BUILDING HB.3.9.1 ............................106
MEAUREMENT RESULT: BUILDING HB.3.9.2.............................................106
DATA ANALYSIS: BUILDING HB.3.9.3............................................................109
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page vii
Executive Summary
This report summarizes the work and findings of the "Rightsizing of Rooftop
HVAC Systems" project. The main objective of the project is to identify the
'signature of oversizing' of rooftop units (RTU) through measurement during
peak cooling conditions and estimation of the penalties associated with
oversized RTUs for the monitored period. We also interviewed mechanical
engineering firms to better understand the design and sizing process. Finally,
extensive simulation work was completed to extend the penalties associated
with oversizing throughout the whole cooling season.
Determining the 'Signature of Over sizing'
From a review of the literature, we found several previous projects that had
been carred out to study the pedormance ofRTUs. All previous studies were
carred out in order to identify solutions to increase the performance of
(oversized) RTU s. Even though many of the earlier studies concluded that the
RTUs were oversized, there was no attempt to look back at the design stage of
these RTUs to identify what factors lead to oversizing.
We determined that previous methods for estimating penalties associated with
oversizing did not account for all penalties due to the focus of the earlier
studies on operations and maintenance. The earlier studies tyically estimated
the penalties by comparing two scenarios of the same RTU: (1) the cycling
scenario and (2) the steady state scenario. In both scenarios, the RTU was the
same oversized RTU and did not consider the pedormance of a 'rightsized' unit.
By contrast, this research calculated the penalty using the rightsized RTU as the
comparison baseline, which increased the penalty associated with oversizing.
For each oversized RTU we calculated the rightsized capacity, and estimated
the penalties by comparing the energy consumption and the peak cooling
demand of these two RTUs, the existing (oversized) RTU and the rightsized
RTU.
The rightsized RTU has considerably lower capacity as compared to the
existing RTU, depending on the degree of oversizing. Somewhat surprisingly,
the energy penalty estimated with the new method is similar to the earlier
studies, because even though the baseline capacity has decreased, the smaller
unit would need to run longer to meet the load. However, the new method
found that the peak cooling demand penalty is considerably higher than earlier
study because the peak cooling demand is now compared to the rightsized RTU
with a smaller capacity, and therefore a smaller power draw.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page vüi
This research proposes to use both the maximum cycling rate (Nma) and the
ru-time fraction (RTF) as the signature of oversizing. The desired combination
is to have a low Nmax and high RTF. These two parameters can be easily
calculated based on data from the multiple RTUs measured for this research.
The Signatures of the Measured RTUs
A total of nine RTUs in eight buildings were measured durng peak summer
conditions in July and August 2009. The measurement protocol included
logging the air temperatues at various points of the air distrbution system (at a
minimum the outside air, retu air, mixed air, supply air, and indoor air
temperatures). The measurement also logged the electrc current drawn by the
compressor and the supply fan.
Out of nine RTUs measured, this study found only two that were rightsized
while the rest showed different degrees of oversizing. The two rightsized RTUs
have the following combination ofNmax and RTF: 0 cycle/hour and l(for
Building G) and 1.13 cycles/hour and 0.9 (for Building F). The low Nmax for
Building F and G means that the RTUs raely cycled ON and OFF, and the
high RTF means that the RTUs were ruing almost all the time durng the
peak condition.
The rest of the buildings showed varous degree of oversizing, had relatively
high Nma and low RTF, although the RTU with highest Nmax did not necessarily
have the lowest RTF. The inverse is also tre, the RTU with the lowest RTF did
not have the highest Nma. The highest Nmax was 8.78 cycle/hour, with an RTF of
0.31. The lowest RTF was 0.15, with an Nma of2.66 cycle/hour.
Penalties of Oversizing
This study found that the signature of oversizing (the Nmax and the RTF) can
accurately indicate oversizing. The rightsized RTUs (with the right combination
ofNma and RTF) have a Part-Load Ratio (PLR) of 1, which means that the
RTUs were running at full capacity. The other RTUs with various degrees of
oversizing run at part of their capacity. The RTU with the highest Nnax rus at
PLR of only 0.21, which means it used only about 20% of its capacity to meet
the cooling load on a design day condition. The RTU with the lowest RTF runs
at PLR of 0.5, which means that the RTU can meet the peak load with only half
of its capacity.
A similar trend can also be observed for the energy penalty estimate. The
rightsized RTUs have almost no penalty at all, both in terms of energy and peak
demand. On the other hand, the RTUs with the signature of oversizing show
both energy penalty and peak demand penalty. These energy penalties were as
high as 50%, although the range from 15% to 25% was more tyical depending
on the degree of oversizing. The peak demand penalty was as much as 0.92
kW/ton, which means the peak demand savings from a 5-ton RTU could be 4.6
kW.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page ix
Design and Oversizing
Out of the nine RTUs measured, we have interview results associated with five
of them. Interviews were conducted with the mechanical engineering firms to
determine how the design and sizing process was carred out. The main result
of the interviews is a set of assumptions that were often used in the sizing
calculations by mechanical engineers. With this and other parts of the interview,
we have identified a number of design related factors that can lead to
oversizing: (1) high internal load assumptions, (2) external shading is not
considered in the sizing calculation, (3) safety factors for the sizing calculation,
and (4) lack of communication with other members of the design team.
Incentivized Right-Sizing
Many previous studies have made recommendations on how to increase the
performance existing RTUs. However, there is no real recommendation on how
to tackle the issue of oversizing from the design stage.
This study recommends to develop an incentive progrm so that the owners and
designers can work together to reduce the size ofRTUs. As has been suggested
by many studies, the only way to eliminate oversized RTUs is to install a new-
rightsized - RTD. This is only possible for old buildings that need new HVAC
replacements. Considering the age of a typical offce buildings in the Pacific
Northwest (two-third of small commercial spaces are built prior to 1987), the
market potential for RTU replacement is significant. However, it is common
practice to replace old units with the same sized new unit to avoid any
additional engineering. Therefore an incentive to support downsized
replacements might encourage new and more precise engineering.
This study recommends two tyes of incentives. One targeted at RTU
replacements, and one targeted at new constrction with RTUs. In either case,
we recommend to use the signature of oversizing discussed in this report (the
cycling period and the RTF) as the basis for the incentive programs. These two
parameters can accurately estimate the penalties associated with oversizing. For
RTU replacements, it is feasible that, with guidance, a maintenance engineer or
HVAC contractor can conduct the measurement required and analyze the
measurement results. For new design projects, simulation methods should
supplement existing sizing calculation methods to avoid oversizing. Building
designers currently do not have any incentive to rightsize RTUs, while at the
same time they can avoid several potential problems by oversizing. A design
oriented incentive program that requires a specific simulation methodology wil
result in fewer oversized RTUs. The methodologies for field measurement and
simulation analysis provide a good starting point for the development of these
incentive programs.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page x
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Rooftop units (RTUs) are one of the most commonly used heating ventilating
and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems for small commercial buildings. In
Northern California (PGE 1997), it represents more than 2.3 milion tons of
air conditioning capacity, covering around 70% of the commercial cooling.
The Pacific Nortwest, 34% of the commercial buildings are cooled with
RTUs comprising an estimated 1.3 milion tons (NEEA 2004).
Multiple institutions have conducted research projects to study the
pedormance ofRTUs. In the Pacific Northwest, studies have been carried out
by the Northwest Energy Effciency Allance (NEEA), Portland Energy
Conservation Inc. (PECI), and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
(PNNL). These studies and other research wil be reviewed in Section 2.
Most research has focused on the operation and maintenance issues
associated with RTUs, not the design and sizing ofRTUs as wil be discussed
in this paper.
1.2 Objectives
Specifically, the study aims to:
1. Identify which aspects of the design process lead to RTU oversizing
2. Identify the "signature" ofRTU oversizing by monitoring several RTUs at
peak summertime conditions,
3. Estimate the energy penalties associated with RTU oversizing
4. Develop educational materials based upon the results
1.3 The scope and limitation
The scope of work was limited in the following ways:
1. RTU Type: packaged single zone RTUs only; we did not examine RTUs
with variable air volume (VAV)
2. Building size: small commercial applications only; buildings less than
25,000 ft2 were considered in the sample
3. Building tye: offce buildings only; offce buildings were selected
because they have relatively consistent internal gains from building to
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 1
building. This facilitates comparing data between buildings, however
limits the generalizability of the results to offce applications. Another
useful building type to consider for future study would be small retail
applications, however, the internal loads at this type of facility are highly
variable and therefore not addressed in this paper.
4. Age of buildings: two groups were established, 'old' and 'new'; old
buildings were determined to be anything designed prior to 2001. New
buildings were determined to be those that were designed during or or
after 2001. This date was selected since January of 200 1 marked the date
when the first energy code was enforced in Idaho. The term 'designed'
refers to the point at which constrction documents were submitted to
the building departent for their review.
5. RTU mode: cooling only; although RTUs usually come with both heating
and cooling systems, this study examined cooling performance only.
1.4 Methodology
This research comprises three distinct methods
1. Surveys and interviews with engineers
2. Measurement of RTU performance during peak summer conditions
3. Simulation ofRTU performance using Energy Plus
1.4.1 Survey and Interview
1.4.1.1 Survey
A survey was developed and sent to mechanical engineering firms in the
Treasure Valley, near Boise. The firms were requested to list at least ten
buildings (five 'old' and and five 'new') that incorporated RTUs as the HVAC
system. Specifically, the survey requested the following information:
1. Building name
2. Year of design
3. Floor area of offce space
4. Capacity of the RTU for the offce space
Survey results provided general information about the buildings and basic
sizing and capacity data of the RTU (in terms offt/ton, and total tons). From
this list of ten buildings, we worked with the firm to select two buildings that
would be studied in detaiL. The selected buildings would be considered for
on-site monitoring, follow-up interviews, and simulation.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 2
1.4.1.2 Interview
An interview was carred out with each engineering firm individually and
examined the two buildings selected for detailed study. The scope of the
interviews included a detailed review of the design process for each building,
and specifically addressed the single RTU that would be measured. The
interview included questions in the following categories:
1. RTU sizing process: defining the design assumptions.
2. Design/constrction dynamics: interactions with owner and contractors.
Results from the interviews were used to identify factors that might lead to
sizing errors and to provide general insight into the engineering process.
1.4.2 Measurement
The monitoring was carred out on the RTUs for buildings that were selected
as a result of the survey. Only one RTU for each building was selected for
monitoring due to budget constraints. For each selected RTU, the following
parameters were logged:
1. Outdoor air temperature (OAT)
2. Supply air temperature (SAT)
3. Mixed air temperatue (MAT)
4. Indoor air temperatue (IAT)
5. Retu air temperatue (RAT)
6. Supply fan current
7. Compressor current
The on-site monitoring was cared out for a period long enough to
encompass at least one day where the maximum OAT was above 95°F,
representing a tyical design day for Boise, ID.
The on-site monitoring data provided critical insights to determine the
'signatue of oversizing'. In paricular, cycling patterns of the compressor and
runtime percentages were examined.
1.4.3 Simulation
Simulation was used to estimate, with as much accuracy as presently feasible
with EnergyPlus, the total annual energy penalty associated with RTU
oversizing. The simulations were carred out in several stages:
1. Calibration: the simulation settings (constrction materials, schedules, and
capacities) were set to match the existing constrction and operating
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 3
conditions. Simulations were conducted under the same conditions as the
on-site monitoring The compressor cycling patterns were compared for
the two data sets.
2. Auto-sizing: the calibrated model was re-run using the 'auto-sizing' option
such thatthe compressor was sized using the default method in
EnergyPlus. The results of this stage were then established as a new
(lower) capacity level for the compressor that stil met the cooling load.
Annual simulations for both models (Calibrated and Auto-sized) were
conducted and the energy penalty associated with oversizing was determined
as the difference between the cooling energy consumption of the two
simulation results.
1.4.4 The Buildings
Table 1.1 shows the list of the firms and buildings involved in this study. The
total number of buildings surveyed is 23, and eight of these were monitored.
A detailed report is provided foreach of thse eight buildings , and they are
identified in this report as Buildings A-H. We conducted interviews with the
design firms for six out of the eight buildings monitored.. Four of the six
buildings were simulated using EnergyPlus. Two of these four also had
eQUEST models that we acquired which had been previously completed by
the mechanical engineers.
Table 1.1 Survey result
No Building Name Measured Interviewed Simulated eQuest
Model
FirmA Building 1 Yes - Building C Yes Yes
FirmA Building 2
FirmA Building 3
FirmA Building 4
FirmA Building 5
FirmA Building 6 Yes - Building D Yes Yes Yes
FirmA Building 7
FirmA Building 8
FirmA Building 9
FirmB Building 10 Yes - Building E
FirmB Building i i Yes - Building G
FirmB Building 12 Yes - Building F Yes
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 4
FinnC Building 13
FinnC Building 14
FinnC Building 15
FinnC Building 16
FinnC Building 17 Yes - Building B Yes Yes Yes
FinnC Building 18
FinnC Building 19
FinnC Building 20
FinnC Building 21
FinnC Building 22 Yes - Building A Yes Yes
FinnD Building 23 Yes - Building H
1.5 Deliverables and Report Structure
Our IPC AEE contract specified thee deliverables for this Task:
1. Report summarzing initial team meetings.
2. Report on building monitorig results and estimates for penalties
associated with over-sizing.
3. Attendance list from education and training offering.
This report is wrtten to meet these deliverables, with two important notes:
1. Early in our process,we adapted our research method such that there was
not a single initial team meeting since we determined this would not be
conducive to open sharing of information between competing engineers.
Therefore, the format of the first deliverable is modified as described
below.
The .'initial meeting" is part of the methodology conceived during the
proposal stage of this work. It was thought of as a meeting of local
engineering firms to discuss oversizing concerns in a general manner.
This meeting was intentionally canceled during the initial stage of the
study because we determined the meeting was unlikely to achieve its
intended goal. The sizing process of HVAC systems tend to be guarded
and are considered trade secrets by many engineering firms. We
determined that they would be less likely to openly discuss such topics
with members of other engineering firms, essentially their competitors,
present.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 5
In lieu of this method, we conducted the survey and followup interviews
as described previously. Any identifying information associated with the
surveys and the interviews must remain confidential by requirement of
the University of Idaho Human Assurances Committee. Participants wil
remain anonymous in all reports documentingthis research.
2. The results of this research wil become part of an education program that
wil be carred out after this report has been published, in 2010.
This report has the following strcture:
1. The introduction describes the background, the objectives, the
methodology, and the reporting of the project.
3. A review of previous studies, with the primary goal to develop a
theoretical basis for the quantification of part-load degradation of
cooling systems.
4. The results from surveys and interviews.
5. The signature of oversizing for RTUs measured, summarizing the results
of on-site measurement, and estimating penalty.
6. Energy simulation: estimating the penalty associated to oversizing RTUs
beyond the period of measurement over the whole cooling period.
7. Appendices:
a. Detailed results of survey and interviews (keyed for anonymity)
(Appendix A)
b. Detailed results offield monitoring (8 locations) (Appendix B)
c. Detailed results of simulations (4 building) (Appendix C)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 6
2 RTU Oversizing and Part-Load Degradation: a
Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
This chapter summarizes existing literature on RTU performance. The first
section highlights the niche that the current study fills among previous
research. In the subsequent sections, the theoretical background on part-load
degradation of HVAC equipment is discussed, in particular how to quantify
the degradation based on measured data. The review is concluded by the
discussion of penalty estimation. This study estimated the penalty in peak-
demand by addressing the oversizing in designed capacity ofthe RTUs.
2.2 RTU Market potential
In northern California (Felts & Bailey 2000), small commercial offce and
retail buildings account for 50% of commercial building. floor area and
HVAC system energy use. Over 75% of the building stock is less than 5,000
ff, and almost 90% is less than 10,000 ft. Approximately 80% of the
buildings were constrcted before 1985. Anual air conditioning energy use
for the buildings in the hotter inland areas is 3.64 kWh!f2. RTUs consume 4.3
bilion kWh per year, which trslates into approximately $400 milion/year
In energy expenses.
In the Pacific Northwest (NEEA 2004; NEEA 2005), small commercial offce
and retail buildings account for approximately 33% of commercial building
floor area and about 36% of HVAC system energy use. Around 11 % of the
building stock is less than 5,000 ft2, and almost 36% is less than 20,000 ft2.
Around 67% of the buildings were constrcted before 1987.
2.3 Previous studies on RTUs
We identified six previous studies that examined the performance of the
RTUs since 1998:
1. Pacific Gas and Electrc (PGE), 1998, surveyed 250 RTU in Northern
California.
2. Eugene Water and Electrc Board (EWEB), 2001, studied 30 RTUs in
Eugene, Oregon.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 7
3. Puget Sound Energy (PSE), 2003 - 2004, studied 118 RTUs in Puget
Sound, Washington.
4. Northwest Energy Effciency Alliance (NEEA) Phase I, 2002, studied 65
RTUs in Idaho, Montana and Washington.
5. Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) Phase II, 2003 - 2004,
studied 75 RTUs in Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington.
6. California Energy Commission (CEC), 2001 - 2002, studied 215 RTUs in
California.
All studies found various problems in RTU installation, maintenance, and
operations, and all of them recommend action programs to mitigate these
problems. Based upon the cycling rates identified, these previous studies
concluded that many RTUs are oversized. (Cowan 2004). Specifically, a
report by Felts and Bailey (2000) regarding the 1998 PGE study listed above
stated that:
In at least 40% of the cases, the unit size could be dropped
by 50% or more or conversely, the floor area that the unit
serves could be increased by 100%.
Nonetheless, no previous study addressed the issue from the design point of
view. Our research aimed to examine oversizing from the design perspective.
2.4 How RTUs are sized
Small commercial buildings, the focus of this study, are tyically skin
dominated. That means that the cooling load responds more to the climate
condition (outside air temperature and solar radiation) than to the internal
gains (people, equipments, lighting). The RTU, similar to any air
conditioning system, is sized based on the peak external air temperatures. The
challenge in sizing an RTU is that the peak temperatures occur for only a few
hundred hours throughout the entire year.
Figure 2.1 shows the temperature distrbution for Boise, ID, based on the
tyical year data. The air conditioning (AC) unit is sized based on design day
condition, which is 95 of for Boise, ID. There are only about 100 hours in a
typical year that exceed this design condition in Boise.
Since small buildings are tyically skin dominated, the cooling load is very
sensitive to changes in the outside air temperature. The lower the outside air
temperature, the lower the cooling load. Figure 2.2 shows how the cooling
load of a building changes as the outside air temperatue changes.
Note that the example give in Figure 2.2 shows a scenario where the peak
cooling load happens not at the peak temperature. This tyically caused by
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 8
solar radiation load, which peaks several hours befor,e the peak temperature.
Without the solar radiation load, the cooling load at peak temperature can be
considerably lower, as ilustrted in Figue 2.2.
Figure 2.1 Bin hour pronIe for Boise, ID
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 9
Figure 2.2 Building load v.s. AC capacity
Since the air conditioning is sized based on the high temperatue, it wil
operate most of the time to handle a cooling load (much) lower than its
capacity. This is referred to as par-load operation. Furthermore, when the
RTU has excessive safety factors (oversizing) (see Figure 2.2),the part-load
condition is even worse.
Air-conditioning units do not operate as effciently at part-load as compared
to full-capacity operation. The theoretical background of part-load
degradation wil be discussed in the following sections.
2.5 The Rules of Thumbs
The problem with sizing HVAC systems for small buildings are shown
through the results of the previous surey by Jacobs and Henderson (Jacobs
& Henderson 2002). At least two conclusions are relevant for the current
report. The first important conclusion is the average time spent designing
HVAC systems for small building projects. Figure 2.3 shows the average time
spent to complete various tasks when designing small building projects. The
average time for engineers to design HVAC systems for small building
projects is approximately 40 hours. Although this seems like a short period of
time, the HVAC system design represents a large proportion of all hours
spent on the design of small commerciaL. Furthermore, HVAC system design
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 10
involves very broad work from sizing calculations to air distrbution
calculations to overall system selection.
lAO
Figure 2.3 Design time for small building (Jacobs
& Conlon 2002)
The second conclusion relates to the tool used for sizing calculations (Figure
2.4). Approximately half (51 %) of the respondents use manufacturer's sizing
calculation softare. The next biggest proportion (17%) rely only on
previous experience and the rules of thumb. The widespread use of .'previous
experience" and the rules of thumb could be an indication of why oversizing
is so prevalent in small commercial buildings.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 11
Figure 2.4 Tools used for sizing (Jacobs &
Henderson 2002)
There is nothing inherently wrong with the rules of thumb. Figure 2.5 and
Table 2.1 shows some examples of the rule of thumb method. The rules of
thumb are usually presented as a range of numbers, and do not by themselves
cause the problem if used as they are intended, as a starting point, and a
secondary guide to verify other calculations.
Figure 2.5 Rules of thumb (Guthrie 2003)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report #20090208-01)Page 12
Table 2.1 Rules of thumb for AC unit capacity
(Bell 2008)
Building Type ftl/ton
Offces, Commercial: General 300-400
Offces, Commercial: Large perimeter 225 -275
Offces, Commercial: Large interior 300 - 350
Offces, Commercial: Small 325 -375
Banks, Court Houses, Municipal Buildings, Town
Halls 200-250
Police Stations, Fire Stations, Post Offces 250- 350
Precision Manufacturing 50- 300
Computer rooms 50 -150
Restaurants 100-250
Medical/Dental centers, Clinics, Offces 250- 300
As Haines and Wilson (2003) put it:
Every HVAC designer needs some handy empirical datafor
use in approximating loads and equipment sizes during the
early conceptual stages of the design process.
And further:
Energ conserving practice in envelope construction, in
lighting design, and in system design has resulted in
decreased loads in many cases. But increased use of
personal computers and other appliances has the opposite
effect of increasing the air conditioning requirements.
Designers must develop their own site-specifc data if the
data are to be reliable.
The above quotes represent best practices with regards to the rules of thumb.
However, some engineers use rules of thumb as their primary design tool.
The following paragraph represents the view that rules of thumb are
"accurate" enough even if design practices have changed over the years (Bell
2008):
Many of the rules of thumb listed within this reference
manual were developed many years ago. I have received
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 13
many questions when conducting seminars regarding these
rules of thumb. The most often asked question is "Are the
cooling and heating load rules of thumb stil accurate with
the mandate of energ codes and tighter and improved
building envelope construction?" The answer to this
question is yes. The reason the cooling rules of thumb are
stil accurate is that the internal loads have increased
substantially and cooling loads have switched from
building-envelope-dependent, to lighting-dependent, and
now to people-and-equipment-dependent (more people and
equipment placed in the same area). The reason the
heating load rules of thumb are stil reasonably accurate is
that the ventilation air (outdoor air load dictated by code)
has increased.
The size of the RTUs depend on the how they were designed and what tool
was used. The fact that many RTU's are oversized has a lot to do with the
way the designers use the two most-used tools, the manufacturer's softare
and the rules-of-thumb. Note that what we tr to point out is not the problem
with the tool itself. There is nothing wrong with the tool as long as the the
designers know how to use it with all its advantages and limitations.
2.6 Basic terminologies
2.6.1 Run-time fraction versus Cycling rate
Figure 2.6 shows the relationship between space temperatue, the AC unit
status and the set-point temperature. The AC unit is ON when the space
temperature reaches the maximum point in the set-point range and is OFF
when the space temperature reaches the minimum point. The range around
the set-point temperature is -DT spt.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrted Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 14
AT.
!.ae!.
~
.__.._- T.
.-1tONtOF
ACStasONON
Time
Figure 2.6 Space temperature and AC status
(Henderson et al. 1991)
The cycle time (tcycle) is the time for the AC unit to do a complete cycle of ON
and OFF. Run-time fraction is the ratio of the time when the AC unit is ON to
the total cycle time.It is important to differentiate between ru-time fraction
(RTF) and the cycling rate.
Run Ti Fl1n v,s. Cyng Rat
,., ~--r-r-:-r-r--r-
.
Figure 2.7 Run-time fraction comparison
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 15
Run-time fraction (X) is the fraction oftime in which the unit is ON.
tONX=-
t cycle (1)
And,
t cycle = t ON + t OFF (2)
Figure 2.7 above ilustrates the difference between ru-time fraction and
cycle rate. Both graphs in Figure 2.7 have a run-time fraction of 50%.
However, the bottom graph shows that the AC unit is ON for 60 minutes and
then OFF for 60 minutes, and the top graph shows that the AC is ON for 30
minutes and OFF for another 30 minutes. A run-time fraction of 50% does
not say a great deal about how frequently a unit cycles. It simply states the
total time over a given period that a unit is ON.
Cycling rate (N), on the other hand, is how long a unit has a complete ON-
OFF cycle.
1N=-
t cycle (3)
Referring to the above examples, 60 minutes ON and then 60 minutes OFF
means a cycling rate of 0.5 cycles/hour, while 30 minutes ON then 30
minutes OFF means 1 cycles/hour.
2.6.2 Part-load degradation
Part-load degradation is described by the part-load factor (PLF), which is the
ratio of the part-load coeffcient ofpedormance (COP) to the steady-state
COP.
PLF COP avgCOPss (4)
where:
COPavg
COPss
Average COP ("degraded" COP) over the cycling time
= Steady-state COP
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrted Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 16
PLF is not to be confused by the part-load ratio (PLR) or the cooling load
factor (CLF), which is the ratio of the building load to the total air
conditioning capacity.
PLR=~= Building Load
Qss ACCapacity
(5)
where:
Qavg = Average capacity ("degrded" capacity) over the cycling time
Qss Steady-state AC capacity
The effciency degradation curves can be explained in Figure 2.8 (Jacobs
2003b). AC equipment wil need a certain amount of "start up" time to reach
a steady-state output.
Runtim~
Frp1Zion =0 60%
Runti Tll1E
Figure 2.8 Penormance degradation due to
cycling (Jacobs 2003b)
The startp losses (shaded in red) mark the difference between the actual
output and the steady state output. When the air-conditioning unit operates
continuously (with a high run-time frction and low cycling rate), then the
startp losses wil be negligible. However, if the unit cycles in short periods
of time, then the startp time wil become a significant portion of the total
run-time. In this scenario, the stap losses becomes significant, and
degrade the performance of the air-conditioning unit.
A previous study by Parken et. al. (1985) established that the part-load
pedormance of cycling HVAC equipment depends on:
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 17
1. the response of the system at startp (defined by a time constant or dead
time).
2. the cycling rate of the equipment (governed by the thermostat
characteristics and the building thermal mass)
1M
Figure 2.9 Part-load factor as function of part-
load ratio
Figure 2.9 shows the correlation between PLF and the PLR, and it is
developed by using the following equation:
PLF = 1- ('1)( 1- PLR)(6)
And
-I )(4TNC =4TN (l-e m~)D max (7)
where:
PLF
PLR
Nmax
Part-load Factor
Par-load Ratio
= Maximum cycling rate
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 18
t The HVAC system time constant
The maximum cycling rate (Nmax) is the combined characteristics of the
HVAC system and the building.
N _1 QACmax 4 C.ó Tspt (8)
where:
QAC
1JTspt
C
= Capacity of the AC system
= The thermostat dead-band
= Thermal capacity of the building
2.7 How to quantify over-sizing
Prior research (Felts & Bailey 2000) shows that over 60% of rooftop units
surveyed had a cycling rate of at least 3 cycles/hour. The same study further
concluded that more than 40% of the units studied were more than 25%
oversized and about 10% are considerably greater than 50% oversized. The
study considered only RTUs that are greater than 25% oversized because
many HVAC engineers consider oversizing by 25% as "safe and acceptable
practices" for oversizing.
In the same study, the quantification of oversizing was based on the
monitoring of RTU compressor. Figues 2.10 and 2.11 show the tyical
measurement result for California. The graphs show the outdoor temperatue
and the operating status of the compressor. The oversized RTU shows a
pattern of continuous cycling (Figure 2.10) while the properly sized RTU
shows no cycling during the peak-day operation (Figure 2.11).
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 19
Figure 2.10 Measurement result with the
signature of oversizng (Felts & Bailey
2000)
JI I~ ¡l;l ll..' -'.. ..
Figure 2.11 Measurement result showing properly
sized RTU (Felts & Bailey 2000)
From the above measurement, the cycling rate and the runtime fraction of the
RTU can be calculated. Based on the cycling rate and the runtime frction,
the part-load degradation (in terms of effciency reduction) can be estimated.
Previous studies show several ways to estimate the effciency of the RTUs:
1. By using the compressor power (Felts 1998):
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 20
The measured compressor power is used to calculate the system
effciency as shown in the following equation:
Elf . (compressor input power) kWiciency . -capacity ton (9)
This effciency can then be compared with the published effciency (in
terms ofEER). The ratio of the measured effciency and the nominal
effciency is the PLF (see equation 4).
The term 'capacity' in the above equation is the actual capacity (at the
actual air temperatures at the condenser and evaporator). However, Felts
(1998) decided to use the nominal capacity for two reasons; (1) their
monitored data did not include air flow measurement and (2) their
monitoring period was not confined to the design conditions or near-
design condition.
2. By using the measured air temperatures (outside air and at evaporator)
(Felts 1998):
The study uses this method not to estimate the effciency of the RTU but
to generate a benchmark of ideal operation. The method uses the linear
regression equations supplied by the Air Conditioning Contractors
Association (ACCA) Manual J, as follows:
Total capacity=K +mi CFM +mi T ewb + m3 T oa (10)
Sensible capacity = Q+ ni CFM + ni T ewb + n3T edb + n4 Toa (11)
Compressor power=R+o1CFM+oiT ewb+03Toa (12)
The constants (K, Q, R, mi, mi, m3, ni, ni, n3, 14,01, oi, 03) are
determined using the manufacturers data.
U sing this method one can calculate the effciency of the RTU at any
combination of air temperatures (outdoor and at evaporator). Comparing
this effciency with the nominal effciency, one can calculate the
degradation.
3. By using the measured refrgerant condition
A Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) study (Arstrong et
aL. 2006) found that the measurement of airfow is not feasible because
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 21
(1) it is diffcult to do with acceptable accuracy, and (2) the space inside
the RTU (around the evaporator) does not provide enough room to do a
proper airflow measurement. The study concluded that measuring the
refrgerant is the more accurate and feasible option.
Our study however did not use any of the above methods to quantify the
degree of oversizing. The first method is not accurate enough because it uses
the nominal capacity (instead of the capacity at the time of measurement) to
calculate the efficiency. The second method wil provide the ideal operation,
but wil not help in estimating the real situation (the second method was not
initially used for part-load degrdation in the first place). The third method is
simply beyond the scope of this project. The method used for this study wil
be discussed in Section 4.2.2 on page 34.
2.8 How to quantify the penalty associated to oversizing
An American Council for an Energy Effcient Economy (ACEEE) study
(Neme et aL. 1999) found only a few studies that reported the benefits of
rightsizing (or the penalty of oversizing). This is because:
It is not possible to correct equipment sizing problems
without replacing the unit. That is extremely expensive and,
therefore, never done.
Neme et. aL. (1999) quoted McLain and Goldberg (1984) who estimated an
energy savings of 0.2% for every 1 percent reduction in oversizing. That
means an energy savings of 10% for correcting an average oversizing of
50%. The savings in terms of peak demand is also estimated as "moderate",
and no number is associated to the qualitative description.
It should be noted that McLain and Goldberg (1984) focused on the
residential sector. The reported energy savings assumed an average
oversizing of 50% or more, which means an average of around 1 ton
oversizing for the average home. The average oversizing may be different for
commercial buildings, and the average oversizing in tons wil typically be
more than 1 ton. Furthermore, the operation mode is rarely "continuously
ON" for residential sector, only in about 20% of homes. Therefore the
penalty for oversizing should be be significantly higher on the commercial
sector.
Felts and Bailey (2000) report that over 60% ofRTUs surveyed have cycling
rates of3 cycles/hour or more. Jacobs (2003a), referrng to Felts and Bailey
(2000) report, estimated that the potential energy savings from mitigating this
problem is around 10%. Jacobs (2003a) did not elaborate how he arrved at
the 10% savings.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 22
Felts and Bailey (2000) reported that 40% of the RTUs are more than 25%
oversized. This represents about 900,000 ton or around 180,000 units in
Northern California. The study also found that the power draw of an average
RTU is about 1.5 kW/ton. Their study estimated a 2.5 kW reduction in the
peak demand by replacing an oversized RTU with a more effcient and
properly sized RTU. The reduction in the peak demand (should all the 40%
RTU in Northern California be replaced) wil be 450 MW of 1,350 MW
(roughly 33% savings). Assuming 1,000 hours of operation for the whole
cooling season, the savings wil be 450 milion kWh (roughly 33%
savings).The 33% savings figure also represents the penalty due to
oversizing.
Another study (Henderson et aL. 1991) estimated the penalty for oversizing to
be roughly 11 % for Nmax of 2.5 cycles/hour, the average found in their study
(Table 2.2). However, this estimated energt penalty simply considers the
same sized unit without cycling (under steady state energy use) instead of a
rightsized unit which would actually be necessary to eliminate cycling.
Essentially, the fact that the unit is oversized, thus resulting in the high
cycling rate, is not factored into the energy penalty published.
Table 2.2 Penalty for oversizng (Henderson et al.
1991)
Figure 2.12 ilustrates what is described in Henderson et aL. (1991). The first
graph shows the oversized scenario, where the Qss is the steady state capacity
of the AC unit that cycles with toNI and Ìecle, and, q 1 is the area under the
curve which represents the energy output of the system.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 23
To estimate the energy penalty, the same RTU (with capacity ofQss) is
assumed to ru under steady state condition for a certain period of time, so
that the energy removed from the space (q2) is the same as the energy
removed by the same RTU under cycling condition (q 1). This is ilustrted in
the bottom graph of Figure 2.12. The result is a shorter ON time for the RTU
under steady state condition, and the shorter ON time wil result in about 11 %
savings (for Nmax = 2.5 cycle/hour) as described in Table 2.2.
Figure 2.12 Quantifying the penalty of oversizing
as described by Henderson et al. (1991)
It should be noted that the RTUs shown in both scenarios in Figure 2.12 are
the same unit, the oversized unit. This scenario is unrealistic because the
oversized unit would, by definition, never run without cycling.
We developed Figure 2.13 to ilustrate our concern with the above method
which does not take into account the oversized designed capacity. Figure 2.13
ilustrates a scenario that addresses the issue of oversized capacity, which in
turn wil result in a more realistic estimation on the penalties of oversizing.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 24
Figure 2.13 Quantüying the penalty of oversizing
The first graph in Figure 2.13 represents the same cycling RTU. The cycling
scenario in (as indicated in Table 2.2) is calculated based on the assumption
of 50% PLR, which means that the building load is only half of the RTU
capacity. In other words, the building could function with a RTU of half the
original capacity (or 0.5Qss) as described in the bottom graph of Figure 2.13.
The rightsized unit would run for toN3 which is the same as the tcycle in the first
scenario, not at par-load but at full-load, which wil improve its performance
beyond what was estimated by Henderson et al. (1991).
The numbers in Table 2.2 may stil represents the same penalty for the
rightsized unit ilustrated in Figure 2.13, The decrease in effciency wil stil
be the same if the RTUs (the oversized and the rightsized) both have the same
EER. The increase in energy use wil stil be the same, even though the
rightsized RTU has half of the capacity because it wil need to run longer
( continuously).
What was hidden in Table 2.2 is the peak-demand penalty. The scenario
described in Figure 2.13 reduced the peak-demand by half compared to the
scenario described in Figure 2.12. Previous study (Felts & Bailey
2000) estimated a reduction of 2.5 kW from the average 5-ton unit drawing
7.5 kW, which means 33% reduction in peak demand.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 25
3 Surveys and Interviews
3.1 Introduction
The survey and interviews are carred out in accordance with the University
of Idaho Human Assurances Committee (HAC). The questions and surey
formats were approved HAC. The survey and interviews are all confidentiaL.
The names of the buildings and engineering firms participating in these
surveys and interviews have been replaced with unidentifiable codes.
3.2 The respondents
The respondents for the surveys include mechanical engineering firms in near
Boise, ID. Furtermore, the firms selected had some previous awareness of
the Integrated Design Lab (IDL).. This decision was made based on the
nature of the information sought in the survey. The confidential information
that was shared by the firms required a level of confidence and securty
offered by the IDL. Therefore, no "blind" or random invitations to participate
in the surey were made.
Table 3.1 shows the list of participants with a summary of their involvement.
Some firms had diffculty in responding to the survey because of the scope of
work of this study. For example, some of the firms did not often design
offce buildings with RTUs, reducing the potential buildings to choose from.
3.3 The survey
The survey asked the respondents to list the buildings that met basic suty
parameters (office building with RTU, or buildings with offce space that is
served with separate RTU system). For those buildings, the respondents were
asked to provide data for five 'new' buildings and five 'old' buildings:
1. Building Name: Enter the name of the building
2. Description: Enter the description of the building. General information on
shape and use
3. Owner/Contact Info: Enter the name of the owner and the contact
information
4. Year: Enter the year when the building is designed
5. Total SF (offce only): Enter the total SF for the office space
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab~Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 26
6. Total SF (excluding offce): Enter other areas of the building (if any)
7. Total Tons (offce only): Enter the total refrigeration tons that serve offce
zones
8. Total Tons (excluding offce): Enter the total refrgeration tons for the rest
of the buildings
9. Heating source: Electrc or Gas
10. Heating capacity (Btu): Enter the designed heating capacity
11. Glazing Area: WW for the whole building (Low=less than 20%,
High=more than 40%
The survey was sent to all of the potential respondents, however, only four
firms replied with usable data as summarized below in Table 3.1. The
complete response from the respondents are available in Appendix A.2.
Table 3.1 Summary of respondents
Firm Name Response
FirmA Mechanical engineering firm, responded to the survey, two of the
buildings were measured, interviewed for those two buildings
FirmB Mechanical engineering firm, responded to the survey, two of the
buildings were measured, interviewed for those two buildings
FirmC Mechanical engineering firm, responded to the survey although with
diffculties due to the building tye, responded with three buildings for
the survey, all three buildings were measured, interviewed for two of the
buildings (the firm did not design the third building themselves).
FirmD Mechanical engineering firm, responded to the survey although with
diffculties due to the building type, responded with three buildings for
the survey, all three buildings were measured, interviewed for two
buildings (the firm did not design the third building)
FirmE Mechanical engineering firm, attempted to respond to the survey, but
failed to respond due to the building type requirement. The firm agreed
to participate in the monitoring (their offce building) although they did
not design the building.
FirmF Mechanical engineering firm, attempted to respond to the survey, but
failed to respond due to the building tye requirement.
FirmG HVAC contractor firm, agreed to participate, but since they did not do
any design work, they could not provide any data.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 27
3.4 The survey result
Table 3.2 shows the results of the survey. The range of the RTU capacity is
from 275 ft2/ton to 488 ft2/ton. Depending on which rules ofthumb, the
numbers range from slightly oversized to righsized. The three entries with
capacity above 700 felton are not used (highlighted in grey in the table),
because they are installed in the building with many unconditioned areas, and
the firm does not have the data on the total unconditioned areas. Also
excluded were buildings with missing data (highlighted in yellow). These are
the entres where the firm submitted the names of the buildings but later
could not find the relevant information for various reasons.
Table 3.2 Survey result
No Building Description Year Total SF Total ft2/to
Name Tons n
FirmA Building 1 One story offce building 2000 13700 41 334
FirmA Building 2 One story office building 2001 4400 16 275
FirmA Building 3 One story offce/exam building 1995 9300 26 358
FirmA Building 4 One story offce building 1994 4800 17 282
FirmA Building 5 Polygon Two storey offce building 2000 28900 69 419
FirA Building 6 Polygon One story offce/garage building 2005 6300 21 300
FirmA Building 7 Two storey offce building 2006 2800 8 350
FirmA Building 8 One story offce/garage building 2005 10500 37 284
FirmA Building 9 One story offce building 2005 7500 18 417
FirmB Building 10 Offce 2001 28800 76.5 376
FirmB Building 11 Offce 1999 11125 32 348
FirmB Building 12 Offce 2006 4875 10 488
Firme Building 13 Offce 1999 10878 36 302
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 28
Without the missing and ignored entres, the overall average capacity is 359
felton, which is within the rage of right sized (on the end of the range
towards oversized). Again, this depends on which rules of thumb we use to
determine the degree of oversizing.
The average ft/ton for each firm does not suggest a large variation among
firms (348, 378, 363 ft2/ton for Firms A, B and C). For Firm A (who
submitted the survey without any missing data), there is no significant
variation between old buildings and new buildings (361 and 322 felton for
old and new buildings) despite increased pedormance standards in energy
codes. The new buildings have slightly more capacity than the old buildings,
although this cannot be concluded as a trend due to the small sample size. Of
the three buildings with a capacity less than 300 felton, two are 'old'
buildings and one is a 'new' building.
3.5 The interviews
The interviews were carred out with three firms for a total of five buildings
(see Table 3.3). The data from three buildings (highlighted in grey) cannot be
collected in the interview. Firm B could not collect all the data necessary for
the interview for Building E, so we could not complete the interview for this
building. Buildings G and H are the offce spaces for Firms Band D
respectively, and the firms allowed us to measure the RTU even though the
firms did not design the HVAC systems for these two buildings.
Table 3.3 The Firms and the measured buildings
Firm Building
Building A
Building B
Building C
Building D
FirmC
FirmC
FirmA
FirmA
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 29
The interviews were carred out after the data from the measurement had
been compiled so that these preliminary results could be discussed durig the
interview.
The interview questions and their corresponding responses are compiled in
Appendix A.3. The main objective of the interview was to discuss the design
process and tr to identify the factors that lead to system sizing. The results
are presented in two forms:
1. Individual responses to the questions are discussed in terms of their
potential contribution to to oversizing in the
2. Qualitative analysis of the responses are presented Section
3.6 Lessons Learned: Factors contributing to oversizing
3.6.1 Generous Level of Internal Load
Occupancy load: the default policy for the mechanical engineers interviewed
is to wait for the architect to provide a schedule for occupancy. We found a
great over-estimate in occupancy load for the 'old' buildings. There was
certainly a trend towards "head-count" for the design occupancy load for
office spaces, especially for the 'new' buildings. However, there is only one
firm who set the occupancy load based on the workstation count. This firm
also said that for retail area they wil use the net area instead of the gross area
to calculate the occupancy load, and then use a 50% diversity factor.
Equipment (plug) load: The equipment load was assumed to be high, up to
1.25 W Ift2. A previous study found (Komor 1997) that even 1 W Iff is at the
high end of the normal range, and values above 1 W Ift2 are only found in less
than 5% of the total areas studied. Typically the equipment load was
determined on a per area basis, and we found only one firm who set the
equipment load at a per workstation basis.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 30
Lighting load: usually set to the code requirement. The comparson between
the 'old' and the 'new' buildings are a significant contrast since the old
buildings were sized prior to energy codes. One of the old buildings listed
upwards of 2 W Ift2 for lighting, while new buildings were typically closer to
1 Wife.
3.6.2 Shading is not included
We found that engineers tyically excluded all building shading during the
sizing calculation, even external fixed shading. There is no argument for this
practice other than a safety precaution in case the shading was taken away by
the building owner at a later date. This is one of the major source of
oversizing in our research.
3.6.3 Safety factor
As indicated in the literature review section, safety factors are commonly the
focus of the oversizing problem. Nobody has the exact number as what safety
factor ishould be included on top of the peak cooling load in determining the
size ofaRTU.
The firms inteviewed discussed this problem. The general practice is to add a
certain safety factor before selecting the RTU unit. Often, selecting the next
available unit size for purchase involves gross oversizing. One firm has a
practice to select the next available smaller unit, provided that the downsizing
is within a certain safety limit. The firm did not specify what safety limit was
used for these downsizing selections. One firm has a policy to not oversize at
the end of the calculation because assumptions involved in the calculations
have already had a built-in safety factor. This firm also has a policy to
downsize for retail spaces because of:
i. diversity factor (of the cooling load).
2. interaction with other system; the cooling load for the space can be
satisfied by other RTUs serving the building.
3.6.4 Communication with architect or other designers
Oversizing can happen because of communication problems. The sizing of
mechanical systems runs in parallel with other design work, including cost
estimation and often 'value engineering'. Building shading or advanced
lighting control systems could be removed and result in system under-sizing
and are therefore sometimes left out of sizing calculations. Furthermore, the
decision to use high-performance windows, for example, might come too late
in the design process, well after systems have been sized and specified. The
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 31
sizing of mechanical system has long been completed using the worst case
scenario, i.e. using low performance windows and the lowest common
denominator for other system choices. This practice wil inherently lead to a
significant oversizing in terms of AC capacity.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho,Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report #20090208-01)Page 32
4 The signature of oversizing
4.1 Introduction
4.2 The Measurement
4.2.1 Methodology
The measurements were carred out on eight buildings and a total of nine
RTUs. Table 4.1 shows the buildings and the measurement period.
Table 4.1 Measurement period
Building Start Date End Date
Building A 10-Aug-2009 l2-Aug-2009
Building B 9-Jul-2009 17-Jul-2009
Building C 19-Aug-2009 25-Aug-2009
Building D 20-Aug-2009 31-Aug-2009
Building E - RTU7 3-Aug-2009 7-Aug-2009
Building E - RTU6 29-Jul-2009 3-Aug-2009
Building F 10-Aug-2009 12-Aug-2009
Building G 23-Jul-2009 28-Jul-2009
Building H 25-Aug-2009 3l-Aug-2009
The summary of the RTUs measured is shown in Table 4.2. Almost all of the
RTUs were small, tyically less than 10 ton. Two RTUs were 10 tons or
larger but these had two compressors so it can be considered to have two
small compressors. The EERs were between 8 to 11.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 33
F or every RTU, the measured parameters are recorded for at least one peak
conditions day. The measurement was stopped once we recorded a set of data
with OAT of at least 94 oF. Some buildings have data for multiple days, either
because the measurement began on a relatively cool day, or simply because
the next building was not available once we recorded the peak conditions
required.
Table 4.2 RTU summary
No. of Capacity EERcompressor(tons)
Building A 1 4 9.7
Building B 1 4 11.1
Building C 1 4
Building D 1 3
Building E - RTU6 2 10 9.1
Building E - RTU7 1 3
Building F 1 6 10.1
Building G 1 6
Building H 2 17.5 11
The measurement was cared out using HOBO data loggers with temperatue
probes for air temperature and current transformers to monitor electrc
current. Some of the compressors were measured using a status monitoring
sensor, which reported only the ON/OFF status.
The following sections describes a complete example of how the data were
analyzed in order to determine the oversizing of each RTU.
4.2.2 Data Analysis
From different parameters discussed earlier (see Section 2.6), this study uses
the Nmax and the PLR as the signatue of the oversizing. Both parameters are
calculated from the measurement data.
4.2.2.1 The maximum cycling rate
Ninax is calculated based on the cycling data. Figure 4.1 shows the
measurement data for Building A. The outdoor temperatue during the
measurement reached 100 of, which is higher than the design day
temperature for Boise. These data show that the compressor is cycling during
a very hot day, a clear sign of oversizing.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 34
8u1l A. M_me ~.11
Figure 4.1 Measurement data
From the measurement data, the following data was extracted:
1. The start time of every compressor cycle
2. The end time of every compressor cycle
3. The OFF period between the compressor cycles
4. The outside air temperatue at the sta of the compressor cycle
From the above data the following parmeters are calculated:
1. tON
. t ON=t start -tend
2. tcycle
t cyle = t ON + t OFF
3. Cycling rate
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)
(13)
(14)
Page 35
1N=-
t cycle (15)
4. Runtime Fraction (RTF)
t
RTF= ON
t cycle
(16)
Table 4.3 shows the results of the data analysis described above. Note that the
last cycle is not used because the period from the last time off to the next
cycle is too long.
Table 4.3 Cycling pattern for Building A
Cycle #tON t.yd.OAT N RTF
(hour)(hour)CF)(cycle/hour)(-)
1 8 35 74.30 1.71 0.23
2 5 21 79.00 2.86 0.24
3 5 87 77.90 0.69 0.06
4 7 68 88.49 0.88 0.10
14
15
7
7
56
73
89.78
89.13
1.07
0.82
0.13
0.10
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 36
Nmax is the maximum cycling rate that is calculated using a curve fit from the
combination of RTF and the cycling rate. The equation is:
N=4N maxX(I - X)(17)
where:
N = Cycling rate
Maximum cycling rate
= Runtime Fraction (RTF)
J(max
X
Figure 4.2 shows the result of the curve fit. The maximum cycling rate for
Building A is 2.66 cycles/hour.
Corer Cy Da . BtßdilA.
Figure 4.2 Curve fit to calculate Nmax
Table 4.4 shows the maximum cycling rate from previous studies. Henderson
et. al. (1991) found that the average Nmax for the study is 2.5 cycleslhour.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 37
4.2.2.2 Part-load ratio (PLR) and Part-load factor (PLF)
The PLR and PLF are calculated based on the following equations:
t -tONPLR= ON -2.(I-e--)
t cycle t cycle
-tONT -PLF= 1--(I-e T )
tcycle
where:
tON
tcycle
t
= The time when the compressor is ON
The cycling time
= RTU time constant
Table 4.4 Maximum cycling rate from previous
studies (Hugh Henderson et al. 1991)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)
(18)
(19)
Page 38
The time constant (1;) is a time that shows how fast a compressor reaches the
steady state output when it starts from OFF. This is empirical data that can
only be found from previous studies. Henderson et. al. (1991) used 80
seconds. Another study (H Henderson et al. 2000) uses 60 seconds for
"typical AC" and 30 seconds for "good AC".
Table 4.5 show the PLR for Building A. The PLR shows the degree of
oversizing. The maximum PLR is 0.2 (with 1;=60 sec). Considering that PLR
shows the building load (see equation 4 on page 16), and that the
measurement was carred out on a peak cooling day, then the capacity of the
RTU is about 5 times greater than peak load, or 400% oversized.
Table 4.5 Part-load Ratio for Building A
Cycle #tON tcycle N RTF PLR PLR % diff(min)(min)(cycle/hr)(t= sec)(t=30 sec)
1 8 35 1.71 0.23 0.200 0.214 7.0%
2 5 21 2.86 0.24 0.191 0.214 12.0%
3 5 87 0.69 0.06 0.046 0.052 13.0%
4 7 68 0.88 0.1 0.088 0.096 9.1%
5 6 42 1.43 0.14 0.119 0.131 10.1%
6 7 37 1.62 0.19 0.162 0.176 8.6%
7 7 29 2.07 0.24 0.207 0.224 8.2%
8 7 38 1.58 0.18 0.158 0.171 8.2%
9 7 40 1.5 0.18 0.150 0.163 8.7%
10 7 31 1.94 0.23 0.194 0.210 8.2%
11 9 49 1.22 0.18 0.163 0.173 6.1%
12 8 48 1.25 0.17 0.146 0.156 6.8%
13 10 55 1.09 0.18 0.164 0.173 5.5%
14 7 56 1.07 0.13 0.107 0.116 8.4%
15 7 73 0.82 0.1 0.082 0.089 8.5%
Table 4.6 Part-load Factor for Building A
toN tcycle N PLF PLF
Cycle #(min)(min)(cycle/hr)RTF (t=60 sec)(t=30 sec)% diff
1 8 35 1.71 0.23 0.875 0.938 7.2%
2 5 21 2.86 0.24 0.801 0.900 12.4%
3 5 87 0.69 0.06 0.801 0.900 12.4%
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 39
4 7 68 0.88 0.1 0.857 0.929 8.4%
5 6 42 1.43 0.14 0.834 0.917 10.0%
6 7 37 1.62 0.19 0.857 0.929 8.4%
7 7 29 2.07 0.24 0.857 0.929 8.4%
8 7 38 1.58 0.18 0.857 0.929 8.4%
9 7 40 1.5 0.18 0.857 0.929 8.4%
10 7 31 1.94 0.23 0.857 0.929 8.4%
11 9 49 1.22 0.18 0.889 0.944 6.2%
12 8 48 1.25 0.17 0.875 0.938 7.2%
13 10 55 1.09 0.18 0.900 0.950 5.6%
14 7 56 1.07 0.13 0.857 0.929 8.4%
15 7 73 0.82 0.1 0.857 0.929 8.4%
Table 4.6 shows the PLF for Building A. The PLF provides the performance
degradation of the RTU. The minimum PLF is 0.8 (with 1;=60 sec). As
described in equation 5 (on page 17), this means that the RTU was running at
80% of its nominal COP.
4.2.2.3 The penalty of oversizing
Ener&y penalty
The energy delivered by the RTU to cool the space throughout toN is
determined by the following equation:
-tON
q cycling
= Qss (tON-T (l-e--))(20)
where:
tON
1;
Qss
qcycling
= The time when the compressor is ON (in hour)
RTU time constant (in hour)
= Steady state RTU total capacity (in W or Btu)
= energy over the cycling period (in kWh or Btu)
This energy is depicted as qi in Figure 4.3 below. This amount of energy was
delivered by the cycling compressor.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 40
~""';~-----.. .,--..'_."..._.",..,_,.fI..!L."..~:
Figure 4.3 Energy penalty
The input energy of the cycling compressor can be calculated using the
following equation:
e cyling = E ss tON (21)
where:
ecycling = input energy of the cycling compressor over the period of one
cycle (in kWh or Btu).
Ess Steady state RTU input power (in W or Btu)
To calculate the energy penalty, the same amount of energy should be
delivered by the existing compressor during steady-state (the bottom graph in
Figure 4.3 with q2 equals qi).
The tON2 (which is the ON time of the compressor under steady state) can be
calculated as follows:
t - qcyclingON2-Qss
(22)
where:
qcycling energy over the cycling period (in kWh or Btu), as defined
above (equation 20).
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 41
Qss = Steady state RTU total capacity (in W or Btu/h)
The input energy of the compressor on steady state can be calculated as
follows:
ess= Ess tON2 (23)
where:
ess input energy of the compressor under steady state condition
(in kWh or Btu).
Qss Steady state RTU total capacity (in W or Btu/hr)
The energy penalty can be calculated as follows:
I ecycling 1energy pena ty =--
ess (24)
Table 4.7 and Table 4.8 show the calculation results for the energy penalties
for t=60 sec and t=30 sec respectively. For t=60 sec, the energy penalty is
around 16% while for t=60 sec the energy penalty is 7.5%.
Table 4.7 The energy penalty for oversizing for
Building A (t=60 sec)
Cycle #toN lcyde qcyde ecyde tON2 e..Energy
(hour)(hour)(Btu)(Wh)(hour)(Wh)Penalty
1 0.13333 0.58333 5600 582 0.11667 509 14.28%
2 0.08333 0.35000 3205 364 0.06678 291 24.79%
3 0.08333 1.45000 3205 364 0.06678 291 24.79%
4 0.11667 1.13333 4801 509 0.10002 436 16.65%
5 0.10000 0.70000 4002 436 0.08337 364 19.94%
6 0.11667 0.61667 4801 509 0.10002 436 16.65%
7 0.11667 0.48333 4801 509 0.10002 436 16.65%
8 0.11667 0.63333 4801 509 0.10002 436 16.65%
9 0.11667 0.66667 4801 509 0.10002 436 16.65%
10 0.11667 0.51667 4801 509 0.10002 436 16.65%
11 0.15000 0.81667 6400 655 0.13334 582 12.50%
12 0.13333 0.80000 5600 582 0.11667 509 14.28%
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 42
13 0.16667 0.91667 7200 727 0.15000 655 11.11%
14 0.11667 0.93333 4801 509 0.10002 436 16.65%
15 0.11667 1.21667 4801 509 0.10002 436 16.65%
TOTAL 73619 7782 6693 16.27%
Table 4.8 The energy penalty for oversizing for
Building A (t=30 sec)
Cycle #
tON tcyde qcyde ecyele tON2 e..Energy
(hour)(hour)(Btu)(Wh)(hour)(Wh)Penalty
1 0.13333 0.58333 6000 582 0.11667 545 6.67%
2 0.08333 0.35000 3600 364 0.06678 327 11.11%
3 0.08333 1.45000 3600 364 0.06678 327 11.11%
4 0.11667 1.13333 5200 509 0.10002 473 7.69%
5 0.10000 0.70000 4400 436 0.08337 400 9.09%
6 0.11667 0.61667 5200 509 0.10002 473 7.69%
7 0.11667 0.48333 5200 509 0.10002 473 7.69%
8 0.11667 0.63333 5200 509 0.10002 473 7.69%
9 0.11667 0.66667 5200 509 0.10002 473 7.69%
10 0.11667 0.51667 5200 509 0.10002 473 7.69%
11 0.15000 0.81667 6800 655 0.13334 618 5.88%
12 0.13333 0.80000 6000 582 0.11667 545 6.67%
13 0.16667 0.91667 7600 727 0.15000 691 5.26%
14 0.1 1667 0.93333 5200 509 0.10002 473 7.69%
15 0.11667 1.21667 5200 509 0.10002 473 7.69%
TOTAL 79600 7782 7236 7.540/0
Peak demand penalty
In order to calculate the peak demand penalty, a "rightsized" capacity has to
be estimated for a paricular RTU. The rightsized capacity is calculated based
on the peak load. Once the nghtsized capacity has been calculated, the input
power can also be calculated by assuming the same EER for the RTU. The
rightsized input power wil then be compared to the installed input power to
determine the peak demand penalty..
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 43
The peak cooling load of the building can be calculated by using the
following equation:
Building Cooling Load=PLRXQi (25)
where:
PLR
Qi
= Part-load ratio
= RTU total capacity (in W or Btu)
Since the measurement was carred out on a peak cooling day, the measured
cooling load represents the peak cooling load.
The rightsized capacity of the RTU is set to be the same as the peak cooling
load.
Q2=PeakCooling Load (26)
where:
Q2 = Rightsized RTU total capacity (in W or Btu)
The degree of oversizing can be calculated by using the following equation:
O .. D Qi 1versizing r actor = -Q -
2
(27)
The input power for the rightsized capacity can then be calculated by
assuming the same EER:
E = Q22 EER (28)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 44
where:
E2 =
Q2 =
EER =
input power for the rightsized RTU (in W or Btu/h)
Rightsized RTU total capacity (in W or Btur)
Energy Effciency Ratio of the RTU
The peak demand penalty can be expressed in terms of percentage, or it can
be expressed in terms ofkW per ton.
Peak demand penalty = E 1- E 2 (29)
Or,
E¡-E2
Peak demand penalty =
Q¡
(30)
Where:
Ei
E2
Qi
input power for the oversized RTU (in W or Btu)
input power for the rightsized RTU (in W or Btuhr)
= RTU total capacity (in ton)
Table 4.9 shows the peak demand penalty calculation (assuming t=60 sec).
The maximum "rightsized" capacity is 12,416 Btu, which makes the RTU
(at 4 ton capacity) around 200% oversized. The peak demand penalty is
around 3.5 kW or about 0.89 kW/ton.
Table 4.10 shows the peak demand penalty calculation (assuming t=30 sec).
The maximum "rightsized" capacity is 13,448 Btu, which makes the RTU
(at 4 ton capacity) around 156% oversized. The peak demand penalty is
around 3.5 kW or about 0.877 kW/ton.
The peak demand penalty does not seem to be sensitive to the time constant
(t)
Table 4.9 The peak demand penalty for
oversizing for Building A (t=60 sec)
toN Íede Peak Rightsized Input Penalty PenaltyCycle # CLF Load Cap Power(hour)(hour)(Btulh)(Btulh)(W)(W)(kW/ton)
1 0.13333 0.58333 0.20001 9600 12001 1091 3273 0.818
2 0.08333 0.35000 0.19080 9158 11448 1041 3323 0.831
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 45
3 0.08333 1.45000 0.04605 2211 2763 251 4112 1.028
4 0.11667 1.13333 0.08825 4236 5295 481 3882 0.971
5 0.10000 0.70000 0.11911 5717 7146 650 3714 0.929
6 0.11667 0.61667 0.16219 7785 9731 885 3479 0.870
7 0.11667 0.48333 0.20693 9933 12416 1129 3235 0.809
8 0.11667 0.63333 0.15792 7580 9475 861 3502 0.876
9 0.11667 0.66667 0.15002 7201 9001 818 3545 0.886
10 0.11667 0.51667 0.19358 9292 11615 1056 3308 0.827
11 0.15000 0.81667 0.16327 7837 9796 891 3473 0.868
12 0.13333 0.80000 0.14584 7000 8750 795 3568 0.892
13 0.16667 0.91667 0.16364 7855 9818 893 3471 0.868
14 0.11667 0.93333 0.10716 5144 6430 585 3779 0.945
15 0.11667 1.21667 0.08220 3946 4932 448 3915 0.979
MAXIMUM 0.21 9933 12416 1129 4112 1.03
AVERAGE 0.15 6966 8708 792 3572 0.89
MINIMUM 0.05 2211 2763 251 3235 0.81
4.3 Measurement results
The measurement results are presented in terms of parameters that have been
discussed in the previous section. The calculation methods are the same as
the examples in the previous section, so they wil be omitted for the other
buildings. Only the summary of the results wil be presented for the rest of
the RTUs.
Table 4.10 The peak demand penalty for
oversizing for Building A (t=30 sec)
tON tcyde Peak Rightsiz Input Penalty PenaltyCycle # (hour)(hour)CLF Load edCap Power (W (kW/ton)(Btu/h)(Btu/h)(W)
1 0.13333 0.58333 0.21429 10286 12857 1169 3195 0.799
2 0.08333 0.35000 0.21429 10286 12857 1169 3195 0.799
3 0.08333 1.45000 0.05172 2483 3103 282 4082 1.020
4 0.11667 1.13333 0.09559 4588 5735 521 3842 0.961
5 0.10000 0.70000 0.13095 6286 7857 714 3649 0.912
6 0.11667 0.61667 0.17568 8432 10541 958 3405 0.851
7 0.11667 0.48333 0.22414 10759 13448 1223 3141 0.785
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 46
8 0.11667 0.63333 0.17105 8211 10263 933 3431 0.858
9 0.11667 0.66667 0.16250 7800 9750 886 3477 0.869
10 0.11667 0.51667 0.20968 10065 12581 1144 3220 0.805
11 0.15000 0.81667 0.17347 8327 10408 946 3417 0.854
12 0.13333 0.80000 0.15625 7500 9375 852 3511 0.878
13 0.16667 0.91667 0.17273 8291 10364 942 3421 0.855
14 0.11667 0.93333 0.11607 5571 6964 633 3731 0.933
15 0.11667 1.21667 0.08904 4274 5342 486 3878 0.970
MAXIMUM 0.22 10759 13448 1223 4082 1.020
AVERAGE 0.16 7544 9430 857 3506 0.877
MINIMUM 0.05 2483 3103 282 3141 0.785
Detailed measurement results for each RTU are presented in Appendix B.3 on
page 77.
The results have been summarzed for all measurement days, except for
Building H where daily results are presented to highlight how the staging of
the two compressors work. Building E RTU-6 that also has two compressors
is assumed to have only one. The RTF of the second compressor is so low
that it is assumed to have never cycled during the measurement period (see
Appendix 8.3.6).
Table 4.11 shows how the measurement data is presented.
Table 4.11 Measurement result presentation
Compressor Stage Day
Building A 1 1 All day
Building B 1 1 All day
Building C 1 1 All day
Building D 1 1 All day
Building E - RTU6 1 1 All day
Building E - RTU7 1 1 All day
BuildingF 1 1 All day
Building G 1 1 All day
Building H - 2-1 Day 1 2 1 Day 1
Building H - 1-1 Day 2 1 1 Day 2
Building H - 1-1 Day 3 1 1 Day 3
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 47
¡Building H - 1-2 Day 1 1 2 I Day 1
4.3.1 The cycling rate and RTF
Table 4.10 shows the cycling rates - average and maximum - and the RTF.
The average cycling rate is the average from the actual data. The maximum
cycling rate is the result of the curve fit based on the measurement data. The
RTF presented below is the maximum RTF from the measurement data. The
maximum cycling rate and the maximum RTF indicate the performance of
the compressor during the design day.
The maximum cycling rate is high for most buildings, too high compared to
other values found in the literature.ß~eciøÎI~r;,l"~~,~;;il~
The desired combination is to
have a low maximum cycling rate and high RTF. The opposite combination is
a sign of oversizing.
Table 4.12 Tbe cycling rate and run-time fraction
Number Cycling rate Cycling rate RTF
of cycles (Ave)(Max)
#cycle/hour cycle/hour (ratio)
Building A 15 1.27 2.66 0.15
Building B 32 1.63 1.75 0.55
Building C 161 5.01 6.22 0.36
Building D 44 2.97 4.53 0.29
Building E - RTU6 27 4.16 6.50 0.56
Building E - RTU7 228 6.91 8.78 0.31
Building F 3 0.32 1.13 0.9
Building G 3 0.12 0.00 1
Building H - 2-1 Day 1 26 1.12 2.65 0.5
Building H - 1-1 Day 2 7 0.41 1.52 0.71
Building H - 1-1 Day 3 7 0.41 1.49 0.88
Building H - 1-2 Day 1 6 1.88 2.51 0.27
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 48
Almost all buildings show a degree of oversizing, except Buildings F and G.
Buildings A has the lowest RTF and relatively high cycling rate. Buildings C,
D and E have a very high cycling rate, too high compared to the values
reported by previous studies.
Building H shows relatively good pedormance (low cycling rate and RTF
more than 0.5). However, the data for Building H only represents a single
compressor of a dual compressor system. The single compressor has shown
some degree of oversizing. Therefore if we consider both compressors the
system is further oversized.
4.3.2 Part-load ratio
Table 4.13 shows the PLR and the average EER, which is the degraded EER
due to cycling. The values of the maximum cycling rate and the RTF is also
shown in the same table to show the correlation between these two values
with the PLR and the EER.
The RTUs with the right combination of cycling rate and RTF (low cycling
rate and high RTF) have a high PLR, which means the compressors in these
RTUs run at or almost at full capacity (see Buildings F, G and also B). This
also means that these RTUs have very low EER degradation. On the other
hand, RTUs with high cycling rates and low RTF wil have low PLR, and
high EER degradation.
Table 4.13 The part-load ratio and EER
degradation
Cycling RTF PLR EER EER EER
rate (Max)avg Nominal Degradation
cycle/hour (ratio)(ratio)(Btu/hr)/W (Btu/hr)/W
Building A 2.66 0.15 0.21 9.46 11.00 14.00%
Building B 1.75 0.55 0.75 12.35 13.00 5.00%
Building C 6.22 0.36 0.65 8.69 11.00 21.00%
Building D 4.53 0.29 0.78 9.13 11.00 17.00%
Building E - RTU6 6.50 0.56 0.75 7.96 9.00 11.56%
Building E - RTU7 8.78 0.31 0.50 6.02 9.00 33.11%
Building F 1.13 0.90 1.00 10.04 10.10 0.59%
Building G 0.00 1.00 1.00 8.98 9.00 0.22%
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 49
Building H - 2-1 Day 1 2.65 0.50 0.89 10.59 11.00 3.73%
Building H - 1-1 Day 2 1.52 0.71 0.97 10.89 11.00 1.00%
Building H - 1-1 Day 3 1.49 0.88 0.98 10.91 11.00 0.82%
Building H - 1-2 Day 1 2.51 0.27 0.36 9.73 11.00 11.55%
4.3.3 Energy Penalty
Table 4.14 shows the energy penalty due to oversizing. The similar pattern as
before can be observed. The RTUs with high cycling rate and low RTF have
high energy penalty. On the other hand, the RTUs with low cycling rate and
high RTF wil have low energy penalty (see Buildings B, F and G).
Table 4.14 The energy penalty
Cycling rate RTF Energy
(Max)Penalty
cycle/hour (ratio)%
Building A 2.66 0.15 16.27
Building B 1.75 0.55 5.24
Building C 6.22 0.36 26.59
Building D 4.53 0.29 20.50
Building E- RTU6 6.50 0.56 13.06
Building E - RTU7 8.78 0.31 49.62
Building F 1.13 0.90 0.59
Building G 0.00 1.00 0.20
Building H - 2-1 Day 1 2.65 0.50 3.87
Building H - 1-1 Day 2 1.52 0.71 0.97
Building H - 1-1 Day 3 1.49 0.88 0.78
Building H - 1-2 Day 1 2.51 0.27 13.04
For RTUs with two compressors like Building H, the energy penalty is small
because the penalties listed is for the first stage only (one compressor). The
energy penalty is considerably higher for the second stage where it is
substantially oversized.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 50
4.3.4 Peak demand penalty
Table 4.15 shows the peak demand penalty. Again, a similar pattern can be
observed. RTUs with high cycling rate and low RTF (the signature of
oversizing) has high peak demand penalty.
Table 4.15 The peak demand penalty
Cycling Oversized Peak-load Peak-Peak-loadrateRTF(peak)penalty load penalty(Max)penalty
cyclelhour (ratio)%W %kW/ton
Building A 2.66 0.15 383.26 3461.00 79.33 0.87
Building B 1.75 0.55 34.09 3692.00 100.00 0.92
Building C 6.22 0.36 53.85 1527.00 35.00 0.38
Building D 4.53 0.29 27.78 711.00 21.73 0.24
Building E - RTU6 6.50 0.56 33.33 3333.00 25.00 0.33
Building E - RTU7 8.78 0.31 99.90 1999.00 49.98 0.67
Building F 1.13 0.90 0.44 31.00 0.43 0.01
Building G 0.00 1.00 0.17 13.00 0.16 0.00
Building H - 2-1 Day 1 2.65 0.50 12.09 2059.00 10.79 0.12
Building H - 1-1 Day 2 1.52 0.71 2.96 549.00 2.88 0.03
Building H - 1-1 Day 3 1.49 0.88 2.44 455.00 2.38 0.03
Building H - 1-2 Day 1 2.51 0.27 175.00 12149.00 63.64 0.69
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 51
5 Simulation
5.1 Introduction
The main objective of the simulation work for this project was to estimate the
cooling energy penalty for the whole cooling season. To achieve that
objective, the simulation assumed two scenarios for comparison; (1) 'existing
size scenario' and (2) 'rightsized scenario'.
To establish the first scenario, the first stage of simulation involved the
calibration of the simulation settings to ensure that the 'existing size scenario'
simulation represents the existing condition as monitored on site. The
calibration stage compares the RTF between the existing simulation and the
onsite measurement results. If the RTF was comparable, then the simulation
settings were assumed to be accurate enough.
The two scenarios were simulated for the whole cooling season and the
cooling energy consumption was compared.
5.2 Simulation settings
5.2.1 Building A
5.2.1.1 Description
The simulated space is one thermal zone served by a single RTU. The zone
has three rooms: a conference room, a offce space, and a storage room. The
zone is located in the northwest par of the building, with its north and
western walls exposed to external environment. The zone has a flat roof.
Figue 5.1 shows the simulated zone modeled in EnergyPlus.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrted Design Lab-Boise (Report #20090208-01)Page 52
Figure 5.1 The simulated zone in Building A
5.2.1.2 Construction
External walls are made up of 5/8" gysum board on either side, with R -19
insulation. The concrete floor is placed above the ground surface. The roof is
a concrete mass with R-30 insulation.
The glazing area is located in the north wall (area=252 ft2, WWR=17%) and
the west wall (area=784 ft, WWR=9%). A double-pane window is used with
thermal properties of glazing set as built (SC=0.81 and U-value=0.59).
5.2.1.3 Internal gains
Table 5.1 shows the internal gains used in the simulation. These values were
obtained from the interviews.
Table 5.1 Internal gains for Building A
Design Unit Per SF Unit
assumption value
Occupancy 20 person 47.000 sf/person
Lighting 2W/sf 2.000 W/sf
Equipment 800 W 0.851 W/sf
5.2.1.4 HVAC System
The RTU is modeled using the EnergyPlus template for a unitary system.
There are five curves used to describe the performance ofthe RTU. For this
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 53
simulation we used custom curves based on the manufacturer data (see Figure
5.2 and Figue 5.3).
CopalÌn ~n Measl. Da and C~~fi
Figure 5.2 RTU Performance Curve (function of
temperature) for Building A
CopalÌn ~n Mea$Uld data and Cul'll~fi
l!
¡¡
FUlm!k
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 54
Figure 5.3 RTU Performance Curve (function of
airfow) for Building A
The figures above show the comparison between the manufacturer's
(measured) data and the EnergyPlus default curve. Figure 5.2 shows that the
default curve is a very good fit to the measurement data Figure 5.3, however,
shows that the default curve is not a good fit to the measurement data. Figure
5.3 also shows the corrected curve used in the simulation.
5.2.2 Building B
5.2.2.1 Description
5.2.2.2 Construction
5.2.2.3 Internal Gains
5.2.2.4 HVAC System
5.2.3 Building C
5.2.3.1 Description
5.2.3.2 Construction
5.2.3.3 Internal Gains
5.2.3.4 HVAC System
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 55
5.2.4 Building D
5.2.4.1 Description
5.2.4.2 Construction
5.2.4.3 Internal Gains
5.2.4.4 HVAC System
5.3 Simulation results
5.3.1 Calibration
5.3.1.1 Building A
Figure 5.4 Simulation Result for Building A
(Existing Condition)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 56
5.4 Heading Level 2
5.4.1 Heading Level 3
5.4.1.1 Heading Level 4
5.4.1.2 Heading Level 4
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab~Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 57
References
Armstrong, P.R., Sullivan, G.P. & Parker, G.B., 2006. Field Demonstration of a High-
Effciency Packaged Rooftop Air Conditioning Unit at Fort Gordon, Augusta, GA,
Available at: htt://www.osti.gov /energycitations/servlets/purl/8944 72-eyCW 5b/
(Accessed August 24,2009).
Bell, A.A., 2008. HVAC: Equations, Data, and Rules of Thumb 2nd ed., McGraw-Hil.
Cowan, A., 2004. Review of Recent Commercial RoofTop Unit Field Studies in the
Pacifc Northwest and California
, White Salmon, WA, USA: New Buildings Institute. Available at:
http://www.peci.org/ComRetail/docs/NPCC _ SmallHVAC _Report _ R3 _.pdf.
Felts, D.R., 1998. Rooftop Unit Performance Analysis Tool- A Case Study
, California, USA: Pacific Gas and Electrc Company.
Felts, D.R. & Bailey, P., 2000. The State of Affairs - Packaged Cooling Equipment in
California. Available at:
http://www.eceee.org/conference yroceedings/ ACEEE _ buildings/2000/Panel_ 3/p
3 11/.
Guthrie, P., 2003. The architect's portable handbook: first step rules of thumb for
building design 3rd ed., McGraw-Hil.
Haines, R.W. & Wilson, C.L., 2003. HVAC Systems Design Handbook 4th ed., McGraw-
Hil.
Henderson, H., Parker, D. & Huang, J., 2000. Improving DOE-2 s RESYS routine: User
Defined Functions to Provide More Accurate Part Load Energy Use and
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrted Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 58
Humidity Predictions, Berkeley, CA, USA: Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory.
Henderson, H., Raustad, R. & Rengarjan, K., 1991. Measuring Thermostat and Air
Conditioner Performance in Florida Homes
, Florida, USA: Florida Solar Energ Center.
Jacobs, P., 2003a. Small HVAC Field and Survey Information, Califonia Energy
Comission. Available at: htt://ww.energy.ca.gov/2003publications/CEC-500-
2003-082/CEC-500- 2003-082-A -23 .PDF.
Jacobs, P., 2003b. Small HVAC System Design Guide, Califonia Energ Comission.
Available at: htt://ww.newbuildings.org/downloads/FinalAttachments/ A-
12_Sm_HVAC_Guide_ 4.7.5.pdf.
Jacobs, P. & Conlon, T., 2002. State-of-the-Art Review Whole Building, Building
Envelope, and HVAC Component and System Simulation and Design Tools - Part
1: Whole-Building and Building
Envelope Simulation Design Tools. Available at:
htt://tc4 7 .ashraetcs.org/pdf/resentations/Jacobs _ Cincinnati. pdf.
Jacobs, P. & Henderson, H., 2002. State-of-the-Art Review Whole Building, Building
Envelope, and HVAC Component and System Simulation and Design Tools,
Arlington, VA, USA: Air-Conditioning and Refrgeration Technology Institute.
Komor, P., 1997. Space Cooling Demands for Offce Plug Loads. ASHRAE Journal,
39(12),41-44.
McLain, H. & Goldberg, D., 1984. Benefits of replacing residential central air
conditioning systems. In Washington DC, USA: American Council for an
Energy-Effcient Economy, pp. E226 - E227.
NEEA, 2004. Assessment of the Commercial Building Stock in the Pacifc Northwest,
Portland, OR, USA: Northwest Energy Efficiency Allance. Available at:
http://www.nwallance.org/research/reports/ 125 .pdf.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 59
NEEA, 2005. Light Commercial HVAC, Portland, OR, USA: Northwest Energy
Effciency Allance. Available at:
http://www.nwallance.org/researchlreports/143 .pdf.
Neme, C., Proctor, J. & Nadel, S., 1999. Energ savings potentialfrom addressing
residential air conditioner and heat pump installation problems, Washington DC,
USA: American Council for an Energy-Effcient Economy.
Parken, W.H. et aI., 1985. Field performance of three residential heat pumps in the
cooling mode, Gaithersberg, MD, USA: National Bureau of Standards.
PGE, 1997. Commercial Building Survey Report, California, USA: Pacific Gas and
Electric Company.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 60
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 61
A Survey and interview result
A.I Introduction
Table A.l Below shows the response for the survey.
A.2 Survey result
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 62
Ta
b
l
e

A
.
I
Su
r
v
e
y

R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
No
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
Ye
a
r
To
t
a
l

S
F
To
t
a
l

S
F
To
t
a
l
To
t
a
l
He
a
t
i
n
g
He
a
t
i
n
g
Gl
a
z
i
n
g
Na
m
e
(o
f
f
c
e
(e
x
c
l
u
d
i
n
To
n
s
To
n
s
so
u
r
c
e
ca
p
a
c
i
t
y
Ar
e
a
on
l
y
)
g
o
f
f
c
e
)
(o
f
f
c
e
(e
x
c
l
u
d
i
n
(B
t
u
l
h
r
)
on
l
y
)
g
o
f
f
c
e
)
Fi
r
m
A

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

I
On
e

s
t
o
r
y

o
f
f
c
e

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
20
0
0
13
7
0
0
0
41
o
G
A
S
66
4
,
0
0
0

H
I
G
H
Fi
r
m

A

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

2
On
e

s
t
o
r
y

o
f
f
c
e

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
20
0
1
44
0
0
0
16
o
G
A
S
24
0
,
0
0
0

M
E
D
I
U
M
Fi
r
m

A

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

3
On
e

s
t
o
r
y

o
f
f
c
e
/
e
x
a
m

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
19
9
5
93
0
0
84
0
0
26
22

G
A
S
91
8
,
0
0
0

M
E
D
I
U
M
Fi
r
m

A

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

4
On
e

s
t
o
r
y

o
f
f
c
e

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
19
9
4
48
0
0
0
17
o
G
A
S
32
2
,
0
0
0

M
E
D
I
U
M
Fi
r
m

A

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

5
Po
l
y
g
o
n

T
w
o

s
t
o
r
e
y

o
f
f
c
e

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
20
0
0
28
9
0
0
0
69
o
G
A
S
i
,
6
0
3
,
0
0
0

M
E
D
I
U
M
Fi
r
m

A

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

6
Po
l
y
g
o
n

O
n
e

s
t
o
r
y

o
f
f
c
e
/
g
a
r
a
g
e

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
20
0
5
63
0
0
16
0
0
21
o
G
A
S
44
0
,
0
0
0

M
E
D
I
U
M
Fi
r
m

A

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

7
Tw
o

s
t
o
r
e
y

o
f
f
c
e

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
20
0
6
28
0
0
0
8
o
G
A
S
18
3
,
0
0
0

L
O
W
Fi
r
m

A

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

8
On
e

s
t
o
r
y

o
f
f
c
e
/
g
a
r
a
g
e

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

(
w
i
t
h

m
e
z
z
a
n
i
n
e
)
20
0
5
10
5
0
0
78
3
2
37
o
G
A
S
63
2
,
0
0
0

L
O
W
Fi
r
m

A

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

9
On
e

s
t
o
r
y

o
f
f
c
e

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
20
0
5
75
0
0
0
18
o
G
A
S
22
8
,
0
0
0

M
E
D
I
U
M
Fi
r
m

B

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

i

0

O
f
f
c
e
20
0
1
28
8
0
0
0
76
.
5
Fi
r
m

B

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

i

i

O
f
f
c
e
19
9
9
11
1
5
32
Fir
m

B

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

1
2

O
f
f
c
e
20
0
6
48
7
5
27
9
1
5
10
50
Fi
r
m

C

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

i

3

O
f
f
c
e
19
9
9
10
8
7
8
36
Fi
r
m

C

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

1
4

c
l
u
b

h
o
u
s
e

L
O
S
T
19
9
9
Fi
r
m

C

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

1
5

H
i
g
h

s
c
h
o
o
l
19
9
9
91
0
5
4
65
Fi
r
m

C

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

1
6

O
f
f
c
e

L
O
S
T
19
9
9
Fi
r
m

C

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

i

7

M
e
d
i
c
a
l

o
f
f
c
e
20
0
4
16
5
2
7
37
Fi
r
m

C

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

1
8

I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l

off
c
e

20
0
4
46
5
1
5
59
.
5
Fi
r
m

C

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

i

9

M
e
d
i
c
a
l

o
f
f
c
e
20
0
4
33
4
6
0
45
Fi
r
m

C

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

2
0

O
f
f
c
e

L
O
S
T
20
0
4
Fi
r
m

C

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

2
1

B
a
n
k
20
0
4
34
5
9
11
Fir
m

C

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

2
2

O
f
f
c
e
20
0
1
61
9
4
18
Fi
r
m

D

B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

2
3

O
f
f
c
e
Fi
r
m
E
At
t
e
m
p
t
e
d

t
o

f
i
l
l

i
n

t
h
e

s
u
r
v
e
y
,

b
u
t

h
a
s

n
o
t

b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g

t
h
a
t

f
i
t
s

i
n
t
o

t
h
e
ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
Fi
r
m
F
No

r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
A.3 Interview result
Table A.2 Interview Result with Firm A for
Building A
id you use printed drawing?
id you use a CAD fie?
hat were geometrcal simplifications used verage roof heights was used.on sizing calculations?
ho specified the materials?
as it assumed to be code compliance? If
es, what code?
ow was this information input into the loa
alculation? U.A.deltaT?
as thennal mass somehow included in the
oad calculation?
hat is the glazing specs? VLT? SHGC?
hat is the WWR?
as there any shading? Was it included in
he calculation?
at method was used? CLTD? RTS? LTD(ELITE software)
imulation Software?
hat are the main considerations? One big everal small Units
nit or several small units?
s there sub-zoning? What system was used? 0
VVT?
hat specific conditions were used for peak ir temperature
izing? Air temp and RH?
as an hourly weather file used? From what 0
ata source?
as there a lighting designer on the project?
hat was the lighting power density used?
as another assumption used? From where? 0
ho determine the occupancy? Did the ased ou number of workstation
rchitect? Did someone else describe the
ccupancy? If not, how did you determine
ccupanc for sizin calculations?
as other assumption were used? How were 0
hey generated?
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 64
esign
'dynamic"
onstruction,
peration and
aintenance
dynamic"
at assumptions were used? How were
hey determined?
pecify what load, what number was used,
nd how they were determined.
hat number was used and how was it
etermined?
hat is the design airow baed on for the roportoned by sensible load
izing calculation?
as a safety factor applied in this project?
fso, what %?
as the safety factor applied at the end of
e calculation?
as the safety factor applied as par of the
ssumptions?
as there a set budget for mechanical
ystems ($/sf)?
as the project open bidding? Pre-existing
elationship? With owner? With architect?
hat is the duration of the project? Any
ime constraint for HVAC?
id the owner dictate a certin indoor
ondition?
ny mandate to accommodte futue
rowth? How
as the installed capacity "upsized" to the
ext available unit?
id the HVAC contractor changed the
apacity?
id the owner has special requirement that
hanged the design?
as there a commissioning? Staup
rocedure? Who is the commissioning
gent?
tart-up by Mechanical contractor
'r balance only
f yes, is there any concer durng
ommissioning?
s there any reportcomplaint from the
enants/users?
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report #20090208-01)Page 65
Table A.3 Interview Result with Firm B for
Building C and D
Building Did you use printed drawing?Yes Yes
Geometr Did you use a CAD fie?Yes Yes
What were geometrcal simplifications used No No
in sizing calculations?
Building Who specified the materials?Architect Architect
Material Was it assumed to be code compliance? If No energy code IECC 2003
yes, what code?
How was this information input into the U.A.deltaT U.A.deltaT
load calculation? U.A.deltaT?
Was thermal mass somehow included in the No No
load calculation?
Glazing What is the glazing specs? VLT? SHGC?U-0.48, SC-0.63 U-0.3, SC-0.44
What is the WWR?
Was there any shading? Was it included in No Yes, No it was not
the calculation?nsed in the
calcnlation
Load What method was used? CLTD? RTS?CLTD CLTD
Calculation Simulation Softare?
Method
Zoning What are the main considerations? One big Small Units Small Units
unit or several small units?
Is there sub-zoning? What system was No No
used?CVVT?
Outdoor What specific conditions were used for Outsise drybulb Outsise drybulb
Design peak sizing? Air temp and RH?temperature-96°F temperature-97°F
condition Was an hourly weather file used? From No No
what data source?
Lighting load Was there a lighting designer on the Yes Yes
roject?
What was the lighting power density used?1.5 W /sqft as per 1.3 for the selected
ASHRAE 90.1-1999 zone as per
residential IECC
2003
Was another assumption used? From No
where?
Occupancy Who determine the occupancy? Did the Furniture plan or Furniture count or
load architect? Did someone else describe the Max occupancy per ASHRAE62.1
occupancy? If not, how did you determine IMC.Owner/Architect
occupancy for sizing calculations?provided the
occupancy schedules.
Was other assumption were used? How No NA
were they generated?
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 66
Equipment What assumptions were used? How were 1.25 W/Sqft, Old in
load they determined?house standard
Any other Specify what load, what number was used,NA NA
loads?and how they were determined.
Outside air What number was used and how was it (MC, 20cfm/person 20 cfm/person , 1330
flow determined?Total (140 for the
selected zone- RTU
4)
Design airfow What is the design airfow based on for the 20. AT sensible heat 20. AT sensible heat
sizing calculation?gain gain
Safety factor Was a safety factor applied in this project?Not in percentages,No
If so, what %?some conservative
assum tions
Was the safety factor applied at the end of NA NA
the calculation?
Was the safety factor applied as par of the Some conservative NA
assumptions?assumptions
Design Was there a set budget for mechanical
"dynamic"systems ($/st)?
Was the project open bidding? Pre-existing Selective bidding,Open bidding, Prior
relationship? With owner? With architect?proir relation with relation with
Architect,Architect and owner.
What is the duration of the project? Any 5 months designing,
time constraint for HVAC?8 months for
construction, No
special HVAC
constraints.
Did the owner dictate a cert indoor No No
condition?
Any mandate to accommodte futue No No
owth? How
Was the installed capacity "upsized" to the Yes Yes
next available unit?
Did the HVAC contractor changed the No No
capacity?
Did the owner has special requirement that Raised Door,but no No
changed the design?mechanical impact
Constrction,Was there a commissioning? Startp No Yes there was
operation and procedure? Who is the commissioning commissioning,
maintenance agent?startup contractor
"dynamic"o:firm name deleted::
If yes, is there any concern durng
commissioning?
Is there any reportcomplaint from the No
tenants/users?
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 67
Table A.4 Interview Result with Firm C for
Building A and B
Building
Geometry
Building
Material
Glazing
Load
Calculation
Method
Zoning
Outdoor
Design
condition
Did you use printed drawing? No
Did you use a CAD fie? Yes
What were geometrical simplifications used No, Simplein sizing calculations? rectangles
Who specified the materials? Architects
Was it assumed to be code compliance? If Yes, Either IBC oryes, what code? VBC
No
Yes
None, Rectangle
Architect
International
Building Code 2006
How was this information input into the V Value/R Value
load calculation? U.A.deltaT?
Was thermal mass somehow included in the No
load calculation?
What is the glazing specs? VLT? SHGC? V-.59, SC-0.81
RValue
No
V-0.35, SC-O.72
What is the WWR?
Was there any shading? Was it included in
the calculation?
Yes, there is shading; No
No, it was not
included in the
calculationsCLTD CLTDWhat method was used? CLTD? RTS?
Simulation Softare?
What are the main considerations? One big One big zone
unit or several small units?
One big zone based
on use
Is there sub-zoning? What system was
used? CVVT?
What specific conditions were used for
peak sizing? Air temp and RH?
No No
Air temperature and Air temperature and
time of the day Time of day
Was an hourly weather file used? From
what data source?
No No
Lighting load Was there a lighting designer on the Yes Yes
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 68
Occupancy
load
Equipment
load
Any other
loads?
project?
What was the lighting power density used?
Was another assumption used? From
where?
Who determine the occupancy? Did the
architect? Did someone else describe the
occupancy? If not, how did you determine
occupancy for sizing calculations?
Yes
2w/sqft as per
ASHRAE
Architect, Code and
ASHRAE
1 W/sqft
No
Architect
Mechanical code
based on sqft of zone
Was other assumption were used? How
were they generated?
What assumptions were used? How were
they determined?
Specify what load, what number was used,
and how they were determined.
None
Computer Load-
ASHRAE
No
None
None
Computer/Equipme
nt loads information
from the owner
Outside air
flow
20cfm/person/percod
e/ASHRAE
What number was used and how was it
determined?
Code, per person
Design
airflow
Safety factor
Design
"dynamic"
What is the design airfow based on for the
sizing calculation?
Was a safety factor applied in this project?
If so, what %?
Was the safety factor applied at the end of
the calculation?
1600cfm 1600 cfm
Yes, 10% in load Yes, 10~
calculation only
Yes, Safety Factor Yes
was taken out when
equipment was
selected and instaUedYes NoWas the safety factor applied as par of the
assumptions?
Was there a set budget for mechanical
systems ($/st)?
Was the project open bidding? Pre-existing Open bidding for
relationship? With owner? With architect? MEP
Yes, $ 15/sqft
Open bidding for
MEP
What is the duration of the project? Any
time constraint for HVAC?
2months,No 3 months, no
constraints
Did the owner dictate a certain indoor
condition?
No Yes, Standard offce
conditions
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 69
Any mandate to accommodate future
growth? How
No Yes, shell and core
space built
Was the installed capacity "upsized" to the
next available unit?
Did the HVAC contractor changed the
ca aci ?
Did the owner has special requirement that
changed the design?
Construction, Was there a commissioning? Startp
operation and procedure? Who is the commissioning
maintenance agent?
"dynamic"
Yes
No No
No No
Startp procedure
by Mechanical
contractor
Yes, c:firm name
deleted~
If yes, is there any concern during
commissioning?
Is there any reportcomplaint from the
tenants/users?
No
No
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 70
B Measurement results
B.l Introduction
B.2 The outdoor temperature comparison
This appendix shows the outdoor temperature durng the measurement
periods. The measured outdoor temperatures are compared with the TMY
weather data and the measured data at the Boise airport for the same day.
The Boise Airport weather data is downloaded from WunderGround website.
OifT~ ~n -!ildA
Figure B.l Outdoor temperature comparison - Building A
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 71
Figure B.2 Outdoor temperature comparison - Building B
Figure B.3 Outdoor temperature comparison - Building B
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 72
~tr\ml*ti Comp(lln¥
Figure B.4 Outdoor temperature comparison - Building C
BUÍk!t¥l)
Figure B.5 Outdoor temperature comparison - Building D
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 73
EltilOtl i:
Figure B.6 Outdoor temperature comparison - Building D
Figure B.7 Outdoor temperature comparison - Building E-7
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 74
Figure B.8 Outdoor temperature comparison - Building E-6
Figure B.9 Outdoor temperature comparison - Building F
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 75
Figure B.IO Outdoor temperature comparison - Building G
ß\#lt! H
Figure B.ll Outdoor temperature comparison - Building H
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 76
B.3
B.3.l
B.3.L.l
B.3.l.i
Measurement results
Building A
Building and RTU Description: Building A
Buildini: description
The building is a single story narrow offce building. The total floor space
area is 6,194 ft. The year of design is 2001. It was not designed to meet any
energy code.
Zone description
The measured space is a combination of 3 rooms and is served by a single
HVAC system. The rooms are a conference room, a single offce and a
storage. The bulk of the cooling load comes from the conference room.
The zone is located in the nortwest corner of the building, with its north and
west walls exposed to external environment. All the windows have a fixed
external shading.
The total floor space area served by this RTU is 915 ft2. Table B.l shows the
description of the RTU for Building A.
Table B.l RTU Description for Building A
RTU Building A
Manufacturer Carer 48TF-005
Tons 4
Compressor/control l/single stage
EER 11
CFM 1600
Measurement result: Building A
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 77
eodll' A ~
Figure B.12 Measurement Result - Building A (ll-Aug)
B.3.1.3 Data analysis: Building A
Comprem:r Cycling Da * Building A
Figure B.13 Nmax calculation for Building A
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 78
Table B.2 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building A
unit t=30 t=60
Number of cycles #15 15
Cycling rate (Ave)cycle/hour 1.27 1.27
Cycling rate (Max)cycle/hour 2.66 2.66
RTF (ratio)0.15 0.15
PLR (ratio)0.224 0.207
EERavg (Btu)/W 10.23 9.46
Energy Penalty %7.54 16.27
Oversized %346.15 383.26
Peak-load penalty W 3386 3461
Peak-load penalty kW/ton 0.846 0.865
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 79
B.3.2
B.3.2.1
B.3.2.2
Building B
Building and RTU Description: Building B
Buildini: description
The building is a irregular polygonal two story clinical building. Top floor of
a two story building is dedicated to clinical services, while the basement is
dedicated to clinical wards. The total floor space area is 16,527 ft. The year
of design is 2004. It was not designed to meet any energy code.
Zone description
The measured space is a rectangular double height strcture, located at the
second floor level of the building. The nurse station is an internally
dominated zone, with walls and floor being adiabatic. The roof is the only
heat transfer surface in the building. The total floor space area served by this
RTU is 1368 ft2. Table B shows the description of the RTU.
Table B.3 RTU Description for Building B
RTU Building B
Manufacturer Carer 48HJ-005
High Effciency
Tons 4
Compressor/control l/single stage
EER 13
CFM 1600
Measurement result: Building B
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 80
~"l 6.. Meaa_~ 7.14
Figure B.14 Measurement Result - Building B (14-Jul)
~e. Meaar_ri 1.$
Figure B.15 Measurement Result - Building B (15-Jul)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report #20090208-01)Page 81
Figure B.16 Measurement Result - Building B (16-Jul)
Figure B.17 Measurement Result - Building B (17-Jul)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 82
B.3.2.3 Data analysis: Building B
Core Cy Da - Bult B
~~"'*'t;ß~
Figure B.t8 Nmax calculation for Building B
Table B.4 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building B
unit t=30 t=0
Number of cycles #32 32
Cycling rate (Ave)cycle/hour 1.63 1.63
Cycling rate (Max)cycle/hour 2.66 2.66
RTF (ratio)0.55 0.55
PLR (ratio)0.754 0.746
EERavg (Btu)/W 12.29 11.97
Energy Penalty %2.55 5.24
Oversized (ave)%99.42 105.48
Oversized (peak)%32.58 34.09
Peak-load penalty W 936 969
Peak-load penalty kW/ton 0.234 0.242
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 83
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 84
B.3.3
B.3.3.1
B.3.3.2
Building C
Building and RTU Description: Building C
Buildini: description
The building is a polygon shaped single story offce building. It has two
wings on either side, with a double height lobby space. The total floor space
area is 13,700 ft2. The year of design is 2000. It was not designed to meet
any energy code.
Zone description
The measured space is a section of the right wing, with its north western wall
exposed to external environment. The rectangular space is a part of an open
offce plan served by a separate HVAC system. The total floor served by this
RTU is 1242 ft2. Table C shows the description of the RTU.
Table B.5 Measured RTU for Building B
RTU Building C
Manufactuer Bryant 580 DPV
048074
Tons 4
Compressor/control l/single stage
EER 10.9
CFM 1600
Measurement result: Building C
Figures B.19 to B.23 show the measurement results use for the analysis.
There are a total of five days of data.
The data shows that the RTU is constantly cycling. The compressor cycled
161 times over the period of 32 hours of data analyzed.
The fan mode of operation is not continuous, but cycle together with the
compressor. The RTU has no economizer mode.
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 85
Figure B.19 Measurement Result - Building C (19-Aug)
Figure B.20 Measurement Result - Building C (20-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 86
M_emen&-21
Figure B.21 Measurement Result - Building C (21-Aug)
Figure B.22 Measurement Result - Building C (22-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 87
Figure B.23 Measurement Result - Building C (24-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 88
B.3.3.3 Data analysis: Building C
CoreSS Cytl Dat . Buin C
A,i\,f't!.!h¡t:::l'd'l
Figure B.24 Nmax calculation for Building C
~~:i4"~ii
Table B.6 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building B
unit
Number of cycles
Cycling rate (Ave)
Cycling rate (Max)
RTF
PLR
EERavg
Energy Penalty
Oversized ( ave)
Oversized (peak)
Peak-load penalty
Peak-load penalty
#
cycle/hour
cycle/hour
(ratio)
(ratio)
(Btuhr)/W
%
%
%
W
kW/ton
t=30
161
5.01
2.66
0.36
0.675
7.36
12.85
532.9
48.15
1880
0.470
t=0
161
5.01
2.66
0.36
0.650
6.56
26.59
781.68
53.85
2024
0.506
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 89
B.3.4
B.3.4.1
B.3.4.2
Building D
Building and RTU Description: Building D
Measurement result: Building D
Figure B.25 Measurement Result - Building D (20-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 90
~.O,M__&..~1
Figure B.26 Measurement Result - Building D (21-Aug)
8I00 I). M_ent $-22
Figure B.27 Measurement Result - Building D (22-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 91
Figure B.28 Measurement Result - Building D (24-Aug)
Figure B.29 Measurement Result - Building D (25-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 92
~.!ì..M__II&.U
Figure B.30 Measurement Result - Building D (26-Aug)
Figure B.31 Measurement Result - Building D (27-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 93
Figure B.32 Measurement Result - Building D (28-Aug)
B.3.4.3 Data analysis: Building D
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 94
Coressr Cycli Dat ~ Builing D
Figure B.33 Nmax calculation for Building D
Table B.7 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building D
unit 1;30 1;0
Number of cycles #44 44
Cycling rate (Ave)cycle/hour 2.97 2.97
Cycling rate (Max)cvcle/hour 4.53 4.53
RTF (ratio)0.29 0.29
PLR (ratio)0.804 0.783
EERavg (Btu)/W 5.69 5.17
Energy Penalty %9.44 20.5
Oversized (ave)%393.26 468.16
Oversized (peak)%24.32 27.78
Peak-load penalty W 607 675
Peak-load penalty kW/ton 0.202 0.225
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 95
B.3.5
B.3.5.1
B.3.5.2
Building E - RTU7
Building and RTU Description: Building E
Measurement result: Building E
'I.
Figure B.34 Measurement Result - Building E-7 (3O-Jul)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 96
81líl E . RTU 7.. M__meii r~ai
Figure B.35 Measurement Result - Building E-7 (31-Jul)
Figure B.36 Measurement Result - Building E-7 (Ol-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 97
Figure B.37 Measurement Result - Building E':7 (02-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report #20090208-01)Page 98
B.3.5.3 Data analysis: Building E
CoreCyg Da . Buin E RTU'1
Figure B.38 Nmax calculation for Building E-7
Table B.8 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building E - RTU7
Number of cycles
Cycling rate (Ave)
Cycling rate (Max)
RTF
PLR
EERavg
Energy Penalty
Oversized (ave)
Oversized (peak)
Peak-load penalty
Peak-load penalty
unit
#
cycle/hour
cycle/hour
(ratio)
(ratio)
(Btu)/W
%
%
%
W
kW/ton
t=30
228
6.91
8.78
0.31
0.550
5.09
22.18
339.06
81.82
1397
0.466
t=0
228
6.91
8.78
0.31
0.500
4.16
49.62
467.1
99.9
1551
0.517
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 99
B.3.6 Building E - RTU6
B.3.6.1 Building and RTU Description: Building E - RTU6
B.3.6.2 Measurement result: Building E - RTU6
Figure B.39 Measurement Result - Building E-6 (02-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report #20090208-01) Page 100
Ii,M-.e!la4
Figure B.40 Measurement Result - Building E-6 (02-Aug)
I~E., RTU ij. M_em.8-5
Figure B.41 Measurement Result - Building E-6 (02-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrted Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01) Page 101
B.3.6.3 Data analysis: Building E - RTU6
Copreuof Cyling Oam w 6uldîrt E RTU6
Figure B.42 Nmax calculation for Building E-6
Table B.9 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building E - RTU6
unit t=30 t=0
Number of cycles #27 27
Cycling rate (Ave)cycle/hour 4.16 4.16
Cycling rate (Max)cycle/hour 6.5 6.5
RTF (ratio)0.56 0.56
PLR (ratio)0.768 0.750
EERavg (Btu)/W 5.84 5.51
Energy Penalty %6.54 13.06
Oversized (ave)%261.16 357.16
Oversized (peak)%30.23 33.33
Peak-load penalty W 720 776
Peak-load penalty kW/ton 0.240 0.259
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01) Page 102
B.3.7
B.3.7.1
B.3.7.2
Building F
Building and RTU Description: Building F
Measurement result: Building F
8ung f .. MMlIlt!Ml' $.11
Figure B.43 Measurement Result - Building F (ll-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01) Page 103
B.3.7.3 Data analysis: Building F
Compreno Cycling Dam . Bulldín F
Figure B.44 Nmax calculation for Building F
Table B.10 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building F
unit t=30 t=0
Number of cycles #3 3
Cycling rate (Ave)cycle/hour 0.32 0.32
Cycling rate (Max)cycle/hour 1.13 1.13
RTF (ratio)0.9 0.9
PLR (ratio)0.997 0.996
EERavg (Btur)/W 6.21 6.19
Energy Penalty %0.29 0.59
Oversized (ave)%57.75 59.85
Oversized (peak)%0.33 0.44
Peak-load penalty W 10 14
Peak-load penalty kW/ton 0.003 0.005
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01) Page 104
B.3.8
B.3.8.1
B.3.8.2
Building G
Building and RTU Description: Building G
Measurement result: Building G
~.G ....._mI (.24
Figure B.45 Measurement Result - Building F (24-Jul)
~G.. MNli7.23
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 105
Figure B.46 Measurement Result - Building F (28-Jul)
B.3.8.3 Data analysis: Building G
Note: The Nmax calculation was not attempted because the compressor was
always ON (and never cycled OFF) during the day after it was ON at the
beginning of the day.
Table B.ll Summary of Measurement Result for
Building G
unit t=30 t=0
Number of cycles #3 3
Cycling rate (Ave)cycle/hour 0.12 0.12
Cycling rate (Max)cycle/hour 0 0
RTF (ratio)1 1
PLR (ratio)0.999 0.998
EERavg (Btur)/W 6.22 6.21
Energy Penalty %0.1 0.2
Oversized (ave)%0.12 0.23
Oversized (peak)%0.08 0.17
Peak-load penalty W 3 5
Peak-load penalty kW/ton 0.001 0.002
B.3.9 Building H
B.3.9.1 Building and RTU Description: Building H
B.3.9.2 Measurement result: Building H
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01) Page 106
Figure B.47 Measurement Result - Building H (26-Aug)
Figure B.48 Measurement Result - Building H (27-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01) Page 107
Figure B.49 Measurement Result - Building H (28-Aug)
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01) Page 108
B.3.9.3 Data analysis: Building H
Coprss Cyli Da - Bu H - 26Au Co. 2
~#tK~
Figure B.50 Nmax calculation for Building H - Compressor 2
Stage 1 (26-Aug)
Table B.12 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building H - Compressor 2 Stage 1 (26-
Aug)
unit t=30 t=0
Number of cycles #26 26
Cycling rate (Ave)cycle/hour 1.12 1.12
Cycling rate (Max)cycle/hour 2.65 2.65
RTF (ratio)0.5 0.5
PLR (ratio)0.899 0.892
EERavg (Btu)/W 10.79 10.59
Energy Penalty %1.9 3.87
Oversized (ave)%283.23 305.38
Oversized (peak)%11.24 12.09
Peak-load penalty W 1930 2059
Peak-load penalty kW/ton 0.110 0.118
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01) Page 109
CoPfHSOf Cycli 0_ . Building Ii
Jl
$f
J:
$I~ritM
Figure B.51 Nmax calculation for Building H - Compressor 1
Stage 1 (27-Aug)
Table B.13 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building H - Compressor 1 Stage 1 (27-
Aug)
unit t=30 t=0
Number of cycles #7 7
Cycling rate (Ave)cycle/hour 0.41 0.41
Cycling rate (Max)cvcle/hour 1.52 1.52
RTF (ratio)0.71 0.71
PLR (ratio)0.972 0.971
EERavg (Btur)/W 10.95 10.89
Energy Penalty %0.48 0.97
Oversized (ave)%271.82 284.18
Oversized (peak)%2.87 2.96
Peak-load penalty W 533 549
Peak-load penalty kW/ton 0.030 0.031
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 110
Comssor Cycli Da . Building H .2flA. Campi
l
Figure B.52 Nmax calculation for Building H - Compressor 1
Stage 1 (28-Aug)
Table B.14 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building H - Compressor 1 Stage 1 (28-
Aug)
unit t=30 t=
Number of cycles #7 7
Cycling rate (Ave)cycle/hour 0.41 0.41
Cycling rate (Max)cvcle/hour 1.49 1.49
RTF (ratio)0.88 0.88
PLR (ratio)0.977 0.976
EERavg (Btu)/W 10.96 10.91
Energy Penalty %0.39 0.78
Oversized (ave)%67.93 71.36
Oversized (peak)%2.37 2.44
Peak-load penalty W 441 455
Peak-load penalty kW/ton 0.025 0.026
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 111
Compreno Cyellng Da .1 (Sl!nd Stae)
!S!i
Figure B.53 Nmax calculation for Building H - Compressor 1
Stage 1 (28-Aug)
Table B.15 Summary of Measurement Result for
Building H - Compressor 1 Stage 2 (26-
Aug)
unit t=30 t=0
Number of cycles #6 6
Cycling rate (Ave)cycle/hour 1.88 1.88
Cycling rate (Max)cycle/hour 2.51 2.51
RTF (ratio)0.27 0.27
PLR (ratio)0.386 0.364
EERavg (Btu)/W 10.37 9.73
Energy Penalty %6.12 13.04
Oversized (ave)%309.28 337.99
Oversized (peak)%158.82 175
Peak-load penalty W 11715 12149
Peak-load penalty kW/ton 0.669 0.694
Rightsizing of Rooftop HVAC Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090208-01)Page 112
ENERGY USE INDICES
OF SELECTED IDAHO BUILDINGS
Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Authors:
Gladics, G.
Van Den Wymelenberg, K.
Dunn, J.
Hedrick, T.
INTEGRATED DESIGN LABb 0 i s e
COLLEGE of ART and ARCIDTECTU
& Interior
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)
I-0:o
Q.
Wi:..
c(o-Z:towI-
Date
31, December, 2009
20090202-01
Report No.
Page i of 23
Prepared By:
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise
108 N 6th St. Boise 10 83704 USA
ww.uidaho.edu/idl
Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Director
Gunnar Gladics
Project Manager
1-Gunnar Gladics
2-Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
3-Jacob Dunn
4-Tim Hedrick
Authors
C09410-P03
Contract No.
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Bilie Jo McWinn
Project Manager
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by
Idaho Power Company. It does not necessarily represent the
views of Idaho Power Company or its employees. Idaho
Power Company, its employees, contractors and
subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and
assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor
does any party represent that the uses of this information wil
not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not
been approved or disapproved by Idaho Power Company nor
has Idaho Power Company passed upon the accuracy or
adequacy of the information in this report.
Please cite this report as follows:
Gladics, G., K. Van Den Wymelenberg, J. Dunn, T. Hedrick, 2009. Post-Occupancy
Evaluation of Energy Effciency Incentive Programs; Technical Report 20090207-01,
Integrated Design Lab, University ofIdaho, Boise, ID.
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page ii of 23
This page left intentionally blank
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page ii of 23
o N
1 Executive Summary ...............................................................................................................................................5
2 Methods ................................................................................................................................................................7
2.1 Building Selection ...........................................................................................................................................7
2.2 Data Collection ................................................................................................................................ ............... 8
2.3 Data analysis ...................................................................................................................................................9
3 Results ................................................................................................................................................................. 10
3.1 Building reports ............................................................................................................................................ 10
3.2 Comparative Analysis................................................................ .................................................................... 10
3.2.1 Total Energy Intensity of Buildings ........................................................................................................ 10
3.2.2 Total Electrical Intensity ........................................................................................................................ 17
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 4 of 23
The University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab (IDL) was commissioned by Idaho Power Company (IPC) to
collect energy consumption data for at least 100 buildings in IPC service territory. This information was to be used
in several ways. First, IPC was interested in using the data to target specific opportunities for building efficiency
improvements with their clients. Second, the data would also provide additional baseline energy use information
to supplement information such as the Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) conducted every
three years by the United State Energy Information Agency (EIA). The data in the CBECS database is rather sparse
for several building types in Idaho, creating the need for more region specific information. This wil be useful for
budget planning or energy model calibration to anyone planning a new building of a similar type in a similar
geographic region in Idaho. Third, several of the buildings were selected because the IDL or IPC has detailed
information and knowledge about the building and the types of systems installed. Gatheringtotal energy use
information about these buildings in particular is useful for any future design project for similar reasons as
described above.
This report provides detailed energy use data of 115 buildings in Idaho for the period of 2006-2009. Energy
use data for all fuel sources was collected for ten different building types in five separate geographical zones.
General building information including square footage, hours of operation, and average number of occupants
(when applicable). Additionally, address and contact information was gathered for each building in addition to
energy use and geographical region. In order to gather energy use data, it was first necessary to obtain permission
from a building owner or manager. We requested that the building owner or manager sign an energy consumption
data release form for each fuel type used by the building. These were then submitted to the fuel provider (utilty)
and the data was returned for the period requested. Ideally, three years of historical data were averaged together
to form the overall energy use profile for the buildings in the study.
Next, we created a database that could effectively track and easily display all the energy consumption
data for each building and generate various reports for both individual buildings and comparative analysis. The
data was analyzed and a report for each building was generated (Appendix D). All 115 buildings were also plotted
from highest tö lowest total energy use in Section 3.2.1 and by electric use in Section 3.2.2. Additional analyses are
reported in Section 3.2 that were conducted to examine building types and geographic regions. Not surprisingly
Groceries and Hospitals typically had the highest total energy use; however Recreation and Fitness facilities
showed the absolute highest tötal energy use. This is an interesting finding considering that CBECS does not
specifically address these types of facilties. Lowest total energy use tended to be Small Office, Retail, and
Emergency Services. Looking only at electric use we can see that Groceries tend to dominate the top of the list
with Hospitals moving down the chart by comparison due to their high natural gas consumption. Looking at the
lowest electric consumption by type, we see that Emergency Services are near the bottom, with Retail moving up
to near the middle as compared to the total energy consumption graph.
A summary of the maximum, minimum and median for each building type analyzed is included below.
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 5 of 23
Table 1 - Summary of El! Data by Building Type
Max Min Median
Type (kBTU/SF*YR)(kBTU/SF*YR)(kBTU/SF*YR)
Emergency Services 141.00 37.77 81.74
Grocery 300.73 159.60 219.00
Health Service 114.20 75.74 92.59
Hospital 276.30 165.00 259.20
Institutional 167.00 39.73 91.10
Large Office 152.40 63.35 72.97
Lodging 80.34 44.05 62.20
Recreation Fitness 357.20 123.20 300.95
Retail 126.50 40.91 68.95
Small Office 131.40 48.03 71.88
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 6 of 23
Idaho Power Company (IPC) commissioned the University of Idaho Integrated Design Lab (IDL) to collect
EUI data for 100 buildings within their service territory. At the outset of the work the IDL created a framework for
data collection aimed to sample a wide spectrum of energy use building types. These types included hospitals,
health services, groceries, and commercial office buildings. The commercial office type was divided into two
separate categories; small offices of less than 20,000 square feet, and large offices of greater than 20,000 square
feet. Other building types collected included emergency services, institutional, lodging, recreation/fitness, and
retail for a total of ten different building types. The amount and categorization of building types is listed below in
Table 2.
Table 2 - Building Type and Number
Building Type Number of Buildings
13
37
4
3
9
6
9
2
4
28
115
Emergency Services
Grocery
Health Services
Hospital
Institutional
Large Office
Small Office
Lodging
Recreational/Fitness
Retail
Total
In addition to building type, buildings were targeted to fulfil a geographical distribution across IPC's
service area. The zones defined are at a finer resolution than typical climate regions, such as those defined by the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and the International Code
Council (ICC). ASH RAE/ICC only differentiates two climate zones in IPC service territory, Sb or 6b. For this study a
more refined designation is made and the zones are divided into Metro (Sb), Mountain (6b), Western (Sb),
Southern (Sb), and Eastern (6b). Metro was defined as buildings in the Treasure Valley area. The Mountain zone
includes buildings east and north of the Boise area. The Western zone includes all buildings west of the Treasure
Valley area proper. The Southern zone is comprised of the area from Mountain Home and east to Burley. Finally
the Eastern zone includes buildings east of Burley to the eastern bounds of the IPC service territory. Any buildings
outside of IPC's service territory are coded with Out of Service Area zone designation. During the data collection
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202.01)Page 7 of23
we received some buildings as groups by owner, all of which did not fall in the IPC service area. Below, Table 3
shows a list of the zones with the number of buildings in each.
Table 3 - Geographic Zones
Building Region
Metro
Mountain
Number of Buildings
78
11
2
14
7
3
115
Western
Southern
Eastern
Out of Service Area
Total
The goal was to obtain 10 buildings for each building type across a variety of geographic zones. Ideally the
number and type of building in each zone would be equally distributed. However, this was difficult to achieve for
various expected reasons. Additionally, we sought data for buildings that IDl or IPC had previous experience with,
so that we would better understand the relationship between building systems and energy use.
A long list of potential buildings was assembled and the IDl began a phone campaign to contact building
owners and operators to collect permissions to access consumption information from multiple energy providers
(utilties). The first step in this process was to create or collect standardized forms to fax or email to the owners
and operators which were used to record account numbers and signatures that verified permission and retrieved
the consumption data. We collected or created permission forms for all utilties that we encountered and these
are included in Appendix B. The permission process proved more time consuming than originally estimated. Many
owners were difficult to contact or were slow to return permission forms. We initiated contact via phone until we
reached the appropriate person and then followed up via a standard email included in Appendix C. Once received,
the permission forms were sent to the utilties and digital consumption records were returned. A summary of all
the buildings/individuals contacted and the success rate for the phone campaign is listed in Table 4 below.
Although we obtained permissions from 82 people including 172 buildings many, did not fit within the parameters
of this study or we were not ultimately able to procure useful consumption data; therefore only 115 are included
as indicated above.
Table 4 - Building Owners and Operators Contacted
Contacted 347
Accepted 82 (179 Buildings)
Rejected 48
Multiple calls not returned 217
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 8 of 23
Concurrently with the data collection process we built a query-ready database to house consumption
data. The database architecture shown in Figure 1 below made analyzing and displaying data relatively easy. The
database is built in Microsoft Access and several query reports can be exported to Microsoft Excel to provide
flexibility in graphing and charting the data. To calculate the total EUI for each building we ran a report query in
Access for each of the buildings' fuel types including but not limited to electricity, natural gas, and geothermaL.
Each of these uses then linked to an Excel table that was able to produce high quality graphic representations of
the data. All fuel types were converted into kBTU's before being combined and displayed as total energy
consumption. Geothermal data gathered for this study came exclusively from Boise City Geothermal and was
measured in gallons. In order to include this fuel type as part of the total building energy use we converted the
gal.lons into therms using Boise City Geothermal's suggested incoming and outgoing temperature difference of
50°F. Depending on the organization publishing EUI data geothermal use is sometimes omitted entirely. We
included it here despite the fact that it is a renewable resource because it stil represents energy used by the
building.
Y""",.",,IkJD
UlllíJD
Cmimems
Figure 1 - Database Architecture
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 9 of 23
The detailed building reports are available as Appendix D. Each building report is typically three pages
long. The first page of each building report is titled with an independently keyed building number code that
allows for the confidential display of building-specific information. Directly below that is basic building data
including building type, gross floor area, geographic region, ASH RAE/iee climate zone, number of occupants (if
applicable), operational hours, and a comments section. Page one also contains the total electrical use by month
and year for the date range of data collected (typically 2006-2009). The monthly electric consumption numbers are
averaged and reported in kWh and kBTUs. Missing data is not included in the averaging. The annual average
electric consumption was divided by the gross floor area to give the electrical energy use intensity per square foot
per year. There are two charts on the first page; one shows monthly use per year and the other shows average
monthly use over the date range. Page two depicts the natural gas consumption in a similar fashion. As
appropriate, other types of energy use (such as geothermal) are included on the second page as well. The third
page shows the monthly average use for each fuel type in kBTUs and also notes the respective per square foot per
year intensities for each fuel type. A total combined energy use per month as well as per year is provided in kBTUs.
There are two charts on page three; the stacked bar chart shows average energy use by type (in kBTUs) and the pie
chart shows the distribution of annual average energy use by type. Finally, at the bottom of the third page, the
building ID number is restated with the total energy use in kBTU per square foot per year (EUI). The 2003 eBEeS
national average for the appropriate building type and the Architecture 2030 challenge 2010 target of 60%
reduction below eBEes 2003 average are all provided for building performance evaluation.
3.2.1 TOTAL ENERGY INTENSITY OF BUILDINGS
The charts below represent the total energy use of the buildings from Appendix A. Seen below is a
comparison of use for all buildings, listing building type and reference building number for each. Additionally a
breakdown of use by building type follows the first graph including reference building number and the location by
region as defined above.
Descriptive Statistics
Min 37.8
Max 357.2
Median 97.0
Mean 135.6
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 10 of 23
0163,Recreon/Fitness0203, Recretion/Fitness0183, Grocer0165, Groer0171, Grocery
0048, Grocery0158, HospItal0156, Recretion/Fitness
0160, Hospital
0168, Groery
0174, Groery
0170, Groery
007, Grocery
0173, Grocery
0184, Groery
0176, Groery
0167, Grocery
0191, Groery0198, Grocery0181, Groery
0172, Groery
0186, Groery
0190, Groery
0166, Grocery0169, Grocery0188, Grocery0177, Grocery0185, Grocery0179, Groery0196, Grocery0178, Grocery0194, Grocery
0193, Grocery
0175, Groery
0180, Groery
00, Groery
0182, Groery
0195, Groery
0197, Groery
0187, Groer
0189, Groery
0039, Institutional
0159, Hosital
0192, Groerv00, Large Offce
0133, Emeriiency5erves0150, Small Ofce0070, Reail009, smii Offce0023, Recreati/Fitness0154, Health5ervice0132, Emergency5ervices0029, Institutinal0155, Health5ervice0074, Retail0054, tnstitutional
0030, lnstitutional
00, Retall0035, EmergencServices
0129, Institutinal
0077, Retall
0148,5mallOffce
0135, EmergencServicesOU2,largOlfe
0110, Retail
006, Emergency Services
0134, EmergencServices
003, larg Offce
0037, EmergncService
0065, Retail0126,Retail0117, Retail
0057, Lodging0124, larg Offce00, Emergency Services0153, HealthServlce006,Retail004, Reiloo32,5maIIOfce
0131, Emergenc5ervkes
0152, Health~rvice
0137, Emergencv5erves
00, Large Offce
0139, Reail
0205, Emergency5ervkes
002, Retall
005, Emergency servics
0115, Retail0128, Retll
0127, Retil
0125, Retail0149,5mallOfcl'0143,lnstitutiril0145, Larg Offce0140,5maUOffcl'0138, Retail006, Retail
0033, Institutiona0034, Institutional
0072, Retail
003, Retail
0053, Reil
009, Retail
0078, Retail
0014,5maIlOfce
0055, Reail
0079, Reil
0136, Institutional
0027, Retail
0146, Small Offce0071, Retail0052, Lodging0056,5mallOfe009, Retail0036, Emergenc5ervlces
All Buildings kBTU/S.F./Vr
o 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 11 of 23
0133, Metro
0132, Metro
0035, Southern
0135, Metro
0046, Metro
0134, Metro
0037, Southern
0044, Metro
0131, Metro
0137, Metro
0205, Mountain
0045, Metro
0036, Southern
Emergency Servicesk BTU/S.F./Yr
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
0060, Metro
0122, Metro
0043, Metro
0124, Metro
0040, Metro
0145, Metro
0158, Metro
0160, Mountain
0159, Metro
Large Offce kBTU/S.F./Yr
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Hospital kBTU/S.F./Yr
o 50 100 150 200 250 300
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 12 of 23
0183, Southern
0165, Metro
0171, Southern
0048, Mountain
0168, Metro
0174, Metro
0170, Mountain
0047, Mountain
0173, Southern
0184, Metro
0176, Metro
0167, Metro
0191, Metro
0198, Western
0181, Eastern
0172, Eastern
0186, Eastern
0190, Metro
0166, Metro
0169, Western
0188, Metro
0177, Metro
0185, Metro
0179, Metro
0196, Out of Area
0178, Metro
0194, Metro
0193, Metro
0175, Metro
0180, Metro
0049, Mountain
0182, Metro
0195, Out of Area
0197, Out of Area
0187, Metro
0189, Metro
0192, Metro
Grocery kBTU!S.F.!Yr
o so 100 150 200 250 300 350
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 13 of 23
0154, Metro
0155, Metro
0153, Metro
0152, Metro
0039, Southern
0029, .Metro
0054, Mountain
0030, Metro
0129, Metro
0143, Metro
0033, Southern
0034, Southern
0136, Metro
Health Services kBTU/S.F./Yr
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
Institutional kBTU/S.F./Yr
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 160 180140
0163, Mountain
0203, Metro
0156, Metro
0023, Metro
Recreational Fitness kBTU/S.F./Yr
o 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 14 of 23
0150, Metro
0059, Metro
0148, Metro
0032, Metro
0149, Metro
0140, Metro
0014, Metro
0146, Mountain
0056, Metro
Small Offce kBTU/S.F./Vr
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idahò, Integrated Design lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 15 of 23
0
0070, Metro
0074, Metro
0090, Eastern
0077, Metro
0110, Southern
0065, Metro
0126, Eastern
0117, Southern
0026, Mountain
0094, Metro
0139, Eastern
0092, Metro
0115, Southern
0128, Metro
0127, Metro
0125, Metro
0138, Metro
0096, Eastern
0072, Mountain
0063, Metro
0053,Metro
0099,Metro
0078,Metro
0055,Metro
0079, Metro
0027, Mountain
0071, Metro
0069, Metro
Retail kBTU!S.F.!Vr
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 16 of 23
13.2.2 TOTAL ELECTRICAL INTENSITY
The charts below represent the electrical energy use of the buildings from Appendix A. Seen below is a
comparison of electrical use for all buildings, listing building type and reference building number for each.
Additionally a breakdown of use by building type follows the first graph including reference building number and
the location by region as defined above.
Descriptive Statistics
Min 2.7
Max 68.5
Median 16.4
Mean 24.3
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 17 of 23
00, Groer0165, Groer0163, Recreation/Fitness
0183, Grocery
007, Groery0173, Groer
0171, Grocer
0172, Groer
0184, Groery
0168, Grocer
0174, Grocer
0167, Groer
0185, Grocery
0191, Grocer
0049, Grocer
0195, Groery0176, Grocery0188, Grocery0198, Groery
0179, Grocery
0186, Groery
0178, Grocery000, larg Offce0181, Grocery0166,Grocery0180, Grocery0177, Groery0193, Grocery0182, Groery0170, Groery0175, Groer0189, Grocery
0190, Groery
0187, Grocery0194, Groery0196, Grocery
0197, Grocery
0150, Small Offæ
0158,. HoSpital
0203, Recreatin/Fitness
0192, Grocery
0156, Rereation/Fitness
0155, Health5ervice
0074, Retail
0160, Hospital
0117, Retil0124,largOfce
003, Recreation/Fitness
0159, Hospital
0153, HealthSeriiii:
0152, HealthService
00, Retil0035, Emergency Services0169, Groery
0039, Instituonal003, largOffce0026, Retil0139, Retil0059, SmallOfi:0154, HealthService
0133, EmergencyServs0122,largeOfce000, large Offce0070, Retail0115, Retail0030, Institutional
0143, Institutional
00, Retail
005, Retail0110, Retail
0077, Retail
0149, SmallOffe
0054,ln:rtutional
0129, Institutinal
0146, SmaHOffce
0128, Retail
0055, Retail
0127,Retall
0126, Retail
0140, SmaUOffce
0137, EmergncyServices
0148, Smal!Öffce
0029, Institutinal
0071, Retil007, lodging002, Retail
0014, SmaUOfce0145, large Ofce0053, Retail
0072, Retail0132, EmergncyServices
0138, Retail0032, Small Ofce009, RetailOnS,Reil003, Reil0045, Emergeni:servces
0044, Emergency5ervces
0078, Retail0135, Emergency5ervkes
0131, EmergeniServices
006, Retail
0034, Institutional
0027, Retail
0205, Emergeni5ervices
0134, EmergencyServices
009, Retail
0079, Retail006, EmergencyServices
0136, Institutinal
0056,smaIlOfce0036, EmergencyServices
0033, Institutinal
0037, Emergeni:services
0052, lodging
All Buildings kWh!S.F.!Vr
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 18 of 23
0035, Southern
0133, Metro
0137, Metro
0132, Metro
0045, Metro
0044, Metro
0135, Metro
0131, Metro
0205, Mountain
0134, Metro
0046, Metro
0036, Southern
0037, Southern
Emergency Services kWh/S.F./Vr
o 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 1816 20
0060, Metro
0124, Metro
0043, Metro
0122, Metro
0040, Metro
0145, Metro
Large Offce kWh/S.F./Vr
o 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
T
Iiii
0158, Metro
0160, Mountain
0159, Metro
Hospital kWh/S.F./Vr
o 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 19 of 23
0048, Mountain
0165, Metro
0183, Southern
0047, Mountain
0173, Southern
0171, Southern
0172, Eastern
0184, Metro
0168, Metro
0174, Metro
0167, Metro
0185, Metro
0191, Metro
0049, Mountain
0195, Out of Area
0176, Metro
0188, Metro
0198, Western
0179, Metro
0186, Eastern
0178, Metro
0181, Eastern
0166, Metro
0180, Metro
0177, Metro
0193, Metro
0182, Metro
0170, Mountain
0175, Metro
0189, Metro
0190, Metro
0187, Metro
0194, Metro
0196, Out of Area
0197, Out of Area
0192, Metro
0169, Western
Grocery kWh/S.F./Vr
o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80~
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 20 of 23
Health Service kWh!S.F.!Yr
o 5 10 15 20 25 30
0155, Metro
0153, Metro
0152, Metro
0154, Metro
Recreation and Fitness kWh!S.F.!Yr
o 10 20 30 40 50 60
0163, Mountain
0203, Metro
0156, Metro
0023, Metro
t
Institutional kWh!S.F.!Yr
o 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
0030, Metro
0039, Southern
0143, Metro
0054, Mountain
0129, Metro
0029, Metro
0034, Southern
0136, Metro
0033, Southern
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 21 of 23
0150, Metro
0059, Metro
0149, Metro
0146, Mountain
0140, Metro
0148, Metro
0014, Metro
0032, Metro
0056, Metro
Small Offce kWh/S.F./Vr
o 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 22 of 23
0074, Metro
0117, Southern
0094, Metro
0026, Mountain
0139, Eastern
0070, Metro
0115, Southern
0090, Eastern
0065, Metro
0110, Southern
0077, Metro
0128, Metro
0055, Metro
0127, Metro
0126, Eastern
0071, Metro
0092, Metro
0053, Metro
0072, Mountain
0138, Metro
0099, Metro
0125, Metro
0063, Metro
0078, Metro
0096, Eastern
0027, Mountain
0069, Metro
Retail kWh/S.F./Vr
o 5 10 15 20 25 30~
I
I
¡i
!
¡
¡
!
¡
i
Energy Use Indices of Selected Idaho Buildings; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090202-01)Page 23 of 23
CADMUS
June 26, 2009
SUMMARY REPORT
Prepared by:
The Cadmus Group, Inc.
720 SW Washington Street
Suite 400
Portland, OR 97205
[phone]
Prepared for:
Idaho Power Company
Table of Contents
Table of Figures............................................. .................................................................................ii
1. Introduction .................................................................................................3
Background and Objectives ..........................................................................................................3
Study Approach ..............................................................................................................................3Samp Ie Distribution 3Oversample Samp Ie Development 4
Sample Recruitment and Data Collection 5Case Weights 5
2. Idaho Power CBSA Data Summary..........................................................7
Building Type
Building Size
Heating and Coolig
Lighting
Operating Hours
Eils (Electricity)
7
7
8
10
12
12
TilL:
CADMUS
Commercial Building Stock Assment - Idao Power Company
i .
G:Nf)r;:¡'r
Table of Figures
Figure 1. Building Type by Percentage Floor Space.......................................................................... 7
Figure 2. Building Size Distnbution (1000 sq.ft.) ..............................................................................8
Figure 3. Predominant Fuel Type..........................................................................................................9
Figure 4. Primary Heating Equip~nt..................................................................................................9
Figure 5. Primary Coolig Equip~nt................................................................................................10
Figure 6. Interior Lighting Power Density.........................................................................................11
Figure 7. Percent Wattage by Indoor Lamp Type.............................................................................11
Figure 8. Building Hours of Operation............................................. ..................................................12
Figure 9. Annual Electric EUI by Building Type.............................................................................13
Figure 10. Annual Electric EUI by Building Size ...............................................................................13
'rui;;Commercial Building Stock Assessment - Idaho Power Company
ii
4CADMUS
1. Introduction
Background and Objectives
The objective ofthis data collection effort was to augment the results of2oo3 Commercial
Building Stock Assessment (æSA), a regional database of connrciai building characteritics,
with additional buildings in Idaho Power service terrtory. The previous æSA study was
conducted in 2003 and centralizd and updated connrc ial building energy audit data across the
Northwest region. In 2008, Cadnns was contracted by the Northwest Energy Eficiency Alliance
to update the CBSA database and fill in data gaps. As a part of this study, Idaho Power Company
(Ie) requested additional audits within the IPC service territory (referred to as "oversample"
site visits).
This report provides detail on the 2008 IPC overs ample data collection effort and characteris
the connrcial building stock in Idaho Power service terrtory using the oversample data in
conjunction with data from the main CBSA database and other regional studies. The results of
this study are expected to serve as a basis for current planning, forecasting, and program
development initiatives by Idaho Power.
Study Approach
Sample Distribution
The results reported in this summry inc lude the overs ample of approximately 50 buildings and
data from other studies including approximately 140 buildings from the 2003 CBSA study and
other auxiliary data collection efforts; Table 1 provides an overview ofthe data sources. Because
auxiliary data collection activities such as the new construction study and supplemental site visits
for the 1998-2000 cohort provided adequate data for newer buildings, only buildings constructed
before 1995 were included in the oversample.
Table 1. CBSA Data Sources
Building Type IPC CBSA New Legacy Total
Oversample Supplemental Construction CBSA
(2009)(2009)(2006)(2003/200)
14 5 12 12 43
5 0 1 5 11
1 0 7 8 16
1 0 0 3 4
7 0 7 9 23
1 1 6 24 32
19 1 10 11 41
2 2 3 8 15
0 1 2 2 5
50 10 48 82 190
Dry Goods Retail
Groæry
Health
Hotel/Motel
Offiæ
Other
School
Warehouse
Restaurant
Total
T.!E Commercial Building Stock Assessment - Idaho Power Company
3
~CADMUS
"" ..
l.g':2rit~c:~
Oversample Sample Development
To detenne the sample frame for the ovelSaß1le in IPC service territory, Idaho Power
provided a database of all currnt commrcial accounts with usage data. To build a sample
frme, Cadmus classified accounts into building type categories (see Table 2) by NAICS code
and screened for vintage, including only buildings built before 1995 the sample. The building
type sample distribution was determined by the percentage of electric usage (kWh) used by each
building type in Idaho Power's service terrtory. Within each building type, buildings were
sorted into quartiles based on the annual electricity (kWh) consumption. This distnbution was
also compared to the existing æSA sample distnbution to determine which building types and
quartiles were underrepresented.
Offices, schools, and retail make up the largest part of the commrcial electricity load and thus,
had the highest site visit targets. Site visit targets were distnbuted proportionately to the
population distribution across the quartiles, shown in Table 2. Buildings were randomly selected
from the screened customer database for each quartile.
Table 2. Initial Sample Frame, Owrsample
Building Type Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Desired
sample Sample Sample Sample Sample
Dry Goods Retail 0 4 1 12 17
Groæry 0 3 2 2 7
Oftiæ 1 8 4 4 17
Hotel/Motel 0 0 0 1 1
Schools 1 4 8 5 18
Total 2 19 15 24 60
To preemptively address sample attrition durig the recruitment and auditing process, the initial
sample frme targeted 60 build ings, with the goal of completing a miimum of 50 audits at the
conclusion offield work The actual sample of site visits conducted by building type and quartile
is shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Site Visits Conducted!
Building Type Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Not Total
sample Sample Sample Sample AssignecfDry Goods Retail 0 4 0 11 15Groæry 0 2 2 2 6Offi æ 0 6 3 3 12Hotel/Motel 0 0 0 0 0School 1 3 7 5 2 18Total 1 15 12 21 2 51
lNote that th final sartle distribution diffrs frm Table 1 as sorm buildi~s were reclassified as different buildiig types ordropped
due to data problems (n=1)dlli~ the data llppi~ process.
2These sibs were audite at the request of th pa1ci/lnt insead of the buiklirgs selectd frmthe sartle.
TTIF:Commercial Building Stock Assessment - Idaho Power Company
4
4CADMUS
Sample Recruitment and Data Collection
Given the dated and oftn incorrect contact information in the sample frame, it was necessaiy to
design recruitment and schedulig procedures which would reach as many sites as possible.
Project staff called contacts at the commercial buildings listed in the sample frame to recruit
buildings for in-person audits. In cases where contact informtion was wrong or unavailble,
staffperformd Internet research to determe the correct information. Once the targeted number
of site vis its for a given quartile and building type were recruited, the callers moved forward with
recruitment of other quartiles or building types. Schools were recruited at the district level, and
district-wide operations managers generally coordinated site visits with rrltiple schools in their
district.
After a building had comiitted to participate, an auditor followed up and scheduled a specific
on-site audit tim. During the walk-through, the auditor collected informtion on square footage,
building use and general characteristics, HVAC systems, lighting, envelope, and refrgeration (if
applicable). The site visit data collection instrument is attached as AppendixA.
Recruited contacts were uploaded into a Web database designed for organizg and trackig data
collection from site visits. The web database mirored the field data collection instrument and
auditors could access the database in the field and input informtion. Recruitment began August
2008 and concluded October 2008. Auditors conducted site visits from September 2008 through
December 2008.
Case Weights
Case weights for the Idaho Power sample were defied as the population annual usage divided
by the sample annual usage. The weighting was performd at the followig levels: building type,
and two cohort (pre 1994, 1995-2007). Table 4 provides a surrry ofthe rounded case weights
applied to the sample.
Td,;Commercial Building Stock Assesment - Idaho Power Company
5 IPJ: ....
!q':C!n!~l?
CADMUS
TIIF:
CADMUS
-..--------- ( :F(( )i " '
Table 4.Case Weights
Building Type Cohor Frequenc Final Usage Population Weight
Usage
Dry Goods Retail 1987-1994 22 13,597,944 178,938,495 13
Dry Goods Retail 1995-2007 21 28,278,848 224,992,322 8
Other 1987-1994 12 4,344,379 186,649,934 43
Other 1995-2007 19 10,706,808 276,691,280 26
Groæry 1987-1994 7 12,077,901 98,837,380 8
Groæry 1995-2007 4 7,060,273 89,632,348 13
Offiæ 1987-1994 13 1,434,316 294,070,431 205
Offiæ 1995-2007 10 10,458,390 322,452,347 31
Restaura nt 1987-1994 2 310,560 97,018,336 312
Restaura nt 1995-2007 3 731,949 160,673,471 220
Warehouse 1987-1994 9 3,930,094 154,135,192 39
Warehouse 1995-2007 6 1,460,316 122,108,246 84
Hospital/Health 1960-2007 2 1,017,521 87,570,696 86
Other Health 1987-1994 4 2,068,734 23,018,816 11
Other Health 1995-2007 10 4,992,867 37,766,162 8
Hotel/Motel 1987-1994 3 1,170,884 46,764,395 40
Hotel/Motel 1995-2007 1 1,167,040 47,130,686 40
Education 1987-1994 21 7,236,240 121,726,000 17
Education 1995-2007 20 17,439,362 69,777,595 4
Commercial Building Stock Assesment - Idaho Power Company
6
4¡ ~..
¡g'Jc:f)!~()
2. Idaho Power CBSA Data Summary
Building Type
Floor space by building type is shown in Figure 1. The un-weighted totals show the actual floor
space distnbution based on the sample. The weighted totals show the floor space in the
population weighted by each building type's usage distribution. In this sample, offices are under-
represented while schools are over-represented.
Figure 1. Building Type by Percentage Floor Space
30%28%
5%
25%
20%
1:
Cl
~.15%:.
10%
0%
Grocery Health Lodging Office Other Restaurant Retail School Warehouse
. Unweighted Sample lI Weighted Population
Building Size
Commercial building siz is split fairly evenly at 50,000 square feet; approximately half of the
buildings are larger than 50,000 (54%) and half are smaller than 50,000 square feet. Most
buildings fall under the 100,000-499,000 square feet category (36%), and buildings generally do
not exceed 500,000 square feet in Idaho Power Service territory.
.1'IIE _.._'."'."."-'-"...'."'..'.'
CADMUS
Commercial Building Stock Assessment - Idaho Power Company
7
CaZ()UF.
Figure 2. Building Size Distribution (1000 sq.ft.)
40%
36%
35%
30%
25%Cl~II\I 20%::
'õ..15%c
Cl....10%Clc.
5%
0%
1:.. 5 2: 5 -19 3: 20 - 49 4:50-99 5: 100-499
Building Size (1,000 Square Feet)
Heating and Cooling
Natural gas is the priry heating fuel for about 74% ofcommrcial building floor space;
electricity is the priry heating source for about 12% of building floor space, as shown in
Figure 3. Other commrcial building heating sources are propane and geotherml heat.
Figure 4 and Figure 5 show the distribution of priry heating and coolig systemtypes; the
data indicate that the majority ofbuildings are seived by packaged (rooftop) HVACunits.
Boilers and chilers serve approximately 20% of the heated/cooled commrcial floor space while
heat pumps serve 7% ofthe building population.
CADMUS
Commercial Building Stock Asesment - Idaho Power Company
8
'ITIE----------.-~
CADMUS
CFJ'\i.",
..
;40%....
&30%
1: 30%
~cic. 20%
Figure 3. Primary Heating Fuel Type
80%
70%
60%
50%
20%
10%
0%
Electricity Natural Gas Propane Other No Heat
. Percent of Usage !! Percentage of Heated Floorspace
Figure 4. Primary Heating Equipment
60%
52%
50%
40%
10%
0%.....T-.......
PkgHeat Unit Heat
. Percent of Usage
Boiler Heat Pump
m Percent of Floorspace
Other
Commercial Building Stock Assessment - Idaho Power Company
9
Figure 5. Primary Cooling Equi pme nt
60% I.
50%
40% j
1: 30%1CI !u ¡..
~20%
55%
10%
39%
1%1%1% 0%
0%
OX Cooling UnitAC Chiler Heat Pump Other No Cooling
. Percent of Usage II Percent of Floorspace
Lighting
The overall indoor lighting power density (LPD) for all commrcial floor space is 1.2 W Isf.
Figure 6 shows the LPD for each building type as well as the overall commrcial building LPD.
The majority of commrcial lighting wattage is in fluorescent latqs (65%). The fluorescent
category includes T-12, T-8, T-5, and cotqact fluorescent lamps. As shown in Figure 7, T-8
fluorescent lamps account for 42% of the installed lighting wattage, and T-12 lamps account for
about 13%. HID lights make up 23% of the indoor lighting wattages while incandescent lighting
accounts for 11 %.
THE
CADMUS
Commercial Building Stock Assesment - Idaho Power Company
10
1.8
1.6
1.4-
:: 1.2
~¡ 1.0
!.
~ 0.8-'..c.~ 0.6..
.E
0.4
0.2
0.0
Figure 6. Interior lighting Power Density
Overall Grocery Health lodging Offce Other Restaurant Retail School Warehouse
Figure 7. Percent Wattage by Indoor Lamp Type
45%T
42%
i
40%.1
35%~
30%~
I..25%iclViuI..20%-IIIa.i
15%I 13%
110%
~I
1
5%I...1
I
I
0%..~.............r......
'IIIl';-..._--,._-_........-
CADMUS
C;.H(Jt,fP,
1%
23%.
11%10%
1.,1 ....._.1"....._......_._.........1
Fluorescent,
T12
Fluorescent,
T8
HID MiscellaneousFluorescent, Incandescent
Other
Commercial Building Stock Assment - Idaho Power Company
11
Operating Hours
On average, commercial buildings operate about 80 hours per week, shown in Figure 8. Grocery,
health, and lodging buildings generally operate on a continuous schedule; while offices and
schools tend to operate 50 hours per week on average.
Figure 8. Builtlng Hours of Operation
180
158
160
'"..140::0::lli:120~m..Q.Cl 1000::::
Q.80Q.St 60IV..
~40
20
0
Grocery Health lodging Offce Other Restaurant Retail School Warehouse All
EUls (Electricity)
Groceries and restaurants had the highest electric EUIs at 54.2 and 71.0 kWh/sq.ft., respectively
(Figure 9). Warehouses and schools were lowest ofthe building categories, at 7.2 and 10.3 kWh/
sq.ft., respectively. The average EU for commrcial buildings was approximately 27 kWh/sq.ft.
Figure 10 shows the average EU by building size.
THE
C
Commercial Building Stock Assessment - Idaho Power Company
12
Figure 9. Annual Eectric EUI by Building Type
80.0
50.0
14:616;1
,_11-
71.070.0
60.0 54.2
240.0
It-~30.0
.x-
æ 20.0
10.0
0.0
All Grocery Health Lodging Offce Other Restaurant Retail School Warehouse
Figure to. Annual Eectric EUI by Building Size
70.0
10.0
61.2
60.0
2 50.0
~ 40.0
!30.05I.
20.0
0.0
1:.:.5 2: 5-19 3:20-49 4: 50- 99 5:100-499
Building Size (1,000 Square Feet)
'JTIE~-"-~---_.'_'_,,,,Commercial Building Stock Assesment - Idaho Power Company
13CADMUS
(?F;(JtJ;'.
TETE Commercial Bulding Stock Assessment ldah P C
14 - 0 ower ompany
4CADMUS
Appendix A: Data Collection Instrument
.frlE
CADMUS
Commercial Building Stock Asessment - Idaho Power Company
15 .~
,glJ~n!!S
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment
***Confidential: All data collected on this form is confidential and may only be used for this study.
1. General Building Informati()n
Site Name
Site Address
City/State/Zip I I
PrimarY Contact for Site Visit
Contact 1 Title
Address City State I Zip 1
Phone 1a Phone 1b Email.Alternate Contact for Site Visit
Contact 2 Title
Address City State I Zip I
Phone 2a Phone 2b Email
General Building/Complex Information
Is the site building: Functional, Demolished, Vacant, or Inaccessible?F D V I
Is this site a Single building or a Multiple building complex?S M
What best describes the economic use of the buildina/comolex?(table below)
Total Bldg. Floor Area (SQFT) including enclosed parking (exclude residential)
Primary Heating Fuel (table below)
Primary Cooling Fuel (table below)
No. of Floors above grade
No. of Floors below grade
Are there areas within bldg. with high concentration of computers/servers? (If Yes, see page 15)Y N
1 Retail 6 Health
2 Grocery 7 Hotel/Motel
3 Office 8 School
4 Restaurant 9 Other
5 Warehouse 10 Vacant
Economic Use Codes Fuel Tvøe Codes
1 Electricity
2 Natural Gas
3 Fuel Oil
4 Propane
5 Other
Comments:
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 1 /15
Building Occupancy & Management
What percentage of the building/complex is occupied by the Owner and/or Tenants?
I %owner %tenant
Original Construction I Original Total Floor Area
Is a renovation/upgrade planned in the next 2 years?
If yes, which systems?Lighting, HVAC, HVAC Controls, Refrigeration, Window L H C R W Ro
Is a staff person whose duties include energy conservation and/or management?
Is maintenance/repair work done In-house, or by an Outside party?
GeneralO&M I 0 HVAC Controls I 0 Refrigeration I 0
Lighting I 0 HVAC Equipment I 0
General Space Information Primary
Space Secondary
Space
Tertiary
Space Common
Space
Indoor
Parking
Space 10: 1 Space 10: 2 Space 10: 3 Space 10: C Space 10: P
Functional Use (table below)
% Of Total Building SQFT
Space Cooled?y N y N Y N
After Hours Shutoff/Setup?y N y N y N
Space Heated?y N y N Y N
After Hours Shutoff/Setback?y N Y N y N
1
2
3
4
5
6
a eT
7 Office
8 Sales
9 Storage - Low bay
10 Vacant
11 Warehouse - High bay
Utility Information
Electric Accounts 10:
I
El
I
E2
I
E3
Electric Utilty Name: I
Meter #
I I I
Gas Accounts 10: I Gl
I
G2
I
G3
Gas Utilty Name:
I
Meter #
I I I
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 2 /15
2a. Business Schedules
Primary Schedule For Space 10 i
Day Type Business Hours ( 1-24)Closed All Day?Open 24 Hours?
Weekday from To 0 0
......................................................................................................................__............_.-.....__.- ...-.......__...._.._._-_...._..-.....................-...._..._-
Saturday from To 0 0_...._.-,._------_._.._-_.................._...._..........-
Sunday from To 0 0
Primary Schedule For Space 10 .i
Day Type Business Hours (1-24)Closed All Day?Open 24 Hours?
Weekday from To 0 0
...........,.............................................................................................................._..._-'"_._---...-..__.__._--_..__....._........_..
Saturday from To 0 0
............................................................................................................................_........__.._--_._....__.........-
Sunday from To 0 0
Primary Schedule For Space 10 i
Day Type Business Hours (1-24)Closed All Day?Open 24 Hours?
Weekday from To 0 0
............................................................................................................................_..-..........__.._.._-_.._-_......__....-_.__......__._._._..._..__...._......._--
Saturday from To 0 0
..............................................................................................................................._._......_.._--_...__._..._-_..__.._..._.._---_.......-_._-_..._.._.__...._..__.._-_...._._---
Sunday from To 0 0
Primary Schedule For Space 10 Common
Day Type Business Hours (1-24)Closed All Day?Open 24 Hours?
Weekday from To 0 0..__._.._-_._-_._..._._........._...--...._.........._-.....-
Saturday from To 0 0._......_.._.._.-..._.._.._-_...._..._._....._--.....-_...._..._.............._..-.....__...._-_...._._.
Sunday from To 0 0
Primary Schedule For Space 10 Indoor parking
Day Type Business Hours (1-24 )Closed All Day?Open 24 Hours?
Weekday from To 0 0
-_..__......._.._.._.......__......-............._...-
Saturday from To 0 0
.................................................................................................................................._.........-_._--...-..-.....................................-
Sunday from To 0 0
2008 CommerCial Building Stock Assessment Page 3 /15
3. Building Envelope
WALLS Space 1 Space 2 Space 3 Space C
Sunace Type:B = Brick B B B B
C = Concrete C C C C .
CB = Concrete Block CB CB CB CB
F = Wood F F F F
M = Metal M M M M
Framing Type:M = Metal
W= Wood M W M W M W M W
WINDOWS Space 1 Space 2 Space 3 Space C
Of of Wall Area
Layers of Glazing 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
Glazing Material:C = Clear
o = Opaque C 0 R T C 0 R T C 0 R T C 0 R TR = Reflective
T = Tinted
Frame Type: M = MetalV = Vinyl M V W M V W M V W M V W
W= Wood
Window Type:F = Fixed F 0 F 0 F 0 F 0o = Operable
ROOFS Space 1 Space 2 Space 3 SpaceC
Roof Type: F = Flat F p F P F P F PP= Pitched
Sunace Material:B = Built-up
C = Cool Roof B C E B C E B C E B C EE = Membrane
M = Metal M S M S M S M S
S = ShinQles/Felt
Deck Material:C = Concrete
M = Metal C M W C M W C M W C M WW= Wood
Roof Area (SF):(Flat Roof Only)
FLOORS Space 1 Space 2 Space 3 SpaceC
Floor Type: B = Basement B C B C B C B CC = Crawl
S = Slab S U S U S U S UU = Unconditioned
SKYLIGHTS Space 1 Space 2 Space 3 Space C
Skylights?y N Y N Y N Y N
Skylight Area (SF):
Lighting Dimming Control?Y N Y N Y N Y N
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 4 /15
4. Unitary HVAC System
Space ID (s) Served C C C
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
Packaged HVAC System Type (Table below)
Number of Identical Units
Age of Units (Years)
Manufacturer
Model Name/Number
Rated Cooling Capacity (Tons)
Performance Rating (Circle one)EER SEER EER SEER EER SEER
Performance Rating Value
Temperature Control Type (Table below)
Supply Fans: Volume Control: (VAV systems only)D I V D I V D I VDischarge Damper Inlet Vane VFD
Return Fans?Y N Y N Y N
Economizer:Air Water None A W N A W N A W N
Primary Heat:Fuel Type (Table below)
Heating Type (Table below)
Rated Effciency (%) (may be:; 100)
Supp. Heat Fuel Type (Table below)
Heating Type (Table below)
Rated Effciency (%) (may be :; 100)
Packaged System 10:PSI PS2 PS3
P k HV
o Packaged Single Zone - HEAT only
1 Packaged Single Zone - A/C only
2 Packaged Single Zone - A/C w/ heat
3 Packaged Multi Zone
4 Packaged VAV
5 Evaporative Cooler6 Heat Pum air source
T m t Can T
1 Thermostat - Programmable
2 Thermostat - Manual
3 EMS
4 Always On
5 Manual on/off
6 Time clock
Heat Pump, ground source
Heat pump, water source
Split System
Unit Heater
Unit Ventilator
Window / Wall A/C unitWindow Wall Heat Pum
Fuel TVDe Codes Heatina TVDe Codes
1 Electricity 1 Forced Air Furnace
2 Natural Gas 2 Resistance
3 Fuel Oil 3 Central Boiler
4 Propane 4 Other
5 Other
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 5 /15
Sa. Central HVAC System - Boiler
Boiler ID:Bl B2 B3
Boiler Service:Steam Hot Water 5 H 5 H 5 H
Fuel Type (Table below)
Number of Identical Boilers
Number of Units on Standby
Age of Boiler(s)(years)
Manufacturer
Model Name/Number
Input Capacity (kBtu/hr)
Effciency (Nominal %)
EMS Control?y N Y N Y N
HOT WATER PUMPS
Quantity
Motor HP
Motor Effciency (% or 5, Hi P)
Capacity Control:1 speed 2 speed Variable 1 2 V 1 2 V 1 2 V
EMS Control?y N Y N Y N
Fuel TVDe Codes
1 Electricity
2 Natural Gas
3 Fuel Oil
4 Propane
5 Other
2008 Commercial Building 5tock Assessment Page 6 115
Sb Central HVAC System - Chiler.
Chiler ID:CL C2 C3
Chiler Type (Table below)
Number of Identical Chilers
Age of Chiler(s)(Years)
Manufacturer
Model Name/Number
Rated Cooling Capacity (Tons)
Compresor:Design Full Load kW
EMS Control?Y N Y N Y N
HEAT REJECTION SYSTEM
Condenser Type (Table below)
Fan Control:COnstant CYcle CO CY CO CY CO CY
Pony motor Two-Speed P T P T P TVariable Sneed V V V
Condenser Fans: Quantity
HP
EMS Control?Y N Y N Y N
CHILLED WATER PUMPS
Pump Use:Primary Secondary P S P S P S
Quantity
MotorHP
Motor Effciency (% or S, H, P)
Capacity Control:1 speed 2 speed Variable 1 2 V 1 2 V 1 2 V
EMS Control?Y N Y N Y N
CONDENSER WATER PUMPS
Quantity
MotorHP
Motor Effciency (% or S, H, P)
Capacity Control:1 speed 2 speed Variable 1 2 V 1 2 V 1 2 V
EMS Control?Y N Y N Y N
Chiler Tvne Codes Condenser Tv De Codes
1 Centrifugal 4 Absorption, hot water 1 Air Cooled Condenser
2 Reciprocating 5 Absorption, natural gas 2 Cooling Tower
3 Rotary 6 Absorption, steam 3 Evaporative Cooler
4 nthør
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 7 115
SC. Central HVAC System - Air Handler
Air Handler ID:AHI AH2 AH3
Air Distribution System Type (Table below)
Temperature Control Type (Table below)
Age of Air Handler (Years)
Supply Fans: Volume Control: None
Inlet Vane N I V N I V N I V
VFD
MotorHP
Motor Effciency (% or S, H, P)
Return Fans?Y N Y N Y N
Motor HP
Motor Effciency (% or S, H, P)//////
Economizer?Y N Y N Y N
Terminal Reheat:Electric Water E S W N E S W N E S W NSteamNone
Air Distribution System Type Codes
1 CV - Single Zone 8 VAV - Terminal Reheat
2 CV - Multi Zone 9 VAV - Dual Duct3 CV - Dual Duct 10 Fan Coil4 CV - Terminal Reheat 11 Baseboard
5 FPS - Fan Powered VAV - Series 12 Heat & Vent
6 FPP - Fan Powered VAV - 13 Hydronic Heat PumpParallel
7 VAV - Cooling Only 14 Induction
Temperaure Control Type Codes
1 Thermostat - Programmable
2 Thermostat - Manual
3 EMS
4 Always On
5 Manual on/off
6 Time clock
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 8 /15
6. Domestic Water Heating
Water Heater 10:WHI WH2 WH3 WH4
Water Heater Type (Table below)
Fuel Type (Table below)
Number of Identical Units
Age Of Water Heater (years)
Tank Capacity (Gallons)
Input capacity (kW or kBtu/hr)
Tank Wrap?y N Y N Y N Y N
Recirculation Pump?y N Y N Y N Y N
Water Heater TVDe Codes
1 Heat Pumo
2 Heat Recoverv
3 Instantaneous (tankless)
4 Self-Contained
5 Storace Tank (Central Boiler)
6 Other
Ful!l TVDI! CDdl!s1 Electricity
2 Natural Gas
3 Fuel Oil
4 Propane
5 Other
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 9/15
r Liahtina GroUD ID#
r Usage: General Area
FLUORESCENT
Sa. Indoor Lighting
(multiple paQeS OK) I IL- I IL-
Retail Display Task I G R T I G R T
IL-
G R T
I~ I I~ T I~ iGRTIGRTTGRTI
F = Standard Tube F F F F F F
U = U-tube U U U U U U
Length (1.5' 2' 3' 4' 6' 8')
Diameter (T5 T8 TlO Tl2)
CF = Compact Fluorescent CF CF CF CF CF CF
CIR = Circline Fluorescent CIR CIR CIR CIR CIR CIR
HID
MH = Metal Halide MH MH MH MH MH MH
H = High Pressure Sodium H H H H H H
MISC.
I = Incandescent I I I I I I
Q = Quartz/Halogen Q Q Q Q Q Q
XI = Exit Incandescent XI XI XI XI XI XI
XCF = Exit CF XCF XCF XCF XCF XCF XCF
LED = Exit LE D LED LED LED LED LED LED
Watts per lamp:
Number of lamps per fixture:
Total number of fixtures:
Ballast Type:ES = ES Magnetic ES ES ES ES ES ES
E = Electronic E E E E E E
Control Type:E = EMS E E E E E E
DC = Daylighting -DC DC DC DC DC DCrnntin11ouc; rtimminn
DS = Daylighting -DS DS DS DS DS DSSten dimmina
MB = Manual - circuit breaker MB MB MB MB MB MB
MS = Manual - wall switch MS MS MS MS MS MS
OS = Occupancy sensor OS OS OS OS OS OS
p = Photocell P P P P P P
T = Timeclock T T T T T T
N = None (continuous)N N N N N N
Of of Lighting load controlled:
Are controls functional and used?y N y N Y N Y N y N y N
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 10/15
ab. Indoor Lighting - Overview
Lighting Group ID Desription Spac ID Area Surveyed (SF)Total Arefuniaue entries)(select one)Reo resented (SF\
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 ., ~
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3IL-_C P
1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 ., ~
IL-C P-1 2 ~
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 2 3
IL-C P-1 ., ~
Total
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 11/15
9. Outdoor Lighting
Outdoor Lighting ID#OL-OL-OL-OL-_OL--OL--
Use type:Advertising Parking Lot A P A P A P A P A P A PBldg Façade Display F D F D F D F D F D F D
Other Safetv/Securitv G 5 G 5 G 5 G 5 G 5 G 5
FLUORESCENT
F = Standard Tube F F F F F F
U = U-tube U U U U U U
Length (1.5' 2' 3' 4' 6' 8')
Diameter (TS T8 no n2)
CF = Compact Fluorescent CF CF CF CF CF CF
CIR = Circline Fluorescent CIR CIR CIR CIR OR CIR
HID
MH = Metal Halide MH MH MH MH MH MH
H = High Pressure Sodium H H H H H H
N = Neon N N N N N N
MISC.
Q = Quartz/Halogen Q Q Q Q Q Q
I = Incandescent I I I I I I
Watts per lamp (Enter 10 if Neon)
-- Check if lamp watts were estimated?0 0 0 0 0 0
Number of lamps per fixture
(Enter 1 if Neon)
Total number of fixture
(Tot;:l I",nnth if N..on \
Ballast Type:ES = ES Magnetic ES ES ES ES ES ES
E = Electronic E E E E E E
Control Type:E = EMS E E E E E E
MB = Manual - circuit breaker MB MB MB MB MB MB
MS = Manual on/off switch MS MS MS MS MS MS
OS = Occupancy sensor OS OS OS OS OS OS
P = Photocell P P P P P P
PT = Photocell/Timeclock PT PT PT PT PT PT
T = Timeclock T T T T T T
N = None (continuous)N N N N N N
Are controls functional and used?y N Y N Y N Y N Y N Y N
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 12/15
10. Miscellaneous Equipment
Economic Use Type Equipment
Point-of-use terminals (#)................."...............,..................................
Grocery Food Prep -Meat Dept.(l=Yes,O=No)...........................................................................................
Food Prep -Deli (l=Yes,O=No)1----_.__..__..............................................................................
Rooms (#).......................................................................................
Annual Average occupancy (%)....................................................................................
Hotel/Motel Kitchen -Full Service (below)(l=Yes,O=No)-.......................H............................................................
Kitchen -Warming (l=Yes,O=No)_.._-......................................................................................1----.---..---.-Laundry Facility (see below)(l=Yes,O=No)............................................................................................1--_._..._-..-
Ofice PCs (#)-_..__.....__._..1-._---........................................................................................
Beds t~1_.Other Health 1--.....................................................................................
Laundry Facility (see below).J1 =Yes,_O= Nol_. ....._---_._--_.._---_.-..................................................................................
Meals per day (#)...................................................................
Restaurant Kitchen -Full Service (below)(l=Yes,O=No)............................................................................
Kitchen -Warming (l=Yes,O=No)--_._._.__...._..-..........................................................................................
Retail Point-of-use terminals (#)...._-_._-_.._-_.._---......................................................................
Classrooms (#)................................................................................
Kitchen -Full Service (below)(l=Yes,O=No)School ........................................................,......................
Kitchen -Warming (l=Yes,O=No)..-...............................................................................
1--.__._._.._-_._..._.._-_..__.._..Laundry Facility (see below)(l=Yes,O=No)_..-....................................................................................
Warehouse Forklifts (electric only)(#)
Food Service Equipment Electric /Gas
If Kitchen- Full Service Broilers /Fryers E G._._-_..__.._.....
Griddle /Grill E G--"-'-""'''...........................................................................................
Oven E G.._--_...._--...........................................................................................
Range E G---_._..__._._-------_.._----..............................................................................
Dishwasher Booster E G--_.__._-....._._...-._.....__.-_....__...........................................................................................
If Laundry Clothes Dryer -Commercial E G....__._......__._...__..._.._._......-...-.........................................................................................
Clothes Dryer -Residential E G
Packaged Refrigeration Equipment Count
Vending Machines._-_..._._....__..........._...._-_..._-
Beverage Merchandizers....._._.__..._._....__....._._....._-_...._--
Ice Machines.........._..__..__._------
Refrigerators.._...__....__....__..........__......__..._...__......__..._----._.._.__._...._.._-----_._...-
Freezers
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 13/15
11. Refrigeration Equipment
Space ID:C C C C C
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
Compressors ID #:Cp-l Cp-2 Cp-3 Cp-4 Cp-S
Type:Reciprocating Screw R S R S R S R S R STwo-stage multiplex Multiplex T M T M T M T M T MOther00000Temp:Low (0 to -10 OF)Medium (30 to 40 OF)L M H L M H L M H L M H L M HHiah(50 to 55 OF)
Total HP:
Quantity:
Unloaders or VSD compressors?U V NA U V NA U V NA U V NA U V NA
Heat Recovery Type:None N S N S N S N S N SSpace Heating/Reheat
Water heating W 0 W 0 W 0 W 0 W 0Other
Condensers ID #:Cn-l Cn-2 Cn-3 Cn-4 Cn-S
Type:Air-cooled Air-cooled w/Pre-cooler A P A P A P A P A PClose-approach Evap-cooled C E C E C E C E C EWater"cooled W W W W W
Total Fan HP:(all types)
Fan VSD?y N Y N Y N Y N Y N
Pump Motor HP (water-cooled units only)
Pump VSD?y N Y N Y N Y N Y N
Display Cases ID #:DC-l DC-2 DC-3 DC-4 DC-S
Case Length:(IF)
Do the cases have doors?y N Y N y N Y N Y N
Anti-sweat heater control?y N Y N Y N Y N Y N
Tl2 T8 Tl2 T8 Tl2 T8 Tl2 T8 Tl2 T8Lighting Type:
T5 lED T5 lED T5 LED T5 lED T5 lED
Watts per lamp:
Total number of lamps:
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 14/15
12. Server Rooms
Number of Hardware in Use:Less than 3 4-10 11-15
years old years old years old
Servers
Storage Devices
Backup Devices
Routers, switches
Total Floor Area:
Separate electric meter:(V)(N)(1)
Total electrical load:(kW)
Number of servers with power management system installed:
Is power management system acivated:(V)(N)(1)
Does space have it's own conditioning:(V)(N)(1)
Cooling capacity:(tons)
Lighting power density:(W/sf)
UPS Elecrical capacity:
UPS Current load:
Size of Backup generaor on site:(MW)
2008 Commercial Building Stock Assessment Page 15/15
2
Green
~!!ll~~~g
Next Steps for
an Emerging
Trend
Contents
Executive Summary. .... .... ..... .............. ....... ........ ...... 5
Statement ofthe Problem ..... ....... .......... ... ... ..... ..... 6
The Emergence of Green Building and Rating
Systems...................................................................8
What is Really Known About the Pros and
Cons of Green Building? - Research Evidence..... ....11
Research Methods and Findings ......................... ...18
Focus Groups. ..................... ...... ........ ............ ..... 18
Survey Purpose, Audience and Method.............. 25
Local Government Survey, Findings and
Analysis......................................................... 25
Construction Industry Survey, Findings and
Analysis......................................................... 35
Next Steps ... ...... ... ............. .................. ..... ... ...... ....42
References.. ...... .... ....... ........... .......... ........ ............. 45
Appendices
Appendix A-Green Building Survey........................ 47
Appendix B-Construction Industry Member
Survey....................................................................51
list ofTables and Figures ............. Inside Back Cover
3
Executive Summary
on
first-
factors
aggregated
building.
G
reen building practices use
environmentally friendly materials
or systems applied in a holistic and
integrated approach to design and
construction. Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design (LEED) is one rating
system and one of only two (Green Globes being
the other) that have been developed by agencies
accredited by the American National Standards
Institute (PRNewswire-USNewswire). The large
body of research that exists on LEED-certified
buildings makes LEED a useful frame of reference to
understand more about green building in general as
well as LEED-certified buildings specifically.
Research reveals that on some green or LEED-
certified development projects the upfront costs
may be higher (i-flAi) but not nearly as high
as anecdotal evidence (30%) suggests. Being
selective about the sustainable design criteria and
features used in a building can keep construction
within budget and produce greater long-term
energy conservation. Incorporating green building
techniques from the inception of a project, and in a
holistic manner, can reduce costs as well as further
assure benefits will be used and realized by owner
and tenants alike. Familiarity with green building
standards provides greater understanding of costs
and benefits, lessening resistance to green building.
Education for builders, owners, and tenants wil go a
long way to encourage green building.
Data drawn from focus groups conducted in
Boise, Idaho and surveys with cities in the Pacific
Northwest (Idaho, Oregon, Utah, and Washington)
reveal healthier buildings and social responsibilty
are currently the biggest incentives for encouraging
developers to engage in green building practices,
and with
their perspectives
communities, in
over 300
one of the largest -
sector on
while costs and uncertainty about return on
investment are the biggest barriers. Cities wanting
to address the biggest barriers see financial
incentives as the key to promoting green building
in the short term. Over the long haul, cities see
education about the benefits and practices of green
building as essential to ensuring the desired return
on the investment and meeting comn;unity goals-
a perspective shared by developers.
This paper recommends several best practices
identified from a review of research and interviews
conducted for this report, as well as from the new
empirical evidence gathered here. The strategies
that follow may be appropriate for communities
in the Pacific Northwest interested in promoting
and supporting green building practices. The
recommendations fall into four broad categories
that involve providing:
~ Marketing to increase public demand for green
building
~ Policies and processes to support financial
payback for developers
~ Information, demonstrations, and training to
encourage the adoption of green building
~ Support for current users of green building and
LEED certification to continue their use and
advocacy of green building
Although the bulk of the leadership for the
recommendations falls on the cities, success
in meeting green building goals wil be best
accomplished through public and private
partnerships that enable both cities and developers
to initiate and advance green building practices. 3€
5
Buildings generate
about 2 millon metric
tons of C02 equivalent
per year.
6
An automobile with gas mileage of 19-20
miles per gallon generates about 1.5 metric
tons of C02 equivalent per year.
Statement of the Problem
gas emissions from commercial buildings are at arate either transportation or residential are
grappling with making their communties more sustainable. In Idaho, one
communities are tackling this problem is the Department
Regional Offce in Boise, which was recently awarded a "gold"
Green Building Cmmdl for reducing environmental
square-foot
\\ e continue to take steps to assess
and reduce our environmental
impact," Secretary of Veterans
Affairs Eric K. Shinseki said.
"Ensuring the sustainability of our
facilities across the country helps us accomplish our
primary mission - serving veterans." (PRNewswire-
USNewswiref).
How does meeting green building standards
ensure sustainability? Or more plainly, why
should we care about building emissions? Carbon
Figure 1
dioxide is, by far, the most prolific component of all
greenhouse gas emissions, specifically accounting
for 6,021 milion of the 7,282 millon of metric tons
of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCDE) generated
in the u.s. in 2007 - more than 80 percent of
the green house gas emissions (U.s. Energy
Information Administration (EIA), 2009).1 And
residential and commercial buildings combine to
account for 40 percent of all energy consumption
and energy-related greenhouse gas emissions
annually, making them an obvious focus of
greenhouse gas emission reduction efforts.
Transportation and industry are the other major
sectors of energy use, but neither contributes as
much as buildings to greenhouse gas emissions
(EIA, 2009).
While, there is no "average" building to allow for
comparisons, one way to think about the issue is
by using Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
estimates, which say that burning one gallon of
gasoline generates about 19.4 pounds of C02. By
1 Energy use accunted for 5,917 MTCDE of the 6,021 MTCDE gener-
ated in 2007 (EIA, 2009)
converting that to miles per gallon, we can estimate
that an automobile with gas mileage of 19-20 miles
per gallon generates about one pound of C02
equivalent per mile. Using that comparison, the
average person generates 1.5 metric tons of C02
per vehicle annually (U.s. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), 2009). In comparison, the amount of
C02 buildings generate can be sobering. Each year
since 2001, buildings have generated approximately
2 milion metric tons of C02 equivalent (EIAb,
2009). And it's a growing problem - emissions from
commercial buildings are accelerating at a faster
average annual rate (1.8 percent from 1990 to 2008)
than either transportation or residential building
emissions 1.4 percent) (EIAc 2009).2
As noted in the recent news about the VA
regional offce in Boise, 'sustainability' refers to
development that meets current needs without
compromising the environment of future
generations" (PRNewswire-USNewswire/). To
that end, more than 900 city mayors to date have
committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions in
their communities by 7 percent or more below 1990
levels by 2012 (U.s. Conference of Mayors Climate
Protection Agreement, 2009). The agreement lists
a dozen strategies to help communities reach this
goal, including:
~ Practicing and promoting sustainable building
practices by using USGBC LEED certification
program or similar programs
~ Providing education about reducing global
warming pollution
'The commercial sector includes schools, offæ building, and
shopping malls.
~ Adopting land-use policies that reduce sprawl
~ Making energy effciency a priority through
building codes
~ Retrofitting lighting
~ Conserving by increasing water- and
wastewater-pump effciency
Even as awareness about climate change grows and
more mayors sign on to climate change agreements,
a ground swell of change has been slow to take
shape. There are communities making great
strides, such as Seattle and Portland, but these
cases tend to be the outliers and not yet the norm.
Concern that the current goals of the agreement
may not be met is reaL. And the persistence ofthe
sluggish economy, one of the worst downturns in
generations, fuels these concerns. Stil, whether
good times or bad, meeting climate change goals
and the growing interest in green building as a
construction industry practice makes it is worth
examining what works in local communities. To
that end, this report seeks to provide:
~ A history of green building rating standards
~ Current research on LEED - one of the most
widely used green building standards
~ New data drawn from cities and construction
industry members specifically for this study
~ An analysis of the data and recommendations
for next steps in light of what is already known
and in conjunction with the findings from this
original research. 3:
7
The Emergence of Green
Building and Rating Systems
Almost day, in every major news outlet, there is some
a new green building. But there are still many people
a building green. This section talks about the
construction, the of green design,
we at todayfs standards lEED rating
Aiayperson might say that a green
building uses environmentally-friendly
materials or systems, or perhaps that
the developer incorporated processes
to reduce resource consumption
during construction. Though these are important
characteristics, perhaps the most powerful aspect
of a green design in the built environment is
that practitioners apply a holistic and integrated
approach to design and construction. And though
we may have veered from such approaches in recent
history, the concept actually dates back thousands
of years to the origin ofthe master builder. Most
of civilization's signifcant works of architecture,
from the pyramids of Egypt to the classic cathedrals
of Europe, were designed and built by the master
builder (Dinsmore, 2007). These builder-architect
had a far-reaching view of the entire building
from design through construction and lifetime
operations, incorporating functional passive designs
for heating, cooling and lighting. Today, these
effcient, passive design features, which consider
climatic setting and solar orientation, are mainstays
of what is considered to be green building, and
achievements
feature strongly in today's green building rating
schemes.
Long before the 20th century however, the
master builder had all but disappeared, replaced
by designer-artists who received architectural
commissions but had little understanding of the
building arts. As the separation of architectural
design and construction became more distinct,
a new business enterprise emerged - that of the
general building contractor (Dinsmore, 2007).
Starting in the 1930S, the availability in the u.s.
of cheap fossil fuels spurred the development of
glass-and-steel structures that could be heated
and cooled with massive heating, ventilation, and
air conditioning systems (GreenBuilding.com,
2007). New building technologies, including air
conditioning, low-wattage fluorescent lighting,
structural steel, and reflective glass allowed
architects, developers and general contractors to
eschew the time-tested methods of the master
builders, in favor of these energy intensive
technologies.
Green Building and Rating Systems 3,000 B.C. to 2009 A.D.
8
By the 1970S, suburban development based
on these technologies was rampant and some
forward-thinking architects, environmentalists,
and ecologists began to question the advisabilty
of such energy intensive building practices. But
it was the OPEC oil embargo of 1973 spiking
gasoline prices, and lines at gas stations that
finally caught the attention of the American
public and called into question the nation's heavy
reliance on fossil fuels for transportation and
buildings (Building Design & Construction, 2003).
Stil, it would be another two decades before the
EPA and the u.s Department of Energy would
launch the ENERGY STAR program and the
City of Austin, Texas would introduce the first
local green building program. In 1993, President
Clinton introduced the "Greening of the White
House" initiative. Through the collaboration
of environmentalists, design professionals,
engineers, and government offcials, numerous
off-the-shelf improvements led to $300,000 in
annual energy and water savings, and reductions
in landscaping expenses, waste management
costs, and carbon emissions at the executive
mansion (Building Design & Construction, 2003).
The success of this landmark effort led to a flurry
of federal greening projects and gave new life to
the sustainable building movement.
At the same time, the efforts by professionals
from a variety of public and private companies,
organizations and agencies (including the
American Institute of Architects, the Rocky
Mountain Institute, the Carrier Corporation,
Herman Miller Inc., the Department of Energy,
and the National Institute of Standards and
Technology, along with many others) led to
the development ofthe u.s Green Building
Council (USGBC), which was offcially
founded in 1993. After considering and
rejecting a variety of building rating
models, including the one that had
been developed by the City of Austin,
the USGBC membership approved
the first version of LEED certification
requirements in 1998, drafted a
reference guide, and launched a pilot
program. Since its inception,
the LEED rating system
has undergone
various
iterations.
A key
characteristic of
LEED is its evolution
through a consensus-
based process led by volunteer
committees. Over the years, it has
changed to consider regional effects and
the life cycle analysis of building materials.
Launched on April 27, 2009, the third version
of LEED (LEED 2009) retains the fundamental
structure of the previous versions, but provides
avenues for incorporating new technologies and
prioritizes energy use and C02 emissions. LEED
2009 incorporates five separate commercial
and institutional building rating systems: new
construction, core and shell, commercial interiors,
existing buildings, operations and maintenance,
and schools. Other LEED rating systems exist for
homes, neighborhood development, retail, and
healthcare. There are currently 35,000 projects
participating in the LEED system, comprising over
4.5 billon square feet of construction space in all
50 states and 91 countries (U.S. Green Building
Council, 2010). :i
9
10
What Is Really Known About the Pros
and Cons of Green Building? - Research
Evidence
green building and more
There has been a great
- about green building. Thatimpact onto conserve energy Evidence
while discussion areas fall into the
one separate fiction? is a
LEED-certified buildings (as opposed to
using green guidelines), so section
pros and cons
or
that
within
Costs
The U.s. development community largely retains the
perception that new or retrofitted LEED-certified
green buildings cost more than conventionally
constructed buildings. Though there can be real and
perceived first cost premiums, many building owners
- particularly in the public sector - are realizing long-
term savings in lower operating and maintenance
costs as well as in the significant costs associated
with personnel or tenant attraction, retention and
productivity.
First Costs
One of the biggest obstacles to adopting green
building practices in general, and LEED certification
specifically, is a perception that those buildings
wil cost more to construct. Peter Morris and David
Langdon's 2007 article "What Does Green Really
Cost?" asserts:
The most common reason cited in studies for not
including green elements into building designs is the
increase in first cost. People who are green averse
are happy to relate anecdotes of premiums in excess
of 30% to make their buildings green. The numbers
are simply not, however, borne out by the facts,
as evidenced by many studies of the cost of green
building. Even though there is no one-size-fits-
all answer to the cost question, it is clear from the
the effects
-and more
has coincided
substantial weight of evidence in the marketplace
that reasonable levels of sustainable design can be
incorporated into most building types at little or no
additional cost (Morris & Langdon, 2007, p. 55).
The USGBC in a 2002 National Trends for High-
Performance Green Buildings report chimed in on
this issue as well, citing the importance of evaluating
the costs of a building's life cycle, rather than looking
only at first costs. They concluded:
Of the total expenditures an owner will make over
the span of a building's service lifetime, design and
construction expenditures, the so-called "first costs"
of a facility, account for just 5-10 percent. In contrast,
operations and maintenance costs account for 60-80
percent of the total life-cycle costs. Unfortunately,
decision-makers rarely use life cycle cost analysis
to link capital and operating expenses. Therefore,
energy savings, decreased worker absenteeism, and
higher productivity are not universally accounted for
in the cost equation (USGBC, 2002, p. 17).
However, that same study admitted that there were
still real and perceived higher first costs associated
with incorporating green design features:
While many green buildings are designed and
constructed at comparable or even lower costs than
conventional buildings, environmental performance
features can add costs to design and construction
expenditures. According to green building
professionals, such initial cost increases generally
11
12
range from an average of 2 to 7 percent, depending
on the design and extent of added features (USGBC,
2002, p. 17).
Yudelson, (2007) found that "28% of survey
respondents thought that green building carried
a four percent or more cost premium" (p. 10). In
the same study, 48 percent of respondents cited
perceived cost increases as the biggest barrier to
green building, and 40 percent perceived that they
had not received an adequate amount of publicity
or new business for their decision to build green
(Yudelson, 2007, p. 11). We can speculate that this
may be more of an obstacle in the United States
where the development model shows a tendency
to develop a building and then sell it shortly after
construction. In this approach, developers seek
to minimize short-term construction costs up
front because they intend to sell the building
immediately. This short tumaround sales model
means that developers themselves do not enjoy
the longer-term building effciencies resulting from
lower operating and maintenance costs, and thus
are not motivated to incorporate green design
features that provide long-term cost savings.
Longer-term Cost Savings and Profitability
Counter to the short-term development model,
the U.S. developer in the public sector who owns
and maintains a new building is in a position to
realize the lower operating and maintenance costs
that can result from building green. In addition,
the more holistic approach that LEED certification
promotes results in other significant - but less
acknowledged - cost benefits as welL. For example,
one California study looked at the economic impact
of green building policies at a university. The
authors found that the university already employed
many sustainable practices in the construction of its
buildings although the practices varied widely from
project to project. The university's main reason for
adopting green building practices was to offset the
projected future increases in electrical consumption
and energy rates. To evaluate future impacts, the
university chose to take a systems approach to
green building, extending the time frame against
which it measured economic costs and benefits.
The report recommended that the university's
policy include a requirement that "campus design
standards incorporate a minimum number of
sustainability attributes such that all new buildings
wil achieve the equivalent of a certified rating using
the LEED system" (Bade, 2003, p. 4). To achieve this
goal, the study recommended that the university
include performance measures in the project-
programming and budget-setting processes (Bade,
2003).
At the time the report was published there was "no
mandate to document the costs of specific design
features meant to achieve green ratings. Therefore,
there are no comprehensive data reflective of
the probable cost of specific green measures"
(Bade, 2003, p. 16). However, there was evidence
to suggest that the university could achieve LEED
certification without increasing current standard
building budgets. The greatest initial capital
expenses are related to energy effciency and water
conservation.
A cost review by Langdon in 2007 was quite
thorough. This study was notable because it not
only included hundreds of buildings, but also
because it took the unusual step of categorizing
results by building type. As a result, the study
allows readers to compare costs for academic
buildings, library buildings, laboratory buildings,
community centers, and ambulatory care facilities.
Perhaps more importantly, the study evaluated
costs associated with each of the LEED credit areas,
thus allowing developers to filter for potentially
expensive credits early in the design process.
In a 2008 study, Lockwood also evaluated
commercial retrofit costs. In his report, he asserts
that:
A growing number of companies are implementing
green retrofits of their buildings to save money,
improve productivity, lower absenteeism and
healthcare costs, strengthen employee attraction
and retention, and improve their corporate
sustainability reports and brand equity - all at a
relatively modest cost. However, timing is important
for companies seeking to use green retrofits as a
point of competitive differentiation (Lockwood,
2008, p.i).
Lockwood's mention of timing is perhaps an
important factor. Innovators in a market usually
derive a premium early in the process. For instance,
those companies who first produced electronic
calculators were able to demand a higher premium
until those devices became more commonplace.
Ultimately, Lockwood is suggesting that those
who are quickerto implement green retrofits on
their buildings may have the advantage of better
competitive differentiation with corresponding
rewards.
Yet another study looked at the incremental
cost savings of Enterprise Green Communities
Criteria, an investment capital and development
organization that devises solutions for affordable
housing and community revitalization (Bourland,
2009). As an organization, Enterprise has
invested more than $10 bilion since 1982 to help
finance more than 250,000 affordable homes
in communities nationwide. Enterprise Green
Communities Criteria requires housing developers
to implement mandatory as well as a required
number of optional criteria. This study found that:
When considering the benefits revealed in our study,
the average cost per dwelling unit to incorporate
the energy and water criteria was $1,917, returning
$4,851 in predicted lifetime utility cost savings
(discounted to 2009 dollars).
In other words, the energy and water conservation
measures not only paid for themselves but also
resulted in savings of 2.5 times over the projected
lifetime costs. Moreover, water cost savings shared
in this report are almost certainly underreported,
given that they were unable to obtain complete
data on sewer fee savings, which are a direct result
of water-conservation measures (Bourland, p. 3,
2009).
Another long-term factor to consider is that some
costs associated with green building appear to be
tied to a learning curve. Once expertise with green
building practices and the certification standards
are developed, costs may go down. However, the
learning curve can present a significant barrier on its
own. While green developers can make real gains in
13
14
increasing short-term profits by carefully evaluating
and selecting LEED credit areas that will have the
maximum return, they may also find ready financial
arguments to avoid green building practices due to
the burden associated with learning something new.
Balancing Short- and Long-term Interest
According to Langdon, "Many project are achieving
LEED certification within their budgets, and in the
same cost range as non-LEED projects" (Langdon,
2007, p. 3). Costs are related to but separate from
benefits. Many benefits derived from green building
practices do not appear on short-term ledgers, but
developers and owners may be able to realize them
during the lifetime of the home or commercial
building.
What the trend toward long-term gains from green
building does suggest is that those operating
buildings over the long term can expect to see
greater gains. Typically, these types of owners-
federal, state, and local governments, as well as
other long-lived institutions - may see the greatest
return on investment. Also, developers relying on
short-term sales models can actively market such
benefits to potential owners - owners who may be
very interested in long-term operating effciencies
once they are made aware of them - to help offet
any additional first costs.
From another perspective, Langdon suggests that,
"in many areas of the country, the contracting
community has embraced sustainable design, and
no longer sees sustainable design requirements
as additional burdens to be priced in their bids"
(Langdon, 2007, p. 3).
Building Performance
A key reason that project personnel adopt LEED
standards and pursue LEED certification is to
realize potential energy savings in the building's
day-to-day operational costs. While it appears that
green building practices do indeed provide some
energy conservation savings, the case that LEED
certification directly correlates with energy savings
is not yet water-tight.
In fact, actual energy savings in some LEED-certified
buildings have been disappointing. This may be due,
in part, to the nature of LEED certification itself.
Some building designers pursue LEED certification
specifically to gain maximum energy savings.
However, it is feasible for project personnel to
deemphasize the pursuit of energy effciency and
gain LEED certification by instead emphasizing
the pursuit of credits in site selection, water use or
other areas. That said, even when builders do seek
to achieve increased energy effciencies in their
buildings, they may not always reach intended
conservation levels. To study this issue, the USGBC
has started to require all new LEED buildings to
collect operating data after construction in an
effort to connect the anticipated effciencies to the
building's day-to-day operational costs. In short,
while there is some solid evidence that those green
building projects that include a focus on energy
effciency do provide energy savings, researchers
continue to gather evidence.
Human Performance
A developer who can realize at least a minimal
financial gain may find additional incentives to
pursue green building design and development by
examining externalized costs that are traditionally
overlooked. What are some of the real costs of not
including green building strategies into the design
of future buildings on the people who work in those
buildings? And what can the developer adhering to
a short-term sales model do to'draw attention to
these benefits in a way that offsets first tosts? It is
certainly feasible to promote the "greater good" of
your community while maintaining profitability.
Watson (2008, p. 10) asserts that ''the construction
and operation of buildings requires more energy
than any other human activity. The International
Energy Agency estimated in 2006 that buildings
used 40 percent of primary energy consumed
globally, accounting for nearly a quarter of the
world's greenhouse gas emissions." In addition to
cost and benefit comparisons and energy savings
related to building performance, green building
has other direct and indirect economic benefits
including occupant satisfaction and improvements
in employee productivity, performance and
retention (Bade, 2003). "Salaries represent
approximately 90 percent of the money flow
through a building, the rest being amortized
construction costs, operations and maintenance,
including utilities" (Watson, 2008, p. 14). While
developers typically have less of a stake in employee
productivity within a building, this suggests a
powerful marketing point developers can make with
potential building owners to recoup building costs
by increasing the value oftheir building.
There is relatively strong evidence that building
characteristics and indoor environments
significantly influence the occurrence of
communicable respiratory ilness, allergy and
asthma symptoms, sick building symptoms, and
worker performance. Smith (2003) reports:
An increase of 1 percent in productivity (measured
by production rate, production quality, or
absenteeism) can provide savings to a facility that
exceeds its entire energy bilL. It is easy to see why
this is the case by comparing the relative operating
costs for commercial business. On average,
annualized costs for personnel amount to $200 per
square foot - compared with $20 per square foot for
bricks and mortar and $2 per square foot for energy.
A modest investment in soft features, such as
access to pleasant views, increased daylight, fresh
air, and personal environment controls, can quickly
translate into significant bottom-line savings.
Theoretical and limited empirical evidence indicate
that existing technologies and procedures can
improve indoor environments in a manner that
increases health and productivity. Available
existing research allows only rough estimates
of the magnitude of productivity gains that
operators might realize by providing better
indoor environments. However, as Fisk (2000)
says, "the projected gains are very large. Forthe
United States, the estimated potential annual
savings plus productivity gains, in 1996 dollars,
are approximately $40 billon to $200 bilion."The
potential savings and productivity gains are larger
than the total estimated cost of energy used in
buildings. For the United States, the estimated
potential annual savings and productivity gains are
$6 to $14 billon from reduced respiratory disease,
$1 to $4 bilion from reduced allergies and asthma,
$10 to $30 bilion from reduced sick building
syndrome symptoms, and $20 to $160 billon from
direct improvements in worker performance that
are unrelated to health.
Judith Heerwagon, in a study she conducted in
2000, suggested that "green buildings can provide
both cost reduction benefits and value added
benefits. The emphasis to date, however, has been
on costs, rather than on benefits. The need for
more data on value added benefits underscores the
importance of studies that focus on these human
and organizational factors." She goes on to say:
It is also important to recognize that the benefits
of green buildings are more likely to occur when
the building and organization are treated as an
integrated system from the start. As pointed out by
Cole (1999), it is entirely possible to have a "green"
building with "gray" occupants due to a lack of
systems integration and lack of training on how
to use the technologies in the most effcient and
effective way. Gray occupants are also more likely
to be found in buildings that "green" individual
systems rather than the environment as a whole
or in buildings which focus primarily on technology
to the exclusion of building features that wield
their effects through social and psychological
mechanisms. And finally it is possible for "gray"
organizations to exist in green buildings, thereby
passing up significant opportunities for high-level
benefits resulting from resource effciency and
process innovation throughout the organization
(Heerwagon, 2000, p 20).
While some ofthe implications on building energy
effciency, as a result of the growing knowledge
about productivity gains from better indoor
environments, are uncertain, one might suppose
that quantified and demonstrated productivity
gains could spur the development of energy
effciency measures that have a positive impact on
human performance.
A University of California study suggests that the
greatest initial capital expenses on green projects
relate to achieving higher levels of energy effciency
and water conservation. External costs associated
with certification systems - most notably high
consulting fees - also add significantly to overall
project costs. These are costs that the developer
normally shoulders, so it should be little surprise
that developers resist these added costs. However,
as already established, some of the greatest gains
from green building come through increased
employee productivity, and those gains are realized
1S
not by developers, but by the building's tenants.
This suggests that, when marketing those buildings
to potential tenants, developers and owners can
set a premium on indoor environments designed to
increase productivity. The result would potentially
be a win.win-win situation among developers
who may be able to realize premiums from green
buildings, owners collecting increased revenues
for leased space, and tenants gaining increased
effciency and productivity resulting in a significant
impact on their organization's bottom line.
Building stakeholders are increasingly recognizing
the myriad benefits of green buildings beyond
energy cost savings. In particular, this trend appears
to be driving some ofthe exponential growth in the
green building industry in Canada. There is currently
a strong business case for green building in Canada
that emphasizes a more holistic, longer-term
view of real building costs. Developers can further
strengthen this business case through focused
collection of evidence on the benefits of their
buildings and educating building stakeholders about
productivity costs they may not be considering. For
example:
~ Good daylighting may increase productivity by
13 percent, retail sales by 40 percent, and school
test scores by five percent
~ Increased ventilation may increase productivit
by four to 17 percent
~ Better quality ventilation can reduce sickness by
nine to 50 percent
~ Increased ventilation control may increase
productivity by as much as 0.5 to 11 percent
From a human performance standpoint, green
buildings can offer numerous unique benefits when
compared to conventional buildings, and there are
strong indications that these benefits substantially
outweigh the relatively small increase
in construction costs.
16
Performance
Measurement
Much of the debate over the move
toward green building practices has to
do with developing a set of standard
building performance measures
and when to begin measurement.
One report concludes that "adding
sustainable building measures after the design
direction of the project has been established is
typically far more expensive than incorporating them
from the outset" (Bade, 2003, p. 4).
Birt and Newsham (2009) conclude that early
generations of green-certified (including but not
limited to LEED) commercial buildings now have
several years of occupancy behind them and enable
us to examine ifthey are living up to expectations.
Their paper reviews several of the post-occupancy
evaluations that researchers have performed.
The problem they ran into was that only a limited
number of such evaluations were available in the
public domain. This access problem made it more
diffcult to draw solid conclusions. However, they
tell us that "trends suggest that green buildings
on average seem to be delivering reduced energy
use, however, a large spread in performance is
often observed meaning that individual buildings
do not always perform as expected. Occupant
satisfaction with some aspects of the indoor
environment appears to have improved compared
to conventional buildings, but there are areas where
expected improvement trends are not realized."
Progress in Adopting LEED
Standards
When evaluating LEED standards adoption, it
is worthwhile to examine whether projects that
seek LEED certification are actually successful in
achieving certification.
As of 2008, about six percent of new commercial
construction projects applied for LEED certification.
Of these applicants, only 25-30 percent ultimately
gain certification (Watson, 2008, p. 3). Some
projects apparently apply for certification in order
to gain access to incentives such as fast tracking
on permits without any real intention of following
through with certification. Others may intend
to follow through with certification but run into
obstacles and never achieve final approvaL. Though
the high attrition rate is discouraging, it is important
to keep in mind that the initial six percent figure
looks only at projects specifically pursuing LEED
certification. The figure does not encompass
projects whose personnel pursue other energy
certification, nor those who use green building
practices but - for various reasons - choose to avoid
certification altogether.
Community and Developer Incentives
Which green building incentives have proven most
effective? The list of potential incentives can be long,
but there are a few that seem to have better track
records than others. Suggested incentives for cities
to promote green building practices among the
development community include offering (Watson,
2008):
~Lower utility connection fees
~Accelerated permit approval
~Density bonuses
~Carbon pricing
~Improved building codes
~Construction worker training
programs
~Market education
However, Yudelson's (2007) survey
research concluded that "developers
are aware ofthese incentives, but
don't always use them. One reason
is that the timing of development
decisions and the response time of
local government don't always mesh
together." From the developers' point
of view money is important (in the form
of tax reductions), but equally - or more
important - are:
~ A faster time to market
~ More certainty in the development
approval process
~ Additional flexibility to add more
space if market conditions warrant
(Yudelson, 2007, p. 12)3
Furthermore, 62 percent of respondents
said local government incentives are
necessary to accelerate green building
development. To make these incentives
as effective as possible, governments
should involve the developers in
the discussion about incentive
development. Yudelson points out that
this is important due to the diverging
motivations among the development
community. For example:
3 These items were not in a bulleted list in the source
document but are displayed in bullets here for ad.
ditional clarity.
~ Architects cited marketing/good publicity as the
most significant reason to build green
~ Developers cited density bonuses as the most
significant reason
A Summary of What the
Research Tells Us
The research offers several conclusions for
governments and the development community as
summarized in the table below. :l
Table 1: Summary of Main Points from Reviewed Research
17
Research Methods and Findings
In original research, focus groups and interviews were
questions that would provide empirical evidence to better sort out
that exist for green building and LEED initiatives.
Focus Groups
Focus groups were conducted in Boise, Idaho
with two key stakeholder parties: city planners
and public works professional as well as building
developers and owners. The goal was to examine
the differences and commonalities in the responses
between the focus groups, with the objective of
eventually understanding more about the incentives
and barriers to green building for both cities and the
development community.
Focus Group Questions
Focus group participants were asked to respond to
the following questions within the context of green
building practices in general, and then for lEED
certification standards specifically:
~ What are the overall factors that encourage
green building?
~ What incentives or information encourage the
adoption of green building?
~ What are the specific barriers to the adoption of
green building practices?
~ What tools or support would encourage you to
adopt green building practices?
~ Are there any other things that might impact
the adoption of green building practices?
Focus Group Methodology
An adaptation of nominal group technique is used
as an altemative to brainstorming as our process
for collecting responses to the above open-ended
questions. At the end of the process there is a
prioritized list of solutions or recommendations.
Specifically, after the conclusion of each focus
group, we tabulated the results of the rankings
according to the following scheme:
18
to
barriers
survey
Table 2: Ranking Values for Focus Group Responses
The points for each factor were then added and
talled to come up with the final ranking as shown in
the tables following.
Focus Group Results
To get an initial picture ofthe potential diferences
and commonalities of city professionals and
building developers, four focus groups were
conducted: the first two with city planners and
public works personnel, and the second two with
developers, construction industry members, and
architects. Each type of stakeholder had two
separate focus groups. Each group generated
their own ideas and rankings. As a result, the ideas
(factors) generated by the separate focus groups
for each of the questions often do not match
exactly. Where they did match exactly, the results
were combined. Where there was any significant
difference (i.e., "Education" and "Consumer
Education") they are left separate. The following
tables show responses to each of the questions
listed first by highest point value, and second
(where points were equal) alphabetically.
City Professionals - Question 1: What are the
overallfactors that encourage green building?
City planners and public works professionals had
a broad spread of responses on this question as
indicated by the many items with low score totals.
As a result, there were fewer factors that stood out
Focus Groups - Comparison the public may feed the developers' interagency cooperation and coordination.
need for consumer demand of the green City planners were just as likely to turn to
building product, it may also meet a city's the density bonus, which is a zoning tool,
goals with regard to their climate change instead of reduced fees, which is more of
initiatives and agreements. It is clear a direct financial benefit to a developer.
T. bt . C' .. Developers preferred the,a ell. ompa"son of the Top Five Factors for City Professionals and .the Development Community more direct benefits ofreduced fees and also looked
for trends and product
information to help ensure
their success. Nonetheless,
both groups saw social
responsibility as an important
incentive. In fact, city planners
may look to recognize and
promote developers engaged
in green building. The barriers
seen by both groups were
remarkably similar with cost
and lack of education or
information topping both
lists. The economy and
political mindset were two
factors city planners noted
that developers did not.
Comparing answers between the two
groups on each question may be helpful
in further communication and developing
useful strategies and
policies regarding green
building. Table 11 shows
the top five responses for
city planners and public
works professionals
and members of the
development community
side by side for each
question. By understanding
the differing perspectives
of the two stakeholder
groups on each question, it
may be possible to begin to
understand how to bridge
the gaps between them.
In reviewing Table 11
it is evident that city
planners and public works
professionals reported
five distinct elements as
important: tools, return on
investment, performance,
marketability, and political
will and education.
Members of the
development community
ranked consumer demand,
return on investment and
building performance at
the top oftheir list, and
then ranked customer
value and education of
developers and suppliers
as important The primary
differences are that city
professionals recognized
that they need political support to take
on new initiatives and members of the
development community recognized
the importance of customer value and
consumer demand for green building to
ensure long-term feasibility. Additionally,
members of the development community
pointed to the need for their own as well as
their suppliers' education in green building.
City professionals felt strongly about the
education of the public with regard to the
value of green building. While educating
In terms of tools and support,
education topped both lists,
although each advocated for
education of different groups.
Members ofthe development
community were interested in
education for the consumers
and city professionals were
more interested in educating
all groups, including city
staff. Political wil and local
legislative support made the
top of the city planners' and
public works professionals' list.
Members ofthe development
community reported needing
more financial supports through incentives
and expedited approval processes. Here,
developers were searching for short-term
supports and cities were seeking lon~term
supports with much greater emphasis
on education for all the stakeholders
(consumers, developers, and staff.
In short, for city planners, education,
performance of buildings, in terms of return
on investment and energy conservation, as
well as political considerations were the top
priorities noted in the focus groups.
that both city planners and developers
valued building performance and return on
investment as important to achieving green
building goals.
In terms of incentives and information, it
is once again clear that both groups placed
value on return on investment. However,
there was a small disconnect in that city
professionals were much more likely to
fast-track approval for projects, which
could address developers' concerns with
23
Survey Purpose,
Audience and Method
Following the focus group evaluation two surveys
were designed to examine green building practices
in the Northwest. To obtain perceptions from key
stakeholder groups on green building development
incentives and barriers, this study makes use of data
from the two surveys - one for planners and public
works professionals and the other for the architects
and construction professionals.
This section of the report provides an analysis of:
~ The primary data collected at the city level and
the findings from that data
~ The county data and 101 largest MSAs by
aggregated responses
~ The aggregated individual level data for the
construction industry members and Idaho
architects
Statistical Areas (MSAs) across the United States
to better understand the way large and small cities
(in terms of population) may differ or be similar.4
A reminder letter with a paper copy of the survey
was mailed approximately three weeks later.
Planning directors were also contacted by phone to
encourage survey responses. The overall response
rate was 51 percent with 201 of the 396 cities, and
38 percent or 57 of 152 counties responding to the
survey. Table 12 provides the breakdown by state for
cities and counties where Idaho demonstrates the
highest response rate at 65 percent for cities and
50 percent for counties, and Utah the lowest at 45
percent for cities and 10 percent for counties. The
overall response rate for the core cities of the 101
largest MSAs was 45 percent with 45 of 101 cities
returning the surveys.s
Architects and Construction Industry
Members Survey
A second survey
was developed
after interviews
with developers
in Idaho,
Oregon, and
Washington and
focus groups
with Idaho
developers,
architects, and
members of
the construction industry. The survey was sent by
post to all the members of the Associated General
Contractors of America (AGC) who are directly
involved with building in the states of Idaho, Oregon,
Utah, and Washington; and in Idaho to all of the
members of Idaho chapter of the American Institute
of Architect. The cover letter included a link so
respondents could either take the survey online
or complete it and return it in the self-addressed
postage paid envelope. Reminders were sent
approximately three and six weeks later encouraging
a response to the survey. Also, AGC members
were contacted by phone to encourage them to
complete the survey. The steepest challenge of this
survey was getting a response from construction
Table 12: Local Government City and County Survey Response Rate by State
kIUl
Local Government Survey, Findings
and Analysis
The local government survey was developed after
a handful of interviews with planning directors in
Idaho, Oregon and Washington, and with focus
groups in Idaho that included local planners and
public works personneL. The local government
survey questions were also modeled from surveys
previously used by Saha and Paterson (2008) and
Jepson (2004) and were pre-tested with selected
interviewees for clarity. The survey was sent to
planning directors in cities with a population of 2,500
or more in Idaho, Oregon, Utah, and Washington
as well as all of the counties in those four states. In
addition, the survey was also sent to city planners
in the core cities ofthe 101 largest Metropolitan
, An MSA is characterized as having a central core, comprising an
urbanized area of at least 50,00 people, together with adjacent
counties that have social and economic connectivity with a larger
central core. The boundary designation of an MSA is determined by
the Offce of Management and Budget (OMB).
5 In the remainder of the report MSA will refer to the core city of the
MSA that responded to the survey.
25
Table 13: Construction Professionals Survey Response Rate by State
Table 14: Mayor/County Commissioner Support for Gren Building Practics
professionals. After assembling the mailing list from
the public data available on the AGC website for
each state, the first mailing went out after removing
businesses that were not obviously related directly
to construction such as insurance companies and
law firms. Early returns indicated that some of the
survey participants did not feel the survey applied
to them. In follow-up phone calls to everyone in
the population across the four states that had not
yet returned the survey, additional businesses were
identified that had ignored the survey because
they also felt they it did not apply to them. One
gentleman explained his business supplies concrete
pumps and therefore is not directly involved with
building construction. The additional follow up
helped to focus the population of the target group
as well as encourage additional responses. The
response rate was 19 percent with 484 of 2,589
surveys being returned. By state, Idaho's 24 percent
response rate was the highest and Washington,
at 14 percent, was the lowest, as seen in Table 14.
The overall response rate of construction industry
members and Idaho architect of 19 percent yields a
margin of error of plus or minus five percent.
Local Government Research Questions
The research at the city level was designed to
compare findings among cities, counties and MSAs.
Specifically, the city survey questions were:
~ What is the level of general knowledge and
26
support, and community factors that currently
exist to support green building?
~ What types of capacity are there in terms of
established goals and policies, and number of
personnel and their knowledge?
~ How often are specific economic incentive tools
used and what is the influence of federal, state
and local factors on policy considerations?
~ What are the specific
identified barriers and incentives
for both green building and LEED
certification?
Findings
Community Factors
Looking at the aggregated
survey data provided by the city
and county surveys in the four
states and the top 101 MSAs, not
a single local government reported that their mayor
or county commissioners do not support green
building and, further, that the support from local
leaders was high, as seen in Table 14. (See Appendix
A for copy of the local government survey.)6
Interestingly, the reported awareness among
developers of green building is somewhat less
across cities and counties than MSAs. Cities and
counties in the four states were less likely to report
developers are trying out and using green building
and LEED certification standards than MSAs.
Sixteen percent of cities and counties report that
developers are trying out and using green building
practices in general, while 15 percent of cities and 8
percent of counties report that developers are trying
out and using LEED standards specifically. A full 64
percent of MSAs reported that their development
community is experimenting with and using green
building techniques, and 47 percent indicated they
are trying out or using LEED certification standards.
Community factors that might influence green
building include: the availability of green materials
near one's community; developers and architects
knowledgeable about green building; and existing
green buildings in the community. More than 50
6 The only difference in the city and county surveys was the first
question was changed from City Mayor to County Commissioner.
Additionally the word "cit was substituted with "county" for the
county survey questions. The top 101 MSAs received the exact
same survey as the four state city survey.
percent of the cities, counties and MSAs in the
survey reported having sources of green building
materials that would meet LEED standards within
a soo-mile radius of their community. However,
equally noteworthy that 41 percent of cities,
40 percent of counties and 36 percent of MSA
respondents indicated they did not know if these
materials existed within a soo-mile radius of their
community.
More than half of the cities and 42 percent of the
counties reported having a developer or architect
that promotes green building in their community.
Additionally, cities (31%) and counties (26%) in the
four states also indicated that they have formally
recognized green buildings that used a rating
system other than LEED, such as EnergyStar.
An overwhelming 96 percent of MSAs reported
that they had a developer or architect promoting
formally recognized green buildings (including but
not limited to LEED certified buildings).
Table 15: Cities' Perceptions of the Awareness of Green Building by Developers
Table 16: Community Fadors that Support Green Building
27
Economic Tools
Although the majority of cities, counties and MSAs
reported having promoted green building, using
economic tools to foster green building was infrequent
across cities, counties and MSAs, as seen in Table 17.
Respondents in cities, counties and MSAs only noted
using five tools relatively frequently or frequently.
These more frequently reported tools - unlike the
other economic development tools, such as grants, fee
reduction, and tax credits - are relatively inexpensive
to use.
Policy Considerations
In terms of green building being a goal or priority for
a city, a majority of the cities indicated it was not and
74 percent of cities indicated they had not established
informal orformal guidelines governing green building.
Seventy percent of counties in the study did not have
green building goals or priorities and a full 83 percent
did not have guidelines or established policies for green
building. In contrast to the four state cities and counties,
the largest MSAs all indicated that green building was
a goal or priority and 66 percent had formal or written
goals and priorities for green building. Yet, 18 percent of
the largest MSAs did not have either informal or formal
policies or guidelines governing green building; however
a majority (55%) did have formal or written policies or
guidelines on green building.
Althoii
cities, G
reported. 11
green buildi,fg,
tools to foster
was infreque
cou
28
Table 17: Use of Economic Tools to Promote Green Building
Table 1B: Policy and Guidelines for Green Buildng
29
Table 19 highlights findings on factors that may
influence green building policy. Specifically, when
asked about the influence of federal guidance on
green building policy in their communities, cities
and counties were more likely to say it is not very
influential (44% and 36% respectively) while MSAs,
on the other hand, indicated much more frequently
(40%, as compared 26% for cities and 22% for
counties) that federal guidance influenced their
policies. In all cases state guidance was much more
likely to be noted as influencing city (42%), county
(53%) and MSA (47%) policy on green building. The
International Code Council (ICC) had more influence
on policy for cities and counties where 50 percent
report it as influential as compared to MSAs with 38
percent indicating ICC as influentiaL.
The impact of whether neighboring cities were
engaging or not engaging in green building
was much less likely to have an influence on the
city, county or MSAs policy on green building in
their own jurisdictions. However, whether local
business leaders championed green building clearly
influenced cities (49%), counties (42%) and MSAs
(49%). The support of green building by local
elected offcials was much more important to cities
(60%) and core cites in the largest MSAs (70%) than
the counties (45%).
Factors such as the risk associated with getting
the new code standard wrong or that the current
technology is incorrect had virtually no influence
on policy for a clear majority of the cities, counties
and MSAs. On developer push back, the threat
that a developer would take their development
elsewhere, the survey reveals that cities (41%),
counties (45%) and MSAs (46%) reported it had
little or no influence. Conversely, far fewer cities
(36%), counties (25%) and MSAs (36%) reported
it did have an influence. Political push back from
developers was a little more evenly divided with
nearly a third of cities (36%), counties (35%), and
MSAs (40%) indicating it has little or no influence
compared to nearly a third of cities (3TlAi), counties
(26%) and MSAs (32%) reporting it to have at least
some influence on policy. In terms of the reported
influence of the implications of global warming,
the differences among MSAs (53%), cities (34%)
and counties (13%) is striking. Finally, the Cities
for Climate Protection (CCP) Mayor's agreement
appears to have virtually no influence for cities
(15%) and counties (7%) while a majority of MSAs
(51%) report it influencing their green building
policies. Cities, counties and MSAs differed in terms
of capacity with regard to personneL. As expected,
MSAs had much more capacity and were more likely
to have a lead offce or personnel (38%) dedicated
to green building as compared to cities (19%) and
counties (16%).
As noted in Table 20 a majority of MSAs (75%)
also had ten or more public works personnel and
planners and support staff compared to a minority
for cities (42%) and counties (32%) in the four-
state study. The same was true in terms of support
staff for MSAs (67%), cities (13%) and counties
(18%). Interestingly, and by significant margin,
more cities (46%) and counties (51%) do not have
LEED AP accredited staff than do. Nine percent of
MSAs report having no LEED AP, while 9 percent
report having 10 or more on staff.? Perhaps even
more interesting is that a significant portion of
cities (43%), counties (39%) and MSAs (43%) do
i A LEED accredited professional is someone who has passed an
exam, signaling an advanc level of knowedge in green building
practices in general and LEED certification requirements in
particular.
Table 20: Staff and LEED AP Accredited Staff by City, County and MSA
ny
they
31.
not know how many LEED AP staff they may have.
The difference in staffng between the MSAs and
cities and counties is likely to be àttributed to the
larger population size of central cities of MSAs as
compared to the other cities and counties studied.
Incentives and Barriers
Fliure 2: Top Five Barriers for Green Bulldlni
140
12
10
80
60
40
20
o
The respondents were
asked to rank the top five
incentives and barriers to
green building. As seen
in Figure 2, the top five
responses were similar for
cities, counties and MSAs,
however, the fifth most
important barrier was a
significant deviation with
counties indicating consumer
education and MSAs noting
the complexity of the
certification process. There
also appeared to be broad
agreement that perceived
costs, real costs, cost to
retrofit, the bad economy
and the lack of demand for
green building were the most
important barriers to green
building practices in their
communities.
As seen in Figure 3, there
were several ties when it
came to ranking the most
important incentives that
encourage the adoption
of green building in local
communities. The data
varied across communities,
but the factors that tended
to be ranked more frequently
by cities, counties and MSAs
included financial payback,
codes that encourage green
building, and marketability
of green buildings.
32
/' ,~~,;,,
Jl'4 ¡f Jfl
..rJ~~.. ilQt.çotM..flMi
Figure 3: Top ~lVe Incentives for Green Buildlni
10
80
60
40
20
o
".... .... Z '''ZF'' ..,rI/.f.~'..."'/..'~:/
'.".j'../" .......'..~.. '..........'.~~ ..... . litl .s'" ~'.,/II COntBl MSA
Figure 4 ilustrates that
the most important
barriers to LEED certified
building that had broad
acceptance among cities,
counties, and MSAs were,
once again, perceived
cost, real cost, and the
bad economy. Cities and
counties noted factors
such as a lack of demand
for green building, lack
of consumers, and lack of
consumer education. MSA
respondents identified
paperwork load and
process uncertainty as
the fourth- and fifth-most
important barriers.
Figure 5 reveals
considerable variation
among cities, counties,
and MSAs in terms of what respondents consider
the most important incentives to encourage
LEED certified practices. The only factor that all
communities ranked as relevant was financial
payback, but in varying importance. Four other
factors ranked in the top five incentives for at
least two of the respondent categories of city or
county or MSA. The four factors were citizens'
interest, marketability of LEED buildings,
political vision, and banks promoting green
loans and/or appraisals. The other factors noted
included expedited reviews, recognition for
builders and developers, codes that encourage
green building, education resources, public
outreach/education, LEED certification as brand
adds value, and trained staff with green building
expertise.
Finally, open-ended comments revealed several
themes. The most frequent comment was
the need to address return on investment and
knowledge of green building, and its costs and
benefits. Another theme was that green building
is diffcult in small cities without additional
funding or staff. Additionally, mandating green
buildng, providing education and low-cost
resources as well as acknowledging other non-
LEED green building program/practices were
other frequent comments.
Figure 4: Top Five Barriers for LEED
~~~o
¡.o~(l
'l'i
~o~
¡.'i~v
i.(l~'t
~o~!!c*0
'bc'0
,o'l~~o
¡¿
"I'b~
.§~~e?:~c
~,;e"
"1,&
~o~
.¡.'i~t,'td-
~~
?l'
(,o~
.~43~?S
~'O
e't~..0'
~~~
~e~
d-it,,'I
Fire 5: Top Fiv Inc fo LEED
~ el; g ~"~~e ~o'l .¡:o'l ;.~'i~'I qy . "i~ ~,e ",'I ¡.'i ~.:~ ~v i.'i
.:¡ ~'i ~l' " 'O~ . e~ ,'t 'b~~" ~e~v "i~v'l ri'I'O 'b~~~(j .~t¿~ t¿e~ ~ ~~ (S "10 i.(l ~o'
4~'I ò-e c"~ ",+4' 'O(! ~t¿'I ri"ò ~~d' 'b" 0'; ~\I't ~ 'I."i~ . 0'1 itt, ~vo ,o'l~~ ~,; e'. ~..'I .~t) "I .. ¡¿N,'t n~ ;s'l ~(l~-§ t,v bt¿" ~'I'1øi (,0 ~o'0 &0
.~'i~~
'l'b~
1." i¿" .~e
~o~'t o.jC ri~
!i't ,e" ø-t:~~~ ~o'l ."i'I'1-S. (f i:1." ~v '0';.~ò't (Ç t¿t¿'I'O~ ~..0' .lt.0'1 ~.,~~ i;'I¡.o"ò ri~q,(l ,,~~
33
Analysis
In summary, city professionals' findings reveal the
largest MSAs tend to have more capacity for green
building than cities and counties since they have:
~ Nearly universal support from their mayors
~ Developers using the practices
~ Access to LEED certified materials of staff
~ Developers and architects promoting green
building
~ Non-LEED green buildings in their communities
~ Green building goals, policies and guidelines
~ A lead person or offce responsible for green
building
~ More public works and planning, and support
staff
Although some of this, such as number of
personnel, may be a function of the size of the core
cities of MSAs, it is noteworthy that they are just
as likely as cities and nearly as likely counties to
34
indicate they do not promote green building. Those
that do promote green building report using the
same tools that cities and counties note. MSAs also
show no greater tendency overall to use tax credits,
fee reduction, grants, loans, or financial awards for
green building than cities and counties.
For the most part MSAs, cities and counties are
similar as well in terms of factors that influenced
their green-building policy. However, the ways
in which MSAs differ from cities and counties
are noteworthy. First, federal guidance is more
important to green building policy at the MSA level,
while cities and counties are more in tune with the
International Code Councilor other code drafting
bodies. The support of elected offcials also tends to
resonate more with MSAs than cities and counties.
Finally, the implications of global warming and the
Cities for Climate Protection Agreement are clearly
more important to a majority of MSAs as compared
to the fraction of cities and counties that reports
these items having an influence on green building
policy.3:
Construction Industry
Member Survey,
Findings and Analysis
A second survey was conducted to obtain
information about the factors that encourage
the adoption of green building practices in the
eyes ofthe construction industry (see Appendix
B for construction industry member survey). In
the survey, participants were asked about:
~ General construction industry factors
that might suggest some level of existing
inclination for green building
~ Construction industry capacity in terms
of specific environmental supports and
personnel factors
Toward that end, the following specific
questions with construction industry members
were addressed:
~ What are the overall factors that encourage
green building?
~ What are the specific barriers to adoption of
green building practices?
~ What incentives or information encourage
the adoption of green building practices?
~ What tools or support would encourage the
adoption of green building practices?
~ What is the demographic make up of the
survey respondents?
Findings
Incentives and Barriers
The survey revealed that 71 percent ofthe
respondents believed green building is becoming
more important for the competitive edge of
their company with 55 percent of respondents
indicating that LEED certification is specifically
becoming important for the competitive edge
of their company. As seen in Figure 6, the five
most important barriers to green building were
real costs, perceived costs, bad economy, the
cost to retrofit existing buildings, and confusion
among green build programs. The data on
incentives and barriers for LEED certified buildings
ilustrates that the biggest barriers for construction
industry members were: paperwork load, real cost,
perceived cost, complexity of certification process,
and confusion among green building programs.
Figure 6: Top Five Barriers
"/. "// 4l . /' / ;:.,;'.' ~'.' ~'f/"..L
~r--.!ll.D
Figure 7: Top Five Incentive
/...:///.,l', ...;. ...~ ,.~ /.r.
/ .~ /",lIGr~ !lLUt
The five most important incentives for green
building, as seen in Figure 7, were healthier
buildings, social responsibility, marketability
of green buildings, lower life-cycle costs, and
financial payback. The top five incentives for LEED
certification in order were: healthier buildings, social
35
responsibility, marketability of green buildings,
lower life-cycle costs, and LEED certification as a
brand adds value.
Social Networks and Adoption of Green Building
Nearly 40 percent of respondents indicated they
frequently hear their colleagues talk about green
building practices and understand green building
practices. Forty-eight percent of respondents
reported having a large social and professional
network. Twenty-eight percent indicated they are
considering enrollng in a professional accreditation
course for green building. Thirty-seven percent
indicated they enjoy working with green building
practices and 28 percent regularly discuss green
building practices with their peers and colleagues.
More than 50 percent indicated they believe green
building practices have significant financial and
environmental benefit for society, would like to
see green building practices expanded, yet do
not intend to find more information about green
building practices. Eighty-five percent indicated
they are not concerned about the well-being of
future generations and 64 percent indicated they
believe science and technology actively benefit
humanity.
Disseminating Information and Making
Connections
When asked about sources of information, the
respondents' top five sources reported, in order,
were trade journals, newspaper, television,
magazines and the Internet. The top
communication methods were email,
cell phone, telephone, face-to-face
meetings and text messaging.
Stage of Adoption
When considering construction
professionals' awareness of green
building practices, only 5 percent
reported being unaware. The largest
percentage of respondents (36%)
indicated they are curious, the next
largest category was envisioning
the use of green building practices
(23%). Nearly a quarter, though, were
trying out or using green building
practices. The data reflected a very
similar pattern with regard to how
aware construction professionals
believe city planners are with regard
36
to LEED certification standards. While 46 percent of
respondents indicated they intend to try applying
green building practices on a project, only 18
percent of respondents reported that they feel like
the have the knowledge, resources and support
to implement green building practices. Nineteen
percent of respondents indicated they have earned
a certification in green building practices and
intended to seek out additional information to
aid in the use of green building practices. Twenty-
two percent of respondents indicated they are
currently using green building practices on a
regular basis, and 16 percent plan to continue using
green building practices in the future. Nearly a
quarter of respondents say they aggressively seek
more information about green building practices.
Additionally, only 19 percent of respondents
reported seeing obvious benefits to their use of
green building practices. Yet, 27 percent indicated
that they encourage their colleagues and peers to
adopt green building practices.
A little over 40 percent of respondents reported that
they enjoy experimenting with new technology,
(Technology, in this case, is defined as the
application of best practices to solving construction
industry problems) and 38 percent reported they
enjoy working through complex problems. Forty-
three percent indicated they can imagine complex
goals and the path to reach them. Nearly three-
quarters of respondents indicated they have a great
deal more to accomplish in their professional life.
Demographics
The demographics revealed that the highest
level of education achieved by the parents of the
majority of construction professionals is high
school (37%), followed by those having a bachelor's
degree (29%) and those with an associate's degree
(11%) or master's degree (11%). The highest level
of education of the respondents themselves
was a bachelor's degree (43%) followed by high
school (20%). Only 5 percent indicated they never
participate in professional or social organizations
and 13 percent never travel for professional
purposes. A full 31 percent indicated they never
have contact with persons or organizations
representing green building practices.
In terms of income, 38 percent of the respondents
reported their income to be $100,000 or more,
followed by 17 percent indicating their income was
more than $50,000 but less than $75,000, and 16
percent indicated that their
income was in the range of
$75,000 to $100,000. Fifteen
percent declined to indicate
their income.
Finally, open ended comments
revealed several themes.
The most commonly cited
comment was that green
building needs to look at the
measurable benefits and
provide empirical data showing
the energy savings and costs.
Another reoccurring concern
was with "green washing" and
the possibilty that paperwork
and certification processes
make these efforts anything
but green and ultimately draw
into question the legitimacy
of green building programs.
Finally, developers also
indicated there should be more
recognition of programs other
than LEED.
Analysis
Table 21: Summary of Construction Industry Survey Data
In summary, it comes as no
surprise that the primary
barriers to adopting green
building practices center almost
entirely around costs. The
third factor (bad economy) is
also cost-related since we can
assume that a "bad economy"
reduces profitability. The likely
result of this is an increase
in caution (risk aversion)
for trying something new.
The fifth barrier, confusion over green building
programs, is also related to cost in that construction
industry members are limited in the resources
they can devote to learning new techniques and
standards. The lack of consensus on a green
building standard means that they cannot commit
to a single standard without putting themselves
at risk for not committing to whichever standard
emerges from the pack as "the" standard for green
building. Because ofthis uncertainty, construction
industry members may decide to avoid spending
time, money, and other resources committing to
a standard that could be replaced, thus rendering
their expenditure a less recoverable cost.
With regard to incentives, the responses were
somewhat unexpected. The top two incentives
listed were "healthier buildings" and "social
responsibility."This suggests that construction
industry members are concerned about providing
buildings that meet broader societal needs and
goals. However the nextthree incentives suggest
that the top two socially oriented incentives need
to be supported by market demand and financial
benefits. The ranking ofthe incentives may reflect
37
an acknowledgement of the value of green buildings
to society as a whole rather than an indication
of individual motivation. Construction industry
professionals in general see their profession as
providers of the built environment as a benefit to
human society. They enjoy seeing solid evidence
of their labors and view that evidence as their
legacy. Providing a healthy built environment
that benefits society may therefore be seen as a
worthy and admirable goal. The primary incentives
for adopting LEED certification suggests that
the construction industry sees LEED as providing
healthier buildings that meet a social need. This, in
turn, is seen as increasing marketability and brand
value to those buildings while lowering operating
and maintenance costs.
Two of the barriers to the adoption of LEED
certification as a standard are similar to those
for green building in general, including concerns
surrounding costs. However, in the case of LEED
certification, paperwork, process complexity, and
confusion among green building programs suggest
that construction industry members may fear that
potential schedule and cost impacts will result from
uncertain design and construction standards. This,
combined with the risk of committing to a standard
that stil lacks universal industry support, suggests
that LEED certification may be perceived as raising
first costs without providing a correspondingly sure
payoff at the point of sale.
Table 22: Adoption Level and Strategy
convincing proof of payback.
According to Everett Rogers (2003), a researcher
who investigated how innovations make their
way into society, strong social networks are one
indicator that people faced with something new wil
fall into the category of "innovators," those people
most open to trying something new. One-quarter to
one-half of the respondents fall into this innovator
category of Roger's diffusion modeL. That suggests
that these members are - at least potentially-
interested in, wiling to look into, and perhaps
adopt changing construction practices. It further
suggests a potential opportunity to take advantage
ofthese social networks to promote green building,
to disseminate information, and to provide
demonstrations, training, and support. Training
programs that specifically tie the construction
industry to green construction programs sponsored
by municipalities and regional utilities may help
drive this change. By appealing to the innovators
in the construction industry, cities and utilities
can give those innovators the tools they need to
transition into active change agents who, in turn,
can help pull slower adopters along in the process.
If green building advocates can maintain buy-in
from these construction industry change agents
they potentially can help drive the development of a
critical mass in the early adopter category.
On the face of it, the contradiction in this result
seems counterintuitive. However, it may be that
construction industry members feel
that they already have the knowledge
necessary to employ green building
practices at a level at which they feel
confident of results. Ifthat is the case,
then these findings may suggest the
need to provide support mechanisms
for their existing level of knowledge
and expertise rather than in-depth
training. Subsequently, support might
then profitably come in the form of information,
demonstrations, and smaller task- or technique-
focused training opportunities as green building
practices continue to change, driving new skill and
knowledge needs. It may be worth noting that in
an industry and region of the country where one
might expect greater resistance to change, and
resistance to green building in particular, half of the
38
When we look at the barriers and incentives on
LEED certification together, we start to see what
may be a pattern of wanting to accept LEED as
a certification standard tempered by a lack of
confidence that the incentives offered offet the
perceived up-front costs. The result, particularly
in a time when the economy is seen as poor, may
be that LEED is seen as too risky without more
respondents find enough benefit to desire greater
adoption.
These information preferences, combined with
earlier data on networking, tend to indicate
that a strong social network exists, but one that
is dependent on person-to-person interaction
both orally and in written communication. This
is supported by the data that most of these
professionals have substantive social contact with
their peers within the construction industry. The
implications for using social networking tools to
support this industry need to be considered in
terms of maximizing the pre-existing networking
systems. In other words, those advocating the
adoption of green building practices should work
with the communication and networking tools that
are already in place. The introduction of any kind
of new online social networking tool will take time
and a good deal of marketing in the traditional
sources such as trade journals and newspapers
before those new networking tools can assume
an important role as both a source of information
and a communication tool. The more cost effective
method for transmitting information about tools
and resources coming online for construction
professionals would be to create awareness using
the social and professional
organizations that already
serve the needs of the
construction industry's
members.
Nearly half of all respondents indicate a desire to
introduce green building practices on a project,
but only one out of five indicate that they have
the knowledge, resources, or support to be truly
effective. In theory, that leaves a significant portion
of construction professionals as a viable market for
tightly targeted training programs and resources.
A breakdown of the construction industry members
by stage suggests the following distribution across
the stages of adoption.
This suggests that effort to generate the adoption
of green building are best targeted at providing
(Table 23):
~ Information for those just getting started
~ Demonstrations of practice (and financial retum)
for those actively considering green building
~ Targeted training for those ready to start
~ Support for those already using green building
as well as for those who are likely to become
active users as other strategies become
effective.
It is interesting to note that while only about one-
fifth of the respondents see obvious benefits to
green building, more than one-quarter suggest
Table 23: Construction Industry Members and Stage of Adoption
Dormant (1999) built on
Roger's work to propose
five renamed stages that
people go through when
considering the adoption
of something new (Table
23). Each stage has a corresponding strategy to
maximize the stage's success. What these results
suggest is that green building advocates do not
need to worry about advertising, but instead
can focus their efforts on providing information,
demonstrations, training, and support. Any
marketing that needs to occur can be done using the
pre-existing social networks within the construction
industry; data presented earlier in this report
supports the notion that this market is likely to
occur as a self-sustaining viral campaign of person-
to-person contacts. However, this data emphasizes
the need for well-designed and robust resources as
social networks are equally quick to spread negative
assessments as positive.
that they encourage their peers and colleagues
to use such practices. This may suggest that they
see potential long-term benefits to green building
and/or that they feel the social benefits make
green building worth pursuing. Another possible
interpretation is that they desire a more level
playing field where a better overall understanding
of the basics of green building will allow competitive
differentiation via specialty.
Nearly three-quarters of respondents indicated
they have a great deal more to accomplish in
their professional life. This may suggest why over
one-third of the members of this group are not
shying away from the complexity of applying new
technology to solving diffcult and challenging
39
40
problems but instead may be waiting for the
right tools and information to start this problem-
solving process. The key to this comes in the form
of well-designed tools and information. Adopting
a user-centered approach that identifies specific
user needs will help reduce and minimize the
possibilty of user rejection at the later stages of
implementation. According to Rogers, a signifcant
portion of innovations fail at the implementation
(use) stage because they were not designed based
on the needs ofthe end user. Green building
practitioners that are most successful tend to use an
integrated design approach where key stakeholders,
usually those who most quickly adopt something
new, are brought in during the early stages of
the design. These people are highly motivated to
participate and ensure that the design wil best
serve their peers because a good deal of their
professional and personal reputation is dependent
on the success of the innovation. In other words,
if those who choose to adopt green building and
LEED certification can show the processes to be
substantive and meaningful then, as a result, they
look good, which raises their ability to further
influence others within their social network.
Rogers suggests that people with a higher
level of upward mobility are more likely to be
innovators and wil therefore be quicker to adopt
something new. Assuming that the respondents are
reasonably representative ofthe larger population,
we can project that enough professionals in the
industry are open and interested in developing their
skil set to justify investing in a comprehensive set of
supportive resources and tools. However, additional
research would need to be conducted before this
assumption can be validated. Given the available
data, a population that fits the demographic profile
wil be suffciently innovative so that an investment
in developing resources and tools for them would
be worthwhile. In business terms, this would be a
calculated risk well worth taking.
This income profile indicates that more than half
of the respondents fall in the middle to upper-
middle income brackets. Rogers points to the
availability of material resources as being a strong
indicator of innovativeness. That is, the more
material resources you have, the less risk averse
you are because the consequences of failure wil
not impact you as much as they would someone
with fewer resources.
Local Government and
Construction Industry
Members Survey
Conclusions
Perhaps the most notable findings are evident
when considering the information in both the
local government surveys and the construction
professional data. There is a general consensus by
cities, counties, MSAs and construction industry
members that real and perceived costs, as well as
costs to retrofit, and the bad economy, are salient
barriers to green building in general and LEED
certification specifically.
An additional barrier to more widespread adoption
of LEED certification by both communities and
construction professionals is the paperwork
load, and in the case of MSAs, the complexity of
certification. There appears to be a significant
disconnect between cities, counties and MSAs
compared to the construction industry members
about the incentives that promote green building.
The only factors that both groups agree on were
the financial payback and marketability of green
building. It is also noteworthy that cities generally
find financial payback the NO.i incentive and
rank marketability fourth whereas construction
industry members rank marketability third and
financial payback fifth. In terms of incentives that
encourage LEED certification, cities and MSAs
agree with construction industry members only
on the factor of marketability, while MSAs and
construction industry members agree that LEED
certification does add brand value. Despite the
matchups, financial incentives are ranked higher by
cities and lower by construction industry members.
This suggests that cities may need to rethink
their strategies. Perhaps highlighting the health
and social responsibility of green buildings will
do more to advance green building than financial
incentives. Additionally, this evidence suggests that
cities' current approach of not relying on financial
incentives but rather low cost inducements such as
publicity, demonstration projects, and education
is an appropriate strategy. In this way, they may
help foster the market transformation of demand
for green buildings, which in turn increases the
likelihood of a financial payback for a developer.
Alternatively, one might conclude it may be that the
financial incentives offered to date are not known
.a ~. cl I
or are insuffcient in type or quantity to motivate
the construction industry. As a result, construction
industry members may stil view adoption of green
building practices as a progressive move on their
part that provides health and social benefits. For
those developers, building green without additional
inducements may be seen as the right thing to
do and can meet the current demand for green
buildings by specific segments ofthe market. Yet,
if supply does not keep up with current demand,
there may be a need for additional or more robust
financial incentives to increase the number of green
buildings until there is an overall increase in demand.
Ultimately, this means there is more than one way
to attract demand for green building from both
a developer's and a community's perspective. In
communities where there are resources that can help
guarantee more green buildings, financial incentives
may be the quickest most direct way to achieve
green building goals. However, in communities
where few financial incentives exist, one way to
foster green building is to help developers spread
the word of their value to individuals in terms of
health and environmental goals to hasten the
market transformation for greater demand in green
buildings. Clearly communities that can afford
to provide incentives or have mandates for green
buildings could also benefit from general education
and promotion of the benefits of green building as
welL.
Considering both findings from the surveys in
combination with the focus group data, both
education and financial incentives can playa key
role in meeting green buildings goals. Tables 7, 9 and
10 highlight the developers' perspective of taking a
long-term view of green building ranking consumer
desire/market demand, lack of education, and
consumer education as very important (either first
or second on their list) and city professionals in Table
6 ranked education as the top tool for encouraging
green building. At the same time, Tables 8 and
9 suggest developers ranked reduced fees and
return on investment as their NO.1 incentive and
certification costs their top barrier. In Tables 2, 3, and
4 cities equally note the importance of cost benefits
and incentives that can lower costs for developers
less directly than reduced fees, such as expedited
approval processes and density bonuses, and
awareness ofthe up-front costs and the economy's
potential effect on encouraging green building.
Financial incentives are, in theory, a short-term
tool for promoting green building because both
developers and cities realize the value of green
building but understand a market item cannot and
should not be subsidized for long-term sustainability.
In the end, increasing consumer demand is the only
sure way to guarantee return on the investment.
Although cities may recognize that subsidies are
not feasible for long-term sustainability, cities
also are motivated to use financial incentives to
get the ball rolling because of political necessity
to meet community needs and priorities. All the
while cities demonstrate they value the importance
and role of education for all stakeholders for the
purpose of meeting long-term goals. Construction
professionals also have a role to play in marketing
and education and demonstrate that they too
recognize its value for long-term sustainability in
the market place.
Perhaps not as salient to the overall outcomes, but
stil noteworthy, is the discrepancy between the
local government respondents and the construction
professionals in their respective belief of the
development community's awareness of green
building. Regarding construction professional
awareness, cities and counties tend to underestimate
the number of construction professionals who
are trying out and using green building practices.
City estimates indicate that only 15 percent of
construction professionals are trying out and using
green building practices as compared to the 23
percent reported by construction professionals
themselves. Although the MSAs report much
more use and experimentation (64%) than the
respondent data from construction professionals
in the Pacific Northwest, it is diffcult to generalize
the response from the Pacific Northwest to all
MSAs. The differences between local government
and construction professionals are noteworthy
because they suggest the critical mass necessary
to meet a market transformation in green building
in the construction industry is further along than
anticipated by cities. Additionally, survey data
reveal a full 75 percent also appear poised to move
to the next stages of trying out and using green
building techniques. In the end, the similarities,
gaps, and differences between the developers and
local government perspectives and capacity for green
building help identify some key next steps. 3€
41
Next Steps
011 gaps and similarities in perspectives and capacities
constn.lctiol1 industry members discovered in this study, severa!
practices are identified that may be appropriate strategies
communities in the Pacific Northwest.
The recommendations fall into four broad
categories:
~ Marketing to the public to increase demand
~ Policies and processes for developers to support
financial payback
~ Information, demonstrations, and training to
enable green-building practices
~ Support for current users of green building and
LEED certification to continue green building
practices
Although the bulk of the leadership for the
recommendations falls primarily on the cities,
success in meeting green building goals wil only
be realized by public/private partnerships in
terms of the wilingness of both groups to take
some initiative to advance green building in our
communities. The next steps in this section are
intended to help cities, counties, utilities, MSAs,
developers, building owners, architects, and other
construction industry members promote green
building in general, and in ways that are beneficial
to all involved.
Marketing to the Public
Both cities and construction industry members
listed the creation of additional marketing efforts
(presumably to generate additional consumer
demand) as something that could drive the
adoption of green building. One recommendation,
42
then, is that cities, utilities, and construction
industry members should work with existing
networks in construction industry associations and
real estate associations to market green buildings of
all types to potential government, commercial, non-
profit, and residential consumers. While this study
did not examinE! consumer views on green building,
the literature on the diffusion of innovations
suggests:
~ Buildings that comply with indoor environmental
quality standards and guidelines that are part
of most green building rating systems tend
to provide healthier occupant environments
and these health benefits can add directly
to a leasing organization's bottom line
through reduced employee ilness and greater
productivity. The long-term financial benefit can
be marketed to consumers of green building
space as a way to increase the premium of green
building purchases and leases.
. It may be profitable to focus on the rapid
returns on investment that can be realized from
energy and water effciency measures in green
buildings, which can eventually exceed any
additional up-front costs for green design and
construction, as well as what features to look
for in green properties to achieve these goals.
This information may be particularly effective
for those consumers intent on purchasing or
leasing building space for longer periods
oftime.
. Some secondary benefit might be gained from
promoting the purchase, lease, or renting of
green buildings for reasons of a contribution
to greater social responsibility in the form of
improved quality of life for the community and
its residents.
. By working in tandem, cities, the construction
industry, and real estate associations may be
able to create enough market demand to begin
overcoming the negative inertia caused by the
poor economy and begin to develop a critical
mass of demand for green buildings across
market sectors.
. It may also be useful to work with local, regional,
and even national real estate associations to
include green building features as search criteria
on the multiple listing service (MLS) through
which consumers search for property that meet
their criteria. Interviews revealed this to be
promising practice in Portland, Oregon.
Policies and Processes to Support
Financial Payback
AsYudelson (2007, p. 12) suggests, cities, counties
and MSAs should work with construction industry
members, both individually and in concert with
professional associations, to create policies and
processes that help provide financial incentives to
adopt green building practices. Any such policies
should include the detailed input of construction
industry members to increase their acceptance and
buy-in. Interviews (2009) revealed, such policies
might include but would not be limited to:
. FastTracking: Fast tracking permits for green
building practices (Interviews 2009).
. Incentives for New Construction: Cities and
utilties might provide incentives to developers
who build the infrastructure to support the later
addition of renewable energy, water saving,
and other green financially beneficial building
features into their new buildings.
. Incentives for the Purchase/Lease of Green
Buildings: Cities might consider providing
financial incentives to consumers who purchase
green buildings when those buildings result in a
decreased load on utilities and other municipal
resources. This type of incentive may also be
beneficial to creating a synergistic demand
through marketing efforts.
. Incentives for Retrofits: Cities and utilities might
provide incentives to consumers who retrofit
existing buildings with renewable energy,
passive energy saving strategies, water saving,
and other green features that result in reduced
resource use. This type of incentive may also
be beneficial to creating a synergistic demand
through marketing efforts.
. Provide Support for LEED Projects: Cities
might consider providing LEED accredited
professionals on their own staff to provide
support to construction industry members to
reduce the costs associated with the
~ initial learning curve on green buildings
~ additional costly paperwork load
~ identification and planning for the most
marketable green building features
Information, Demonstrations, and
Training
Work with construction industry associations to
plan, develop, and deliver:
. Construction Process/Procedure Information:
Specific and targeted information on the
benefits of green building to directly meeting
the needs of construction industry members
. Marketing Information: Information and,
possibly, training for directly meeting the
needs of members of the real estate industry
on potential features and financial, health, and
social responsibility benefits of green buildings.
This option would need an independent
professional needs assessment to verify both its
feasibility and desirability.
. Professional Demonstrations: Professional
demonstrations of green building techniques as
requested by construction industry members.
These demonstrations should be driven directly
43
44
by information needs expressed by builders and
developers and could be provided on a regular
or semi-regular basis as new building techniques
are developed and start to become accepted
(Interviews 2009).
~ Case Studies: Developing easily accessible case
studies showing financial payback and return
on investment for green building projects,
particularly in local or regional context. These
cases should be created and disseminated
in close cooperation with members of the
construction industry. To the extent possible,
focus should be on those features of green
building / LEED certification that realistically
provide the most positive impact on the financial
outcomes of the projects. Those features
might then be the subject of information and
demonstration effort listed above.
~ Training: In those cases where the knowledge
and skil gaps of construction industry members
cannot adequately be addressed using
information or demonstrations, cities, utilities,
and construction industry associations may
work to together or alone to develop targeted
training to address more complex skil and/or
knowledge gaps. Another option is to contract
with outside providers of training that meet
the specific needs of construction industry
members. Training, because it is expensive and
perishable in nature should only be used when
less expensive options are unsuitable. In those
cases when training is called for, it should be
developed by capable instructional designers to
ensure it meets the intended learning outcomes
and avoids providing ineffective solutions that
merely waste participants' time.
Provide Support for Current
Users of Green Building and LEED
Certification
In order to maintain support and maintain early
adopters of green building and LEED, cities should
consider providing the following kinds of support:
~ Local/Regional Green Buildings Supplier Lists:
Construction industry members, in theirfocus
groups and survey results, identified diffculty
in finding or not knowing of regional green
building supplies as one obstacle. Providing
and maintaining online lists ofthe suppliers
and locations of green building supplies would
be one way to support those who have already
embraced green building practices.
~ Local/Regional Green Building Contractor and
Sub-Contractor Lists: Construction industry
members, in their focus groups, identified
diffculty in finding skiled and knowledgeable
contractors and sub-contractors as one
obstacle to adopting green building practices.
Providing and maintaining online lists of reliable
èontractors and sub-contractors would be
one way to support those who have already
embraced green building practices. This might
be done using existing mechanisms by having
industry associations work with providers of
service information such as Angie'S List or by
creating their own accessible directories that
allow for consumer feedback.8 This kind of list,
for contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers
of the green building industry would go a long
way toward making that information not only
accessible, but also easier to prioritize.
~ Professional Associations with Green Building
Information: Providing lists of professional
associations that have networks and
communities that are already sharing green
building practices would support those already
involved in green building.
~ Best Practice Information on Green Building /
LEED Certification: Providing a clearinghouse
of best-practices on green building. This might
be provided by professional associations, cities,
universities, or other third party providers.
~ Calendars of Local/Regional Events: Centralized
calendars providing access to local or regional
green building demonstrations and training.
These might be maintained by any involved in
cooperation with interested stakeholder groups. 3€
a Angie's List is a third part vendor that collects information about
contrctors, service providers, and docors. Those being evaluated by
their customers do not pay to be on the list. Similarly, the data collection
for the list is standardized and there are no anonymous reviews.
References
Bade, M. (2003). Feasibility study for a green building policy for the University of California. Prepared by
Michael Bade, Offce of the President, Design & Construction Services May 19, 2003.
Birt, B., & Newsham, G. (2009). Post-occupancy evaluation of energy and indoor environment quality in
green buildings: A review. http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/obj/irc/doc/pubs/nrcc51211.pdf.
Bourland, D. (2009). Incremental cost, measurable savings: Enterprise green communities criteria.
Retrieved from: http://www.greenbiz.com/research/report/2009/10/22/incremental-cost-
measurable-savings
Building Design and Construction (2003). White paper on sustainability. Reed Business Information,
November 2003.
Cole, R. (1999). Green buildings and gray occupants. Paper presented at the AIA-USGBC Conference on
Mainstreaming Green, Chattanooga, TN, October 14-16, 1999.
Dinsmore, H. Robert Jr. (2008). The ancient master builder, an essay. Masterbuilder Fellowship for the Built
Environment, Inc. http://www.masterbuilderfellowship.com/page5.html
Dormant, D. (1999). Implementing Human Performance Technology in organizations. In H. Stolovitch & E.
Keeps (Eds.), Handbook of human performance technology (2nd ed., pp. 237-259). San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass/pfeiffer.
Fisk, W. (2000). "Health and productivity gains from better indoor environments and their implications for
the u.s. Department of Energy." Proceedings ofthe E-Vision 2000 Conference, October 11-13,
2000, Washington, D.C.
GreenBuilding.com (2007). Green building timeline (archived). http://web.archive.org/
web/20070708221914/http://www.greenbuilding.com/greenHistory.html
Heerwagen, J. (2000). Green buildings, organizational success and occupant productivity. Building Research
and Information, 28(5/6), 353-67.
Interviews (2009). Interviews conducted by Tony Marker and Susan Mason during 2009. All interviewees
were assured confidentiality and therefore are not noted by name.
Jepson, Jr. E. J. (2004). The adoption of sustainable development policies and techniques in U.S. cities: how
wide, how deep, and what role for planners? Journal of Planning Education and Research. 23, 229-
241.
Kats, G. (2006). Greening America's schools: costs and benefits. Available at: http://www.cap-e.com/
ewebeditpro/items/059F12807. pdf
Langdon, D. (2007). The cost of green revisited: Reexamining the feasibility and cost impact of sustainable
design in the light of increased market adoption. Retrieved on December 8, 2009 from http://
www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=77.
Lewis, P. G. (2001). Looking outward or turning inward? Motivations for development decisions in
California central cities and suburbs. Urban Affairs Review. 36(5), 696-720.
Lockwood, c. (2008). The dollars and sense of green retrofits. Joint study by Deloitte and Charles
Lockwood. Retrieved on December 8, 2009 from http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-
United States/Local%20Assets/Documents/us_re_Dollars_Sense_Retrofits_190608_.pdf.
Morris, P., & Langdon, D. (2007). What does green really cost? PREA Quarterly. Retrieved on December 8,
2009 from http://ww.pca.state.mn.us/oea/greenbuilding/cost.cfm .
45
Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
Saha, D. & Paterson, R. G. (2008). Local government efforts to promote the "Three E's" of sustainable
development: Survey in medium to large cities in the United States. Journal of Planning Education
and Research, 28, 21-37.
Smith, A. (2003). Building momentum: National trends and prospects for high-performance green buildings.
Report by the U.S. Green Building Council for the u.s. Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works, USGBC, Washington, D.C
Sullivan, D. M. (2002). Local governments as risk takers and risk reducers: An examination of business
subsidies and subsidy controls. Economic Development Quarterly. 16(2), 115-126.
Turner, C, & Frankel, M. (2008). Energy performance of LEED for new construction buildings, New Buildings
Institute, 2008. Retrieved on October 18, 2009 from http://ww.newbuildings.org/downloads/
Energy _Performance_oCLEED-NC_Buildings-Final-3-4-08b.pdf.
Turner, C (2006). LEED building performance in the Cascadia Region: A post occupancy evaluation report.
Cascadia Region Green Building Council, Portland, OR.
Torcellni, P.,Deru, M., Griffth, B., Long, N., Pless,S., Judkoff, R., & Crawley, D. (2004). Lessons learned
from field evaluation of six high-performance buildings. American Council for an Energy-Effcient
Economy Summer Study on Energy Effciency in Buildings, Pacific Grove, CA.
U. s. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Center. 2009. U.s Conference of Mayors Climate Protection
Agreement. Retrieved May 26, 2009, from http://www.usmayors.org/ c1imateprotection/.
U.S. Energy Information Administration (2009). Emissions of greenhouse gases report 2007. Retrieved June
22, 2009, from http://W.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/99rpt/index.html. .
u.s. Energy Information Administrationb (2009). Emissions of green house gases in the United States 2001.
Retrieved, December 31, 2009, from http://W.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/archive/gg02rpt/index.htmi
U.s Energy Information Administrationc (2009). Energy in Brief. Retrieved, October 2, 2009, from http://
tonto.eia.doe .gov/energy _in_brief/greenhouse_gas.cfm
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2009). Emission facts: greenhouse gas emissions from a typical
passenger vehicle. Retrieved, August 13, 2009 from, http://www.epa.gov/OMS/c1imate/420f05004.
htm
U.s. Environmental Protection Agencyb (2009). Green building history in the U.s. Retrieved, January 6, 2009
from http://ww.epa.gov/greenbuilding/pubs/about.htm
U.S. Green Building Council (2010) About USGBC Retrieved on January 11, 2010 from http://www.usgbc.
org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=124
u.s. Green Building Council (2002). Building momentum: National trends for high-performance
green buildings. Retrieved on December 8, 2009 from http://www.usçibc.org/DisplayPage.
aspx?CMSPaçieID=zi
PRNewswire-USNewswire/ (2009). "Shinseki Applauds Top Rating by Independent Group" WASHINGTON,
Dec. 29 Retrieved December 30, 2009 from http://www.redorbit.com/news/business/1803537/
environmental_certification_awarded_ to _boise_ va_benefits_offce/
Watson, R. (2008). Green building impact report 2008. Retrieved on December 8, 2009 from http://www.
greenbiz.com/research/report/2008/11/18/green-building-impact-report - 2008.
Yudelson Associates (2007). Green building incentives that work: A look at how local governments are
incentivizing green development. Retrieved on December 8,2009 from http://www.naiop.orçi/
foundation/g reeni ncentives. pdf
46
. JI .
Appendix A
Green Building Survey
As our communities develop it is important to understand why some green building practices are more accepted by and
accessible to cities, developers, planners and other stakeholders. Your responses to this questionnaire are important for
understanding more about green building practices and standards which may affect the way our communities grow.
As you complete the survey please keep in mind that green building is a tenn used to describe materials and methods
that result in buildings that use less energy, water, and resources; generate less waste; have less impact on the building
site; and offer healthier indoor environments for the occupants.
Section A. General Questions
The following are general questions about factors that may influence a city's engagement in green building practices.
1. Does your city Mayor support green building practices? (PLEASE CHECK ONE)i: i: i: i: i:
Does not Somewhat Neither supports Somewhat SupportsSupport does not nor supports
support does not support
i:
Don't Know!
Not Sure
2. How aware are most developers in your city with regard to green building practices in general?
(PLEASE CHECK ONE)
i: Unaware: Not yet aware of green building practices
i: Curious: Aware but don't yet have much infonnation about green building practices
i: En~sioning: knowledgeable but want to see them in action before they try them
i: Tryout: Ready to actively get training on green building so they can use it on the job
i: Using it: Already using it and want or need support to maintain its use
i: Don't Know! Not Sure
3. How aware are most developers in your city with regard to using LEED certification standards
specifically? (PLEASE CHECK ONE)
i: Unaware: Not yet aware of LEED building practices
i: Curious: Aware but don't yet have much infonnation about LEED building practices
i: En~sioning: knowledgeable but want to see them in action before they try them
i: Tryout: Ready to actively get training on LEED building so they can use it on the job
i: Using it: Already using it and want or need support to maintain its use
i: Don't Know! Not Sure
Section B. Community Factors
The following questions are about local resources and infonnation available that may influence green building practices.
4. Is there a supplier of LEED certified materials such as wood within a 500 mile radius of your city?
(PLEASE CHECK ONE)
i: Yes
i: No
i: Don't Know! Not sure
5. Is there a developer or architect in your city that is familar with and promotes green building?
(PLEASE CHECK ONE)
i: Yes
i: No
i: Don't Know! Not sure
6. Are there buildings in your city that are fonnally recognized as green buildings that are not LEED certified (e.g., Earth
Advantage, EnergyStar, NetZero) in your city? (PLEASE CHECK ONE)
i: Yes _ 6a. (If yes, approximately how many)
i: No
i: Don't Know! Not sure
47
Section C. Economic Tools Use
7. Has your city e\er promoted green building or LEED certification? (PLEASE CHECK ONE)
D No - (If no, SKIP to question 8)
DIYes.
7a. Municipalities have a vanety of educational and economic tools at their disposaL. Using the scale to the
nght, please indicate how frequently, if at all, that your City uses the following tools to promote green
building. (PLEASE CIRCLE THE BEST RESPONSE).
Section D. Policy Considerations
The following questions concern decision making resources for green building.
8. Has your city established green building as a goal or pnorty?
D No
D Yes, informal/unwrtten (e.g., resolution or stated pnonty)
DYes, formal/wntten (e.g., created an ordinance or office of sustainable development)
D Don't Knowl Not sure
.Please continue on the next page.
48
9. Has your city established policies or guidelines goveming green building? (PLEASE CHECK ONE)
o No
o Yes, informal/unwritten (e.g., given more leeway or consideration)
o Yes, formal/written (e.g., adopted as part of a comprehensive plan or functional plan)
o Don't Know/ Not sure
10. How important are the following factors in terms of actually influencing policy on green building in your
city? Using the scale to the right, please indicate how much influence, if at all, the following factors
haw on green building policy in the city. (PLEASE CIRCLE THE BEST RESPONSE)
11. Is there a lead offce or personnel specifically responsible for green building projects or activities in the city? (PLEASE
CHECK ONE)
DYes
DNa
o Don't Know/ Not sure
12. How many public works personnel or planners work specifically for the city? (CIRCLE A NUI\ER or 00
if you Don't Know) Don't Knowo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+ 00
13. How many support staff are there for the public works personnel or planners that work for the city?
(CIRCLE A NUMBER or 00 if you Don't Know) Don't Knowo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+ 00
14. How many of the staff are accredited as a LEED AP? (CIRCLE A NU MBER or 00 if you Don't Know)
Don't Knowo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+ 00
15. What are the most important barrers to the use of green building practices in the city? (PLEASE CHECK THE TOP
FIVE)
o Confusion among green building programs 0 Misrepresentation "green washing"
o Availabilty of certified resources for green building 0 Lack of regulatory flexibilityo Cost to retrofit existing buildi ngs 0 Bad economy
o Resistance by industry and trade unions 0 Lack of consumer education
o Process uncertainty 0 Need for new suppliers
o Building code issues and interpretation of codes 0 Learning curve costso Perceiwd costs 0 Complexity of certification
o Cost (real) up front vs. Retum on investment Cl Lack of demand for green buildings
o Neighboring city did not adopt green building policies Cl Other
.Please turn the page over and continue the survey.
49
16. What are the most important incentives that encourage the adoption of green building in the city? (PLEASE CHECK
THE TOP FIVE)
i: Expedited reviews (of green projects)
i: Healthier buildings
i: Reduced impact fees
i: Bank prooting green loans and/or appraisals
i: Recognition for builders and developers
i: Citizens' interest
i: Codes that encourage green building
i: Higher density/bonus and offets for green building
(risk mitigation)
i: Education resources
(Education materials and training)
i: Neighboring city did not adopt gren building poicies
i: High profile champions locally
i: Marketabilty of "green" buildings
i: Public outreach/education
i: Social Responsibility
i: Lower life-cycle costs
i: Increased longe.,ty of buildings
i: Political .,sion
i: Regulations that provide predictability
i: Trained staff with green building expertise
i: Financial payback
i: Reduce Carbon
i: Other
LEED Certification
17. What are the most important barrers to LEED certified building in the city? (PLEASE CHECK THE TOP FIVE)
i: Confusion among green building programs i: Misrepresentation "green washing"
i: Availabilty of certified resources for green building i: Lack of regulatory flexibilityi: Paperwork load i: Bad economy
i: Resistance by industry and trade unions i: Lack of consumer education
i: Process uncertainty 0 Need for new suppliers
i: Building code issues and interpretation of codes 0 Learning curve costsi: Perceiwd costs i: Coplexity of certification
i: Cost (real) up front vs. Return on investment 0 Lack of demand for green buildings
i: Other
18. What are the most imporant incentives that encourage the adoption of LEED certification in the city? (PLEASE
CHECK THE TOP FIVE)
i: Expedited reviews (of green projects)
i: Healthier buildings
i: Reduced fees in general
i: Bank promoting green loans and/or appraisals
i: Recognition for builders and developers
i: Citizens' Interest
i: Codes that encourage green building
i: Higher density/bonus and offets for green building
(risk mitigation)
i: Education resources
(Education materials and training)
i: Financial payback
i: High profile champions locally
i: Marketability of "LEED" buildings
i: Public outreach/education
i: Social Responsibilty
i: Lower life-cycle costs
i: Increased longe.,ty of buildings
i: Political .,sion
i: Regulations that provide predictabilty
i: LEED certification as a brand adds value
i: Trained staff wih green building expertise
i: Reduce Carbon
i: Other
19. Are there any topics not treated in this questionnaire that you feel are important for understanding more about what
makes green building practices more accepted by and accessible to cities, developers, planners and other stakeholders?
If so, please provide the information below or use additional sheets, if necessary.
50
Appendix B
Construction Industry Member Survey
section A: General Questions
For the firt set ci questions, we are asking about græn buHding practices in general. These practices could be a~ set ci that you use in the COlre ci
yourwork such as LæD and Energy Star arrng others. There are sane questions specific to the U.S. Green Bt/ding Couæil's LEED cerifiation
standards; we have rrde sure to bold text specfic to LEED to help you recognize these questions rrre easily. TONards the end ci this section, there
wHI be sorm questions about hON you approach n(Nel situations.
If there are any questions you cb not wish to an9Neryou rry leave them blank; hONever, itwill aid in our analysis if you would rrrk, "I prefer not to
say," on the survey.
Rease rrrk the response that best indicates your response.
I 1. Green building is beconing rrre i iwortant fa the corwetitive edge of ~ corwany.
o i strongly 0 I 0 I some hat 0 I neither agree ordisagree disagree disagree disagree
o I don't knON
o I some hat 0 Iagree agree
o I prefer not to say
o i strongly
agree
I 3. Rease rrrk the five rrst iiwortant ba-riers ti the use ci green building practices in yourwak?
o Confusion arrng green building programso Availability of certfied resollces fa green building ~ ~ad ke~ono~ r ed cationo Cost to relrciit existing buildings 0 Neacd f consurm I' u". e a new supp ierso Resistance by In?us1r and lrade unions 0 Learning Qirv Costso A"~c~ss unce~ainty.. 0 Corwlexit of certficationo Buildi~g code issues and interpretation of codes 0 Lack ci derrnd for geen buildingso ~rceived costs 0o Cost (real) up froot vs. Return on investrmnt Other
o Neighboring city did not adopt geen building policies
o Msrepresentation "geen washing"
o Lack d regulatory flexibilit
o i don't knON .
o I prefer not to say.
ase rrr e ive rrst IlWor n mce
pe e revies green proJec1s
o Healthier buildings
o Reduced iract fees
o Bank prorrting green loans and/a appraisals
o Recognition fa builders and developers
o Ciizens' interest
o Codes that encourage green building
o Hiher densit/boous and cise1s fa green building
o Education resolles (edu:ation rrterials and training)
o Neighboring city did not adopt geen builing policies
o High prof He charwions locally
o Marketability of "geen" buildings
o Public outreach/education
o I don't knON .
o I prefer not to say.
5. Rease rrrk the five rrst iiwortant ba-riers ti the use d Le:D ce rtification stiidar for buildings in yourwork?
o Confusion arrng green building programs 0 Lack d regulatory flexibilito Availabilit of certfied resollces fa green building ~ ~~ke~~~i:rmr educationo Pap~rwak Lo~d . 0 Need fa new supplierso Resistance by in?uslry and lrade unions 0 Learning Qirve Costso A"~c~ss unce~ainty.. 0 Coiwlexit of certfication
o BUlldl~g code issues and interpretation ci codes 0 Lack ci derrnd for geen buildingso ~rceived costs 0o Cost (real) up froot vs. Return on investrmnt Other
o Misrepresentation "geen washing"
o I don't knON .
o I prefer not to say.
5:1
o Education resoises (education materials and training)
o Hih profile chariions locally
o Marketability of "green" buildings
o F\blic outreach/education
o Other
o I don't knCM .
o I prefer not to say.
ractbes.
I neiter agree or
disagree
ne er agree or
disagree
o I somehat 0 Iagree agree
o I prefer not to say
o I strongly
agree
I 9. I am NOT considering enrollng in a certfication course fa a setd green building prætices.o I strongly 0 I 0 I some hat 0 I neiter agree ordisagree disagree disagree disagree
o i don't knCM
o I somehat 0 Iagree agree
o I prefer not to say
o I strongly
agree
I neiter agree or
disagree
o i strongly
agree
I some hat 0 iagree agree
o I prefer not to say
12. I think green buildin practices have significant financial and envtonmental benefit fa our cllrent society and future
I strongly 0 I I some hat 0 I neither agree or I some hat Idisagree disagree disagree disagree agree agreeo I don't knCM 0 I prefer not to say
enerations.
o I strongly
agree
13. Iwould personall
o I strongly
disagree
like to see the ¡:actbe d reen bulding practices ex nded.o I I some hat I neiter agree ordisagree disagree disagree
o I don't knCM
o Isomehatagree agree
o I prefer not to say
o I strongly
agree
15. I 0 NOT intend to find rmre infamation about green buildin
I strongly 0 i I some hat
disagree disagree disagree
o I don't knCM
practbes.
I neither agree or
disagree
o I neiter agree or
disagree
16. I intend to try applyin
I strongly
disagree
o Isomehat 0 Iagree agree
o I prefer not to say
o I strongly
agree
o I some hatagree agree
o I prefer not to say
18. I a m currently usin
o I strongly
disagree I neither agree or
disagree
o I somehat 0 Iagree agree
o I prefer not to say
19. I DO NOT plan to continue to use green building practices in the future. I strongly I I some hat 0 I neiter agree ordisagree disagree disagree disagree
o i don't knCM
52
o I strongly
agree
o I some hat Iagree agree
o I prefer not to say
20. I am seeing obvious benetffs to rr use õf green builing pracfiæs bõh in terms õf building performance and in terms offinancial results.
o I strongly 0 I 0 I SOI' hat 0 I neither agree or 0 I SOI' hat 0 I 0 I stronglydisagree disagree disagree disagree agree agree agreeo I don't knOO 0 I prefer not to say
23. Atwhi:h of thefolloing s1ages of adoption would ya. expect to find rmst construction profesionals with rega-d to geen buildingpracti:es in general?
aN a-e: ye aNa-e geen UI ing prac ees
i: Curious:Aw cre but don't yet have much information about green buildingpracti:es i: I don't kmm .
i: Envisioning: knON Iegeable butwari to see them in action before they try them
i: Tryout: Ready to actwely get 1raining on green building so they can use it on the i: i prefer not to say.
job
i: Using it: Already using it and want or need support to maintain its use
24. Atwhi:h of thefollOOing s1ages of adoption would ya. expect to find rmstcity planners with regard to using Lstandard specfically?naNa-e: ye aNa-e UI ing prac ices
i: Curious:Awcre but don't yet have much information about LEEDb uilding practices
i: Envisioning: knOOledgeable but want to see them in action before they try them
i: Tryout: Ready to actwely get 1raining on LEED building so they can use it on the job
i: Using it: Already using it and want or need support to maintain its use
ED certification
i: I don't knOO .
i: i prefer not to say.
26. I am NO very concerned about the well-being of future generations. o I strongly 0 I 0 i SOI' hat 0 I neither agree ordisagree disagree disagree disagree
o i don't knOO
o i sor hat 0 I
agree agree
o i prefer not to say
o Istrongy
agree
27. I a m confident that science and technol ætively benefit humanit.
I strongly 0 I 0 I SOI' hat
disagree disagree disagree
o I don't kn OO
i neither agree or
disagree
o i some hat 0 i
agree agree
o i prefer not to say
I 29. I aggresswely seek rmre information about green building practices.
o I strongly 0 I 0 I SOI' hat 0 I neither agree ordisagree disagree disagree disagree
o I don't knOO
o I somehat 0 iagree agree
o I prefer not to say
o I strongly
agree
30. I can clearly imagine complex goals and the path to reæh them.
o I strongly 0 I 0 I SOI' hat
disagree disagree disagree
o I don't knOO
o i neither agree or
disagree o I strongly
agree
o I somehat 0 iagree agree
o I prefer not to say
32. There is still a great deal rrre I have yet D accomplish in rr profesional life. o i stronalv 0 I 0 i SOI' hat 0 i neither aaree ordisagree disagree disagree disagree
o i don't knOO
o I somehat 0 Iagree agree
o i prefer not to say
01 stronalvagree
53
33. I have a large social and profesional network that includes people ou1side Il local area.o I strongly I 0 I SOIT hat 0 I neither agree or .0 i SOIT hat 0 Idisagree disagree disagree disagree agree agreeo I don't knON 0 I prefer not to say
o I strongly
agree
Section B: Demographics
The foRON ing derrraphic questions will help us better lIdelstand who has responded to oi. sIley. Wew ill cormine yoi. ansi eis with thæe of
everyone else to give us a big picti.evie of the professionals involed in the oons1rudion industr regarding green building practices. Wew HI rot
identify individuals. f there ere any questions you do notw ish to anser yoo may leave them blank; hON ever, itw in aid in our analysis L yoo woU mark,
"I prefer not to say," on the survey.
34. What is the highest de ree either of yoor perents have eerned:
Hih Schooli: Asociates Degree
i: Bacheiois Degree
i: Technical Certifbate
i: IIstels Degree
i: Doctoral Degree
i: Fbst-Graduate Certlications
i: i don't knON .
i: i prefer not to say.
irr per yeer
cr profesional pur es (e.g., business 1rlpS and corternces :
1-2 tiræs per yeer 0 3-4 tiræs per yeer 0 5-6 tirr per yea
o Idon'tknON
o 1-2 per nnnth 0 3-4 tiræs per nnnth
o I prefer not to say
5-6 tims per nnnth
3-4 tiræs per nnnth
o i prefer not to say
5.6 times per nnnth
38. Hi hest Level of Education you have corrleted:
c
o Asociates Degree
o Bacheiois Degree
o Technical Certifbate
o Fbst-Graduate Certlications
o I don't knON .
o I prefer not to say.
39. IIrk the main ræd ia sources you use for infamation mor than onæ a week, this would include both harclo\1 and elec1ronic sources:
Nespapero A"ofessional Blogs 0 Trade ~rnalso Nesletteis 0 Aca~emc Journalso Television 0 Webinarso Fbcas1s 0 cnher
o Internet video and radio
o Boks
o IIgazines
o I don't knON .
o I prefer not to say.
40. IIrk the ræthods of cOITTn.mication you use mult.
Emil
o Telephone
o Cell Alone
o Text IVssaging
o Social Netw crking Sites
o Online Discussion Boerds
o Face-to-Face ræetings
the week:
o Telecorterencing
o Video Corterencing
o Oter
o I don't knON .
o I prefer not to say.
o I don't kn .
o I prefer not to say.
54
List of Tables and Figures
6 Figure 1: Mr. Ames, 9th grade physics student built a
27 x 27 X 27 cube
17 Table 1: Summary of Main Points from Reviewed
Research
18 Table 2: Ranking Values for Focus Group Responses
19 Table 3: City Planners and Public Works Professionals'
Ranking of Factors that Encourage Green Building
19 Table 4: City Planners and Public Works Professionals'
Ranking of Incentives that Encourage Green Building
20 Table 5: City Planners and Public Works Professionals'
Ranking of Barriers to Green Building
20 Table 6: City Planners and Public Works Professionals'
Ranking oHools that Encourage Green Building
21 Table 7: Members of the Development Community's
Ranking of Factors that Encourage Green Building
21 Table 8: Members ofthe Development Community's
Ranking of Incentives that Encourage Green Building
22 Table 9: Members of the Development Community's
Ranking Barriers to Green Building
22 Table 10: Members of the Development Community's
Ranking oHools that Encourage Green Building
23 Table 11: Comparison of the Top Five Factors for
Developers and Cities
25 Table 12: City and County Survey Response Rate by
State
26 Table 13: Construction Professional Survey Response
Rate by State
Paper used for the production of this report is FSC Certifed.
26 Table 14: Mayor/County Commissioner Support for
Green Building Practices
27 Table 15: Cities' Perceptions of the Awareness of
Green Building by Developers
27 Table 16: Community Factors that Support Green
Building
29 Table 17: Use of Economic Tools to Promote Green
Building
29 Table 18: Policy and Guidelines for Green Building
30 Table 19: Factors and their degree of influence on
green building policy
31 Table 20: Staff and LEED AP Accredited Staff by City,
County and MSA
32 Figure 2: Top Five Barriers for Green Building
32 Figure 3: Top Five Incentives for Green Building
33 Figure 4: Top Five Barriers for LEED
33 Figure 5: Top Five Incentives for LEED
35 Figure 6: Top Five Barriers
35 Figure 7: Top Five Incentives
37 Table 21: Summary of Construction Industry Survey
Data
38 Table 22: Adoption Level and Strategy
39 Table 23: Construction Industry Members and Stage
of Adopt ion
55
POST-OCCUPANCY EVALUATION
OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY INCENTIVE PROGRAMS
Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Authors:
Gladics, G.
Van Den Wymelenberg, K.
Otto, C.
INTEGRATED DESIGN LAB
b 0 i s e
COLLEGE of ART and ARCIDTECTUR
of Architecture & Interior
I-a:o
D.
W0:..
c(U-z::uwI-
31, December, 2009
Date
20090207-01
Report No.
Prepared By:
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise
108 N 6th St. Boise 1083702 USA
ww.uidaho.edu/idl
Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Director
Gunnar Gladics
Project Manager
1-Gunnar Gladics
2-Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
3-Christina Oto
Authors
C09410-P03
Contract No.
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Bilie Jo McWinn
Project Manager
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by
Idaho Power Company. It does not necessarily represent the
views of Idaho Power Company or its employees. Idaho
Power Company, its employees, contractors and
subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and
assume no legal liabilty for the information in this report; nor
does any part represent that the uses of this information wil
not infrnge upon privately owned rights. This report has not
been approved or disapproved by Idaho Power Company nor
has Idaho Power Company passed upon the accuracy or
adequacy of the information in this report.
Please cite this report as follows:
Gladics, G., K. Van Den Wymelenberg, C. Otto, 2009. Post-Occupancy Evaluation of Energy
Effciency Incentive Programs; Technical Report 20090207-01, Integrated Design Lab,
University of Idaho, Boise, ID.
This page left intentionally blank.
E F CO TENTS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................2
2. BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................................................4
2.1. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ...................................................................................................................4
2.2. HyPOTHESiS..................................................................................................................................6
3. METHODS .....................................................................................................................................6
3.1. BUILDING SELECTION ......................................................................................................................6
EASY UPGRADES ..............................................................................................................................................6
BUILDING EFFICIENCY PROGRAM......................................................................................................................... 8
3.2. PARTICIPANTS ...............................................................................................................................8
TYPICAL DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION ...................................................................................................... .......... 9
OTHER OCCUPANT AND LOCATION INFORMATION ............................................................................................... 10
BUILDING INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................. 10
3.3. SURVEY INSTRUMENT ................................................................................................................... 12
3.4. SURVEY DELIVERY ........................................................................................................................13
3.5. DATA RETRIEVAL AND ANALyS~S...................................................................................................... 14
4. RESULTS...............................................,.........................................................................................16
4.1. KEY ........................................................................................................................................... 16
4.2. EEM SYSTEMS (SIMILAR MEASURES COMBINED ACROSS IPC PROGRAMS)................................................. 17
MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES GREATER THAN 30............................................................................................... 18
MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES LESS THAN 30. ................................... ................................................................. 20
4.3. BUILDING EFFICIENCY PROGRAM ..................................................................................................... 21
MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES GREATER THAN 30...............................................................................................22
MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES LESS THAN 30. .................................................................................................... 24
4.4. EASY UPGRADES .......................................................................................................................... 25
MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES GREATER THAN 30...............................................................................................26
MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES LESS THAN 30. .................................................................................................... 26
5. REFERENCES................................................................................................................................ 29
Incentive
Lab-Boise #
Advanced Energy
This Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) was undertaken to provide both Idaho Power Company (IPC) and
the building design and operation community with useful information about occupant satisfaction related to
energy efficiency measures. Specifically, this research examined two of IPC's prescriptive energy efficiency
incentive programs. The information provided by the study may help to guide improvements of current IPC
incentive programs and individual measures, or be the genesis of new incentive measures. There are many
examples when users' impact building performance and POEs are an important means to help understand human
behavioral relationships with building energy consumption and various energy efficiency measures. To assess
occupant satisfaction in relation to specific effciency measures we chose to use an existing relevant survey created
by the National Research Council of Canada Institute for Research in Construction (Veitch, Farley, Newsham, 2002)
for their research of open plan office environments. In our study, data were collected through an online survey
tool where respondents answered questions relating to environmental satisfaction. The paper documents over
forty different energy efficiency measures (EEMs) and subsequent relationships with occupant comfort and
satisfaction. A survey of occupants (n=232) across 20 buildings that participated in IPC's Building Efficiency
Program (BEP) and Easy Upgrades (EU) program was conducted during the summer and fall of 2009. Occupants
were asked to respond to over 40 questions across seven distinct constructs, including Environmental Features
Ratings, Environmental Satisfaction, Jab Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Intent to Turnover, Health, and
Demographic Variables.
Responses to each question were statistically analyzed for significant differences between individuals in
buildings with and without each EEM. However, many of the sample groups had fewer than 30 respondents and
thus the data were reanalyzed by grouping the measures into 15 EEM systems to increase the number of
respondents in each group. The EEM systems defined are Reduced Lighting Power Density, Daylight Photo
Controls, Occupancy Sensors, Efficient Cooling Units, Air Side Economizers, Reflective Roof Treatment, High
Performance Windows, Window Shading, Energy Management Systems, Demand Control Ventilation, Variable
Speed Drives, Central lighting Controls, Improved Insulation, 7 Day Two-Stage Setback, and Highly Efficient
Signage. Upon completion of the second phase of analysis we found the results to be more meaningful and
revealing of occupant satisfaction.
Occupants in buildings with certain EEMs had significantly lower environmental satisfaction than those
without the measure. These included, Daylight Photo Controls, Efficient Cooling Units, Reduced Lighting Power
Density, and Occupancy Sensors. Daylight Photo Controls resulted in a significant decrease in occupant satisfaction
with both the frequency of distractions and abilty to control the physical environment. Occupants in buildings
with efficient Cooling Units, showed lower satisfaction with temperature. Based on the comments we received in
the open-ended response section of the survey, temperature was the number one response occupants gave when
asked "What do you like least about your office?" The majority of the occupants that indicated dissatisfaction with
temperature described their workspaces as "too cold" especially in the summer months when the space was
mechanically cooled! Reduced lighting Power Density, showed decreased occupant satisfaction with their
perceived abilty to alter or control their physical environment. It is also interesting to note that for all three
measures, there were no significant differences in satisfaction with the amount of light provided by the system for
work.
Evaluation of Incentive Programs; Advanced
integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report #
2009
Page 2 of 30
Occupants in buildings with certain EEMs showed increased environmental satisfaction when compared
to those without the measure. This is an encouraging result since it suggests that these EEMs are not only
providing energy savings but also increased occupant comfort. These included, Air Side Economizers, High
Performance Windows, Window Shading, Energy Management Systems, Demand Control Ventilation, Variable
Speed Drives, Air Side Economizer, and T8 Replacements. Air Side Economizers resulted in increased occupant
satisfaction with temperature. Questions regarding occupant comfort and measures that relate to the building
shell returned some interesting results. Buildings with High Performance Windows showed increased occupant
satisfaction with temperature. Window Shading showed improved occupant satisfaction with glare and aesthetics.
It is also interesting to note that no statistically significant differences were shown for satisfaction with the amount
of light on the desktop or for computer work for buildings with High Performance Windows or Window Shading,
thus indicating that neither measure had a negative effect on the amount or quality of lighting in the space.
Occupants in buildings that received an incentive for EMS showed an increase in satisfaction with the questions
regarding thermal comfort, air movement, air quality, and temperature and there was no difference in satisfaction
with the occupant's ability to control their environment leading us to believe that energy management systems
improved occupant comfort while not diminishing individual control. Demand Control Ventilation returned results
that show occupants had a higher level of satisfaction with the air quality without affecting their comfort level in
regards to temperature.
With a few notable exceptions, these results suggest that occupant satisfaction with environmental
features is most commonly beneficially affected or unaffected by the EEMs incentivized by IPC. In a few cases
listed above, occupant satisfaction was significantly lower in buildings with certain EEMs. Additional research may
be warranted on EEMs that returned significantly beneficial or detrimental affects upon occupant satisfaction.
This study was not intended to provide conclusions about causality. While the body of the paper does formulate
some hypotheses as to causality, further study of particular EEM systems would need to be conducted to
understand the reasons why occupants responded the way they did. We suggest those EEMs that produced
significantly lower occupant satisfaction warrant additional causal research in order to provide concrete guidance
to improve IPC incentives so they maintain or improve occupant satisfaction when implemented. This follow up
research may include interviews with building occupants, targeted data logging of EEM performance, and or
human factors data collection and comfort analysis.
Evaluation of Energy Efficiency Incentive
Lab-Boise #
In the recent decade, regulating agencies, such as public utility commissions, have placed increased
demands on electric utilities to maximize efficiency opportunities prior to building new electric generation
facilties. Utilty companies nationwide have developed programs that pay incentives to individuals or companies
to spur investment in energy efficient technologies that decrease energy use and peak demand in areas such as
lighting, heating and cooling, ventilation, plug load, and refrigeration. In this manner, Idaho Power Company (IPC)
offers its customers several incentive programs to encourage more efficient energy use. These programs span a
wide scope of work from new construction to simple equipment upgrades. Aside from 'process loads', most energy
consumption in buildings is to provide a comfortable and productive environment for workers. Therefore, it is not
unreasonable to assume that energy efficiency strategies and technologies interact with human comfort in
important and sometimes dramatic ways. This paper documents research aimed and understanding the comfort
implications associated with IPC's incentive programs. The paper documents overall satisfaction and comfort of
occupants that participated in a survey of people who work in buildings that participated in IPC's incentive
programs. The purpose of this paper is to determine if any of IPC's energy efficiency measures (EEMs) significantly
impacted occupant satisfaction, and if so, to document the magnitude and direction of the effects. The paper is
not intended to provide conclusions to causality, however in select instances, hypotheses are offered.
This paper focuses on two of i PC's commercial efficiency incentive programs; the Building Efficiency Program
(BEP) and Easy Upgrades (EU). BEP is oriented towards new construction projects or major remodels, renovations,
and additions. The incentives include 12 prescriptive measures, such as high performance windows and shading
devices or daylighting photo controls and energy management systems. The EU program is oriented towards
existing buildings undergoing routine improvements and equipment upgrades. EU is also a prescriptive program
with 143 possible measures. Measures include lighting fixture upgrades, high efficiency equipment, variable speed
drives etc. The full list of measures is available at IPC's Commercial Efficiency web page listed below.
http://www.idahopower.com/EnergyEfficiency/Busi nessl defa u It.cfm ?ta b-Business
This literature review is not intended to document the detailed experimental or survey research on the
multitude of specific energy efficiency technologies or strategies. Rather, we sought out studies that examined
occupant comfort in relation to utilty sponsored energy efficiency incentive programs. The body of research most
closely related to purpose of our research is commonly referred to as 'Post-Occupancy Evaluation' (POE) research.
A Post-Occupancy Evaluation as defined by Preiser and Vischer (2004) is "the act of evaluating buildings in a
systematic and rigorous manner after they have been built and occupied for some time." This method can be used
to study the potential interactions between energy efficient strategies and technologies with human comfort,
satisfaction and productivity. While the extensive body of POE research is not reviewed here in detail, a broad
overview is offered.
Evaluatíon of Energy Incentive Programs; Advanced
Design lab-Boise (Report #
Several researchers have made significant contributions to the field of POE research including those at the
Center for the Built Environment (CBE) at UC-Berkeley, the New Buildings Institute (NBI), the National Research
Council of Canada's Institute of Research in Construction (NRC-IRC), and Buildings-in-Use to name a few. This body
of research provides substantial knowledge about specific energy efficient strategies, such as daylighting and
passive heating, cooling and ventilating and the various technologies that accompany these strategies. However,
the nature of this work often requires detailed and time intensive methodologies that prevent broad surveys
across multiple buildings. This research tends to be deployed in a case study approach where the occupant
satisfaction with the specific combination of EEMs at one building is documented. Only as a sequence of individual
case studies accumulates can statements of a broad nature be made. To our knowledge, this body of research has
not been extended as an evaluation method of utilty incentive programs as we proposed with our research. Our
research set out to determine whether there is a relationship between occupant satisfaction and comfort in
buildings that participated in the specific incentivized EEMs and those that did not have incentivized EEMs. In other
words, do various incentivized EEMs positively or negatively affect occupant satisfaction or comfort with their
workspace. The methods used by the research teams above were evaluated in terms of the information that was
collected, the time investment by the researchers and the time investment by the participants. Based upon this
evaluation, we selected the survey instrument as developed by the National Research Council of Canada (Veitch,
Farley and Newsham, 2002) for their research into open-plan office environments.
In addition to the POE research, we found a few studies that aimed to assess comfort in relation to
various utilty incentivized energy effciency measures. A brief description of the research aims, methods and
results are provided below.
In 2003, Clinch and Healy (2003) published an investigation of the economic benefits associated with
improving thermal comfort for the residences in Ireland participating in energy-efficient retro-fitting programs.
Their results suggest that approximately 21% of those surveyed wil value increased comfort as more important
than reduced energy cost. While this paper clearly addresses a connection between occupant comfort and energy
efficient incentive program it is specific to thermal comfort and focuses on residential applications.
In 2005, the California Energy Commission (CEC) published a case study on a 415,000 SF building that had
installed an energy management system (EMS) in Beverly Hils, California. The EMS system integrated the
operation of new mechanical, electrical, and sensing equipment. According to the CEC, the building saved
approximately $300,000 annually and resulted in reduced occupant complaints regarding comfort by 95%. This
case study judges occupant satisfaction with the EMS system and other mechanical and electrical upgrades by the
recording the reduction in building complaints to the facility staff. However, it does not examine occupant
satisfaction or comfort directly, only indirectly.
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) in California, is currently working with its federal customers to award
incentives for their adoption of high efficiency lighting and controls technology. This program helps both PG&E
and Federal buildings meet their mandated energy efficiency targets. According to PG&E's website (PG&E, 2009),
data wil be collected on occupant comfort and customer satisfaction in addition to energy and peak demand
savings. This research is stil underway but indicates the need for the type of incentive program evaluation carried
out and included in this report.
Incentive
Lab"Boise (Report #
Advanced
This paper draws from previous research (Veitch, Farley, Newsham, 2002) on occupant satisfaction within
open plan office environments but is unique in that the objective of this research is to study the effects of a large
suite of EEMs on occupant satisfaction with the resultant indoor environment. This research began with the
following hypothesis: EEMs in buildings wil provide a comfortable and productive working environment that is
equivalent to traditional building systems. In other words, EEMs implemented wil save energy in buildings with no
significant negative or positive effect on people working in that environment. Thus there wil be no significant
difference in ratings of satisfaction for individuals working in buildings that implemented the EEM and those that
did not.
Selection of the buildings was created through a process that began with IPC providing master list of
buildings that participated in their incentive programs and had received incentive checks for either their Building
Efficiency Program (BEP) or Easy Upgrades (EU) program between January 2006 and April 2009. Upon receipt, the
list contained 289 EU buildings and 119 BEP buildings. Several filters were applied to arrive at a manageable list of
possible buildings to be included in the study. IPC applied the first filter prior to the list being distributed to the
research team. This first filter eliminated any EU buildings that had an upgrade cost of less than $8,000. This filter
reduced the list down to 289 buildings. Prior to this filter the incentive amounts paid by IPC ranged from $112 to
upwards of $20,000. The next filter was applied to both the EU and BEP lists, and it eliminated schools and prisons
to avoid 'vulnerable participants' in order to simplify the approvals process with the University of Idaho's Human
Assurances Committee (HAC).
EASY UPGRADES
For EU buildings, an additional filter eliminated any buildings without some office environment
component. Since the survey instrument was going to be delivered via the Internet, participants would be
required to have access to a computer. Furthermore, office settings are a fairly consistent in terms of occupant
comfort expectations, therefore reducing variabilty in the sample. After applying these filters, 104 EU buildings
remained. These buildings were later prioritized into two groups, low priority (21) and high priority (83) for the
phone recruitment campaign. High priority buildings were deemed to have a greater number of occupants in office
environments.
Evaluation of lncentíve Programs; Advanced
Design lab-Boise # 20090207-01)
2009
Page 6 of 30
EU BUILDING TYPES ELIMINATED
Schools
Prisons
Church
Grocery
Gym, Cafeteria
Restaurant
High-rise Apartment
EU BUILDING TYPES INClUDED
Multifamily
Hotel
Machine Shop
Other Industrial
Shop
Warehouse
I nstitutional/ government
College
Fire Station
Commercial
Office
Office/Warehouse
of Incentive
Lab-Boise #
Retail
Healthcare
Medical Offce
Miltary
Multi Use
Manufacturing
Advanced 2009
1of30
BUILDING EFFICIENCY PROGRAM
The BEP building list was comparatively smaller (119); therefore the incentive payout filter was not
applied. The incentive payouts range from $45 to the maximum possible of $100,000. The other filters used for
the EU program were applied, leaving a total of 72 potential buildings for inclusion. These too were prioritized; low
priority (36) high priority (36) using the same logic as described for the EU program.
BEP BUILDING TYPES EXCLUDED BEP BUILDING TYPES INCLUDED
Schools Institutional/government
Restaurant Commercial
Other Industrial Office
Warehouse Agricultural Ofice/Warehouse
Retail
Healthcare
Medical Office
Manufacturin
This section provides basic participant demographics. Descriptive data collected includes gender, age,
and work function. There are also data on the location of the occupant within the building relative to floor and
proximity to a window. Also included is a list of the building types and general locations of the building within IPC's
service area.
Evaluation of
Integrated
Incentive Programs; Advanced
Lab-Boise (Report # 20090207-01)
Effciency 2009
Page 8of30
I TYPICAL DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
Table 1- Participant Demographics
GENDER AGE Administrative Technical Professional Managerial Totals
18-29 0 5 4 0 9
30-39 6 15 12 8 41
OJ 40-49 2 12 9 2 25¡:::50-59 0 7 11 6 24
60+2 1 5 1 9
All 10 40 41 17 108
18-29 4 3 9 1 17
30-39 12 0 13 2 27
OJ¡:40-49 11 2 11 7 31E
OJ 50-59 14 6 13 5 38u.
60+1 0 0 1 2
All 42 11 46 16 115
Totals 52 51 87 33 223
Education
I~ Highschool I~ Certficate
I~ Some University I~ Undergraduate
i.Graduate
Figure 1 . Participant's Education
2009
90f30
OTHER OCCUPANT AND LOCATION INFORMATION
The information gathered in this survey included non-specific location information regarding occupants'
proximity to a window as reported in Figure 2. Access to a window from where the occupant normally works was
recorded for to provide additional insight into questions related to daylight, view and visual comfort. Survey
responses showed that 44% of occupants had a window directly next to them, 12% had access to a window next to
their neighbor, 23% did not have a window in their area but could see one from where they worked, and 21% had
no access to a window at alL. In addition we found that 94% of occupants used lCD computer screens and only 6%
use older CRT screens. These data are required for an analysis that is beyond the scope of this report.
Window Direction
Ii North II East m South II West
Figure 1. - Window Orientation
BUILDING INFORMATION
Table 2 below depicts characteristics of the sample of buildings that had occupants who responded to the
survey. Some of the buildings/occupants that responded to the survey, not included in the final analysis for several
reasons. Some buildings were found not to have IPC measures .and some occupants did not check the consent
approval box in the survey. We have excluded the names of the buildings so as to keep the identities of the
participants and buildings confidentiaL. The names have been replaced with a unique building code for each of the
respective buildings. Also listed is the occupancy type of the building, which due to the nature of the study is
overwhelmingly office or includes some office occupancy. Additionally we included the general region in which the
building is located. These areas are defined as Metro Area, Mountain, Eastern, and Western. The Metro Area
Evaluation of Incentive Programs; Advanced
Design lab-Boise #
2009
10 of 30
includes any buildings within the Treasure Valley region of Idaho. The Mountain designation includes buildings that
lie directly north or east of Boise in the higher altitude locations. The Eastern designation includes buildings east of
Burley that fell within IPC's service region. Finally the Western designation includes buildings that lie west or north
of the Treasure Valley.
Table 2 - Building Type and Location of Sample
Key Building Type Location
Building 1 Office Mountain
Building 2 Office Metro Area
Building 3 Office Metro Area
Building 4 Office/Warehouse Metro Area
Building 5 Office Metro Area
Building 6 Office Metro Area
Building 7 Office Metro Area
Building 8 Office/Warehouse Metro Area
Building 9 Office Metro Area
Building 10 Office Metro Area
Building 11 Office/Storage Metro Area
Building 12 Office/Warehouse Metro Area
Building 13 Office Metro Area
Building 14 Office Metro Area
Building 15 Office Metro Area
Building 16 Office Metro Area
Building 17 Office Mountain
Building 18 Office Mountain
Building 19 Office Metro Area
Building 20 Office Eastern
Building 21 Office/laboratory Western
Building 22 Warehouse Metro Area
Building 23 Recreation Metro Area
Building 24 Office Metro Area
Building 25 Office Metro Area
Building 26 Offce/laboratory Eastern
Building 27 Office/iaboratory Eastern
Building 28 Office/laboratory Eastern
Building 29 Office/iaboratory Eastern
Building 30 Office/laboratory Eastern
Effciency Incentive Advanced
Lab-Boise :# 20090207-01)
2009
1 of 30
The survey instrument (Appendix D) that was used to measure occupant satisfaction was
constructed by researchers at the National Research Council of Canada's Institute for Research in
Construction (NRC-IRe). They ran a research project titled Cost-effective Open-Plan Environments (COPE),
through which this instrument was developed. The construction of the survey instrument was
multidisciplinary and spanned several years of development by the NRC-IRe. Each section of this survey
had been rigorously tested for validity and internal reliabilty. This instrument had been used in several
previous studies measuring occupant satisfaction for various research purposes.
The survey comprises seven sections concerning different aspects of the work environment. The
following is a description of each section and its question contents.
- Environmental Features Ratings - This section questions occupants on 18 specific aspects of
their work environment in the categories of satisfaction with ventilation, satisfaction with lighting,
satisfaction with privacy, and satisfaction with control. The original 18-ltem questionnaire was developed
for the COPE project (Charles et aI., 2003: Veitch et aI., 2002) and was based on Ratings of Environmental
Features created by Stokols and Scharf (1990).
- Environmental Satisfaction - This section contains a two-item measure of overall environmental
satisfaction developed as part of NRC-IRe's COPE project, which has shown to relate to conditions in the
physical environment (Veitch, Charles, Newsham, Marquardt, & Geerts, 2003).
- Job Satisfaction - This section is a single item scale of overall job satisfaction, which has been
shown to have acceptable reliability and to be suitable for use when longer scales are impractical (Dolbier
et aI., 2005; Wanous, Reichers, &Hudy, 1997). Wording for this item was developed by Dolbier, Webster,
McCalister, Mallon, and Steinhardt (2005).
- Organizational Commitment - This section includes six items developed by Meyer, Allen, and
Smith (1993).
-Intent to Turnover - This section includes three items created by Colarell (1984).
-Health - This section was used to measure various occurrences of adverse health reactions and
their frequency and intensity. The items were developed by Veitch and Newsham (1998) using a
combination of work from a scale developed by Wibom and Carlsson (1987) as well as literature from
Hedge, Erickson, and Rubin (1992).
-Demographic variable - This section was included to provide statistical control by allowing a
determination of the degree to which the occupants in the study groups are similar (Newsham et aI.,
Boyce et aI., 2003). Also included are some open ended, non-identifying questions about their location in
the building and other opinions on environmental conditions.
Evaluation of Energy Incentive
Design Lab-Boise (Report #
Advanced Energy 2009
Page 12 of 30
After a review of the methods available to deliver online surveys we chose to use Lime Survey.
Lime Survey is an open source freeware that is widely used for general and scientific research. We created
the survey instrument in Lime Survey using methods similar to those of the NRC-IRC COPE studies. The
online survey followed the section breakdowns listed above. The online survey format is available in
Appendix G. The survey was delivered to each participant via an email with a hyperlink.
After the initial sorting of the building lists from IPC was completed, several standardized
documents were created to contact building owners and operators and recruit their participation in the
study. We began a phone campaign in June of 2009 that continued through October of 2009 to secure
participants. This process is detailed below. After making initial contact through the phone campaign, a
formal email (Appendix B) that described who was conducting the research (University of Idaho), what the
intent of the research was, and the procedures to participate were distributed to the appropriate building
representative. This email also included the approval letter from the HAC, and a standardized memo that
management could distribute to encourage employee participation in the survey (Appendices A and F).
We began the phone campaign by contacting all high priority buildings on both the BEP and EU
lists established during building filter and selection process. We made contact with 46 BEP building
representative and 83 EU building representatives. Of the 46 BEP representatives contacted, 10 denied
participation, 24 did not respond to repeated requests to follow through with contact information, 1
building was no longer occupied, and 11 managers agreed to participate in the study and followed
through with the necessary contact information. Of the 83 EU representatives contacted, 30 denied
participation, 29 did not respond to repeated requests to follow through with contact information, 3 were
no longer occupied, and 21 agreed to participate and followed through with the necessary contact
information. The process was extremely time intensive and often required two to three months of
repeated contact and in some cases several personal meetings to obtain approval from management.
Sometimes permission was granted by managers, but we were unable to secure the necessary contact
information or participation from staff. The phone campaign resulted in permission to distribute the
survey to 681 people from 11 BEP buildings and 21 Easy Upgrades buildings.
In two cases, building management agreed to participate, but could not directly provide email
address due to legal limitations. For these cases, we modified Lime Survey so that managers could
distribute a single hyperlink to their employees so they could login to the survey and release their own
information if willng. Furthermore, one of these would not allow the Intent to Turnover questions be
distributed and provisions in Lime Survey were made to accommodate this request.
In all other cases, managers sent email addresses directly and these were input into Lime Survey and the
surveys were distributed via email as contact information was received. Before proceeding to the survey,
participants were asked to read a letter of consent (Appendix D) that described the purpose and procedure of the
survey. At the end of the letter, participants were required to check yes or no next to their agreement to
participate in the study. If participants check "No" their results were excluded from analysis. In addition to the
initial email notification, each potential participant was sent up to three weekly reminders via email (Appendix H) if
Incentive
Lab-Boise #
2009
13 of 30
they had not yet completed the survey. A thank you and confirmation email (Appendix I) was sent to participants
upon completion of the survey.
After a period of five months results from the two iterations of the survey (Intent to turnover questions
were removed for one building with 38 respondents) were exported from Lime Survey and combined using ExceL.
Results that were missing in the Intent to turnover section for the 2nd Iteration of the survey were coded as null in
Excel and were not included in the analysis for those three questions. The combined results were imported into
JMP statistical software for analysis. JMP is an interactive, visual, statistical analysis software developed by SAS
that is widely used by behavioral researchers.
Of the 681 individuals input to Lime Survey, 232 completed the survey (34% response rate). Of the 232, 7
responses were either missing critical data or checked 'no' under the consent to participate section and were
therefore removed from the analysis. This left a total of 225 survey participants.
This paper describes results for the 18 Item environmental features ratings, personal productivity, overall
environmental satisfaction, and overall job satisfaction. Other data wil be maintained for future analysis.
Satisfaction was rated using a seven point Likert scale as shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3 - Likert satisfaction scale.
For each EEM, we separated participants into two groups, those that occupied buildings without the
measure (Group 1) and those occupied buildings with the measure (Group 2). We sorted them into these
groupings and compared the mean satisfaction ratings (Table 3) for each group across each question to determine
whether the differences were statistically significant. We selected the Wilcoxon nonparametric test of significance
and calculated the means and standard deviations for each question-measure combination.
The Wilcoxon nonparametric test of significance is the preferred analysis type for this paper for several
reasons. First, our data is categorical or rank-based using a seven point Likert scale. Secondly, we could not control
who and how many people under each EEM took the survey, so our sample sizes by EEM are not assumed to be
equal. Lastly, we found no suitable previous research to draw from to suggest a direction in our hypothesis and an
estimated effect size for each EEM. In other words, we could not predict whether occupants in buildings with
energy efficiency measures would be more or less satisfied with their space nor could we determine the strength
of that prediction.
During our initial screening of the data, we realized that the number of respondents for many of the EU
incentives were less than 3D, and based on the general understanding of normality and the Central Limit Theorem,
were unlikely to provide reliable results. While those results are included in Sections 4.2,4.3, and 4.4 below, we
made note of any sample size below 30 respondents. In hopes of effectively eliminating many of the issues
of Energy
Design lab-Boise
Incentive Advanced Energy
# 20090207-01)
2009
14 of 30
associated with sample sizes of less than 3D, as well as to make the data more manageable and meaningful, we
combined similar measures into what we refer to as EEM 'systems' (S). The EEM 'systems' and their respective
individual EEMs are listed below in Table 3 and discussed in detail in section 4.2
Table:3 - EU and BEl' measures combined into "Systems" listed below.
EEM Systems (S)
51 - Reduced lighting Power Density
52 - Daylight Photo Controls
53 - Occupancy 5ensors
54 - Efficient Cooling Units
55 - Air Side Economizers
56 - Reflective Roof Treatment
S7 - High Performance Windows
S8 - Window Shading
59 - Energy Management Systems
S10 - Demand Control Ventilation
Sl1 - Variable Speed Drives
512 - Central lighting Controls
S13 - Improved Insulation
S14 - 7 Day Two-Stage Setbacks
515 - Highly Efficient 5ignage
BEP:l1 EU:l1,L2,L3,L4,l9,116,L17,119,L30
BEP:L2
BEP:L3 EU:L24
BEP:A1,A2,A3 EU:H1,H9
BEP:A4 EU:H10,H11
BEP:B1 EU:B5
BEP:B2
BEP:B3
BEP:C1 EU:H19,H20
BEP:C2
BEP:C3 EU:M22,H16,H17
EU:L26
EU:B7,B9
EU:H18
BEP:L4 EU:L31,L32
Once individual EEMs were combined into systems, sample sizes for all but 4 systems were greater than
30 respondents. Those four systems are: High Performance windows with a total of 29 respondents, Central
Lighting Controls with a total of 8 respondents, Improved Insulation with a total of 5 respondents, and Seven-day
two-stage Setback with a total of 7 respondents. We caution the use of the results for these four systems.
Advanced 2009
15 of 30
Statistical analysis of the results returned some findings that reject the hypothesis. A summary of results
indicating a significant difference for mean satisfaction between Group 1 (occupants in buildings without the
measure) and Group 2 (occupants in buildings with the measure) are listed in tables corresponding with each
group. Specifically, summarized results for each of the two IPC incentive programs are discussed individually in
these tables and the combined EEM systems results are summarized as welL. Detailed results for each BEP
measure, EU measure, and combined EEM systems are available in Appendix A.
Table 4 below provides a key to match the questions with their abbreviated question codes.
Table 4 - Key for satisfaction questions codes
Questions
Air movement in your work area
Overall air quality in your work area
Temperature in you work area
Quality of lighting in your work area
Amount of light on the desktop
Amount of light for computer work
Amount of reflected glare in the computer screen
Your access to a view of the outside from where you sit
Amount of noise from other people's conversations while at your workstation
Frequency of distractions from other people
Level of privacy for conversations in your office
Amount of background noise (not speech) you hear at your workstation
Level of visual privacy within your office
Your abilty to alter physical conditions in your work area
Distance between you and other people you work with
Aesthetic appearance of your office
Degree of enclosure of your work area by walls, screens, or furniture
Size of your personal workspace to accommodate your work, materials, and visitors
Code
Q:A1
Q:A2
Q:A3
Q:A4
Q:A5
Q:A6
Q:A7
Q:A8
Q:A9
Q:A10
Q:All
Q:A12
Q:A13
Q:A14
Q:A15
Q:A16
Q:A17
Q:A18
Personal productivity increased or decreased by the physical environment Q:B1
Degree of satisfaction with environment as a whole
Degree of satisfaction with your job as a whole
!ncentìve
Lab~Bo¡se (Report #
Q:C1
Q:C2
Advanced Energy 2009
16 of 30
Table 5 below is designed to ilustrate which question-system combinations resulted in a significant
difference in mean satisfaction ratings for Group 1 (without system) compared to Group 2 (with system).
Responses for questions that rejected the null hypothesis indicate that the EEM system had some effect on mean
satisfaction ratings between groups. A summary of all statistically significant differences is listed in Table 5 below.
Any question-system result that is not included in the table below was not statistically significant and confirms our
null hypothesis. Please, note that in this study, confirming the null hypothesis for several question-system
combinations is also a meaningful result and wil be discussed when appropriate below. Brief discussions of the
results listed in Table 5 are included below. Finally, this research was not intended to prove causality for
statistically significant question-measure combinations.
Table 5 - Summary of statistically significant mean satisfaction differences by "System" EEM
--~"
Effciency Systems
S2 - Daylight Photo Controls
S2 - Daylight Photo Controls
S4 - Effcient Cooling Units
! S5 - Air Side Economizers
! 57-High Performance Windows
i 58 - Window Shading
58 - Window Shading
59 - Energy Management Systems
59 - Energy Management Systems
59 - Energy Management Systems
510 - Demand Control Ventilation
511 - Variable Speed Drives
511 - Variable Speed Drives
511 - Variable Speed Drives
Sl1 - Variable Speed Drives
512 - Central Lighting Controls
a (; .05
Q:A10
Q:A14
Q:A3
Q:A3
Q:A3
Q:A7
Q:A16
Q:A1
Q:A2
Q:A3
Q:A2
Q:A1
Q:A2
Q:A10
Q:A12
Q:A14
Evaiuation of Energy Effdency incentive
of Idaho, Design Lab-Boise (Report:#
I llGroup 1
4.12
4.16.
4.26
3.68
3.76
5.09
5.16
4.59
4.97
3.72
4.95
4.58
4.84
3.84
3.96
3.97
ll Group 2 P - Value
3.59
3.59
3.61'
4.45;
4.69"
5.641
5.94
5.32
5.55
4.661
5.481
5.00
5.561
4.321
4.53
5.63
0.0456 ¡
0.0379
0.0151
0.0103
0.0106
0.0064
0.0002
0.0078
0.0097
0.0039
0.0065
0.0176
0.0001
0.0418
0.0306
0.0007
2009
Page 17 30
I MEASURES WiTH SAMPLE SIZES GREATER THAN 30
LIGHTiNG
S2 - Daylight Photo Controls
- Group 2 (with measure) was less satisfied with the frequency of distractions in their environment with a
mean difference of 0.53. A p-value of .0456 indicating a moderately high statistical significance.
-Group 2 (with measure) was less satisfied with the abilty to alter the physical conditions in their
workspace with a mean difference of 0.57. A p-value of .0379 indicates a moderately high statistical
significance.
Daylight Photo controls resulted in a significant decrease in occupant satisfaction with both the
frequency of distractions and abilty to control the physical environment. While this research was not
intended to provide conclusions about causality, this result suggests the occupants in spaces with photo
control mechanisms are more distracted than those without them. This could be for any number of
reasons and would require additional research to prove causality. Possible considerations could include
that occupants may find the changes in lighting levels distracting. This could be especially problematic in
a space with insufficient daylight or if the photo control system is not properly commissioned. These
results do suggest the importance of providing user controls so that occupants feel empowered to adjust
their lighting. It is also interesting to note there was no significant difference in satisfaction with the
amount of light provided by the system for work.
AIR CONDITIONING (HVAC)
S4 - Efficient Cooling Units
- Group 2 (with measure) was less satisfied with the temperature in the workspace with a mean
difference of 0.64. A p-value of .0151 indicates a high statistical significance.
S5 . Air Side Economizers
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the temperature in their workspace with a mean
difference of 0.77. A p-value of .0103 indicates a high statistical significance.
Buildings with 54/ efficient cooling units, suggested lower satisfaction with temperature. Based on the
comments we received in the open-ended question section of the survey, Temperature was the number one
response occupants gave when asked "What do you like least about your office?". The majority of the occupants
that indicated dissatisfaction with temperature described their workspaces as "too cold" especially in the summer
months when the space was mechanically cooled! Was this because more complex and non-standard systems
require highly specialized commissioning and units were not operating as intended? System 55/ airside
economizer, showed an increase in satisfaction with temperature; however, we did not see any change in the
satisfaction with the air quality. Does more natural fresh air increase peoples' comfort range? Further research
would be necessary to describe causality.
Evaluation of Incentive
Design lab-Boise (Report #
Advanced Energy 2009
Page 18 of 30
BUILDING SHELL
*S7 . High Performance Windows (*n=29)
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the temperature in their workspace with a mean
difference of 0.93. A p-value of .0106 indicates high statistical significance.
58 . Window Shading
. Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the amount of reflected glare on the computer screen
with a mean difference of 0.55. A p-value of .0064 indicates a very high statistical significance.
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the aesthetic appearance of their office with a mean
difference of 0.78. A p-value of .0002 indicates a very high statistical significance.
Questions regarding occupant comfort and measures that relate to the building shell returned some
interesting results. Measure 57, high performance windows, increased satisfaction with temperature. Measure 58,
window shading, improved occupant satisfaction with glare. This suggests that not only do these measures reduce
energy use in buildings but they may also increase the overall level of satisfaction with the built environment.
Additionally, 58, window shading, also showed increased satisfaction with air quality and aesthetics. It is also
interesting to note that no statistically significant differences were shown for satisfaction with the amount of light
on the desktop or for computer work, indicating that neither measure had a negative effect on the amount or
quality of lighting in the space. While these are exciting results, further research would be necessary to describe
causality. Note, 58 had a sample size of only n=29.
CONTROLS
S9 - Energy Management Sysems
. Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the air movement in their workspace with a mean
difference of 0.72. A p-value of .0078 indicates a very high statistical significance.
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the air quality in their workspace with a mean
difference of 0.58. A p-value of .0097 indicates a very high statistical significance.
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the temperature in their workspace with a mean
difference of 0.94. A p-value of .0039 indicates a very high statistical significance.
S10 . Demand Control Ventilation
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the air quality in their workspace with a mean
difference of 0.53. A p-value of .0065 indicates a very high statistical significance.
!nceiitíveLab-Boise :#2009
19 of 30
511 - Variable Speed Drives
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the air movement in their workspace with a mean
difference of 0.42. A p-value of .0176 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the air quality in their workspace with a mean
difference of 0.72. A p-value of .0001 indicates a very high statistical significance.
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the frequency of distractions in their workspace with a
mean difference of 0.48. A p-value of .0418 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the amount of background noise with a mean
difference of 0.57. A p-value of .0306 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
Buildings that received an incentive for energy management systems showed higher satisfaction
with the questions regarding thermal comfort, air movement, air quality, and temperature. With this
measure we did not see a decrease in satisfaction with the occupant's ability to control their environment
leading us to believe that energy management systems improved occupant comfort while not diminishing
individual control. Demand Control Ventilation showed that occupants had a higher level of satisfaction
with the air quality without affecting their comfort levels in regards to temperature. Could it be that
Demand Control Ventilation systems were better able to maintain temperature by only providing the
fresh air necessary? Variable speed drives had positive results with several questions. With regard to
thermal comfort, they provided occupants with a better feeling of air movement and air quality and did
not have an effect on their satisfaction with temperature. People were also more satisfied with the
amount of distraction and the amount of background noise. Could this be because there was less
background fan noise? Further research would be required to draw conclusions about causality.
MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES LESS THAN 30.
512 - Central Lighting Controls
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with their abilty to control the physical environment in their
workspace with a mean difference of 1.66. A p-value of .0007 indicates a very high statistical significance.
incentíve Advanced
lab-Boise (Report:# 20090207-01)
2009
Page 20 of 30
Table 6 below is designed to ilustrate which question-measure combinations resulted in a significant
difference in mean satisfaction ratings for Group 1 (without measure) compared to Group 2 (with measure).
Responses for questions that rejected the null hypothesis indicate that the measure had some effect on mean
satisfaction ratings between groups. A summary of all statistically significant differences is listed in Table 6 below.
Any question-measure result that is not included in the table below was not statistically significant and confirmed
our null hypothesis. Please, note that in this study, confirming the null hypothesis for several question-measure
combinations is also a meaningful result and wil be discussed when appropriate below. Brief discussions of the
results listed in Table 6 are included below. Finally, this research was not intended to prove causality for
statistically significant question-measure combinations.
Table 6 - Summary of statistically significant mean satisfaction differences by BE? EEM
BEP Measures
BEP:A1 - Premium Effciency HVAC Units
BEP:A2 - Additional Unit Effciency Bonus
I BEP:A3 - Effcient Complex Cooling System
BEP:A4 - Air Side Economizer
: BEP:B2 - High Performance Windows
, BEP:B3 - Window Shading
BEP:B3 - Window Shading
BEP:B3 - Window Shading
BEP:C2 - Demand Control Ventilation
BEP:C3 - Variable Speed Drive
BEP:C3 - Variable Speed Drive
. BEP:L1 - Reduced Lighting Power Density
BEP:L2 - Daylight Photo Controls
BEP:L3 - Occupancy Sensors
lao: .05
Q:A3
Q:A2
'Q:A3
.Q:A3
Q:A3
Q:A2
Q:A7
Q:A16
Q:A2
Q:A1
Q:A2
Q:A14
Q:A14
Q:A14
* P-values ~ .05 are significant and not likely to occur by chance.
IIiGroup 1
4.28
4.91
4.08
3.74
3.76
4.95
5.09
5.16
4.95
4.59
4.85
4.21
4.16
4.38
Evaluation of Energy Efficiency incentive Programs; Advanced
of Idaho. Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090207-01)Page 21 of 30
11 Group 21 P - Value
3.56
5.361
3.18i
4.77:
4.68.
5.481
5.64;
5.94
5.48)
5.00
5.58
3.59
3.59
3.75.
0.0054
0.0071
0.0034 :
0.0039
0.0111
0.0065
0.0063
0.0003
0.0065
0.0184
0.0001
0.02
0.043
0.0083
MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES GREATER THAN 30
(One exception made for High Performance Windows that had a sample of 29)
HVAC
BEP:Al- Premium Efficiency HVAC Units
- Group 2 (with measure) was less satisfied with the temperature in their workspace with a mean difference of
0.72. A p-value of .0057 indicates high statistical significance.
BEP:A2 - Additional Unit Efficiency Bonus
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with air quality in their workspace with a mean difference of 0.45. A
p-value of .0068 indicates high statistical significance
BEP:A3 - Efficient Complex Cooling System
- Group 2 (with measure) was less satisfied with the temperature in their workspace with a mean difference of .90.
A p-value of .0032 indicates high statistical significance
BEP:A4 - Air Side Economizer
- Group 2 (with measure) was less satisfied with the temperature in their workspace with a mean difference of
1.04. A p-value of .0039 indicates high statistical significance.
The HVAC unit efficiency measures (Al and A2) generally build upon each other, just increasing in their
efficiency requirement. While this study was not designed to prove causality, it is improbable that efficiency alone
is responsible for the differences in means and it is reasonable to assume that the differences in satisfaction has
more to do with how the air was delivered to the occupant. Buildings with measure A3, complex-cooling systems,
suggested lower satisfaction with temperature. Was this because more complex systems require highly specialized
commissioning and units were not operating as intended? Additionally was the reaction typically due to being too
cold or too warm? Measure A4, air side economizer, showed an increase in satisfaction with temperature;
however, we did not see any change in the satisfaction with the air quality. Does more natural fresh air increase
peoples' comfort range? Further research would be necessary to describe causality.
BUILDING SHELL
*BEP:B2 - High Penormance Windows
. Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with temperature in their workspace with a mean difference of 0.93.
A p-value of .011 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
BEP:B3 - Window Shading -
Evaluation of Incentive
Lab-Boise (Report # 20090207-01)
2009
22 of 30
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with air quality in their workspace with a mean difference of 0.53. A
p-value of .0065 indicates a very high statistical significance.
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the amount of reflected glare on their computer screen with a
mean difference of .055. A p-value of .0063 indicates a very high statistical significance.
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the aesthetic appearance of their office with a mean difference
of 0.78. A p-value of .0003 indicates a very high statistical significance.
Questions regarding occupant comfort and measures that relate to the building shell returned some
interesting results. Measure 82, high performance windows, increased satisfaction with temperature. Measure 83,
window shading, improved occupant satisfaction with glare. This suggests that not only do these measures reduce
energy use in buildings but they may also increase the overall level of satisfaction with the built environment.
Additionally, 83, window shading, also showed increased satisfaction with air quality and aesthetics. It is also
interesting to note that no statistically significant differences were shown for satisfaction with the amount of light
on the desktop or for computer work, indicating that neither measure had a negative effect on the amount or
quality of lighting in the space. While these are exciting results, further research would be necessary to describe
causality. Note, 82 had a sample size of only n=29.
CONTROLS
BEP:C2 - Demand Control Ventilation
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the air quality in their workspace with a mean difference of 0.53.
A p-value of .0065 indicates a very high statistical significance.
BEP:C3 - Variable Speed Drive
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the air movement in their workspace with a mean difference of
0.41. A p-value of .0184 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the air quality in their workspace with a mean difference of 0.73.
A p-value of .0001 indicates a very high statistical significance.
Measures C2, Demand Control Ventilation (DCV), and C3, Variable Speed Drives (VSD), both showed an
increase in satisfaction with the air quality of the space. C3, VSD, also showed higher satisfaction with air
movement. It seems that systems equipped with these measures delivered air to occupants in a preferred manner.
It is interesting to note that there were no significant differences in satisfaction with temperature indicating that
these systems were performing as well as other system types. This research was not intended to provide
conclusions about causality and further study would be needed to test this hypothesis.
Advanced 2009
23 of 30
LIGHTING
BEP:Ll - Reduced Lighting Power Density
- Group 2 (with measure) was less satisfied with their abilty to alter physical conditions with a mean difference of
0.62. A p-value of.02 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
BEP:L2 - Daylight Photo Controls
- Group 2 was less satisfied with their abilty to alter physical conditions with a mean difference of 0.57. A p-value
of .043 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
BEP:L3 - Occupancy Sensors
- Group 2 was less satisfied with their abilty to alter physical conditions with a mean difference of 0.64. A p-value
of .0083 indicates a very high statistical significance.
All three measures (reduced lighting power density, daylight photo controls, and occupancy sensors)
significantly decreased occupant satisfaction with their perceived abilty to alter or control their physical
environment. While additional research would be required to provide conclusions about causality, this result
suggests the importance of providing user controls so that occupants feel empowered to adjust their lighting. It is
also interesting to note that for all three measures, there were no significant differences in satisfaction with the
amount of light provided by the system for work.
MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES LESS THAN 30.
Nearly all BEP EEMs had groups larger than 30 respondents. One measure, BEP:B2, had a sample size of
29, however it was discussed above and noted with an asterisk.
Incentive
Lab-Boise (Report #
Advanced 2009
24 of 30
Table 7 below is designed to ilustrate which question-measure combinations resulted in a significant
difference in mean satisfaction ratings for Group 1 (without measure) compared to Group 2 (with measure).
Responses for questions that rejected the null hypothesis indicate that the measure had an effect on mean
satisfaction ratings between groups. A brief summary of all statistically significant results is listed below in Table 7.
Any question-measure result that is not included in the table below was not statistically significant and confirming
our null hypothesis. Please, note that in this study, confirming the null hypothesis for several question-measure
combinations is also a meaningful result and wil be discussed when appropriate below. Brief discussions of the
results listed in Table 7 are included below. Finally, this research was not intended to prove causality for
statistically significant question-measure combinations.
Table 7 - Summary of statistically significant mean satisfaction differences by EU EEM
Easy Upgrades
EU :H9 - 20 ton or more AC unit, 10 EER min
EU:Hll- Air Side Economizer (2008-2009)
EU:L1-1 or 2 lamp 4' T8
EU:L1-1 or 2 lamp 4' T8
EU:L3 - 4 lamp 4' T8
EU:L9 - 2 lamp 4' T5
EU:L9 - 2 lamp 4' T5
EU:L16 - Florescent Delamping (2007-2008)
EU:L17 - Flourecent Delamping (2009-2010)
EU:L17 - Flourecent Delamping (2009-2010)
EU:L26 - Central Lighting Controls
EU:L26 - Central Lighting Controls
EU:L30 - CFL or LED lamps, up to 25W
EU:L30 - CFL or LED lamps, up to 25W
EU:M22 - Variable Speed Drives
EU:M22 - Variable Speed Drives
EU:M22 - Variable Speed Drives
EU:M22 - Variable Speed Drives
a 'c.05
Q:A14
'Q:A12
Q:81
Q:C1
Q:81
Q:81
Q:C2
Q:A14
Q:81
Q:C1
Q:A14
Q:81
Q:A14
Q:81
Q:A1
Q:A2
Q:A3
Q:C1
IncentiveLab-Boise #-
11 Group 1 i 11 Group 2 P - Value
3.99' 5.60
4.05' 5.10.3.24 4.86'
4.571 5.24
4.22: 4.92
4.32 5.67
5.74 3.33
3.98 ¡ 5.30
4.27 4.92
4.59 5.44:
3.97 5.631
4.31 5.251
3.97 5.63
4.31 5.25:
4.63 5.761
5.00 5.883.78 5.12 i4.60 5.65'
Advanced
0.0327
0.0131
0.0271
0.0451!
0.015 .
0.0251'
0.01391
0.0178!
0.04971
0.0253.
0.00381
0.04661
0.00381
0.0466i
0.00481
0.0108 '
0.0031
0.0157
i MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES GREATER THAN 30
LIGHTING/CONTROLS
EU:L1 - 1 or 2 lamp 4' T8
- Group 2 (with measure) had an increase in their perceived productivity with a mean difference of 0.62. A p-value
of .027 indicates a moderately high significance.
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the overall environmental conditions in their workspace with a
mean difference of 0.67. A p-value of .0451 indicates a moderately high significance
EU:L3 - 4 lamp 4' T8
- Group 2 had an increase in their perceived productivity with a mean difference of 0.70. A p-value of .015
indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
Both of these measures returned a increase in satisfaction with the overall perceived productivity with
EU:l1 and EU:l3 also showing higher satisfaction with the overall environment. The more efficient upgraded
lighting actually increases environmental satisfaction and perceived productivity in buildings. This indicates that
IPC lighting upgrades are both saving energy and making employees more satisfied and productive. This research
was not intended to provide conclusions about causality and further study would be needed to determine this.
MEASURES WITH SAMPLE SIZES LESS THAN 30.
HVAC/CONTROLS
EU:H9 - 20 ton or more AC unit, 10 EER min
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with their abilty to alter physical conditions with a mean difference of
1.61. A p-value of .0327 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
EU:H11 - Air Side Economizer (2008-2009)
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the amount of background noise in their workspace with a mean
difference of 1.05. A p-value of .0131 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
Evaluatíon of
Integrated
Incentive Advanced
Lab-Boise (Report # 20090207-01)
LIGHTING/CONTROLS
EU:L9 - 2 lamp 4' 15
- Group 2 (with measure) had an increase in perceived productivity with a mean difference of 0.62. A p-value of
0.027 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
-Group 2 (with measure) was less satisfied with their job with a mean difference of 2.4. A p-value of.0139
moderately indicates a high statistical significance.
EU:L16 - Florescent Delamping (2007-2008)
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with their ability to control the physical environment with a mean
difference of 1.33. A p-value of.0178 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
EU:L17 - Fluorescent Delamping (2009-2010)
- Group 2 (with measure) had an increase in perceived productivity with a mean difference of 0.65. A p-value of
.0497 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
-Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the overall environmental conditions of their workspace with a
mean difference of 0.85. A p-value of.0253 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
EU:L26 - Central Lighting Controls
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with their abilty to control the physical environment with a mean
difference of 1.66. A p-value of .0038 indicates a very high statistical significance.
-Group 2 (with measure) had an increase in perceived productivity with a mean difference of 0.94. A p-value of
.0466 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
EU:L30 - CFL or LED lamps, up to 25W
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with their abilty to control the physical environment with a mean
difference of 1.66. A p-value of .0038 indicates a very high statistical significance.
-Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the overall environmental conditions of the workspace with a
mean difference of 0.94. A p-value of .0466 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
Evaluation of Energy Efficiency Incentive Programs; Advanced
of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090207-01)
MOTOR.S/CONTROLS
EU:M22 - Variable Speed Drives
- Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the air movement in their workspace with a mean difference of
1.13. A p-value of .0048 indicates a very high statistical significance.
-Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the air quality in their workspace with a mean difference of 0.88.
A p-value of.0108 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
-Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the temperature in their workspace with a mean difference of
1.34. A p-value of.0031 indicates a very high statistical significance.
-Group 2 (with measure) was more satisfied with the overall environmental conditions in their workspace with a
mean difference of 1.04. A p-value of .0157 indicates a moderately high statistical significance.
Incentive
Lab-Boise (Report #
Advanced
Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) International and the Urban land Institute (Uli), 1999. What
office tenants want: 1999 BOMA/ULI office tenant survey report. Washington, D.C.:BOMA International and Uli-
the Urban land Institute.
Veitch, J. A., Farley, K. M. J., & Newsham, G. R. (2002). Environmental satisfaction in open-plan environments: 1.
Scale vaHdation and method (IRC-IR-844). Ottawa, ON: National Research Council Canada, Institute for
Research in Construction.
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative
commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1), 1-18.
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: An
examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49(3), 252-276.
Boyce, P. R., Veitch, J. A., Newsham, G. R., Myer, M., & Hunter, C. (2003). Lighting quaHty and office work: A field
simulation study (PNNl14506). Richland, WA, USA: Pacific Northwest National laboratory.
California Energy Commission, 2005. Enhanced Automation Case Study 8. In Arden Realty/next::edge retrieved
December 17, 2009 from
http://www.energy.ca.gov/enhancedautomation/case_studies/CS08_Arden_ w2.pdf
Charles, K. E., Veitch, J. A., Farley, K. M. J., & Newsham, G. R. (2003). Environmental satisfaction in open-plan
environments: 3. Further scale vaHdation (IRC-RR-152). Ottawa, ON: National Research Council of Canada,
Institute for Research in Construction.
Clinch, J.P. & Healy, J.D. (2003). Valuing Improvements in comfort from domestic energy-efficiency retrofits using a
trade-off simulation modeL. Energy Economics 25 (5), 565-583.
Colarell, S. M. (1984). Methods of communication and mediating processes in realistic job previews. Journal of
AppHed Psychology, 69(4), 633-642.
Dolbier, C. lo, Webster, J. A., McCalister, K. T., Mallon, M. W., & Steinhardt, M. A. (2005). Reliabilty and validity of a
single-item measure of job satisfaction. American Journal of Health Promotion, 19(3), 194-198.
Hedge, A., Erickson, W. A., & Rubin, G. (1992). Effects of personal and occupational factors on sick building
syndrome reports in air-conditioned offices. In J. C. Quick, lo R. Murphy, & J. J. Hurrell (Eds.), Work and
Well Being: Assessment and Interventions for Occupational Mental Health (pp. 286-298). Washington,
D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Meyer, J. P., Allen, N. J., & Smith, C. A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test
of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of AppHed Psychology, 78(4), 538-551.
Newsham, G. R., Veitch, J. A., Arsenault, c., & Duval, C. (2004). Effect of dimming control on offce worker
satisfaction and performance. In Proceedings of the IESNA Annual Conference, Tampa, FL, July 26-28,2004
(pp. 19-41). New York: IESNA.
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). (2009). PG&E's Advanced lighting Technology Program for Federal Buildings. In the
Energy Savings and Rebates web page. retrieved December 17, 2009 from
http://www.pge.com/mybusiness/ energysavingsrebates/incentivesbyind ustry / government/incentives/in
dex.shtml
Preiser WFE, Vischer Jc. Assessing Building Performance. Butterworth-Heinemann; 2004.
Saks, A. M., & Ashforth, B. E. (2002). Is job search related to employment quality? It all depends on the fit. Journal
of AppHed Psychology, 87(4), 646-654.
Stokols, D., & Scharf, F. (1990). Developing standardised tools for assessing employees' ratings of facility
performance. In G. Davis & F. T. Ventre (Eds.), Performance of Buildings and Serviceabilty of FaciHties (pp.
Incentive
:#
Advanced
55-68). Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials.
Veitch, J. A., Charles, K. E., Newsham, G. R., Marquardt, C. J. G., & Geerts, J. (2003). Environmental satisfaction in
open-plan environments: 5. Workstation and physical condition effects (IRC-RR-154). Ottawa, ON:
National Research Council Canada, Institute for Research in Construction.
Veitch, J. A., Farley, K. M. J., & Newsham, G. R. (2002). Environmental satisfaction in open-plan environments: 1.
Scale validation and method (IRC-IR-844). Ottawa, ON: National Research Council Canada, Institute for
Research in Construction.
Veitch, J. A., & Newsham, G. R. (1998). Lighting quality and energy-efficiency effects on task performance, mood,
health, satisfaction and comfort. Journal of the tIuminating Engineering Society, 27(1), 107-129.
Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E., & Hudy, M. J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: How good are single-item measures?
Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2),247-252.
Wibom, R. I., & Carlsson, L. W. (1987). Work at video display terminals among office workers. In B. Knave & P. G.
Wide back (Eds.), Work with Video Display Units 86 (pp. 357-367). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
Evaluation of Incentive
Design Lab-Boise (Report #.
2009
30 of 30
MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION
OF DA YLIGHTING PHOTOCONTROLS
Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Authors:
Acker, B.
Van Den Wymelenberg, K.
INTEGRATED DESIGN lAB
b 0 i s e
COLLEGE of ART and ARCmTECT
Department of Architecture & Interior Design
Measurement and Verification
of
Advanced
:# 20090205-01)
2009
1 of 28
I-iio
Q.
Wri..
c(o-z:iowI-
January 11, 2010
Date
20090205.01
Report No.
Prepared By:
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise
108 N 6th St. Boise ID 83704 USA
ww.uidaho.edu/idl
Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Director
Brad Acker
Project Manager
1- Brad Acker
2- Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Authors
C09410.P03
Contract No.
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Bilie Jo McWinn
Project Manager
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by
Idaho Power Company. It does not necessarily represent the
views of Idaho Power Company or its employees. Idaho
Power Company, its employees, contractors and
subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and
assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor
does any part represent that the uses of this information wil
not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not
been approved or disapproved by Idaho Power Company nor
has Idaho Power Company passed upon the accuracy or
adequacy of the information in this report.
Please cite this report as follows:
Acker, B., Van Den Wymelenberg, K., 2010. Measurement and Verifcation of Day lighting
Photocontrols; Technical Report 20090205-01, Integrated Design Lab, University ofIdaho, Boise, ID.
Measurement and Verifìcatìon of Photocontm!s; AdvancedLab-Boise #.Efficiency 2009
:2 of 28
This page left intentionally blank.
!BACKGROUND 5
1.1 LITERATURE REVIEW 5
~METHODS 7
2.1 SIT SELECTION 7
2.2 METERING METHODOLOGY 7
2.3 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 7
~SUMMARIZED RESULTS 9
3.1 MONITORING PERIOD ENERGY SAVINGS 9
3.2 ANNUAL ESTIMATED ENERGY SAVINGS 10
!DETAILED RESULTS 11
4.1 BUILDING 01- OFFICE 11
4.1.1 SITE SPECIFIC DETAILS 11
4.1.2 RESULTS 12
4.1.3 DISCUSSION 14
4.2 BUILDING 02 - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 15
4.2.1 RElEVANT SIT SPECIFIC DETAILS 15
4.2.2 RESULTS 16
4.2.3 DISCUSSION 17
4.3 BUILDING 03 - MANUFACTURING/OFFICE 18
4.3.1 STUDVAREA 18
4.3.2 RESULTS 18
4.3.3 DISCUSSION 19
4.4 BUILDING 04 - OFFICE/MEDICAL 20
4.4.1 STUDVAREA 20
4.4.2 RESULTS 20
4.4.3 DISCUSSION 21
4.5 BUILDING 05 - WAREHOUSE/MANUFACTURING 22
4.5.1 STUDVAREA 22
4.5.2 RESULTS 22
4.5.2.1 9-hour workday based analysis 22
4.5.2.2 24-hour period based analysis 23
4.5.2.3 Estimated Annual Energy Savings 25
4.5.3 DISCUSSION 25
l DISCUSSION 27
§REFERENCES 28
Photocontrols; Advanced Energy
Lab-Boise (F(eport #
2009
4 of 28
Lighting control systems designed to integrated electrc light sources with daylight sources
are referred to as 'daylighting photocontrols' or 'daylight harvesting systems'. For clarity and
simplicity this document wil refer to this tye of lighting control as 'photocontrols.
Photocontrols are employed as an energy efficiency strtegy that are intended to reduce the
amount of electrc lighting used in a space based upon the daylight available within that space.
Photocontrols are strctly an energy effciency measure and their affects upon the lighting in a
space can at best go unnoticed by building occupants.
Photocontrols are the most complicated tye of lighting control and require the most
attention to ensure successful implementation. There are several critical aspects regarding
system design and implementation including the tye and quality of the architectural daylighting
design, the components that comprise the photocontrol system, the positioning and field of view
(FOV) of the photometric sensor, the types of control logics available and the tye and
configuration of ballasts. Photocontrol systems are most commonly composed of an iluminance
sensor that measures the ilumination at a specific point (tyically mounted on or near the
ceiling), a control module that translates the signal from the photocell to a low voltage control
signal that is provided to the (dimming) ballast, and finally a light fixtue with lamps that provide
variable (continuous dimming or step-dimming) lumen output dependent upon the ballast signaL.
Obviously, not all systems are designed the same and varations of system designs wil be
addressed as required throughout the document.
Previous studies have identified several reasons why the realized energy savings are often
not as high as predicted savings however, on some occasions realized energy savings are higher
than predicted savings. Many of the previous studies do not suggest what the actual or predicted
savings were, they just report a percentage of realized savings. A brief review of these previous
studies is offered below.
Pigg et al. (1996) reported findings from a study of twelve private offces in a university
business building in Wisconsin and found that only half of the rooms showed any savings due to
automatic dimming over the II-month monitoring period. No specific savings data were offered
for the other rooms and it was noted that all twelve rooms were south facing and several had
blinds closed all of the time. Resulting from a seven-month field study in a large federal offce
building, Jennings et al. (1999) found that automatic dimming saved on average 29% of the
lighting energy, however no predicted savings were offered. McHugh et al. (2004) reported on a
field study of 32 spaces with skylights and daylight sensing controls and assessed how much
energy was actually saved compared to the savings predicted from eQuest (Hirsch & LBNL,
n.d.) energy simulations. Very high realized savings ratios were reported and mean savings was
98% (range 25%-156%). If one low outlier was eliminated all locations saved more than 60%.
A follow-up study in 123 sidelit spaces found realized savings ratios to be very low (Heschong,
Howlett, McHugh, & Pande, 2005). Half (52%) of the 123 spaces saved zero energy. The half
(48%) that saved some energy saved only 53% of what was predicted for a mean realized savings
ratio of 23%. Galasiu et al. (2007) reported on a yearlong field study of 86 office workstations in
Measurement and Verifcation of
of
2009
5 of 28
a single building and found that automatic dimming accounted for 20% lighting energy savings.
Finally, in some cases, daylight sensing lighting controls actually resulted in increased energy
use (Reinhart & Vos, 2003; Moore et aI., 2003) due to the increased ballast voltage required of
dimming ballasts or because of a combination of improper design, commissioning or user
operation.
Measurement and Verifcation of Daylightìngor Lab-Boise Advanced Energy
# 20090205-01)
Five buildings were selected for monitoring from Idaho Power Companýs list of buildings with daylight
photocontrol incentives.
01 Office 68,000 South Open Offces 3,250 Chubbuk, ID
Northeast Open Offces 1,333
Nort Open Offces 4,620
East Open Offces 1,632
02 Element School 65,000 944 Nam a,ID
03 Manufacture/Offce 60,600 4,600 Hailey, ID
1,017
04 Offce/Medical 21,104 1,300 Boise,ID
1,342
05 Warehouse/Manufacture 5,400 1,432 Caldwell, ID
At each building included in this study, lighting circuits were selected for data logging one of two ways.
Either all of the photocontrolled circuits across the entire building were monitored or a representative
sample of circuits was selected. Details are offered in Section 4 describing which circuits were selected
for logging at each individual building. Once the circuits were selected, the monitoring protocol
included placing a power meter and current transformers (Dent ElitePro Energy) on lighting circuits or
establishing trend logs in building energy managements systems (EMS) to capture lighting energy
consumption. Data were collected until sunny and cloudy conditions were recorded, typically for a
period of two weeks to two months. This was done in order to ensure photocontrol performance was
captured under a range of sky conditions. In some cases, long-term performance data was available
from trend logs in the EMS. Exterior illumination and sky cover data during the monitoring period were
collected as well, either on site or from nearby weather stations.
In order to establish the baseline energy consumption for each monitored circuit the total connected
load in kW for each circuit was multiplied by the normal operating hours (less holidays) during the study
period. The total connected load for each monitored circuit was determined from logged data and
checked against available drawings and lighting fixture schedules. If monitoring data for a circuit showed
Lab~Boíse
a substantial difference in connected load as compared to the drawings, the maximum kW loads from
the monitoring data were used. The normal operating hours were recorded for each building studied by
questioning the staff on site.
The actual energy use of each monitored circuit was found by summing the logged data for each circuit
during the occupied operating hours. When occupancy sensors were present (was the case for just one
circuit) we reported savings for the combined system (occupancy+photocontrols) as well as an estimate
of the savings attributable to photocontrols alone. This is all that was necessary to provide energy
savings data for the specific circuits monitored over the monitoring period.
Determining annual energy savings estimates for the study areas required additional steps. One of two
possible methods was used to extrapolate savings from the monitoring period to the whole year. The
data analysis method selected depended upon the type and duration of monitoring data and supporting
data available. Every effort was made to ensure the most accurate translations to annual energy
estimates, however there is inherently error in this step due to the annual variabilty of daylight
available. Even though multiple sky conditions were recorded and analyzed during the monitoring
period, these data can only be approximately correlated with annual weather phenomenon.
Furthermore, the annual energy savings estimates rely upon Typical Meteorological Year (TMY) weather
data, which is an approximation of a typical weather year and may not represent a particular weather
year. The two possible annual extrapolation methods are outlined below.
Annual Extrapolation method 1: When long-term lighting energy use data were available from trend
logs in an EMS, samples were selected under different sky conditions and at different times of year.
These savings data were binned and referenced with TMY3 weather data to derive annual savings
estimates.
Annual Extrapolation method 2: If long-term data were not available we established a detailed
relationship between the monitored lighting circuit energy use data, hours of daylight availability,
exterior ilumination and cloud cover data as reported by nearby weather stations. When obvious
dimming or switching trends were found relative to a specific outdoor ilumination values or durations
after/before sunrise/sunset, these trends were referenced with TMY3 illumination or sunrise/sunset
data to determine the annual periods of savings potentiaL. As necessary, additional resolution related to
cloud cover and exterior illumination were considered. These relationships were then referenced with
TMY3 weather data in order to translate the measured savings across the entire year.
Annual Extrapolation Method 1 is expected to be more accurate, however long-term data were only
available for one building (Building 02). We have reasonably high confidence in the accuracy of both
methods for the purposes of this study.
and Verification of Daylighting
lab~ßoise
Advanced
:# 20090205~()1)
Table :1 Percent Energy Saved During Mcmltorìng Period For Regular Operating Hours
South 0 en Offces
Northeast Open
Offces
Nort 0 en Offices Sideli htin 0.6%
East 0 n Offces Sideli tin 47.4%
02 Elementary Nampa,Aug. 25-Sept. 5,Classroom 420 Sidelighting/73.4* -
School ID 2008 Toplighting 78.1%*
Dec. 1-12, 2008
03 Manufactue/Hailey, ID Aug. 13-28, 71.8%
Office 2009
0%
04 Offce/Boise, ID Feb. 26-May 5,51-73%
Medical 2009
May 25-June 12,Nurses' Station 75.2-82.2%
2009
05 Warehouse/Caldwell,Mar.9-Apr.14,Medium Bay 30.7-89.5%
Manufacture ID 2009
* See Section 4.2.3 for explanation; these values included savings from occupancy sensors in addition
photocontrols.
Measurement and Verification of
of
Table 2 Armua! Estimated Energy Savings in Areas
South 0 en Offces
Northeast Open
Offces
Nort 0 en Offces 0%0.0
East en Offces 11.4%0.27
02 Elementa Nampa,Aug. 25-Sept. 5,Classroom 420 20.0%0.45
School il 2008
Dec. 1-12,2008
03 Manufactue/Hailey, il Aug. 13-28, 22.5%0.97
Offce 2009
0%0.0
04 Offce/Boise, il Feb. 26-May 5,41.6%1.26
Medical 2009 40.7%1.25
May 25-June 12,
2009
05 Warehouse/Caldwell,Mar.9-Apr.14,Medium Bay 88%0.41
Manufactue il 2009
Measurement and Verificatìon of DayHghtìng Photocontrols; Advancedof Lab-Boise #Effciency 2009
10 of 28
This office building, located in Chubbuck, 10, has several different areas with daylighting photocontrols,
facing in four orientations. The building totals 68,000 SF and is four stories talL. Four perimeter office
zones on the second floor were studied, each containing open plan office occupancy.
Operational Hours: 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Friday
Daylighting and Electrc Lighting Design: Large trnsparent perimeter windows provide day lighting to
the offce spaces. The south façade has deep exterior louvered overhangs and shallow interior
lightshelves, while the rest of windows are not shaded except for interior blinds. Pendant mounted
direct/indirect fluorescent fixtues provide electrc ilumnation as described in Table 3 below. A
photocell is located on the ceiling and positioned with a field of view including the work suraces for each
daylight zone.
Monitoring Period: November 10-December 5, 2009; 160 operating hours.
TableS 01 Summary of zones monitored
Energy Logger
Channel Total
Number Description connected laod
H2-1: Second floor, South perimter open offices.Unear
Ch1 bank of pendant f10urescent fixtures.2.63kW
H2-3: Second floor, Small cluster of pendant f10urescents
Ch2 in Nort East Corner.O.95kW
Ch3 H2-5: Second Floor, North perimeter open offces.3.6kW
Ch4 H2-9: Second floor, East end, adjacent to elevator.1.35 kW
Measurement and Verification of
of
2009
11 of 28lab~Boíse
Measured energy savings during the monitoring period are reported in Table 4. Annual estimated
energy savings data are reported in Table 5 using the monitoring data and Annual Extrapolation Method
2 as described in Section 2.3. Logging data for selected periods with regard to cloud cover are plotted in
Graph i and Graph 2 below.
Tal:le4 01 Energy Data for Monitoring Period (November lO-December 5, 20(9)
South
(Channell
2.63
420
269
East
(Chanel
1.35
216
113
151
35.9%
38
25.1%
4
0.6%
103
47.4%
:; 01 Estimated Annual Energy Savings in Study Area
672
24.7%
0.50
o
0.0%
0.00
443
11.4%
0.27
1,518
20.1%
0.47
Measurement and Verification of Day!íghtingof Lab-Boise Advanced Energy
:# 20090205-01)
2009
12 of 28
EnelJ U.. and Cl Cor. Mostly Clear
4 8
7
6
5
Ii ----Ch1kWu
4 It --Ch2kWe
~Ch3kW
3 ~-.-Ch4kW"
a -CIdCover0
2
1
.",I
"c.,/.,..
L
~""-'~,...,,~, ,,,,,.j,,,,,,
I
,,,,,,,,
l
,,,,.,~.",,,1,,,i,,,,.i(,,,.I,,I,,.-l,,,!.,\ ',,,, .¡,,,h ' :l
.,= l ...., \" :i ,..~ l ,:: . .. . ... ~ l
!~=.=-~ ~:- - - - -.;---------:J----1. ~------..,~~....
..i i..¡..i I..\_--¡
'1 90:00 1111710912:00 11/18/090:00 11/18/0912:00 11/19/090:00 11119/0912:00 11/2010
._--
3.5
3
2.5
2
~
1.5
1
0.5
o
11117
o
90:00
-0.5 -1
Graph 1 01 Energy use and cloud cover- mostly clear
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
~2..
1.5
1
0.5
EMI Un .nd Clud Co. Mo Ovrast
--;I
, - -- "" - :.=-::,.:_-.. -.. - - -:.=-:--
'-. .,.. - ._. -'i~~~-~_--__________1
o ---.-_.--
11/12 0:00
.0.5.
1
11/12/0912:00 11/13/0912:00
o
Graph 2 Building 01 Energy use and doud cover- mostly overcast
Measurement and Verifcation of
of Design Lab-Boise
2009
Page 13 of 28
In general, the photocontrolled lighting system was performing welL. Despite steps to correlate measure
data with annual daylight availability, the annual savings estimates are conservatively biased for this site
since data were logged during winter conditions. Commissioning the north zone logged with Channel 3
is expected to produce additional energy saving since the northeast zone logged with Channel 2 showed
substantial energy savings.
Channel four, serving the east side of this space did not have savings that translated well from the study
period to an annual savings. From looking at the data it appears users would override the photocontrols
by switching the lights off entirely. This user interface, being unpredictable, was not taken into
consideration when the annual energy savings was modeled. Therefore, annual predicted savings are
lower than might be expected given the monitored period savings shown in Table 4 and Table 5.
Measurement and Verification of
of
Photocontm!s; Advanced EnergyLab~Boise :#2009
Page 14 of 28
This elementary school, located in Nampa, ID, has some classrooms with photocontrols and some
classrooms without. Two adjacent classrooms were studied. Room 410 is 992 SF and does not have
photocontrols, while Room 420 is 944 SF and has photocontrols. The small difference in size is due to a
small corner tutoring room that is accessed from the hallway and extends in to classroom 420.
Figure 1 Floor Plan of 02 highlighting the study areas
Operational Hours: 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM, Monday though Friday.
Daylighting and Electric Lighting: Room 420 has daylight provided by south clerestory windows and
translucent skylights at the back of the space. The electrc lighting system consists of direct/indirect
fluorescent fixtues with dimming ballasts and T8 lamps. The control strategy utilizes an integrated
daylighting and electric lighting system with photocells and occupancy sensors. The lighting power
density is 0.89 watts/sf. The daylight harvesting system uses a WattStopper LS-290c photocell, and
LCD-203dimming module and BT -203 Power Pack. The photocell is placed in the skylight well, looking
Measurement
of Lab~ßoíse (Report #Page 15 of :28
toward the translucent skylights and the sensitivity was set accordingly. Room 410 has daylight provided
from south clerestory windows only. The electrc lighting system utilizes direct fluorescent parabolic
tougher fixtures and has a lighting power density is 1.1 watts/sf. This room has occupancy sweep controls
but no photocontrols.
Monitoring Period: August 25-September 5, 2008 and December 1-12,2008
Other: At this building, long-term trend log data were available. Therefore a sample of data from
extreme weather periods and solar angles were selected from across the school year. The energy use
figures presented represent an average performance over the periods sampled.
Measured energy savings during the two monitoring periods are reported in Table 6 and Table 7.
Annual estimated energy savings data are reported in Table 8 using the monitoring data and Annual
Extrapolation Method 1 as described in Section 2.3 source not found.
Table 6 Energy Data for Period 25-September 5, 2008)
Classroom 410
non- hotocontrolled
0.93
134
56
78
58.1%
0.88
127
34
93
73.4%
Table 7 02 Energy Data for Monitoring Period 25-June 12,
Classroom 410
non- hotocontrolled
0.93
134
62
72
53%
0.88
127
28
99
78.1%
Measurement and Verilìcation of Advanced
of Design labwBoíse (Report #.
2009
16 of 28
Table 8 úi Energy Data for Monitoring Period (August 25-September S,iO(l8)
Classroom 410
non- hotocontrolled
.93
2,277
55.8%
1,006
1270
1.28
0.88
2,154
75.8%
521
1633
1.73
20%, 0.45 kWh/SF*YR
Since both classrooms have occupancy sensors, the data presented in Table 6, Table 7, and Table 8 must
be interpreted further to determine savings due to photocontrols alone. Savings reported in Classroom
410 are from a combination of occupancy sensor switching and manual wall switching. The savings
reported in Classroom 420 are from a combination of photocontrols, occupancy sensor switching and
manual wall switching. These data are confounded since the photocontrol system switches lights off in
addition to dimming. Therefore, it is impossible to extract savings from "dim-to-off instances from
occupancy or manual wall switching instances. Occupancy signal data were not available, and even if
they were, manual wall switching data would stil be confounded with photocontrolled dim-to-off
savings. For these reasons, Table 8 estimates the savings due to photocontrols only by subtracting the
savings found from occupancy and manual wall switching during normal working hours in Classroom 410
(55.8%) from the savings presented in Classroom 420 (75.75%), resulting in an estimated 19.95%
photocontrol savings. The estimated savings in kWh/SF*YR was obtained by reducing 1.65 kWh/SF*YR
reported for Classroom 420 by (1-(19.95%/75.75%)=73.6%), resulting in 0.43 kWh/SF*YR). Obviously,
the occupancy and wall switching patterns in Classroom 410 and 420 are not likely to be exactly the
same. However, their use patterns are believed to be similar enough for these estimates. From informal
surveys, users are satisfied with the photocontrol system performance in room 420.
Measurement and Verifìcatìon of
lab-Boise
2009
Page 11 of 28
This manufactuing and offce building, located in Hailey, ID, has two areas (the manufacturing floor and
the offices) with daylighting photocontrols totaling 5,625 SF. The manufacturing floor is 4,600 SF and
the offices are 1,017 SF.
Operational Honrs: Both spaces are occupied Monday through Friday from 7 :00 AM to 6:00 PM. The
facility also has operating hours on the weekend but due to limited hours and inconsistent use only
weekday hours were considered in this analysis.
Daylighting and Electric Lighting: The manufacturig space is top lit with (4) 8' x 27' linear skylights
organized in a line centered on the space. There are also large glazed roll-up doors. The manufacturing
area is electrically lit with (16) high-bay fixtures each with (6) 54-watt T5 high output (54WT5HO)
lamps. Daylight is introduced to the offce area through perimeter windows that ru from floor to ceilng.
The office area is electrically lit with (16) direct/indirect 2-lamp fixtures using 28-watt T5 lamps.
The photocontrol system is a WattStopper multi-level switching tye using a LCO-203 control module.
The electric lights are controlled by an exterior roof-mounted photocell in the manufacturing floor and by
a ceiling mounted photocell facing the window wall in the offces. Both photo sensors are mounted in
accordance with manufactuers recommendations. The system was installed by a local electrical
contractor and was commissioned and verified by a representative from WattStopper.
Monitoring Period: Lighting energy use was logged for a 12-day period from August 13 - August 28,
2009, including i 10 regular working hours.
Other: One lighting circuit in the offce area and two circuits in the manufacturing area were logged.
Measured energy savings during the monitoring period are reported in Table 9. Annual estimated
energy savings data are reported in Table 10 using the monitoring data and Annual Extrapolation
Method 2 as described in Section 2.3.
Measurement and Verification of Daylighting Photocontrols; Advanced Energyof Lab~Bo¡se:#2009
Page 18 of 28
Table 9 Built!ing 03 Energy Data for Monitoring Period (August 13-28, 200B)
Manufactuin
6.89
758
214
544
71.8%
Table 10 03 Estimated Annual Energy Savings in Study Area
Manufactun
6.89
19,810
15,349
4,461
22.5%
0.97
The manufacturing area was shown to be operating very well and in a predictable manner. From
informal surveys, users are satisfied with the photocontrol system performance. We were unable to
identify savings in the office area during the monitoring period. Upon inspecting the lighting control
interface, the switching level for this circuit is set too high, at 300 Footcandles. A value of 300
Footcandles at this photocell corresponds to an ilumination level well above what is sufficient for
offices. However, several interior design decisions were made that are counter to good daylit design
practices in these offices. The first row of workstations nearest the windows is designed such that
occupants' backs to the windows and produces glare on the computer screen and forces occupants to
close binds reducing useful daylight. The blinds in the space are full length and roll down from the head
of the window. Bottom up blinds would allow users to control glare while stil allowing daylight
penetration deeper into the space. Finally, all interior finishes are black, which produces a very low
internal reflected component and a sense of dimness, and increases perceived visual contrast. From the
perspective of daylighting, visual comfort and energy savings, the offce areas would benefit from both
photocontrol system re-commissioning and interior design modifications.
MeaSUrement
of
2009
19 of 28
This medical facility, located in Boise, ID, has two areas (main lobby and a nurses' station) with
daylighting photocontrols. The main lobby is 1,300 SF and nurses' station is 1,342 SF.
Operational Hours: 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Thursday and 8:00 AM to 1:00 PM Friday
Daylighting and Electric Lighting: Both study areas have translucent skylight monitors and transparent
clerestory windows in four directions. The electric lighting system uses direct/indirect pendant fixtures,
with (3) T8 lamps in cross-section. A SwitchPak 8 relay lighting control panel by Synergy Lighting
Controls is connected to the photocontrolled circuits. This system utilized step-switching with one circuit
controllng two lamps and another circuit controlling one lamp in the three lamp cross-section per fixtue.
Therefore, four lighting levels are possible, all off, one lamp, two lamps or three lamps on. Both areas are
controlled with a single photocell located in the nurses' station, mounted on the top of a 10' tall parial
height wall.
Monitoring Period: February 26 - May 5,
2009 and May 25 - June 12, 2009
Other: During the monitoring period, it was found that occupants were dissatisfied with frequent
switching of the photocontrol system. Therefore a commissioning effort occured which lengthened our
monitoring period and resulted in new control hardware being installed. Subsequently, this allowed us to
report pre-commissioning and post-commissioning pedormance data.
Measured energy savings during the (pre-commissioned' period are reported in Table 11. Measured
energy savings during the (post-commissioned' period are reported in Table 12. Annual estimated
energy savings data are reported in Table 13 using the post-commissioned data and Annual
Extrapolation Method 2 as described in Section 2.3. The additional savings due to commissioning are
reported in Table 14.
11 04 PnH:ommissioning Energy Data for Monitoring Period 26-May 5,
Lobb
0.90
135.15
66.29
68.86
51%
Nurses Station
1.94
291.52
72.33
219.19
75.2%
Measurement and Verification of Day!ightil1g Photocontrols; Advanced Energy
of Design Lab-Boise (Report #
2009
Page 20 of 28
Tabí212 04 Post-commissioning Energy Data for Monitoring Period (May 2S-June 12, lOOS)
Nurses Station
1.94
197.09
35.15
161.94
82.2%
TabíeB 04 Estimated Anm.i! Energy Savings in Study Area
Lobb
0.90
1923
1 123
800
41.6%
0.61
Nurses Station
1.94
4147
2,458
1,698
40.7%
1.26
Table 14 - Building 04 Improved Energy Savings Due to Commissioning
Nurses Station
75.2%
82.2%
7%
With a step-switching photocontrol system such as the one used at this site, both occupant comfort and
energy saving need to be balanced during the commissioning effort. During the first monitoring period
occupants were very unhappy with the frequency with which the lights switched on and off. A
commissioning effort that was conducted after the first monitoring period revealed a damaged circuit
board in the photocontrol system. The circuit board was replaced and reprogrammed. The dead band
settings for switching levels were adjusted to minimize occupant distraction from switching. After
commissioning was complete, we conducted a second phase of monitoring to determine any additional
savings due to commissioning. Upon informal discussions with occupants after commissioning, the
frequency of switching was still an issue but was much improved after commissioning.
of 2009
Page 21 of 28
The study space is a light industrial manufacturing building in Caldwell, ID, with a total of 5,400 SF (732
SF of offce and 4,668 SF of medium bay warehouse). The study space was confined to the 4,668SF
warehouse.
Operational Hours: 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday
Daylighting and Electric Lighting: Thirteen 3'x 1 0' trnslucent skylight panels are built into the metal
roof system and comprise a skylight to floor area ratio of 8.4%. The space is electrically iluminated by
chain hung, direct florescent fixtures utilizing two (2) 48" T8 32-watt lamps with electronic ballasts. The
lighting system is controlled with two circuits and both were monitored. One circuit has 14 fixtures and is
controlled by a photocontrol system and a wall switch. The second circuit has 28 fixtues and is controlled
by a wall switch only. A WattStopper model LS-lOOXB control system is used for daylight harvesting
and the photocell is positioned vertically in a skylight well (open-loop configuration). The photocell has
an adjustable dead band, switching set point, and time delay. The WattStopper system is configued with
basic on/off switching has no time clock control, and no external control panel to provide switching
inputs such as occupancy scheduling or occupancy detecting.
Monitoring Period: March 9 to April 14,2009,37 calendar days, 27 working days, 250 working hours
Measured energy savings on a '9-hour workday basis' are reported in Table 15. Due to user related trends
in the photocontrolled data, the energy consumption was also analyzed on a 24-hour basis. Measured
energy savings on a '24-hours basis' are reported in Table 16. The data showed a clear trend regarding
when the lighting system switched off and back on. It consistently switched off approximately one hour
after sunrise and switched back on approximately one hour before sunset. This is logical given the
abundant daylight design; therefore Anual Extrapolation Method 2 as described in Section 2.3 was
selected. Anual estimated energy savings data are reported in Table 18 using the '9-hour workday' data.
The additional savings due to commissioning are reported in Table 17.
4.5.2.1 9-hour workday based analysis
The total connected lighting load for the study space is 2,604 watts (0.55 W/SF), well below the lighting
power density allowable by code. The photocontrolled circuit has a connected load of 870 watts and the
lighting circuit controlled only by a wall switch has a connected load of 1,700 watts. The photocontrolled
circuit can only be tured on with the photocontrol and can be turned off with the wall switch or
photocontrol. Figure 3 below shows the logged data for a tyical 24-hour period. Sunise and sunset
Measurement and Verífcatìon of Daylighting
of Design lab-Boise
Effciency 2009
Page 22 of 28
times are overlaid with a green dashed line. The graph verifies the correct fuctioning of the
photocontrolled lighting circuit and the occupant use of the manually controlled lighting circuit.
Logged Power Data with Day/Night Indication
0.5 .. .. Switched Circuit
0.4
\
I
I
0.3
~..I
l
I
0.2
it.'"ö..
..'"w,.
g
tž
~
g
..ö..
g
..
~g
Figure :3 05 logged data, wOrkday hours
Duing normal working hours, 89% of the lighting energy was saved as compared to the baseline
considering both the photocontrolled circuit and the wall switched circuit. The table below shows the
baseline energy use compared to the actul logged data for working hours durg the monitoring period.
Tab!e 15 05 Energy Use Data (March 9-AprH 14, 2009)
4.5.2.2 24.hour period based analysis
Analyzing the total lighting energy consumption for a 24-hour period gives a different view of the actual
energy savings and reveals a user control problem associated with this paricular daylight harvesting
system design. Graph 3 below shows a 5-day period with the power use of both circuits and the sunrise
and sunset times overlaid. On April 6th the sunrise was at 7:20 a.m. local time and sunset was at 8:20 p.m.
local time.
of
2009
23 of 28
Logged Pow~rDatawith Dav/Nightin.dicatiol"- Photo-controle:d tlrwit
- - Switched Circuit
0.5
004
0.3
~"'
o
~
~'"Q~Q
:e
.St'"li...:i00
-t:
¡'"~."
3 05 logged data, 24-nour basis
Table 15 05 Energy Use Data by Workday and by 24-hol.r Period (March 9-Apríi 14, 2(09)
8AM-5PM Basis
hotocontrolled Switch
Circuit Circui
0.87
651
68
583
89.5%
The total energy used by the lighting system on a 24-hour basis during the study period was 451 kWh. Of
this, only 68 kWh was used during working hours and 384 kWh was used after working hours. Over the
study period and on a 24-hour basis, the total energy use logged for the photocontrolled circuit was 317
kWh and the standard wall switch lighting circuit was just 134 kWh.
Measurement
of
Verification of Daylightìng
Design lab-Boise
Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
#. Page 24 of 28
Tab¡e 17 - Buikling 05 Estimated Energy Savings Due to Commissioning During the Monitoring Period
%
rovement due to ex (%)
4.5.2.3 Estimated Annual Energy Savings
This analysis was conducted based upon the 9-hour workday analysis period.
Tabie 18 Building 05 Estimated Annual Energy Savings in Study Area
Annual energy saving would be approximately 1,790 kWh per year during daylight hours with the system
operating as installed. However, if all hours (including summer nights) were considered the savings
would be less. Graph 3 reveals excessive nighttime energy use during thee nights. It appears as though
users forgot to switch off the photocontrolled circuit when they were done workig on these days. The
sun was stil up at the end of normal working hours and the photocontrolled circuit was stil switched off,
as it should have been. However, it was the daylight harvesting that had turned the lights off, but the wall
switch was stil on. After the sun set, long after normal work hour, the photocontrols appropriately
switched the lights back on due to the lack of daylight available. The lights then remained on all night.
The lights then switched offby the photocontrol in the morning before workers returned. Therefore, it
seems the error went unnoticed for days on end. Durng the monitoring period, it was found that 29 out of
37 nights (78%) the lights were left on. This nighttime lighting use would occur for approximately 10
hours per night for approximately six months of the year due to after workday sunset times when the
control problem could go unoticed. Using 78% of the nights over a six-month periods and an average of
10 hours per night of unintended consumption, there would be approximately 1260 hours of unintended
nighttime energy use. This results in approximately 1,096 kWh, thus reducing photocontrol system
savings to 694 kWh per year for the circuit monitored in the study area.
Measurement and Verification of
Lab~Bo¡se #
2009
25 of 28
This problem could easily be solved with improved design. Incorporating some tye of occupancy sensor
and/or an automatic nighttime sweep would solve the problem. In this specific project a $75 dollar
industrial timer was used to control the exterior building lighting. That same type of timer could be
incorporated into the photocontrol circuit. Another option would be to incorporate a small LED indicator
light to alert occupants that the lighting system is stil on even though the lights are switched off due to
daylight harvesting. This option was in fact recommended for this project but was never followed up on,
or related to the proper people (Norfleet Photo Control Incentive Letter-8/8/07). Another option would be
an occupancy sensor, which could sweep lights off when occupants are not present. Finally, a momentary
switch could be used instead of a relay switch to turn the lights on, such that the lights would not come
back on automatically as daylight tapers off at the end of the day.
Measurement and Verifcation of
of
Photocontrols: Advanced
Lab~Bo¡se #
The savings due to photocontrols for the ten circuits monitored at five buildings for the regular
operating hours during the monitoring periods ranged from 0-89.5% with an average of 51% savings.
The estimated annual energy savings due to photocontrols during regular operating hours ranged from
0-88% with an average 26.9%, while the estimated savings per square foot per year range from 0-1.26
kWh/SF*YR. Five circuits monitored had daylight from sidelighting only while five circuits had daylight
from toplighting of some type. While this is a small sample, the energy savings in spaces with a
toplighting component were generally higher than those with sidelighting only, supporting previous
studies (McHugh et aI., 2004 and Heschong et aI., 2005). Specifically, circuits with sidelighting only
produced 0-47% savings during regularly occupied hours in the monitoring period with an average of
21.8%. The figures for monitored circuits in spaces with toplighting were consistently higher ranging
from 30.7-89.5% with an average of 68.1%. Sidelit spaces were estimated to save 0-24.7% annually with
an average of 11.24% and 0-0.5 kWh/SF*YR with an average of 0.25 kWh/SF*YR. Spaces with
toplighting were estimated to save from 19.95-88% annual with an average of 42.55% and 0.45-1.26
kWh/SF*YR with an average of 0.89 kWh/SF*YR. Three circuits were logged in a manner to provide pre
and post commissioning data. During the monitoring periods, post-commissioned circuits saved 7%,
22%, and 58.8% more than the same pre-commissioned photocontrolled circuits.
When comparing energy savings data between sites it is important to consider the differences in
regularly occupied hours. This report used each building's regularly occupied hours to determine the
baseline energy consumption of the photocontrolled lighting circuits. The greater the percentage of
regularly operating hours falling during daylight hours, the greater the savings potential for
photocontrolled circuits in that building.
Realized energy savings from photocontrolled systems result from the combination of a well designed
building, well designed lighting control systems, and proper system installation, commissioning and user
operation. Errors in any of these steps can diminish savings. For example, a space with consistently low
daylight levels or one with excessive glare such that blinds are usually closed will produce little savings
despite properly installed and commissioned photocontrol systems. However, exemplary execution in
one or more of these steps can increase the overall system robustness and improve savings. For
example, a very well daylit building can make up for improper commissioning in some cases because
photocontrol systems are more forgiving when there is abundant daylight. User operation practices can
also dramatically increase or decrease savings depending on if they understand the intention of the
systems and on the level of satisfaction with the daylighting design, electric lighting design or the
photocontrol system. Photocontrol systems should always be commissioned, users should be education
as to the intention of the design, and proper operational documentation should be provided to the
building owner or operator.
Measurement and Verifcation of
of
200fi
21 of 28
Heschong, L., Howlett, 0., McHugh, J., & Pande, A. (2005). Sidelighting Photocontrols Field
Study. NEEA and PG&E and SCE. Galasiu et aL. 2007
Hirsch, J., & LBNL. (n.d.). eQUEST. Retreved July 10,2009, from
htt://www.doe2.com/equest/ .
Jennings, J., Rubinstein, F. M., DiBartolomeo, D., & Blanc, S. (1999). Comparison of control
options in private offices in an advanced lighting control testbed. In Proceedings of the IESNA
1999 Annual Conference. New Orleans, LA.
McHugh, J., Abhijeet Pande, Gregg D. Ander, & Jack Melnyk. (2004). Effectiveness of
Photocontrols with Skylighting. IESNA Annual Conference Proceedings, 13(New York), 1-18.
Moore, T., Carter, D. J., & Slater, A. i. (2003). Long-term patterns of use of occupant controlled
offce lighting. Lighting Research and Technology, 35(1),43-57.
Pigg, S., Eilers, M., & Reed, J. (1996). Behavioral Aspects of Lighting and Occupancy Sensors
in Private Offices: A Case Study ofa University Office Building. In ACEEE Summer Study on
Energy Effciency in Buildings (pp. 8.161-8.171).
Reinhart, C. F., & Voss, K. (2003). Monitoring manual control of electrc lighting and blinds.
Lighting Research and Technology, 35(3), 243-258.
Measurement and Verifcation of Daylighting Photocontrols; Advanced
of Lab-Boise (Report #2009
28 of 28
MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION
OF DAYUGHTING PHOTOCONTROLS
Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Authors:
Acker, B.
Van Den Wymelenberg, K.
INTEGRATED DESIGN lAB
b 0 í 5 e
COLLEGE of ART and ARCIDECTUR
of Architecture 8. Interior Design
Measurement and Verification of
of
2009
1 of 28
~o
D.
Wii..
c(o-z:iowI-
January 11, 2010
Date
20090205.01
Report No.
Prepared By:
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise
108 N 6th St. Boise 10 83704 USA
ww.uidaho.edu/idl
Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Director
Brad Acker
Project Manager
1- Brad Acker
2- Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Authors
C09410-P03
Contract No.
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Bille Jo McWinn
Project Manager
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by
Idaho Power Company. It does not necessarily represent the
views of Idaho Power Company or its employees. Idaho
Power Company, its employees, contractors and
subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and
assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor
does any party represent that the uses of this information wil
not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not
been approved or disapproved by Idaho Power Company nor
has Idaho Power Company passed upon the accuracy or
adequacy of the information in this report.
Please cite this report as follows:
Acker, B., Van Den Wymelenberg, K., 2010. Measurement and Verifcation of Day lighting
Photocontrols; Technical Report 20090205-01, Integrated Design Lab, University ofIdaho, Boise, ID.
Measurement and Verífìcatlon of
of
2009
:2 of 28
Measurement and Verification
This page left intentionally blank.
!BACKGROUND 5
1.1 LITERATURE REVIEW 5
l METHODS 7
2.1 SITE SELECTION 7
2.2 METERING METHODOLOGY 7
2.3 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 7
~SUMMARIZED RESULTS 9
3.1 MONITORING PERIOD ENERGY SAVINGS 9
3.2 ANNUAL ESTIMATED ENERGY SAVINGS 10
!DETAILED RESULTS 11
4.1 BUILDING 01- OFFICE 11
4.1.1 SITE SPECIFIC DETAILS 11
4.1.2 RESULTS 12
4.1.3 DISCUSSION 14
4.2 BUILDING 02 - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 15
4.2.1 RElEVANT SITE SPECIFIC DETAILS 15
4.2.2 RESULTS 16
4.2.3 DISCUSSION 17
4.3 BUILDING 03 - MANUFACTURING/OFFICE 18
4.3.1 STUDVAREA 18
4.3.2 RESULTS 18
4.3.3 DISCUSSION 19
4.4 BUILDING 04 - OFFICE/MEDICAL 20
4.4.1 STUDVAREA 20
4.4.2 RESULTS 20
4.4.3 DISCUSSION 21
4.5 BUILDING 05 - WAREHOUSE/MANUFACTURING 22
4.5.1 STUDVAREA 22
4.5.2 RESULTS 22
4.5.2.1 9-hour workday based analysis 22
4.5.2.2 24-hour period based analysis 23
4.5.2.3 Estimated Annual Energy Savings 25
4.5.3 DISCUSSION 25
2-DISCUSSION 27
.§REFERENCES 28
Measurement and Verification of Daylighting
of Design Lab~Bo¡s8 Advanced
# 20090205-01)
Effciency 2009
Pa~Je 4 of 28
Lighting control systems designed to integrated electrc light sources with daylight sources
are referred to as 'daylighting photocontrols' or 'daylight harvesting systems'. For clarity and
simplicity this document wil refer to this tye of lighting control as 'photocontrols.
Photocontrols are employed as an energy effciency strtegy that are intended to reduce the
amount of electrc lighting used in a space based upon the daylight available within that space.
Photocontrols are strctly an energy efficiency measure and their affects upon the lighting in a
space can at best go unnoticed by building occupants.
Photocontrols are the most complicated type of lighting control and require the most
attention to ensure successful implementation. There are several critical aspects regarding
system design and implementation including the tye and quality of the architectual day lighting
design, the components that comprise the photocontrol system, the positioning and field of view
(FOV) ofthe photometrc sensor, the tyes of control logics available and the type and
configuration of ballasts. Photocontrol systems are most commonly composed of an iluminance
sensor that measures the ilumination at a specific point (tyically mounted on or near the
ceiling), a control module that translates the signal from the photocell to a low voltage control
signal that is provided to the (dimming) ballast, and finally a light fixtue with lamps that provide
varable (continuous dimming or step-dimming) lumen output dependent upon the ballast signaL.
Obviously, not all systems are designed the same and variations of system designs wil be
addressed as required throughout the document.
Previous studies have identified several reasons why the realized energy savings are often
not as high as predicted savings however, on some occasions realized energy savings are higher
than predicted savings. Many of the previous studies do not suggest what the actual or predicted
savings were, they just report a percentage of realized savings. A brief review of these previous
studies is offered below.
Pigg et al. (1996) reported findings from a study of twelve private offices in a university
business building in Wisconsin and found that only half of the rooms showed any savings due to
automatic dimming over the II-month monitoring period. No specific savings data were offered
for the other rooms and it was noted that all twelve rooms were south facing and several had
blinds closed all of the time. Resulting from a seven-month field study in a large federal offce
building, Jennings et al. (1999) found that automatic dimming saved on average 29% of the
lighting energy, however no predicted savings were offered. McHugh et al. (2004) reported on a
field study of 32 spaces with skylights and daylight sensing controls and assessed how much
energy was actually saved compared to the savings predicted from eQuest (Hirsch & LBNL,
n.d.) energy simulations. Very high realized savings ratios were reported and mean savings was
98% (range 25%-156%). If one low outlier was eliminated all locations saved more than 60%.
A follow-up study in 123 sidelit spaces found realized savings ratios to be very low (Heschong,
Howlett, McHugh, & Pande, 2005). Half (52%) of the 123 spaces saved zero energy. The half
(48%) that saved some energy saved only 53% of what was predicted for a mean realized savings
ratio of 23 %. Galasiu et al. (2007) reported on a yearlong field study of 86 offce workstations in
lab-Boise
a single building and found that automatic dimming accounted for 20% lighting energy savings.
Finally, in some cases, daylight sensing lighting controls actually resulted in increased energy
use (Reinhart & Vos, 2003; Moore et aI., 2003) due to the increased ballast voltage required of
dimming ballasts or because of a combination of improper design, commissioning or user
operation.
Measurement and Verification of Dayhghtìng Photocontrols; Advanced Energy 2009of lab-Boise # Page 6 of
Five buildings were selected for monitoring from Idaho Power Companýs list of buildings with daylight
photocontrol incentives.
01 Offce 68,000 South Open Offces 3,250 Chubbuk, ID
Norteast Open Offces 1,333
Nort Open Offces 4,620
East Opn Offces 1,632
02 Element School 65,000 944 Nam a,ID
03 Manufactue/Offce 60,600 4,600 Hailey, ID
1,017
04 Office/Medical 21,104 1,300 Boise, ID
1,342
05 WarehouselManufacture 5,400 1,432 Caldwell, ID
At each building included in this study, lighting circuits were selected for data logging one of two ways.
Either all of the photocontrolled circuits across the entire building were monitored or a representative
sample of circuits was selected. Details are offered in Section 4 describing which circuits were selected
for logging at each individual building. Once the circuits were selected, the monitoring protocol
included placing a power meter and current transformers (Dent ElitePro Energy) on lighting circuits or
establishing trend logs in building energy managements systems (EMS) to capture lighting energy
consumption. Data were collected until sunny and cloudy conditions were recorded, typically for a
period of two weeks to two months. This was done in order to ensure photocontrol performance was
captured under a range of sky conditions. In some cases, long-term performance data was available
from trend logs in the EMS. Exterior illumination and sky cover data during the monitoring period were
collected as well, either on site or from nearby weather stations.
In order to establish the baseline energy consumption for each monitored circuit the total connected
load in kW for each circuit was multiplied by the normal operating hours (less holidays) during the study
period. The total connected load for each monitored circuit was determined from logged data and
checked against available drawings and lighting fixture schedules. If monitoring data for a circuit showed
Measurement and
University of
of 2009
Page 1 of 28Lab~Boíse
a substantial difference in connected load as compared to the drawings, the maximum kW loads from
the monitoring data were used. The normal operating hours were recorded for each building studied by
questioning the staff on site.
The actual energy use of each monitored circuit was found by summing the logged data for each circuit
during the occupied operating hours. When occupancy sensors were present (was the case for just one
circuit) we reported savings for the combined system (occupancy+photocontrols) as well as an estimate
of the savings attributable to photocontrols alone. This is all that was necessary to provide energy
savings data for the specific circuits monitored over the monitoring period.
Determining annual energy savings estimates for the study areas required additional steps. One of two
possible methods was used to extrapolate savings from the monitoring period to the whole year. The
data analysis method selected depended upon the type and duration of monitoring data and supporting
data available. Every effort was made to ensure the most accurate translations to annual energy
estimates, however there is inherently error in this step due to the annual variability of daylight
available. Even though multiple sky conditions were recorded and analyzed during the monitoring
period, these data can only be approximately correlated with annual weather phenomenon.
Furthermore, the annual energy savings estimates rely upon Typical Meteorological Year (TMY) weather
data, which is an approximation of a typical weather year and may not represent a particular weather
year. The two possible annual extrapolation methods are outlined below.
Annual Extrapolation method 1: When long-term lighting energy use data were available from trend
logs in an EMS, samples were selected under different sky conditions and at different times of year.
These savings data were binned and referenced with TMY3 weather data to derive annual savings
estimates.
Annual Extrapolation method 2: If long-term data were not available we established a detailed
relationship between the monitored lighting circuit energy use data, hours of daylight availability,
exterior illumination and cloud cover data as reported by nearby weather stations. When obvious
dimming or switching trends were found relative to a specific outdoor ilumination values or durations
after/before sunrise/sunset, these trends were referenced with TMY3 illumination or sunrise/sunset
data to determine the annual periods of savings potentiaL. As necessary, additional resolution related to
cloud cover and exterior illumination were considered. These relationships were then referenced with
TMY3 weather data in order to translate the measured savings across the entire year.
Annual Extrapolation Method 1 is expected to be more accurate, however long-term data were only
available for one building (Building 02). We have reasonably high confidence in the accuracy of both
methods for the purposes of this stuçly.
Measurement and Veriícation of Day!ighting Photocontrols; Advanced Energy Effícíency 2009
University or Design Lab-Boise (Heport # Page a or 28
1 Percent Energy Saved During Monitoring Period For Regular Operating Hours
South 0 en Offces
Northeast Open
Offces
Nort en Offces Sideli htin 0.6%
East n Offces Sideli htin 47.4%
02 Elementary Nampa,Aug. 25-Sept. 5,Classroom 420 Side lighting/ 73.4* -
School il 2008 Toplighting 78.1%*
Dec. 1-12, 2008
03 Manufactue/Hailey, il Aug. 13-28, 71.8%
Offce 2009
0%
04 Office/Boise, il Feb. 26-May 5,51-73%
Medical 2009
May 25-June 12,Nurses' Station 75.2-82.2%
2009
05 Warehouse/Caldwell,Mar.9-Apr.14,Medium Bay 30.7-89.5%
Manufacture il 2009
* See Section 4.2.3 for explanation; these values included savings from occupancy sensors in addition
photocontrols.
and of
of
2009
of 28
Tab!e 2 Annual Estimated Energy Savings In Study Areas
South 0 en Offces
Northeast Open
Offces
Nort 0 en Offces 0%0.0
East 0 en Offces 11.4%0.27
02 Elementary Nampa,Aug. 25-Sept. 5,Classroom 420 20.0%0.45
School ID 2008
Dec. 1-12,2008
03 Manufactue/Hailey, ID Aug. 13-28, 22.5%0.97
Offce 2009
0%0.0
04 Office/Boise, ID Feb. 26-May 5,41.6%1.26
Medical 2009 40.7%1.25
May 25-June 12,
2009
05 Warehouse/Caldwell,Mar.9-Apr. 14,Medium Bay 88%0.41
Manufacture ID 2009
Measurement
of
of Daylightìrig Photocontrols; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
Design Lab-Boise # 20090205-01) Page 10 of 28
This office building, located in Chubbuck, ID, has several different areas with daylighting photocontrols,
facing in four orientations. The building totals 68,000 SF and is four stories tall. Four perimeter office
zones on the second floor were studied, each containing open plan office occupancy.
Operational Hours: 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Friday
Daylighting and Electric Lighting Design: Large trnsparent perimeter windows provide day lighting to
the offce spaces. The south façade has deep exterior louvered overhangs and shallow interior
lightshelves, while the rest of windows are not shaded except for interior blinds. Pendant mounted
direct/indirect fluorescent fixtures provide electric ilumation as described in Table 3 below. A
photocell is located on the ceiling and positioned with a field of view including the work suraces for each
daylight zone.
Monitoring Period: November lO-December 5, 2009; 160 operating hours.
Table 3 01 Summary of lighting zones monitored
Energy Loger
Channel Total
Number Description connected laod
H2-1: Second floor, South perimter open offces.Unear
Chl bank of pendant f10urescent fixtures.2.63kW
H2-3: Second floor, Small cluster of pendant f10urescents
Ch2 in North East Corner.O.95kW
Ch3 H2-5: Second Floor, Nort perimeter open offices.3.6kW
Ch4 H2-9: Second floor, East end, adjacentto elevator.1.35 kW
Measurement and Verjfcatìon of
of
2009
11 of 28Lab~ßo¡se
Measured energy savings during the monitoring period are reported in Table 4. Annual estimated
energy savings data are reported in Table 5 using the monitoring data and Annual Extrapolation Method
2 as described in Section 2.3. Logging data for selected periods with regard to cloud cover are plotted in
Graph 1 and Graph 2 below.
Tab!e 4 BI.Htling 01 Energy Data for Period (November H)-December 5, :W(9)
Northeast
(Chanel 2
0.95
152
114
East
Chanel 4)
1.35
216
113
151
35.9%
38
25.1%
4
0.6%
103
47.4%
Tabk, 5 Building 01 Estimated Anm.ia! Energy Savings in Area
1,518
20.1%
0.47
672
24.7%
0.50
o
0.0%
0.00
443
11.4%
0.27
Measurement and Verification of Day!ightingof Lab-Boise Advanced
#
2009
12 of 28
Enerø Use and Cloud Covr- Mostly Clear
4
3.5
3
2.5 ......\.---. .
..\\-.,.....
....,..
¡ii'*''''
\,\
2
...,..
...,..
....,,
....,.
~.~. i i-----~""''_''::--
!,,,\\\
\,\,
1.5
1 " ,
-L=_=_:T ~:- - - - -.;.. ,
0.5
..
o .
11/17!P90:00 11/17/0912:00 11/18/090:00 11/18/0912:00 11/19/090:00 11/19/0912:00
.0.51
i 0!11/20/i0:oo!
8
7
6
5
'i ----ChlkWu
4 1t - -Ch2 kWe
¡¡Ch3kW
3 S -.-Ch4kW
1 ~CIdCorC
2
1
.1
Graph 1 Biiih::ing 01 Energy use and cloud cover- mostly dear
EII U.. and Clud Cove- Mos Ovre
4.5
4
3.5
,-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --2.5
!2
1.5
1
0.5
0
11/12
.0.5.
,
.
,
....f....-,
,
,~-~-~~-
'-",-.0 '0.0,.
11/12/0912:00 11/13/0912:00
Graph 2 01 Energy use and cloud cover- mostly overcast
Measurement and Verification of
University of
Photocontrols; Advanced Energy
Lab-Boise #
9
8
. 7
6
'i -- ChlkWi- -Ch2 kWe
l Ch3kW
4 ..-Ch4kW..
ii --- Cld Covr'0
3
2
1
11/14 0:00
0
2009
13 of
In general, the photocontrolled lighting system was performing welL. Despite steps to correlate measure
data with annual daylight availabilty, the annual savings estimates are conservatively biased for this site
since data were logged during winter conditions. Commissioning the north zone logged with Channel 3
is expected to produce additional energy saving since the northeast zone logged with Channel 2 showed
substantial energy savings.
Channel four, serving the east side of this space did not have savings that translated well from the study
period to an annual savings. From looking at the data it appears users would override the photocontrols
by switching the lights off entirely. This user interface, being unpredictable, was not taken into
consideration when the annual energy savings was modeled. Therefore, annual predicted savings are
lower than might be expected given the monitored period savings shown in Table 4 and Table S.
Measurement and Verification of
of
Advanced Energy
:# 20090205~01)
This elementary school, located in Nampa, ID, has some classrooms with photocontrols and some
classrooms without. Two adjacent classrooms were studied. Room 410 is 992 SF and does not have
photocontrols, while Room 420 is 944 SF and has photocontrols. The small difference in size is due to a
small comer tutoring room that is accessed from the hallway and extends in to classroom 420.
figure 1 - Heor Plan of 131.Hding 02 highlighting the study areas
Operational Hours: 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM, Monday through Friday.
Daylighting and Electric Lighting: Room 420 has daylight provided by south clerestory windows and
translucent skylights at the back of the space. The electric lighting system consists of direct/indirect
fluorescent fixtures with dimming ballasts and T8 lamps. The control strategy utilzes an integrated
day lighting and electric lighting system with photocells and occupancy sensors. The lighting power
density is 0.89 watts/sf. The daylight harvesting system uses a WattS topper LS-290c photocell, and
LCD-203dimming module and BT -203 Power Pack. The photocell is placed in the skylight well, looking
of
Desìgn Lab-Boise
2009
15 of 28
toward the translucent skylights and the sensitivity was set accordingly. Room 410 has daylight provided
from south clerestory windows only. The electric lighting system utilzes direct fluorescent parabolic
tougher fixtures and has a lighting power density is 1.1 watts/sf. This room has occupancy sweep controls
but no photocontrols.
Monitoring Period: August 25-September 5, 2008 and December 1-12,2008
Other: At this building, long-term trend log data were available. Therefore a sample of data from
extreme weather periods and solar angles were selected from across the school year. The energy use
figures presented represent an average performance over the periods sampled.
Measured energy savings during the two monitoring periods are reported in Table 6 and Table 7.
Annual estimated energy savings data are reported in Table 8 using the monitoring data and Annual
Extrapolation Method 1 as described in Section 2.3 source not found.
Table 6 02. Energy Data for Monitoring Period Z5-September 5, 2(08)
Classroom 410
non- hotocontrolled
0.93
134
56
78
58.1%
0.88
127
34
93
73.4%
Table 7 02 Energy Data for Period (May 25-Jun0 12, 2.0(9)
Classroom 410
non- hotocontrolled
0.93
134
62
72
53%
0.88
127
28
99
78.1%
Measurement
of
Verifcation of Day!ighting Photocontrols; Advanced
Lab-Boise #
Effciency 2009
Page 16 of 28
Table 8 02 Energy Data for Monitoring Period (August 25-September
Classroom 410
000- hotocontrolled
.93
2,277
55.8%
1,006
1270
1.28
0.88
2154
75.8%
521
1633
1.73
20%, 0.45 kWhlSF*YR
Since both classrooms have occupancy sensors, the data presented in Table 6, Table 7, and Table 8 must
be interpreted further to determine savings due to photocontrols alone. Savings reported in Classroom
410 are from a combination of occupancy sensor switching and manual wall switching. The savings
reported in Classroom 420 are from a combination of photocontrols, occupancy sensor switching and
manual wall switching. These data are confounded since the photocontrol system switches lights off in
addition to dimming. Therefore, it is impossible to extract savings from "dim-to-oft' instances from
occupancy or manual wall switching instances. Occupancy signal data were not available, and even if
they were, manual wall switching data would stil be confounded with photocontrolled dim-to-off
savings. For these reasons, Table 8 estimates the savings due to photocontrols only by subtracting the
savings found from occupancy and manual wall switching during normal working hours in Classroom 410
(55.8%) from the savings presented in Classroom 420 (75.75%), resulting in an estimated 19.95%
photocontrol savings. The estimated savings in kWh/SF*YR was obtained by reducing 1.65 kWh/SF*YR
reported for Classroom 420 by (1-(19.95%/75.75%)=73.6%), resulting in 0.43 kWh/SF*YR). Obviously,
the occupancy and wall switching patterns in Classroom 410 and 420 are not likely to be exactly the
same. However, their use patterns are believed to be similar enough for these estimates. From informal
surveys, users are satisfied with the photocontrol system performance in room 420.
Advanced
#.
This manufactuing and office building, located in Hailey, ID, has two areas (the manufacturing floor and
the offices) with daylighting photocontrols totaling 5,625 SF. The manufacturing floor is 4,600 SF and
the offces are 1,017 SF.
Operational Hours: Both spaces are occupied Monday through Friday from 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. The
facility also has operating hours on the weekend but due to limited hours and inconsistent use only
weekday hours were considered in this analysis.
Daylighting and Electric Lighting: The manufactuing space is top lit with (4) 8' x 27' linear skylights
organized in a line centered on the space. There are also large glazed roll-up doors. The manufactung
area is electrically lit with (16) high-bay fixtures each with (6) 54-watt T5 high output (54WT5HO)
lamps. Daylight is introduced to the offce area through perimeter windows that run from floor to ceiling.
The office area is electrically lit with (16) direct/indirect 2-lamp fixtures using 28-watt T5 lamps.
The photocontrol system is a WattStopper multi-level switching tye using a LCO-203 control module.
The electric lights are controlled by an exterior roof-mounted photocell in the manufacturing floor and by
a ceiling mounted photocell facing the window wall in the offces. Both photosensors are mounted in
accordance with manufactuers recommendations. The system was installed by a local electrical
contractor and was commissioned and verified by a representative from WattStopper.
Monitoring Period: Lighting energy use was logged for a 12-day period from August 13 - August 28,
2009, including 110 regular working hours.
Other: One lighting circuit in the offce area and two circuits in the manufactuing area were logged.
Measured energy savings during the monitoring period are reported in Table 9. Annual estimated
energy savings data are reported in Table 10 using the monitoring data and Annual Extrapolation
Method 2 as described in Section 2.3.
Measurement and Verification of Daylightlng Photocontrols; Advanced Energy
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-01)
2009
18 of 28
Table 9 03 Energy Data for Monitoring Period (August 13-28, 2009l
Manufactun
6.89
758
214
544
71.8%
Offces
0.56
62
62
o
0%
Table 10 03 Estimated Annual Energy Sailings in Study Area
Manufactun
6.89
19,810
15,349
4,461
22.5%
0.97
The manufacturing area was shown to be operating very well and in a predictable manner. From
informal surveys, users are satisfied with the photocontrol system performance. We were unable to
identify savings in the office area during the monitoring period. Upon inspecting the lighting control
interface, the switching level for this circuit is set too high, at 300 Footcandles. A value of 300
Footcandles at this photocell corresponds to an ilumination level well above what is sufficient for
offices. However, several interior design decisions were made that are counter to good daylit design
practices in these offices. The first row of workstations nearest the windows is designed such that
occupants' backs to the windows and produces glare on the computer screen and forces occupants to
close binds reducing useful daylight. The blinds in the space are full length and roll down from the head
of the window. Bottom up blinds would allow users to control glare while still allowing daylight
penetration deeper into the space. Finally, all interior finishes are black, which produces a very low
internal reflected component and a sense of dimness, and increases perceived visual contrast. From the
perspective of daylighting, visual comfort and energy savings, the office areas would benefit from both
photocontrol system re-commissioning and interior design modifications.
Measurement and Verification of Daylighting
of
This medical facility, located in Boise, ID, has two areas (main lobby and a nurses' station) with
daylighting photocontrols. The main lobby is 1,300 SF and nurses' station is 1,342 SF.
Operational Hours: 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Thursday and 8:00 AM to 1 :00 PM Friday
Daylighting and Electric Lighting: Both study areas have translucent skylight monitors and transparent
clerestory windows in four directions. The electric lighting system uses direct/indirect pendant fixtures,
with (3) T8lamps in cross-section. A SwitchPak 8 relay lighting control panel by Synergy Lighting
Controls is connected to the photocontrolled circuits. This system utilized step-switching with one circuit
controllng two lamps and another circuit controllng one lamp in the three lamp cross-section per fixture.
Therefore, four lighting levels are possible, all off, one lamp, two lamps or three lamps on. Both areas are
controlled with a single photocell located in the nurses' station, mounted on the top of a 10' tall parial
height wall.
Monitoring Period: February 26 - May 5,
2009 and May 25 - June 12,2009
Other: Durig the monitoring period, it was found that occupants were dissatisfied with frequent
switching of the photocontrol system. Therefore a commissioning effort occured which lengtened our
monitoring period and resulted in new control hardware being installed. Subsequently, this allowed us to
report pre-commissioning and post-commissioning performance data.
Measured energy savings during the 'pre-commissioned' period are reported in Table 11. Measured
energy savings during the 'post-commissioned' period are reported in Table 12. Annual estimated
energy savings data are reported in Table 13 using the post-commissioned data and Annual
Extrapolation Method 2 as described in Section 2.3. The additional savings due to commissioning are
reported in Table 14.
Table 11 04 Pre-commissioning Energy Data for Monitoring Period 26-May 5,
Nurses Station
1.94
291.52
72.33
219.19
75.2%
of
2009
Page 20 of
Table 12 04 Post-commissioning Energy Data for Mcmitoring Period (May 25-.I11ne 11, 2009l
Lobb
0.90
91.37
24.70
66.67
73%
Nurses Station
1.94
197.09
35.15
161.94
82.2%
Table 13 04 Estimated Armual Energy Savings in Study Area
Lobb
0.90
1,923
1,123
800
41.6%
0.61
Nurses Station (Channel 2,3
1.94
4,147
2,458
1698
40.7%
1.26
Table 14 - 3uikling 04 Improved Energy Savings Due to Commissioning
Nurses Station
75.2%
82.2%
7%
With a step-switching photocontrol system such as the one used at this site, both occupant comfort and
energy saving need to be balanced during the commissioning effort. During the first monitoring period
occupants were very unhappy with the frequency with which the lights switched on and off. A
commissioning effort that was conducted after the first monitoring period revealed a damaged circuit
board in the photocontrol system. The circuit board was replaced and reprogrammed. The dead band
settings for switching levels were adjusted to minimize occupant distraction from switching. After
commissioning was complete, we conducted a second phase of monitoring to determine any additional
savings due to commissioning. Upon informal discussions with occupants after commissioning, the
frequency of switching was still an issue but was much improved after commissioning.
Measurement and Verification of 2009
21 of 28Lab-Boise
The study space is a light industrial manufacturing building in Caldwell, ID, with a total of 5,400 SF (732
SF of office and 4,668 SF of medium bay warehouse). The study space was confined to the 4,668SF
warehouse.
Operational Hours: 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday
Daylighting and Electric Lightig: Thirteen 3'xlO' translucent skylight panels are built into the metal
roof system and comprise a skylight to floor area ratio of 8.4%. The space is electrically iluminated by
chain hung, direct florescent fixtures utilizing two (2) 48" T8 32-watt lamps with electronic ballasts. The
lighting system is controlled with two circuits and both were monitored. One circuit has 14 fixtues and is
controlled by a photocontrol system and a wall switch. The second circuit has 28 fixtues and is controlled
by a wall switch only. A WattStopper model LS-lOOXB control system is used for daylight harvesting
and the photocell is positioned vertically in a skylight well (open-loop configuration). The photocell has
an adjustable dead band, switching set point, and time delay. The WattStopper system is configued with
basic on/off switching has no time clock control, and no external control panel to provide switching
inputs such as occupancy scheduling or occupancy detecting.
Monitoring Period: March 9 to April 14, 2009, 37 calendar days, 27 working days, 250 working hours
Measured energy savings on a '9-hour workday basis' are reported in Table 15. Due to user related trends
in the photocontrolled data, the energy consumption was also analyzed on a 24-hour basis. Measured
energy savings on a '24-hours basis' are reported in Table 16. The data showed a clear trend regarding
when the lighting system switched off and back on. It consistently switched off approximately one hour
after sunrise and switched back on approximately one hour before sunset. This is logical given the
abundant daylight design; therefore Anual Extrapolation Method 2 as described in Section 2.3 was
selected. Anual estimated energy savings data are reported in Table 18 using the '9-hour workday' data.
The additional savings due to commissioning are reported in Table 17.
4.5.2.1 9-hour workday based analysis
The total connected lighting load for the study space is 2,604 watts (0.55 W/SF), well below the lighting
power density allowable by code. The photocontrolled circuit has a connected load of 870 watts and the
lighting circuit controlled only by a wall switch has a connected load of 1,700 watts. The photocontrolled
circuit can only be turned on with the photocontrol and can be turned off with the wall switch or
photocontrol. Figure 3 below shows the logged data for a typical 24-hour period. Sunrise and sunset
Measurement and Verifìcatìon of
of
Pl1otocontm!s; Advanced Energy Effcìency
lab Boise # Page 22 of 28
times are overlaid with a green dashed line. The graph verifies the correct fuctioning of the
photocontrolled lighting circuit and the occupant use of the manually controlled lighting circuit.
Logged Power Dëlta with Day/Night Indication
0.5 -Photo.tohtloled drcuit - - Switched Circuit Dav~.s.Night=O
0.4
\
I
i
0.3
!I
I
I
0.2
I
I
I
.i:
ê:i ~..i
..'"
~i
......N
¡¿
fj
~i
'"Q='Ö'"
Fìgure OS Logged data, workday hours
During normal working hour, 89% of the lighting energy was saved as compared to the baseline
considering both the photocontrolled circuit and the wall switched circuit. The table below shows the
baseline energy use compared to the actul logged data for working hour during the monitoring period.
Table 15 Buiklirig 05 Energy Use Data (March 9-Apri! 2009)
4.5.2.2 24-hour period based analysis
Analyzing the total lighting energy consumption for a 24-hour period gives a different view of the actual
energy savings and reveals a user control problem associated with this paricular daylight harvesting
system design. Graph 3 below shows a 5-day period with the power use of both circuits and the sunrise
and sunset times overlaid. On April 6th the sunrse was at 7:20 a.m. local time and sunset was at 8:20 p.m.
local time.
Measurement and
of
of Daylighting
Design Lab-Boise
2009
Page 23 of 28
Logged Power Datël.with . Dav/Nightlndicatioli - Photo.çontroled circuit
- - Switched Circuit
0.5
0.4
Q.3
~"'
o
;f~'"'""'"~Q:
Graph :3 Logged data, 24-Ílm.ir basis
Table 16 OS Energy Use Data Workday and by 24-hol.r Period (March 14,20(9)
8AM-5PM Basis
Photocontrolled S'
Circuit C"
0.87 1.7
651
68
583
89.5%
The total energy used by the lighting system on a 24-hour basis during the study period was 451 kWh. Of
this, only 68 kWh was used during working hours and 384 kWh was used after working hours. Over the
study period and on a 24-hour basis, the total energy use logged for the photocontrolled circuit was 317
kWh and the standard wall switch lighting circuit was just 134 kWh.
Measurement and
of
of
#-
Table 11- Building 05 Estimated Energy Savings Due to Commissioning During the Monitoring Period
4.5.2.3 Estimated Annual Energy Savings
This analysis was conducted based upon the 9-hour workday analysis period.
Table 1B 05 Annual Energy Savings in Area
0.87
2,036
246
1,790
88%
0.41
Anual energy saving would be approximately 1,790 kWh per year durg daylight hours with the system
operating as installed. However, if all hour (including summer nights) were considered the savings
would be less. Graph 3 reveals excessive nighttime energy use durg three nights. It appears as though
users forgot to switch off the photocontrolled circuit when they were done working on these days. The
sun was stil up at the end of normal working hours and the photocontrolled circuit was stil switched off,
as it should have been. However, it was the daylight harvesting that had turned the lights off, but the wall
switch was stil on. After the sun set, long after normal work hours, the photocontrols appropriately
switched the lights back on due to the lack of daylight available. The lights then remained on all night.
The lights then switched offby the photocontrol in the morning before workers returned. Therefore, it
seems the error went unoticed for days on end. During the monitoring period, it was found that 29 out of
37 nights (78%) the lights were left on. This nighttime lighting use would occur for approximately 10
hours per night for approximately six months of the year due to after workday sunset times when the
control problem could go unnoticed. Using 78% of the nights over a six-month periods and an average of
10 hours per night of unintended consumption, there would be approximately i 260 hours of unintended
nighttime energy use. This results in approximately 1,096 kWh, thus reducing photocontrol system
savings to 694 kWh per year for the circuit monitored in the study area.
Measurement and Verifìcatkm of
of Lab~Boíse #
This problem could easily be solved with improved design. Incorporating some tye of occupancy sensor
and/or an automatic nighttime sweep would solve the problem. In this specific project a $75 dollar
industrial timer was used to control the exterior building lighting. That same type of timer could be
incorporated into the photocontrol circuit. Another option would be to incorporate a small LED indicator
light to alert occupants that the lighting system is stil on even though the lights are switched off due to
daylight harvesting. This option was in fact recommended for this project but was never followed up on,
or related to the proper people (Norfeet Photo Control Incentive Letter-8/8/07). Another option would be
an occupancy sensor, which could sweep lights off when occupants are not present. Finally, a momenta
switch could be used instead of a relay switch to tum the lights on, such that the lights would not come
back on automatically as daylight tapers off at the end of the day.
Measurement and Verification of
Design Lab~Boíse
2009
Page 26 of 28
The savings due to photocontrols for the ten circuits monitored at five buildings for the regular
operating hours during the monitoring periods ranged from 0-89.5% with an average of 51% savings.
The estimated annual energy savings due to photocontrols during regular operating hours ranged from
0-88% with an average 26.9%, while the estimated savings per square foot per year range from 0-1.26
kWh/SF*YR. Five circuits monitored had daylight from sidelighting only while five circuits had daylight
from toplighting of some type. While this is a small sample, the energy savings in spaces with a
toplighting component were generally higher than those with sidelighting only, supporting previous
studies (McHugh et aI., 2004 and Heschong et aI., 2005). Specifically, circuits with sidelighting only
produced 0-47% savings during regularly occupied hours in the monitoring period with an average of
21.8%. The figures for monitored circuits in spaces with toplighting were consistently higher ranging
from 30.7-89.5% with an average of 68.1%. Sidelit spaces were estimated to save 0-24.7% annually with
an average of 11.24% and 0-0.5 kWh/SF*YR with an average of 0.25 kWh/SF*YR. Spaces with
top lighting were estimated to save from 19.95-88% annual with an average of 42.55% and 0.45-1.26
kWh/SF*YR with an average of 0.89 kWh/SF*YR. Three circuits were logged in a manner to provide pre
and post commissioning data. During the monitoring periods, post-commissioned circuits saved 7%,
22%, and 58.8% more than the same pre-commissioned photocontrolled circuits.
When comparing energy savings data between sites it is important to consider the differences in
regularly occupied hours. This report used each building's regularly occupied hours to determine the
baseline energy consumption of the photocontrolled lighting circuits. The greater the percentage of
regularly operating hours falling during daylight hours, the greater the savings potential for
photocontrolled circuits in that building.
Realized energy savings from photocontrolled systems result from the combination of a well designed
building, well designed lighting control systems, and proper system installation, commissioning and user
operation. Errors in any of these steps can diminish savings. For example, a space with consistently low
daylight levels or one with excessive glare such that blinds are usually closed wil produce little savings
despite properly installed and commissioned photocontrol systems. However, exemplary execution in
one or more of these steps can increase the overall system robustness and improve savings. For
example, a very well daylit building can make up for improper commissioning in some cases because
photocontrol systems are more forgiving when there is abundant daylight. User operation practices can
also dramatically increase or decrease savings depending on if they understand the intention of the
systems and on the level of satisfaction with the daylighting design, electric lighting design or the
photocontrol system. Photocontrol systems should always be commissioned, users should be education
as to the intention of the design, and proper operational documentation should be provided to the
building owner or operator.
Measurement and
of
of
lab-Boise #
2009
210f
Heschong, L., Howlett, 0., McHugh, J., & Pande, A. (2005). Sidelighting Photocontrols Field
Study. NEEA and PG&E and SeE. Galasiu et al. 2007
Hirsch, J., & LBNL. (n.d.). eQUEST. Retreved July 10,2009, from
htt://www.doe2.com/equest/.
Jennings, J., Rubinstein, F. M., DiBartolomeo, D., & Blanc, S. (1999). Comparson of control
options in private offices in an advanced lighting control testbed. In Proceedings of the IESNA
1999 Annual Conference. New Orleans, LA.
McHugh, J., Abhijeet Pande, Gregg D. Ander, & Jack Melnyk. (2004). Effectiveness of
Photocontrols with Skylighting. IESNA Annual Conference Proceedings, 13(New York), 1-18.
Moore, T., Carter, D. J., & Slater, A. i. (2003). Long-term patterns of use of occupant controlled
office lighting. Lighting Research and Technology, 35(1),43-57.
Pigg, S., Eilers, M., & Reed, J. (1996). Behavioral Aspects of Lighting and Occupancy Sensors
in Private Offices: A Case Study ofa University Office Building. In ACEEE Summer Study on
Energy Effciency in Buildings (pp. 8.161-8.171).
Reinhart, C. F., & Voss, K. (2003). Monitoring manual control of electrc lighting and blinds.
Lighting Research and Technology, 35(3), 243-258.
Measurement and Verification of Photocontro!s; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009of Desìgn Lab-Boise # Page 28 of 28
MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION
OF ENERGY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
1:oe-
eli:
Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
-
cau--c.cu
eII-
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Authors:
Acker, B.
Van Den Wymelenberg, K.
INTEGRATED DESIGN LAB
b 0 i s e
March 2, 2010
Date
20090205-04
Report No.
COLLEGE of ART and ARCIDCT
of Architecture & Interior Design
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 1 of31
Prepared By:
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise
108 N 6th St. Boise ID 83704 USA
ww.uidaho.edu/idl
Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Director
Brad Acker
Project Manager
1- Brad Acker
2- Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Authors
C09410-P03
Contract No.
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Billie Jo McWinn
Project Manager
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored
by Idaho Power Company. It does not necessarily
represent the views of Idaho Power Company. or its
employees. Idaho Power Company, its employees,
contractors and subcontractors make no warrant, express
or implied, and assume no legal liability for the
information in this report; nor does any part represent
that the uses of this information wil not infrnge upon
privately owned rights. This report has not been approved
or disapproved by Idaho Power Company nor has Idaho
Power Company passed upon the accuracy or adequacy
of the information in this report.
Please cite this report as follows:
Acker, 8., Van Den Wymelenberg, K., 2010. Measurement and Verifcation of Energy
Management Systems; Technical Report 20090205-04, Integrated Design Lab, University of
Idaho, Boise, ID.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 2 of31
This page left intentionally blank.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 3 of31
! BACKGROUND .....................................................................................................................5
1.1 LITERATURE REVIEW .........................................................................................................................................6
1.1.1 EMS AND HV AC SYSTEM CONTROL................................................................................... 6
i .1.2 EMS AND LIGHTING SYSTEM CONTROL .............................................................................. 8
1.1.2.1 Occupancy Sensors and Lighting Control ....................................................................... 8
1.1.2.2 Daylight Harvesting Lighting Control............................................................................. 8
1.1.3 OTHER BENEFITS OF EMS.....................................................................................................9
1.1.4 BASELINE ENERGY USE DATA................................. ............................................................9
l METHODS ............................................................................................................................... .10
2.1 SITE SELECTION ................................................................................................................................................ 14
~ SUMMARIZED RES.ULTS ..................................................................................................14
4 DETAILED RESUL TS......................................................................................................... is
4.1 BUILDING 01 - OFFICE ...................................................................................................................................... 15
4.1.1 STUDY AREA......................................................................................................................15
4.1.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................16
4.2 BUILDING 02 - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ............................................................................................................19
4.2.1 STUDY AREA......................................................................................................................19
4.2.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................20
4.2.3 DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................20
4.3 BUILDING 06 - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ............................................................................................................ 21
4.3.1 STUDY AREA......................................................................................................................21
4.3.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................21
4.3.3 DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................22
4.4 BUILDING 1 O-OFFCE ......................................................................................................................................- 23
4.4. i STUY AREA......................................................................................................................23
4.4.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................24
4.4.3 DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................28
~ DISCUSSION ..................................................................................,........................................29
~ REFERENCES .........................................,.............................................................................30
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 4 of31
Energy management systems (EMS) can take many different forms but most systems control
HVAC equipment and lighting systems. Some systems are installed to control several aspects of
a building including lighting and HV AC set points and schedules while other systems are
installed with stand alone control of single systems (for example lighting only). EMS can help in
reducing energy use, improve thermal comfort and indoor air quality, while at the same time
lowering maintenance costs (Piette et aI, 2001). EMS control of HV AC systems often couple
differing temperature setpoints with multiple schedules and occupancy sensors, and provide "soft
starts" for equipment or systems that slowly ramp toward comfort parameters to avoid energy
spikes and reduce equipment ware. Used with lighting systems EMS often control schedules,
lighting levels and intedace with occupancy and daylight photocontrol systems. A complete list
of all control parameters is not possible because different buildings have different programs, user
needs, and pedormance criteria. Advancements in computing technologies, sensors, and the
industr trend toward open source program languages have allowed EMS to evolve in order to
meet a wide range of customer needs.
The role that the EMS plays within the building is in large part dependent upon building
operators and institutional goals for, and commitment to, energy and comfort pedormance
criteria. Some building operators use EMS as an operational tool to enhance traditional
equipment, providing alars when maintenance is needed, and to schedule equipment use. The
use of EMS often times does not go beyond this level of implementation. Systems that track total
building energy use and disaggregated end use by sub-system are often referred to as Energy
Information Systems (EIS). Advanced building operators capture this energy use information for
benchmarking and continuous improvement purposes. In general, as awareness regarding
energy use in buildings increases, building operators and owners are becoming more
sophisticated in their use of this information and how it can be used to reach company energy
goals, however additional research, and subsequent trining and education is required in order
for EMS to realize a greater proportion of its potentiaL.
Determining the energy savings potential or the realized energy savings of EMS installations is
incredibly diffcult. Essentially, EMS is a tool that allows building operators and in some cases,
building occupants, to balance and prioritize occupant comfort, energy savings, and equipment
maintenance routines. When EMS is utilized effectively it can increase user comfort, increase
energy savings, prolong equipment life, help to properly schedule maintenance, and save
facilities staff time when troubleshooting. However, determining the energy savings of an EMS
in a unitized fashion would require an extremely large sample size. This paper proposes a
method for estimating energy savings associated with EMS and reports on the results of applying
the method to four case study buildings in Idaho.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 50f31
Savings associated with EMS controls can be confounded with savings associated with other
energy effciency measures (EEM) such as economizer, demand control ventilation, daylight
harvesting systems and occupancy sensors. However, integrtion with an EMS is likely to
increase the effectiveness of standalone technologies by improving overall system integration,
increasing the building operators ability to control the hardware, or the access provided to
building users to practice individual control. Unfortnately, few studies were found that
identified the incremental savings attributable to EMS integration and extension of the individual
technologies as separate from savings associated with otherwise stand alone EEMs. Therefore,
this literature review briefly highlights savings from studies that investigated EMS explicitly and
other relevant studies that examined technologies commonly associated with EMS such as
economizers, daylight harvesting, and occupancy sensors.
EMS and related monitoring softare are developing and expanding. EMS are often used to
control specific pieces of building equipment. Another related softare tool, referred to as
Energy Information Systems (EIS) (Granderson et aI, 2009), are focused on building energy use
and sub-systems analysis with the goal of maintaining and improving building energy
performance. Oftentimes, EIS also track equivalent carbon dioxide emissions associated with
the energy used. As EMS and EIS evolve and become more complex, their similarties increase.
These systems are increasingly common in larger building and across ownership enterprises.
Unfortnately, many EMS lack memory storage capacity and often do not capture trend log data
(Piette, 2003), rather the real time data is used to control systems but the input signals are not
recorded. In fact, trend logs are often established by third part contractors due to the complex
nature and high level of software experience needed for programming and it is rather common
that building operators do not fully understand the capabilities of their controls systems or know
how to interpret the information available. Proper training of personnel is key to energy savings
and building performance. It is recommended practice that ongoing education of operators be
maintained as to the design intent of control systems and how the EMS should be used to
monitor specific systems. (Hatley et aI., 2005).
Nonetheless, EMS have been shown to be useful in assisting energy managers or building
operators to improve building system performance. A study conducted in the San Francisco Bay
area (Piette et aI, 2001) suggests that trendlog data from EMS were the key to helping building
operators understand equipment functionality and improve building performance. In addition,
increased energy savings can be realized by improving the capability of data storage and
sampling interval time steps beyond that of which many EMS are capable. Piette et al (2001)
recommended several improvements and many of these, such as interactive graphics and remote
Internet access, are now standard in most EMS packages. Building operators also found value in
having data on actual energy use disaggregated by end use such as fans, chilers, plug loads and
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 6 of 31
lighting loads. End use data is helpful in assessing equipment performance and monitoring
degradation as well as prioritizing areas for continuous improvement.
The ability of an EMS to control scheduling such that equipment is ruing only when necessary
and at the correct rate is of paramount importance. According to Hatley et aL. (2005),
scheduling features of an EMS can save at least 15% of total energy costs. The use of an air-side
economizer is also a widely used function of an EMS. Hatley et aL. (2005) reported cooling
energy savings, depending on economizer control setting and climate zone, of 15-50%. Recently,
Guo et aL. (2010) published a climate zone specific study on temperature setback/setup for
heating/cooling energy savings. Their results suggest that the full benefit of nighttime
setback/setup setpoints is often not realized. Operators did not know what temperature
setbacks/setups to use for unoccupied hours and when access is given occupants often overrde
setpoints. This study utilized energy simulation softare to determine optimum heating and
cooling setback/setup temperatures based on climate zones and building constrctions types. The
building modeled was described as a double corrdor classroom building. Energy models were
validated against Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) data. The
HV AC systems were RTUs with gas heat, electrc cooling, and no economizer use. Table 1
shows recommended setback/setup temperatures and Table 2 shows modeled energy savings
compared to modeled baseline data. In addition to energy savings in standard unoccupied hours
(nighttime), energy savings are also provided by the use to occupancy sensors on HVAC
equipment. These sensors can force equipment to use unoccupied setpoints during normal
occupied hours. Guo et aL. (2010) states that setback/setup savings are related primarily to the
amount of time in the setback/setup mode. Occupancy sensors are a good way to increase these
hours during times of low occupancy inside the normal set of occupied hours. No data could be
found that quantifies how much energy could be saved with occupancy sensors controllng
HV AC equipment.
Coolin
Heatin
ASHRAE-
Occu ied
75
70
Massive BId.
Unoccu ied
85
51
Metal Bld-
Unoccu ied
87
48
Savings Massive BId.Metal Bld-
from Savings Savings
Baseline
3.34 50%35%
2.56 29%40%
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofldaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 7of31
The ability to control heating equipment based on outdoor temperature can help to better match
building loads to equipment capacity. Without automatic control, building operators are often
required to adjust and stage boilers on a daily basis. This can be labor intensive and requires a
great deal of operator experience. In one case study, Waltz (2000) found a 50% difference in
heating energy use from one operator to another. Control equipment manufactuers (tekmar,
2008) have reported savings of 5-30% with the use of outdoor temperatue reset controls. One
study conducted in Minnesota (Hewett, 1984) on a residential apartment complex reported a 13%
savings in heating energy due to outdoor temperatue control.
1.1.2.1 Occupancy Sensors and Lighting Control
There have been relatively few examinations of the energy savings and user response to
occupancy sensors. However, the research available suggests general user acceptance and
consistent energy savings of 15-20% from the use of occupancy sensors. (Pigg 1996, Jennings
1999) One study showed savings as high as 46% (Maniccia 1999). There are conflcting data as
to the user behavior implications in the presence of occupancy sensors but energy savings persist
in spite of some reported negative behavior modifications (Pigg 1996, Jennings 1999). The
percentage of time when spaces are occupied plays a role in the prediction or evaluation of
energy savings from any lighting control system, but perhaps most significantly occupancy
sensors. Field studies of private offices have shown rèlatively low occupancy ratios of roughly
50% (OpdaI1995, Love 1998, Jennings 1999, Maniccia 1999).
1.1.2.2 Daylight Harvesting Lighting Control
Pigg et al. (1996) reported findings from a study of twelve private offces in a university business
building in Wisconsin and found that only half of the rooms showed any savings due to
automatic dimming over the II-month monitoring period. No specific savings data were offered
for the other rooms and it was noted that all twelve rooms were south facing and several had
blinds closed all of the time. Resulting from a seven-month fièld study in a large federal office
building, Jennings et al. (1999) found that automatic dimming saved on average 29% of the
lighting energy, however no predicted savings were offered. McHugh et al. (2004) reported on a
field study of 32 spaces with skylights and daylight sensing controls and assessed how much
energy was actually saved compared to the savings predicted from eQuest (Hirsch & LBNL,
n.d.) energy simulations. Very high realized savings ratios were reported and mean savings was
98% (range 25%-156%). If one low outlier was eliminated all locations saved more than 60%.
A follow-up study in 123 sidelit spaces found realized savings ratios to be very low (Heschong,
Howlett, McHugh, & Pande, 2005). Half (52%) of the 123 spaces saved zero energy. The half
(48%) that saved some energy saved only 53% of what was predicted for a mean realized savings
ratio of 23%. Galasiu et al. (2007) reported on a yearlong field study of 86 offce workstations in
a single building and found that automatic dimming accounted for 20% lighting energy savings.
Finally, in some cases, daylight sensing lighting controls actually resulted in increased energy
use (Reinhart & Vos, 2003; .Moore et aI., 2003) due to the increased ballast voltage required of
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 8 of 31
dimming ballasts or because of a combination of improper design, commissioning or user
operation.
Many aspects of EMS do not directly save energy via control, but indirectly via indication of
fault states in equipment and parameters such as filter or discharge air temperature alarms. Early
correction of these problems can save energy assuming the problem would have taken longer to
detect otherwise. Many such aspects of EMS save not only energy, but also other 'hard' costs
through reduced labor time spent troubleshooting, and reduced equipment replacement expenses
by catching problems before irreversible equipment damage is done. Additionally, a 2001 study
(Piette et al) indicated that operators that used EMS to track and monitor equipment parameters
saved 20% in facilities staff labor hours and developed a better understanding of the HV AC
systems in their building. These same operators often used the stored data to perform
"continuous commissioning" of equipment and experienced extended equipment life.
Furermore, staff from a central location can remotely monitor several buildings in disparate
locations. This can save travel time and increasing equipment monitoring activity. These
benefits and the associated energy savings are nearly impossible to quantify but should not be
ignored. Therefore, the estimates made by this report should be considered conservative in
nature.
According to 2003 CBECS data, the average size of a building with an EMS is 62,000 SF and
uses 114 kBtuSF*yr. Other relevant CBECS data are presented in Table 3 below. These data
suggest that the general building in the Mountain West and climate zone 5 uses 18% more
energy than the tyical office building in the U.S. and 32% more energy than the tyical school
in the U.S., in part due to the more extreme climate. Cooling energy is a lower percentage of
total energy use in climate zone 5 and heating energy is a similar percentage of the total energy
for schools but offces show 7.7% more heating energy than tyical U.S. buildings. These data
support the general methods outlined in the next section.
Mountain
West, climate 112 52.5 (46.8%)7 (6.25%)59.7 (53.3%)42.9 (38.3%)
zone 5
Offce, all in 91.7 58.9 (64.2%)8.3 (9%)32.8 (35.7%)28.1 (30.6%)U.S.
School, all in 75.7 37.6 (49.6%)7.5 (9.9%)38.1 (50.3%)29.5 (38.9%)U.S.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 9 of31
The scope of this evaluation is to determine energy savings, not from high efficiency equipment
but from the ability of users and building owners to interface, through an EMS, with this
equipment in order to fine tune building performance and optimize energy savings. Site visits
were performed at least twice to each building in the study. Interviews were performed with
building maintenance staff to determine the control strategy for the EMS system and to
determine the level of knowledge the operator(s) have with the system. The level of EMS use
and operators' knowledge of the system were discerned through both the building tours and the
building operator interviews. System setup parameters were viewed and screen shots were
captured to document EMS settings. Facilities were toured to ascertain the systems being
controlled. The vast array of parameters controlled made finding exact energy savings from each
control point an extremely difficult task. Additionally, many aspects of EMS do not directly
save energy via control, but indirectly via indication of fault states in equipment and parameters
such as fiter or discharge air temperature alarms. Early correction of these problems can be
considered to save energy if the problem would have taken longer to detect otherwise. Some
savings were impossible to estimate given the scope and duration of this study.
In this investigation CBECS 2003 national end use average data were used to parse out the
dis aggregated (heating, lighting, cooling etc) energy use of the buildings studied based upon
actual EUI data from each site. When possible, significant EEMs such as economizer and
lighting system energy savings were logged and reported in an effort to increase the reliability of
the EMS energy savings data presented. In addition to logged data, published savings data for
specific technologies were used to report on EEMs associated with the EMS that were not
explicitly logged.
Table 4 below shows savings documented by elements associated with EMS as found in the
literature review. These data were used to determine energy savings for each measure found in
each of the buildings investigated. Data from Guo et aL. (2010) was further broken down and
curve fits established so that specific setback/setup temperatures could be associated with percent
savings for heating and cooling energy.
Optimum start/stop
Boiler savin V s. human control Waltz, 2000, Hewett, 1984,
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 10 of31
tekmar, 2008)
Supply air temp. reset V A V 8%-(Cho et aL. ,2009)
Economizer 15-50%(Hatley et aL. 2005)
Occupancy sensors on HV AC --(Piette et aI, 2001)equipment
Better understanding of controls --(Piette et aI, 2001)
20% reduction in Labor --(piette et aI, 2001)
Better occupant comfort --(piette et aI, 2001)
Graph i Heating setback energy savings (Guo (;t 31.,2010)I----~---
I Heating Setback Energy Saving
I 5096 Climate Zone 58 (Guo et al. , 2010)
4596
i 409
1 3596ti
£i 3096u 2596c~ 209
¡ 1596
~ 1096
596
09
..----_.--------------:--¿:~
.
o 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
SebllTempentur IFI
- Massive Constructon ----Metal Constructon ------~
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 11 of 31
. s (Guo et at ,
Cooling Setup Energy Saving
Climate Zone 58 (Guo et al. , 2010)
609 --././ ......,. .-----
~ 509c
i i 409
~ 309if
~ 209
§ 109
".",
09
o 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Setup Temperaure IF)
-MassiveConstructon ----Metal Construction
Using these data, an example based on the tyical Mountain West (climate zone 5 ) building in
the 2003 CBECS data set shown in Table 3 is given. This example is used to demonstrate the
estimation portion of the methodology used in all buildings investigated. It is also useful as a
generic point of reference for the savings potential of buildings with an EMS in climate zone 5.
The example building has an EUI of 112 kBtu/SF*yr, is 50,000 SF and is assumed to incorporate
all EEMs outlined in Table 4. Based upon CBECS data, a tyicllighting load of21 kBtuSF*yr
was assumed to be controlled by occupancy sensors. The heating setback temperature is 15 of
below setpoint and the cooling setup temperature is 10°F above setpoint. The building has 50
kW of fan energy and because it is a thermally massive building the operator is able to set an
"optimum stop" time for unoccupied mode as 1 hour before the close of business. The building
has a V A V system with supply air temperature reset based on V A V box damper positions. The
air handler uses an economizer mode and the hot water boiler capacity is controlled based on
actual outdoor air temperature.
.Savings from lighting controls: Based upon our literature review, savings due to
occupancy sensors were assumed to be 15% (Pigg, 1996). For this example, we wil
assume occupancy sensors control 25% of the lighting load. This means that 5.25
kBtuSF*yr of lighting is controlled for a savings of 0.79 kBTU/SF*yr.
.Savings from setback/setup: Using Graph 1, a 15 of setback results in 28% heating
energy savings or 12 kBtuSF*yr. Using Graph 2, a 10 of setup results in 47% cooling
energy savings or 3.3 kBtu/SF*yr.
.Savingsfrom Optimum start/stop: Knowing the building has 50 kW of fan energy and the
operator moved the building into unoccupied mode 1 hour early each workday, and
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 12 of31
assuming 255 work days in a work year, savings of 12,750 kWh or 0.87 kBtuSF*yr
would result.
· Boiler savings from actual outdoor temperature vs. human control: Our literature review
suggests that a wide range of savings (from 5-50%) of heating energy is possible. We wil
use a rather conservative figure of 15% of heating energy savings due to outdoor reset
control based upon a subset of our literatue review (Waltz, 2000, tekmar, 2008, Hewett,
1984). Heating energy from Table 3 is 42.9 kBtuSF*yr, 15% of this is 6.4 kBtu/SF*yr.
· Saving from VA V temperature rest: Cooling energy from Table 3 is 7 kBtuSF*yr, Table
4 shows 8% saving from this measure resulting in 0.56 kBtuSF*yr savings.
· Economizer savings: Research has show economizer savings in the range of 15-50% for
cooling energy depending on building types, climate zones, and system settings. The
most conservative value of 15% energy savings wil be used for this example. Therefore,
15% of 7 kBtuSF*yr results in 1.05 kBtuSF*yr saved.
Table 5 below shows a summary of the savings just outlined. Many benefits associated with
EMS are not generalized here for the reasons already discussed.
mmiritain west cUm.ate zone 5 EMS eneruv savin's
Lighting (occupancy 0.79 (Pigg, 1996)sensors
Scheduling 3.3 12 (Guo et aL. ,2010)setback/set u
o timum StartSto 0.87 Calculated
Boiler Control, outdoor 6.4 (Waltz, 2000, Hewett,
reset 1984, tekmar, 2008
Supply air temp. reset 0.56 (Cho et aL. , 2009)VAV
Economizer 1.05
Occupancy sensors on
(Piette et aI, 2001)HV AC e ui ment
Better understanding
(Piette et aI, 2001)of controls
20% reduction in
(Piette et aI, 2001)Labor
Better occupant
(Piette et aI, 2001)comfort
Total Savin s 6.57 18.4
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 13 of31
Four buildings were selected for monitoring from Idaho Power Company's list of buildings that
earned EMS incentives.
01 Offce 68,000 Central computer Chubbuck, ID
based HV AC, lighting
control anels
02 Elementary School 65,000 Central computer Nampa, ID
based HVAC
06 Elementary School 63,400 Central computer Kuna, ID
based HVAC
10 Office 15,750 Computer based Meridian
lighting, unit
controlled HV AC
EMS have the ability to save large amounts of energy, labor and equipment costs for building
owners. However, these savings will only be realized if the owner is committed to continuous
improvement and hires trained building operators that understand the capabilities and limitations
of the softare. There is also a commitment needed on the part of the operators to expand their
knowledge with regards to direct digital control systems and understanding of the intended
control sequences. These systems allow operators to go beyond performing routine maintenance
and incident response (trouble shooting) toward a powerfl role in the organization with the
ability to monitor enterprise energy use and save substantial amounts of energy and money. The
position description of building operators must evolve to include not only skils related to
equipment maintenance but also technical knowledge of control systems, computer literacy and
perhaps most importantly, a desire to seek continuous improvement.
Table 7 below shows summary results of energy saving found in this study. Detailed explanation
of these numbers can be found in Section 4 and the methods were explained in Section 2.
However, it is important to understand these numbers within the appropriate context. First, these
are conservative in nature since many of the potential savings associated with EMS are
impossible to quantify without longitudinal field studies on a large sample of buildings. For
example savings associated with early fault detection are not represented here. Second, these
savings do not attempt to identify the savings associated only with EMS. That is, the savings
values are built up by including measured and published data for technologies that are integrted
through an EMS system. The actual technologies for each site were explicitly considered.
However, given the scope of this study, it was impossible to determine the incremental
improvement offered by EMS systems separate from the savings associated with the associated
energy effcient technologies.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 14 of31
Table 7 Results summary chart and 0 cratm' knowlcd"c
01 Office 68,000 93.25 8.3 12.91 High
02
Elementary 65,000 58.4 5.15 4.65 Low
School
06
Elementary 63,400 57.58 8.06 4.4 Medium
School
10 Offce 15,750 Not available 5.09 Medium
In Table 7, a subjective qualification is given for operator knowledge and use of the EMS. This
knowledge/use level was based on interviews with the operator(s) and features that are present in
the EMS as found during site visits. The facilty that scored highest had an institutional desire to
save energy through the use of the EMS. Energy use was tracked either in the EMS or externally
via a spreadsheet. In the case of the low-medium scores, facilties used the EMS as a
maintenance tool and did not outwardly display an institutional desire to save energy with this
tool. User knowledge was limited as was funding to provide operator training. These facilities
are in danger of having their EMS degrade as untrained operators change settings, ignore alarms
and bypass controls. In one case, Building 10, the separately controlled lighting system was
extremely effective but a value engineering decision was made in the design process that
rendered the HV AC side of the EMS system ineffective.
This office building is located in Chubbuck, ID. The building totals 68,000 SF and is four stories
tall.
Systems Controlled:
This facility uses an underfoor air distrbution (UFAD) system with heating provide by hydronic
boilers and cooling provided through roof top air handlers with direct expansion (DX) cooling.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 15 of31
Lighting is controlled by a daylight sensing photocontrol system with lighting schedules. Each
floor has its own lighting control paneL. This facility uses a central EMS system for HV AC
related controls and a control panel on each floor for lighting controls.
Table 8 below shows summary savings for this site. Further descriptions are given in the rest of
this section.
Lighting (photo 1.25 Measurementcontrol
Lighting (occupancy .22 (Pigg 1996)sensor
Scheduling 4 6.48 (Guo et al. ,2010)setback/set u
Optimum startstop 0.91 Calculated(fan ener
Boiler saving from 6.43 (Waltz, 2000) human control
Supply air temp. reset 0.67 (Cho et al. , 2009)VAV (coolin ener
Economizer 1.25
Occupancy sensors on
(Piette et aI, 2001)HV AC e ui ment
Better understanding
(Piette et aI, 2001)of controls
20% reduction in
(Piette et aI, 2001)Labor
Better occupant
(Piette et aI, 2001)comfort
Total Savin s 8.3 12.91
HV AC Controls:
The building systems are set on a "soft start" so as to warm up at 7 :00 AM, one hour before
normal business hours, and enters unoccupied hours at 6:00 PM, one hour before the close of
normal business. The morning soft start saves electrc demand charges by warming and cooling
the building slowly so energy peaks are not as dramatic. Allowing the building to float for one
hour before the close of business saves fan and heating/cooling energy by using the thermal
energy stored in the building. This is often called "Optimum Start/Stop". Calculating the energy
savings in heating and cooling would require energy modeling, however, the fan energy savings
can be estimated. The building uses a total of95 horsepower (71 kW) in supply fan power.
Exhaust fans were ignored because they do not run all the time. Ifwe assume 255 days in a
typical work year, this would result in 18,105 kWh of savings or 0.91 kBtuSF*yr. The
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 16 of31
scheduling and soft star aspects are a direct result of functionally enabled by the EMS and the
decision to place the entire building into unoccupied mode one hour early is due to an educated
and energy concise building operator. It should be noted that this practice saves energy but can
compromise indoor air quality if excessive "floating" is allowed.
The EMS provides energy and labor savings through automatic control or the boilers. Boilers are
disabled when OAT reaches 65°F. Without an EMS the building operators would manually stage
boilers on a daily basis. Given that building operators are often concerned primarily with
occupant comfort, boilers tend to remain on longer than necessary when manually staged. This
substantial labor penalty is removed with EMS control and operator labor hours are freed for
other activities. This study estimates a 15% heating energy savings from this functionality.
This building has two boilers and boiler pumps. The EMS system switches primary boiler and
pump system each month for equal system usage. The boiler heating water setpoints are
responsive to outdoor air temperatue. Setpoints are 150°F supply water at OAT below 65°P and
180°F at OAT below O°F. This arrangement allows boiler output to better match building load,
which in turn allows pumps and dampers to operate at near optimum settings, providing better
control and increased energy efficiency. EMS alarms are provided for pump status, and supply
and return water temperature. This allows for early fault detection and prevention of long periods
of sub-optimal operation. Figure 1 below shows a screen shot of the boiler loop and control
settings.
Graphics View
ICCU Main Menu
ICCU 1 sf Floor
ICCU 2nd Floor
ICCU 3rd Floor
ICCU 4th Floor
RoofTop Unit RTU1
RoofTop Unit RTU2
RoofTop Unit RTU3
Exhaust Fans
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 17 of31
Air-Handling Units (AHU) and V A V system:
Alarms are provided though the EMS system for freeze protection of DX coils, smoke control,
and high static pressure of the duct system. Freeze protection can save equipment from damage
and reduce fan energy needed to overcome the resistance of clogged coils. Smoke control
provides an additional life safety feature by not providing additional oxygen to a fire before the
main fire control system has detected the fire and has shut the system down. High static pressure
in a duct system can result from several causes such as clogged filters or stuck dampers.
Excessive duct pressure can often go unnoticed by operators or occupants resulting in excessive
fan energy for long periods of time. Supply air pressurization information is provided on the
EMS user interface to ilustrate pressure drop across filter banks and high limit alar setpoints
are provided. Labor and material costs can be reduced by allowing operators to change filters at
the exact time needed instead of with a routine preventative maintenance program. Energy
savings associated with proper duct static pressure can be significant. The thee RTUs on this
building have a total connect load of 167 Amps, 112 (67%) of which is supply fan energy. These
saving are difficult to quantify in a field study, however as an example, the three RTUs on this
sited each supply 28,000 cfm of supply air. If dirt or clogged filters increase the static pressure
drop by 1 inch of water column, this would increase fan power by 5 kW for just one RTU. If this
went unnoticed one week, extra energy use would be 200 kWh, one month would be 1,200 kWh
Supply air set points are controlled by the EMS with regard to heating and cooling loads, space
by space. When AHU fans reach 100% discharge the supply air temperature for cooling wil be
setback from 62°F to 58°F. Also ifthe supply fan reaches 50% of its maximum output the
discharge air temperature wil be setup from 62°F to 66°F. This feature of the EMS system has
the potential to increase occupant comfort during periods of high internal heat gains by lowering
supply air temperatures and increasing control capability of the zone's variable air volume
(V A V) boxes. During periods of low internal loads this feature reduces fan and cooling energy
by increasing supply air temperature set points. In Table 8 this feature is referred to as "Supply
air temperature reset V A V".
The V A V terminal units are controlled by room thermostats and networked with the EMS. The
EMS reports setpoints, current damper positions, room temperatures, occupied/unoccupied
status, and heating valve positions. Heating is accomplished via coils in V A V terminal units.
V A V dampers move to a minimum position on a call for heat, effectively reducing reheat energy
during shoulder seasons. In unoccupied mode, V A V fans cycle only on heating/cooling calls in
order to save fan energy. Figure 2 below shows zone temperatues for the first floor of the
building. Each temperature box is associated with one V A V box to control that zone.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 18 of31
Graphics View
.. ICCU Main Menu
..lliriit,ikW'ì'iEii"
.. ICCU 2nd Floor
.. ICCU 3rd Floor
.. ICCU 4th Floor
.. RoofTop Unit RTU1
.. RoofTop Unit RTU2
.. RoofTop Unit RTU3
.. RoofTop Unit RTU4
.. Hot Water Heating System
.. Exhaust Fans
Lighting Controls:
This building is designed to include daylighting and the perimeter zones are equipped with
continuous dimming systems, . facing in four orientations. Large transparent perimeter windows
provide day lighting to the offce spaces. The south façade has deep exterior louvered overhangs
and shallow interior lightshelves, while the rest of windows are not shaded except for interior
blinds. Pendant mounted direct/indirect fluorescent fixtues provide electrc ilumination. A
photocell is located on the ceiling and positioned with a field of view including the work surfaces
for each daylight zone. During the monitoring period a median energy savings of 30.5 % was
found and annual energy savings was estimated at 1.25 kBTU/SF*yr. For a detailed explanation
of the methods involved see UI-IDL Technical Report 20090205-01.
This elementary school has 27 classrooms and is 68,870 SF. It opened in August 2007.
Systems Controlled:
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 19 of31
This school uses an HV AC related EMS for the entire schooL. Equipment scheduling, trend
logging and alarms are extensively used. This school has two classrooms that were fitted with
high pedormance featues. One feature of these two rooms is the automatic control of lighting
systems through the use of daylight sensing photocontrols. Air side economizers are used in all
standard classrooms.
Table 9 below shows summary energy saving for this building.
Lighting (controls
hoto
Scheduling
setback/set u
Economizer
Occupancy sensors on
HV AC e ui ment
Better understanding
of controls
20% reduction in
Labor
Better occupant
comfort
Total Savin s
1.54 Measurement
4.65 (Guo et al. ,2010)
Measurement
(Piette etal, 2001)
(Piette et aI, 2001)
(Piette et aI, 2001)
(Piette et aI, 2001)
4.65
2.16
1.45
5.15
As with any school distrct, many building must be maintained and benefits associated with
reduced trouble shooting can be significant in terms of labor savings and reduced occupant
comfort complaints. Adjusting temperature setpoints based on occupied and unoccupied time is
one of the most fundamental aspects of an EMS. From examining the EMS at this school the
cooling setup differential is 7°F and the heating setback is 13°F. These values were used along
with Graph 1 and Graph 2 to determine scheduling savings. Economizer savings were measured
in a field study. Finding can be seen in IDL Report # 20090205-02. Similarly lighting savings
details can be found in IDL Report # 20090205-01.
The level of operator knowledge ofthe EMS at this facility is low. Trends logs are set up and
modified by a controls contractor. Greater understanding of EMS functionality and equipments
control points has shown to improve operator knowledge of building functions and control
strategies (Piette et aI, 2001). The two high pedormance classrooms are much closer to the EIS
model presented in the literatue review section. If the entire school incorporated more energy
use trend log capability it would help operators understand and ultimately improve the overall
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrted Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 20 of31
energy use of the facility. EMS can put the frmework in place to save energy but it is up to the
operators to embrace and lear these systems in order to maximize energy savings.
The 63,400 ft2 elementary school utilizes a "U" shape plan that separtes the lower elementary
grades from the upper grdes by an outdoor instrctional courard area. This building is wood
frame constrction with CMU veneer and stucco exterior and features 24 general purpose
classrooms, a library, cafeteria, and separate multi purpose room.
Systems Controlled:
This school uses an HV AC related EMS for the entire schooL. Equipment scheduling, trend
logging and alarms are extensively used. Occupancy sensors in the classrooms control both
lighting and HVAC RTUs. When the sensor indicates no occupancy the RTUs are set to
unoccupied mode for heating and cooling setpoints
Table 10 below shows summary energy saving for this building.
Lighting (occupancy 0.89 (Pigg 1996)sensor
Scheduling 2.74 4.4 (Guo et al. ,2010)setback/set u
Economizer 4.43 Measurement
Occupancy sensors on
(Piette et aI, 2001)HV AC e ui ment
Better understanding
(Piette et aI, 2001)of controls
20% reduction in
(Piette et aI, 2001)Labor
Better occupant
(Piette et aI, 2001)comfort
Total Savin s 8.06 4.4
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrted Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 21 of31
As with any school distrct, many building must be maintained and labor savings associated with
reduced troubling shooting costs can be significant in both dollars and occupant comfort. The
San Francisco study (Piette et aI, 2001) showed a 20% reduction in labor due to automation of
information being provided to operators. This in turn allows operators to better serve occupants
and other operational needs. One major savings of this system is the ability of operators to
monitor building pedormance from a web-based interface. Allowing several building to be
monitored and controlled remotely. The extensive use of trend log data at this facility can
improve the understanding of control systems. It has been shown (Piette et aI, 2001) that building
operators that do not have a good understanding of control systems wil tend to overrde and
short cut controls. This better understanding of control systems results in proper control being
maintained and cascades into better occupant comfort and reduced occupant complaints (Piette et
aI, 2001).
A detailed look at economizer energy saving was pedormed for one room and the results
extrapolated to the entire schooL. During the monitoring period, it was found that the economizer
was in operation 21 hours, saving 12k Wh of energy during the monitoring period. When the
savings data for the monitored period was modeled and expanded to the entire year 549
kWh/ton*yr of savings was found. For the entire 150 tons of cooling at this school this amounts
to 4.43 kBtu/SF *yr. For more information on the economizer savings see IDL reports
20090205-02.
From examining the EMS at this school the cooling setup differential is 13°F and the heating
setback is 12°F. These values were used along with Graph 1 and Graph 2 to determine
scheduling savings.
Occupancy sensor controlled lighting has been shown to save 15% in connected lighting load
(Pigg 1996). Occupancy controlled lighting was reported to be 5.9 kBtuSF*yr, 15% of this
results in 0.89 kBtuSF*yr savings.
The level of operator knowledge of the EMS at this facility is considered to be medium based on
the desire for operators to learn more about the EMS and energy saving aspects of having good
economizer setpoints, setback temperatures and the use of occupancy sensors on HV AC
equipment. However it cannot be considered high because trends logs are set up and modified by
a controls contractor and greater operator training is needed. The school distrct has one operator
that is trained on the operations of the EMS and other operators are eager to learn more. As with
most schools, money and training time is limited. Until managers and school board offcials
realize that savings can only be maintained and improved through operator knowledge, this
system is in jeopardy of losing energy savings as the system degrades to the level of the least
knowledgeable operator. Greater understanding of EMS functionality and equipments control
points has shown to improve operator knowledge of building functions and control strtegies as
reported in the literature review. EMS can put the framework in place to save energy but it is up
to the operators to embrace and learn these systems in order to maximize energy savings and up
to managers (school board) to provide resources to accomplish this.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 22 of31
This offce building is located in Meridian, ID. The facility is 15,750 square feet of office space
with a storage facility located on-site. This report examines the energy management system for
the offce space only and not the large storage business on site. The building has a LEED Gold
certification and comprises reconfigurable offce space and common resource areas including
copy and mail centers, conference and seminar rooms, lounges, flex spaces and a retail space.
Systems Controlled:
This building was designed to provide automatic control of the lighting system and the HV AC
system. Each of these control systems stand alone and do not operate as an integrated Energy
Management System. The lighting control is accomplished with an Encelium lighting control
system. The Encelium system provides a computer desktop-based interface for lighting control
that could be accomplished from the user's desktop, from a centrl location within the building,
or from an off-site location though an Internet connection. According to the control strategy the
system is used to trm all lighting fixtues to 80% of maximum light output. Occupants also have
the ability to further dim lights if needed. Occupancy sensors and schedules control the lights in
all common areas. The HVAC system uses a rooftop unit (RTU) varable air volume (VA V)
system with under floor air distrbution (UFAD). The units are factory installed with a Direct
Digital Control (DDC) panel (internal to RTU only) which allows sensors and actuators to talk to
each other digitally. The system is also furnished with an interior wall mounted user interface
that communicates with the RTU. Some of the features of this system include: automatic supply
air reset, dirt fiter alarm, drbulb/wetbulb control of economizer operation, indoor air quality
economizer reset, seven day two event per day scheduling, 14 holiday event scheduling, and
trend logging capability.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 23 of31
Lighting (occupancy
sensor
Lighting (central
control
Economizer
Total Savin s
1.07 (Pigg 1996)
4.02 Measured
Not Available
5.09
Building managers, equipment suppliers and system designers were interviewed as to the
function, settings, operability and design intent of the two stand alone systems used to compose
the EMS. Set points on equipment interfaces of the lighting system and HV AC system were
recorded. A run time logger was installed on the supply fan to determine fan operating hours.
Energy savings of these two stand-alone systems were ascertained by carefully reviewing the
building operators' use of the systems and how the systems were configured. Savings from the
lighting system were determined by an interview and investigation process. The capabilties of
the lighting control system were investigated using product literature. The building manager was
interviewed to determine what aspects of the system were utilized and what specific control
strategies are being employed. Detailed savings information can be found in IDL Report #
20090205-01. A building layout and spreadsheet was generated to show lighting power densities
in different areas of the building, this can be seen in Figure 7.
HVAC System
The rooftop units installed are state of the art, high efficiency units. Premium-effciency motors
are used along with variable frequency drive, digital scroll compressors, and other energy
effciency features. The DDC system in each unit provides feedback on several sensor signals
used to maintain various set points internal to the RTU. However, the system does not take
advantage of several energy saving operational settings such as nighttime temperatue setbacks
and space occupancy scheduling. Upon inspection of the control sequences and heating/cooling
schedules established in the system, we did not find any temperature setbacks. We followed up,
asking building managers and equipment suppliers to confirm if there were setbacks or schedules
established. During interviews with both the equipment suppliers and building architects, a
common explanation emerged. It appears that during the design-bid-build process the bids came
back were considered too high and as a result the original DDC system, that would have been
external to the R TU, was value engineered out of the project. It is not clear at what point this
value engineering decision happened with regard to when incentive paper work was filed to IPC.
Because of the system definitions and control sequences, the largest and most fundamental
aspect of EMS, occupancy scheduling, was not in place. Economizer saving is stil present and
reported. However, current fan energy use was determined and theoretical energy savings can be
discussed.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 24 of31
Figure 5 below shows a simple representation of the EMS installed. The only communication
from building zones to the R TU is from return air temperature sensors and pressure sensors.
With these properties of the air stream, the RTU increases or decreases the air temperature and
increases or decreases the under floor pressure accordingly. Since the air stream is the only
communication path, the supply fans must remain on all of the time in order to maintain control
of zone temperatures and protect zones from overheating or overcooling. Figure 6 below shows
one possible configuration of a complete EMS.
:: hi§t~nt'd
Ro lo uni
~G
//RetumAir ,
l~:o
/§'
'!Gd'øl'.;
Open or close~-Zo air da
Zone lIrm
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205~04) Page 25 of31
6Possibie EMS
Raofto unt
, ConitiSi
Commnícatio \
Signals
\
Zonelhrm zo lldampe
Logged data of the supply fan in addition to trend log data provided by the equipment supplier
verified that the supply fan runs 24 hours a day. From Graph 3, below, it can be seen that the
supply fan was on for most of the 74 days that we logged data. The periods when the fan was off
do not appear to follow any consistent pattern and were tyically off for less than 15 minutes.
The reason for this shut off cannot be explained.
Grtiph:3 Logged supply fan state
1120.00%
1100.00%
Supply Fan State
60.00%
80.00% .
-Supply fan State
40.00%Period "yhen fan shut off
20.00%
0.00%i i
~~r;~~~çj~~i;r;~r;~r;~r;~r;r:r;~r;~
~~~~~i:~~~~~'f~'t~'f~b-\i:~"\\~"\\"'~"\'V~q,f q,\.;q,'ÇVi O)~O)\~~'V
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 26 of31
4: Logged supply fan speed
RTU-2 fan Spe
r..ll..C112.i-~~.l
Data for Graph 3 were provided by the equipment supplier (who is also the controls contractor).
This data can be used to determine energy used by the fan during unoccupied periods, when, if
an EMS was present the fan could be shut off and only cycle on for short periods of heating or
cooling. Some standard fan law equations (ASHRAE, 2008) can be used for finding fan energy
in these unoccupied hours. Using the above trend logs it can be seen that the fan runs at
approximately 75% of full speed most of the time. Ifwe assume 2,860 hours in a work year with
occupancy from 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, there are 5,900 hours unoccupied. Using fan laws this
7.5HP supply fan motor wil use 2.307 kW of energy at 75% of full speed. Ifwe take the
unoccupied hours (5,900) and multiply them by the energy use of the fan at 75% full speed, the
result equals 13,611kWh/yr (2.9 kBtuSF*yr) of energy used per year in unoccupied mode under
current control conditions for one RTU. This building has two such RTU bringing the extra fan
energy total to 27,222 kWhyr (5.8 kBtuSF*yr). This is wasted energy since the only reason the
supply fan must remain on is because the physical air temperature and pressure are the only
communication paths back to the RTU in absence of a central EMS. The value of 5.8 kBtu/SF*yr
is a reasonable starting point for theoretical energy savings that could be achieved if an EMS was
in place. A small amount of fan energy would be needed to satisfy the unoccupied heating and
cooling calls. Additional savings could be achieved though the use of nighttime temperature
setbacks and occupancy control temperatue setbacks.
Lighting System
The Encelium lighting Energy Control System (ECS) installed has many capabilities including
integrating the use of scheduling, daylight haresting, task tuning, occupancy controls, personal
control (wall switch or computer console), and demand load shedding to reduce peak demand. It
should be noted that this is not a study of actual detailed energy use of the lighting system
installed, but is a study of the estimated energy savings that can be attbuted to the strategies
actually implemented. This building has implemented scheduling, task tuing, occupancy
control, and personal control features of the Encelium system. A layout of the lighting setting as
implemented can be seen in Figure 7. Scheduling is used in common areas and occupancy is
currently set for 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The task-tuning feature is utilized by turning down the
maximum output of fixtures, in this building, rather aggressively to 72% of the maximum
possible lighting output in most spaces. Users can elect to reduce lighting furter through
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 27 of31
individual control but the maximum level is set at 72% of full output in most spaces. Occupancy
sensors are utilized in the restrooms, storage closets and electrcal/mechanical closets. Furher
energy saving is possible by occupants further turning down workspace lighting. Savings
associated with this must be documented through detailed long term data logging, which was
beyond the scope of this study. Occupancy sensor saving was estimated from published data and
reported in Figure 4.
7 10 office
Percent oflightihg Capacít UsEJ II
,....,,015 ~ OCcup.ncSensr_ti
(5 Ugtt'.Dn'!Jom 1a:m-6pm
We believe that the building operator's ability to make adjustments and modifications
themselves is key to building tuning and the energy saving capability of energy management
systems.
At this site, the realized annual energy savings, 23,495 kWh/yr (5.09 kBtuSF*yr) is attributable
to the lighting control system. The EMS for the HV AC is not considered a fully functional
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 28 of31
system because the zones do not talk to the RTUs. Economizer energy saving is present on the
HV AC side but the fudamental aspect of EMS, occupancy scheduling is not being used and
additional fan energy is used due to current setup. For this site, it is not clear whether the "value
engineering" decisions made during design stages was fully understood by the building owners
and operators. It is our hope that the analysis above wil help convince the owners to implement
an integrated EMS.
EMS systems are continually advancing as users request more functionally, computing power
increases, and the desire for building owners to captue building functionality and energy use
information increases. Piette et al. (2001) noted that operators desired a change in terminology
away from "trendlog" and toward the philosophy of "data achieving". This stil appears to be a
concern given the interviews from operators in this study. The difference of these two concepts is
the ability of systems to store large amounts of historical data and increase data sampling rates
for much of the equipment to I-minute intervals. This provides historical data to help audit
systems that would otherwise be lost as the curent practice is to overwrite old data as storage
space is needed, or in some cases not to log data at all.
Energy savings potential associated with EMS is significant. As with many control systems,
actual savings is dependent on proper installation, commissioning, and most of all, the operators'
ability maximize the system. Operators' ability to use the system is a function of both the
knowledge of the operators and the commitment of the building owners or management to invest
in the training needed. As buildings become more advanced and energy savings become more
sought after, the job fuction and skil sets of building operators must expand. Having the EMS
in place is the foundation for energy savings but it taes educated and motivated operators to
maintain and optimize savings.
The energy savings realized by EMS in this study raged from 5.09 to 8.3 kBtuSF*yr for
electrical savings and 0 to 12.9 kBtuSF*yr for gas savings. It is important to understand these
numbers within the appropriate context. First, these are conservative in nature since many of the
potential savings associated with EMS are impossible to quantify without longitudinal field
studies on a large sample of buildings. For example, early correction and early fault detection
are important benefits of EMS and this functionality can be considered to save energy if the
problems would have taken longer to detect otherwise. These savings were impossible to
estimate given the scope of this study. This is an area where additional research is
recommended. For example, savings associated with early fault detection could be investigated
through a longitudinal fied study and recording the events in a records log. These data could be
compared against the probable detection though routine maintenance schedules to determine
how much more quickly the errors were detected due to EMS and energy savings could be
attbuted to the early detection. Second, the EMS savings reported do not attemptto identify
the savings associated only with EMS. That is, the savings values are built up by including
measured and published data for specific technologies that were integrated through an EMS at
each site. A larger sample that included buildings with and without EMS, but otherwise had
similar discreet EEMs, would be required to begin to estimate the incremental improvement
attrbuted to an EMS alone.
Measurement and Verificatìon of Energy Management Systems;. Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 29 of31
Acker, B., Van Den Wymelenberg, K., 2010. Measurement and Verifcation of Day lighting
Photocontrols; Technical Report 20090205-01, Integrated Design Lab, University ofIdaho,
Boise,ID.
Acker, B., Van Den Wymelenberg, K., 2010. Measurement and Verifcation of Roof Top Units
with Economizers; Technical Report 20090205-02, Integrated Design Lab, University ofIdaho,
Boise,ID.
ASHRAE Handbook, HV AC Systems and Equipment. (2008). Atlanta, GA: American Society
of Heating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.
CBECS. (2003). U.S. Energy Information Administration Independent Statistics Analysis.
Retreved 10/15/2009 from http://ww.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs/
Cho, Young-Hum ., Liu, Mingsheng. (2009). Minimum airfow reset of single duct V A V
terminal boxes. Building and Environment 44 (2009) 1876-1885
Fisk, Wiliam J. , Seppanen, Oll. , Faulkner, David. , Huang, Joe. , (2004). Economic Benefits of
and Economizer System: Energy Saving and Reduced Sick Leave. Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory (LBNL-54475).
Galasiu AD, Newsham GR, Suvagau C, Sander DM. Energy Saving Lighting Control Systems
for Open-Plan Offces: A Field Study. Leukos. 2007;4(1):7-29.
Granderson, 1. , Piette, M.A. , Ghatikar, G. , Price, P. , (2009). Preliminary Findings from an
Analysis of Building Energy Information System Technologies. Lawrence Berkley National
Laboratory (LBNL-2224E).
Guo, Wei. , Nutter, Darin W. , (2010). Setback and setup temperature analysis for a classic
double-corrdor classroom building. Energy and Buildings 42 (2010) 189-197.
Hatley, D.D. , Meador, R.J. , Katipamula, S. , Brambley, M.R. , Wouden, CarL. , (2005). Energy
Management and Control System: Desired Capabilties and Functionality. Pacific Northwest
National Laboratory (PNNL-15074).
Heschong, L., Howlett, 0., McHugh, J., & Pande, A. (2005). Sidelighting Photocontrols Field
Study. NEEA and PG&E and SeE. Galasiu et al. 2007
Hewett, M. , Peterson, G. (1984). Measured Energy Savings from Outdoor Resets in Modern,
Hydronically Heated Apartent Buildings. Proceeding of the American Council for an Energy
Effcient Economy. VoL. C, pp. 135-152. Washington, D.C.
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 30 of31
Hirsch, J., & LBNL. (n.d.). eQUEST. Retrieved July 10,2009, from
htt://ww.doe2.com/equest/ .
Jacobs, Pete. (2003). Small HV AC System Design Guide. California Energy Commission (500-
03-082-AI2)
Jennings, J., Rubinstein, F. M., DiBartolomeo, D., & Blanc, S. (1999). Comparson of control
options in private offices in an advanced lighting control test bed. Proceedings of the IESNA
1999 Annual Conference. New Orleans, LA.
Love J. Manual switching patterns in private offces. Lighting Research and Technology.
1998;30(1 ):45-50.
Maniccia D, Rutledge B, Rea M, Morrow W. Occupant use of manual lighting controls in private
offices. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society. 1999;28(2):42-56.
McHugh, J., Abhijeet Pande, Gregg D. Ander, & Jack Melnyk. (2004). Effectiveness of
Photocontrols with Skylighting. IESNA Anual Conference Proceedings, 13(New York), 1-18.
Moore, T., Carter, D. J., & Slater, A. i. (2003). Long-term patterns of use of occupant controlled
offce lighting. Lighting Research and Technology, 35(1), 43-57.
Opdal K, Brekke B. Energy Saving in Lighting By Utilization of Daylight. In: Proceedings of the
3rd European Conference on Energy-Effcient Lighting.; :67-74.
Piette, Mary An. , Kinney, Sat Katar. , Haves, Philp. , (2001). Analysis of an information
monitoring and diagnostic system to improve building operations. Energy and Buildings 33
(2001) 783-791.
Piette, M.A. , Kinney, Sat Kartar. , Bourassa, Norman. , Kinney, Krstopher. , Shockman,
Christine. , (2003). Summary of Early Findings From a Second Generation Information
Monitoring and Diagnostic System. 11 th National Conference on Building Commissioning
(LBNL-53476)
Pigg, S., Eilers, M., & Reed, J. (1996). Behavioral Aspects of Lighting and Occupancy Sensors
in Private Offices: A Case Study of a University Offce Building. In ACEEE Summer Study on
Energy Efficiency in Buildings (pp. 8.161-8.171).
Reinhart, C. F., & Voss, K. (2003). Monitoring manual control of electrc lighting and blinds.
Lighting Research and Technology, 35(3), 243-258.
tekmar Control Systems. (2008). Outdoor Reset Controls (Brochure). Vernon, B.c. Canada.
Waltz, James P. (2000). Computerized Building Energy Simulation Handbook. Liburn, GA: The
Fairmont Press, Inc
Measurement and Verification of Energy Management Systems; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-04) Page 31 of 31
MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION
OF ROOF TOP UNITS WITH ECONOMIZERS
Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Authors:
Acker, B.
Van Den Wymelenberg, K.
INTEGRATED DESIGN LAB
b 0 ì s e
COLLEGE of ART and ARCmTECTUR
of Architecture & Interior
Measurement and VerífìcaUori of Root Units with
of Desìgn lab-Boise
~o
D.
W
0:..
cio-z:iowI-
February 20, 2010
Date
Effciency 2009
Page 1 of 24
20090205-02
Report No.
Prepared By:
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise
108 N 6th St. Boise ID 83702 USA
ww.uidaho.edu/idl
Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Director
Brad Acker
Project Manager
1- Brad Acker
2- Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Authors
C09410-P03
Contract No.
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Bilie Jo McWinn
Project Manager
DISCLAIMER .
This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by
Idaho Power Company. It does not necessarily represent the
views of Idaho Power Company or its employees. IdahoPower Company, its employees, contractors and
subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and
assume no legal liabilty for the information in this report; nor
does any part represent that the uses of this information wil
not infrnge upon privately owned rights. This report has not
been approved or disapproved by Idaho Power Company nor
has Idaho Power Company passed upon the accuracy or
adequacy of the information in this report.
Please cite this report as follows: Acker, B., Van Den Wymelenberg, K., 2010. Measurement
and Verifcation of RoofTop Units with Economizers; Technical Report 20090205-02, Integrated
Design Lab, University ofIdaho, Boise, ID.
Measurement and Verification of Root Units with
of Lab Boise
Advanced 2009
2 of 24.¡tr
This page left intentionally blank.
Measurement and Verification of Root Units with
of Design Lab-Boise (Report #
Advanced Energy Efficjency 2009
30f24
!BACKGROUND 6
1.1 LITERATURE REVIEW 7
~METHODS 8
2.1 SITE SELECTION 8
2.2 METERING AND TESTING METHODOLOGY 8
2.3 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 9
~SUMMARIZED RESULTS 9
3.1 FUNCTIONAL TESTING 9
3.2 MONITORING PERIOD ENERGY SAVINGS 10
3.3 ANNUAL ESTIMATED ENERGY SAVINGS 10
!DETAILED RESULTS 11
4.1 BUILDING 02 - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 11
4.1.1 STUDVAREA 11
4.1.2 RESULTS 12
4.1.3 DISCUSSION 14
4.2 BUILDING 03 - MANUFACTURING/OFFICE 14
4.2.1 STUDVÄREA 14
4.2.2 RESULTS 14
4.3 BUILDING 04 - OFFICE/MEDICAL 15
4.3.1 STUDVÄREA 15
4.3.2 RESULTS 15
4.3.3 DISCUSSION 16
4.4 BUILDING 06 - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 16
4.4.1 STUDVÄREA 16
4.4.2 RESULTS 17
4.4.3 DISCUSSION 18
4.5 BUILDING 07-REsTAURANT 18
4.5.1 STUDVÄREA 18
4.5.2 RESULTS 18
4.6 BUILDING 08-HIGH SCHOOL 20
4.6.1 STUDVÄREA 20
4.6.2 RESULTS 20
4.6.3 DISCUSSION 20
4.7 BUILDING 09-HIGH SCHOOL 21
4.7.1 STUDVÄREA 21
4.7.2 RESULTS 21
4.7.3 DISCUSSION 22
of Root Units with
Lab-Boise #
2009
4 of 24
2 DISCUSSION
§ REFERENCES
Measurement arid Verification of Root Units with Economizers; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009or Design lab-Boise (Report # 5 of 24
22
23
An HVAC economizer system is designed to save cooling energy by using outdoor air (OA)
instead of return air in order to avoid compressor operation, hence, cooling in economizer mode
is often referred to as 'free cooling'. The economizer system operates when there is a call for
cooling in the space and OA conditions are favorable to provide cooling to the space. Figure 1
below shows a schematic view of the different air steams and dampers in a typical economizer
system, the blue line represents the cooling coiL. In full economizer mode the OA damper are
open to the maximum position and the mixed air damper is closed. Some control systems can
also throttle the mixed air damper to provide the desired supply air temperature. When outdoor
air dampers (OAD) are set to the minimum position, they remain slightly open to meet interior
fresh air requirements and to help control envelope infitrtion by maintaining building
pressurization.
Fìgure 1 Air fìow paths with economizer system
,.. Re.. I Ri ..
~/~.:' u_-+ alr ln ii all..
Economizers can be controlled either locally at individual roof top units (R TU) or from a central
energy management system (EMS). The physical components that make up economizer systems
can be factory installed or field installed as an aftermarket energy efficiency measure. Control
strategies and setpoints are configurable and adjustable based on building owner/operator
preferences. Best practices based on climate zone may also be employed. Several control
sequences exist in order to allow the OAD to open and provide free cooling to the space. Two
common control sequences include 1) comparng outdoor air properties to a fixed value selected
on the controller and 2) to compare return airstream properties to the outdoor airstream
conditions. When return air properties are compared to OA properties it is called 'differential
control'. With either of these sequences, two different air properties are commonly monitored,
dry bulb air temperature and air enthalpy. Dry bulb air temperature is a measure taken without
concern for the water vapor content of the air. Air enthalpy is a measure of the energy content of
the air and is dependent both on dry bulb air temperatue and water vapor content of the air. This
study is concerned with the energy saving aspects of economizers in general and does not
contrast different control types or set points.
Measurement and Verification
of
Advanced 2009
6of24#
Most previous studies on economizer performance are based upon modeled data (Frisk, et. aI.,
2004), while few studies have monitored field performance data.
One study modeled a 22,000 s/f office building in Washington D.C. with 72 occupants and
found that $2,000 could be saved per year based on $0.076/kWh for electricity (Frisk, et. aI.,
2004). This study also examined the reduction of sick leave due to increased fresh air and found
these saving to be more significant than energy savings, ranging from $6000-$16,000 per year.
Energy model runs were performed with and without a temperature based economizer system.
The report did not specify the exact control system (OA dr bulb or differential control).
The New Buildings Institute (NBI, 2008) conducted an economizer study and listed for major
goals: 1) benchmark testing of economizer controls, 2) field testing of repair protocols, 3)
devising an appropriate measurement and verification (M&V) approach and 4) developing a
savings prediction methodology based on prototypical buildings. Only the first goal of
examining economizer controls has been completed to date. Their report shows that the exact
control logics of these systems are much more complex than would appear from reading
manufacturers' literature. Control points are dependent on whether OA temperature is increasing
or decreasing (direction of change) and may also be dependent on an OA temperatue being low
enough to cause a 'trigger' in the control systems, referred to in their study as 'control
hysteresis'. These laboratory findings suggest that development of a consistent testing method is
difficult due to the variability in system operations. The study also provided valuable information
about control issues with one sensor in particular. They reported that the Honeywell C7650 dr
bulb sensor presented control problems due to a large temperature deadband that resulted in
reduced hours of economizer use. This sensor can be replaced with a selectable dead band
sensor, Honeywell C7660. The NBI study (2008) reported that the problematic sensor was used
in 70% of the 223 units studied.
An additional study was managed by the New Buildings Institute and prepared by the
Architectual Energy Corporation (Jacobs, 2003). This California Energy Commission and PIER
funded study points out several common problems with HV AC systems including problems with
economizer and fan cycling. Fan cycling refers to fans turning on/off based on cooling calls
during operating hours as opposed to the code standards that require ventilation fans to remain
on during occupied hours. Theyreported that out of215 economizers investigated, 138 (64%)
were not fuctional and 82 (38%) showed fans cycling during occupied hours (Jacobs, 2003).
Fan cycling can cause control problems with sensors because they only register accurate
conditions when air is moving over them.
Measurement and Verification of Root Units with
of Design Lab-Boise Advanced Efficiency 2009
1 of 24#
Eight buildings were identified for economizer monitoring from a list provided by Idaho Power
Company of buildings that received economizer financial incentives. All buildings were newly
constrcted or new HVAC equipment was installed between 2005 and 2007.
Table 1 Site Selection
01 Office 68,000 Stairwell 4 story egress Chubbuck, ID
stair well
02 Elementa School 65,000 Classroom 944 Nam a,ID
03 Manufacture/Office 60,600 Offce 1,017 Haile, ID
04 Office/Medical 21,104 Offces 1,300 Boise, ID
06 Elementa School 63,400 Classroom 1,000 Kuna,ID
07 Restaurant 2,124 Seatin area 1,100 Jerome,ID
08 Hi h School 65,000 Classroom 800 Middleton, ID
09 Hi h School 102,000 Classroom 800 Boise, ID
This literatue review did not identify anyone consistent or standardized testing or data analysis
procedure for estimating energy savings from fuctional economizers. The International
Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IMPMVP) outlines best practices in
documenting energy saving (IPMVP, 2007) and noted future work geared toward measuring and
reporting results. Future studies and guides may provide standardized methods for this work,
however high variability in control systems and after market options wil most likely leave
detailed methods 'equipment dependent'. That said, Jacobs (2003) provided valuable
information that was applied to several units tested for functionality.
For each of the eight buildings investigated data logging was executed for at least one RTU and
functional testing of all, or a large sample ofRTUs, was conducted. Data logging procedures
necessarily varied by site and by brand ofRTU. Unique testing procedures were often necessary
for different R TU s of the same brand due to differences in their installation and the use of
aftermarket economizer packages. At some sites the building EMS was used to perform
functional testing. Equipment manufactuers, contractors and engineers were contacted to
confirm proper installation and appropriate testing procedures. Multiple trps to each site were
and Verification of Root Units with
Lab~ßoíse
often necessary to develop and confirm appropriate testing procedures. Parameters logged
included: compressor state, current and power, supply and exhaust fan state and current, outdoor
air temperature (OAT), mixed air temperatue (MAT), return air temperatue (RAT), thermostat
voltage, and space air temperature. Not all parameters were logged on every unit, and were
determined in accordance with the tye of equipment installed.
Logged data was used to determine monitoring period energy savings due to economizer
functionality. Using logged data, an estimate of annual energy savings was calculated. The
methods for each calculation are described below.
Actual hours for energy savings during the monitoring period were derived by isolating hours
during which the space called for cooling, the supply fan was on, and the compressor was off.
The hours of economizer use were multiplied by the compressor and condenser fan power in kW
to arrve at a kWh value for energy saved due to the economizer during the monitoring period.
Energy savings during the monitoring period were reported in kWh.
Next, annual estimated energy savings were derived by using third generation Typical
Meteorological Year (TMY3) data, the balance point temperature of the building, compressor
power, condenser fan power, compressor run time fractions, and the economizer high limit shut-
off setting. The TMY3 data were sorted for hours when the OA temperature was above the
building balance point and below the economizer high limit shut-off. Each hour in this range was
assigned a compressor run time fraction based on logged data. The compressor run time fractions
(in hours) were summed over the year to arrve at a total number of hours during which the
compressor would have been running had no economizer been installed. This value (in hours)
was then multiplied by the compressor and condenser fan power to arrve at energy saved in
kWh/yr. The RTU cooling capacity (in tons) was divided into the estimated annual energy
savings. This provided an annualized estimated savings expressed in kWhton*yr, a value that
can be compared and averaged across multiple RTUs and buildings.
Functional testing was carred out on all units monitored and most of the remaining RTUs on all
participant buildings. Of the 47 R TU s tested, 10 (21 %) failed the functional test. Of these, 2 (4%
Measurement and Verifcatìon of Root Units with
University of Lab-Boise (Report #
Effìcíency 2009
9 of 24
of total) failed due to jammed economizer gears and 8 (17% of total) did not respond to control
signals. The problematic sensor reported previously (C7650) was responsible for 6 of the 8
control signal failures. Overall, these results are much better than the 64% failure rate reported in
a previous study (Jacobs, 2003). However, our study examined new RTUs only, whereas the
previous study examined a wide range ofRTUs presumably with more variability in age.
Furtermore, we found 15 units (32%) that were not wired to manufactues recommendations.
This did not always result in failure durng fuctional testing but could diminish system
performance.
Savings during the monitoring period are reported in Table 2 below. In the case of Building 03,
there were no savings calculated because the RTU did not pass economizer fuctional testing.
Table 2 Monitored period energy savings
Elementary Aug. 20t -Oct
School 2Dd,2009
03 Manufactue/60,600 Aug. 13 -28 ,Offce 1,017 0 0
Office 2009
04 Offce/Medical 21,104 Oct 7t -26 ,Lobby 1,300 54 186
2009
06 Elementary 63,400 March 9 -April Classroom 1,000 47 89
School 14th, 2009
07 Restaurant 2,140 Aug 13 -28 ,Seating 1,500 11 38
2009 area
08 High School 65,000 Sep 22D -Oct Classroom 1,120 58 283
19th, 2009
09 High School 50,000 July 2D -23 , Oct Classroom 800 20 87
8th _30th, 2009
The estimated annual energy savings are presented below in Table 3. Savings are reported in
kWh/yr*ton in order for comparisons to be made between RTUs and buildings. The average
savings for functional units was 446 kWhyr*ton. The average hours of economizer operation
was 585 hours. A total of 527 tons of cooling was installed on the seven buildings studied.
#
2009
10 of 24
Table 3 Anm.ia! Estimated Energy Savings in Study Areas
Elementar Aug. 20t -Oct
School 2ßd,2009
03 Manufactur 60,600 Aug. 13 -28 ,Offce 1,017 0 0
e/Office 2009
04 Office/21,104 Oct 7 -26 ,Lobby 1,300 441 379
Medical 2009
06 Elementary 63,400 March 9 -April Classroom 1,000 640 549
School 14th, 2009
07 Restaurant 2,140 Aug 13t -28 ,Seating area 1,500 804 563
2009
08 High 65,000 Sep 22ß -Oct Classroom 1,120 578 473
School 19th, 2009
09 High 50,000 July 2ß -23r , Oct Classroom 800 576 490
School 8th_30th, 2009
This elementary school has 27 classrooms and is 68,870 square feet (SF) and opened in August
2007. Classroom 410 was selected to monitor economizer performance. Room 410 houses a
first grade class and is 992 SF. Data were available for this study from the EMS installed at the
schooL. Additional trend logs were established for the purposes of this study.
Study Period: August 20 to October 2nd, 2009
BV AC Systems: The HV AC system tye that serves most of the classrooms is a residential style
split system. The system is referred to as a split system because the heating unit and blower
motor are split from the air conditioning condenser and compressor. Error! Reference source not
found. below shows a tyical mechanical space housing the heating cabinet, blower, and air-
conditioner evaporator coil on the left side of the image. The air-conditioner condenser coil,
compressor and outside air damper are located on the roof in a mechanical well as shown in
Error! Reference source not found.. Each classroom has its own split system and mechanical room
while each wing of the school shares an outside air plenum which supplies economizer air.
Measurement and Verifìcatlon of Root Top Units with
of Design Lab.Boise Advanced Efficiency 2009
11 of 24:#
Figure i Typical mechanical space with blower and evaporator unit (left).
Figure :3 Roof top mecn¡mica! space with corii:lenser and compressor units
Other: Functional testing of the RTUs was done through the EMS ofa select number of units.
The control parameters in the EMS logic indicated good economizer operation.
Data collected though the EMS trend logs included outside air temperature (OAT), economizer
damper position (EDP), fan coil unit watts, and compressor unit watts. The OAT at which the
EDP moves to its minimum position (end of economizer cooling) was determined from trend log
data. The average OAT at which the room called for cooling was also determined from trend log
data. These two temperatures give the OAT range over which "free" economizer cooling is
Measurement and Verification of Root Units withof Lab~8oise
available and compressor energy is avoided. During the analysis it was discovered that tend log
data for the compressor power was not recorded properly by the EMS. Manufacturer data was
used to determine compressor and condenser power and was found to be 1.89 kW. Monitoring
period energy savings were found by determining all hours in which the outdoor damper position
was greater than its minimum position and the OAT was in the economizer range. These hours
were than multiplied by the compressor and condenser fan energy to arrve at a savings number.
TMY3 data was filtered based on economizer temperature ranges. These filtered TMY3 data
were used to determine the annual number of hours when the temperatue was in the range over
which the economizer functioned. These hours, compressor energy use values, and determined
compressor run time frctions were used to arrve at estimated annual energy savings given the
current settings.
Trend log data were analyzed from August 20 to October 2nd, 2009. By analyzing these data it
was determined that the economizer stopped using outdoor air above 60°F. This is an adjustable
control parameter in the EMS system. The point at which the room called for cooling was
determined by averaging the OAT for every instance that the EDP increased from its minimum
position. This OAT at which the classroom requested cooling was determined to be 51 ° F.
Manufacturer's data was used to determine compressor and condenser power and was found to
be 1.89 kW. Therefore the energy savings for room 410 is approximately 89 kWh during the
monitoring period which included 47 hours of economizer use. TMY3 data were filtered to
provide the number of hours during which the OAT was between 51 ~ and 60°F (economizer
free cooling range) and was determined to be 471 hours estimated anually. This equates to 222
kWhton*yr saved by the economizer. Graph 1 below shows a full day of economizer use with
EDP, OAT and compressor energy plotted. Note, and compressor energy is zero.
1 FuB of economizer use
Full day of Economizer Use, 9/30/200
0.9
100
40
0.8
80 0.7
~ECOf Pes. Rm410 0.6
-O.4T 0.5
-.----%."Compressor 0.4
0.3
0.220
0.1
o
9/29/09 19,12
o
9/30/09 0:0 9/30/094048 9/30/09 9:36 9/30/09 14:24 9/30/09 19:12 10/1/00 0:0
Measurement and VerificaIÌon of Root Units withof Lab~8oise #
2009
13 of 24
Classroom 410 shows positive energy savings through the use of an outside air economizer to
provide free cooling. However the system set points could be tuned to provide greater savings
stilL. The set point in the EMS used to end the free cooling period was set to 60°F. It could
arguably be increased to extend the free cooling period. Most non-EMS controlled EDP control
models found on roof top units have a selection of four distinct OATs at which the EDP will
move to its minimum. These setting are labeled A, B, C, and D which at 50% relative humidity
correspond to 73°F, 70°F, 67°F and 63°F respectfully. If the 67°F control points were
implemented on this site instead of the 60°F control point, the free cooling economizer period
would be extended from 471 annual hours to 792 hours. The resultant energy savings would
increase from 222kWhton*yr to 374 kWhton*yr for Room 410. A better understanding ofthe
curent control logic would be necessar before making adjustments to the EMS set points. If
the higher setpoint is implemented, follow up monitoring is suggested to verify that the system
functions as expected. It is important to ensure that outside air introduced is consistently lower
than the RATto avoid energy penalties. However, a diferential economizer control strategy
should eliminate this concern.
This manufactung and office building is located in Hailey, ID. The office spaces are served by
seven RTUs, all six tons or less in size. OA dr bulb temperatue sensors control all
economizers.
Monitoring Period: August 13 - August 28, 2009.
During functional testing it was determined that the unit logged was not functional so no energy
saving could be reported. Data were collected on a random unit prior to fuctional testing. This
was in part due to the long distance to this site and in part because R TU specifics were not
available prior to the first site visit and follow up research was required before the proper
fuctional testing sequence was established. Unfortnately, the unit selected proved to be non-
functionaL. Graph 2 below shows the compressor in operation durng a call for cooling from the
thermostat while the OAT is within the range during which the economizer should have been
functionaL. During the second site visit, functional testing was performed on all RTUs and it was
Measurement and Verification of
of
Advanced
:#
determined that four of the six units had a functional economizer. Due to time constrints,
performance monitoring of a functional RTU was not possible at this site.
Graph 2 Economizer Data
Loge Da RTU-lii
1-..."2.0.8
l..I 0.6
Eo
E0u 0.4."".ii;0 0.2
¡
¡!
o
8/23/
..--,~,---~------------------------, ,I -\ I '1.
:I \
1iLI
I
,i i,!..,I ,.
I L i !,,1,I ~--~+-I_#.._-~_..
II,
l :,Ii 1,.1I1, ,, .
\ i---_._~-_.-_..I.I
t ,i
~J
i
J
.,i
1 \
i \i,,-.-'- ...-
'(13:26 8/23/09 13:33 8/23/09 13:40 8/23/09 13:48 8/23/09 13:55 8/23/09 14:02 8/23/09
62.3
62.2
62.1
62 €
!
6L9 i
Do
6L8 !
;e6L7 Is
16L6 0
_. T~at
-Comp
----OAT
6L5
~
-0.2 6L3
This medical facility is located in Boise, ID, and has seven RTUs all under six tons capacity. The
units are controlled by a Honeywell C7650 OA dr bulb sensor.
Monitoring Period: Monitoring and testing was performed June through October, 2009 with
analysis reported for the periods of October 7th to the 26th, 2009.
Other: Of the seven units at this site, one passed functional testing, five failed and one unit was
non-operable at the time of testing. It is believed such a high failure rate is connected to the use
of the specific sensor which is known to provide poor economizer performance (Jacobs, 2003).
This issue is addressed in the discussion section.
Hours of economizer use were found by segregating data for which the OAT was within the
economizer operating range and the outdoor air damper was above the minimum position as
found in logged data. These time periods were summed to arrve at the total hours of economizer
Measurement and Verifcation of Root Top Units with Economizers; Advanced Energy Eífìcíency 2009of Design Lab.Boise # 15 of 24
use durng the monitoring period and multiplied by the compressor and condenser fan energy
use. On an annual basis, estimation of the energy saved by the economizer was found by
applying a run time fraction for the compressor and condenser fan unit to each hour in the year
which was within the economizer temperature range as determined by fitering TMY3 weather
data. These hours were summed and multiplied by the energy use of the compressor and
condenser fan units. The unit logged showed a monitoring period savings of 186 kWh over 54
hours of economizer use and an estimated anual saving of approximately 379 kWh/ton*yr over
441 hours of economizer use.
The Honeywell C7650 OA dr bulb sensor has known control problems and Honeywell
recommends a replacement for this sensor, the C7660 sensor (Honeywell, 2008A). This control
problem was a result of a wide dead band used by the C7650 sensor that disallowed economizer
cooling until the outdoor temperature dropped below the 10° F dead band leveL. The new C7660
sensor has a tighter dead band of 2° F. Researchers suggest (NBI, 2008) that saving from an
economizer using the C7650 wil be lower than those using a sensor similar to the C7660. This is
consistent with finding from this study.
The 63,400 fr elementary school utilzes a "U" shape plan that separtes the lower elementary
grades from the upper grades by an outdoor instrctional courard area. This building is wood
frame constrction with CMU veneer and stucco exterior and features 24 general purpose
classrooms, a library, cafeteria, and separate multi purpose room. A tyical classroom and a
single rooftop unit was monitored in this study.
Monitoring Period: March 9 to April 14, 2009
HV AC System: The HVAC for this school is controlled by an EMS. Demand control
ventilation (DCV) and economizers are both utilized. Some energy savings are confounded
between the DCV and economizer modes and canot be completely separated. The EMS also
controls HV AC setpoints based on schedules and with the use of occupancy sensors in the
classrooms. There are 37 packaged rooftop units (RTU) present at this school and they are all in
the range of 3-5 tons of cooling. Larger spaces in the school are severed by two built up roof top
units in the range of 15-20 tons of cooling.
Measurement and Verification
of
with
Other: Functional testing of the RTUs was done through the EMS ofa select number of units.
The control parameters in the EMS logic indicated good operation for the economizers.
Monitoring period energy savings were found by deterining the hours during which the
outdoor air damper was open a greater amount than if would have been open from DCV alone.
To do this, a relationship for controllng the outdoor air damper based on CO2 levels needed to
be determined. Graph 3 below shows this relationship. All points above the line (y=.lx-60)
correspond to economizer cooling hours. Savings from this method are of course confounded by
the fact that outdoor air damper position is controlled by economizer use and by DCV use.
Accounting for this confound resulted in conservative energy savings estimates. During the
monitoring period, it was found that the economizer was in operation 21hours, saving 72kWh of
energy during the monitoring period.
Graph :3 Outdoor air damper position and C02 levels
Outdoor damper position Vs. C02
100
90
80i70~0~60
..0
¡SO
0iii 40~
E 30.Q
20
10
0
300 400 500
~ .
~.. ..
.OADV.C02
600 700
C02 (ppm)
800 900 1000 1100
Anual savings were estimated by sorting TYM3 data for the temperature range over which the
economizer functioned, summing these hours and applying a compressor run time fraction to this
value. The economizer temperature range is between the building balance point temperature and
the high limit cut off of the economizer. The balance point temperatue of this school was found
by inspecting the OAT, economizer damper position and C02 data. The affect of DCV needed to
be removed in order to determine building balance point temperature. It could be seen from
plotting the CO2 and the outdoor air damper position data (Graph 3) that the outdoor air damper
Measurement and Verifìcation of Root Top Units with
University of Design Lab-Boise
Advanced Effciency 2009
Page 17 of 24#
closed in DCV mode at CO2 levels below 600 ppm. Therefore, the balance point temperatue
was determined only from OAT points in which the room C02 levels were below 600 ppm and
was found to be 51°F. By examining the EMS system definitions, it was determined that the
economizer mode is set to stop at or above 63°F OAT. TMY3 data were sorted by OAT in the
economizer range of 51°F to 63 of. A ru time frction for the compressor was applied to these
hours. An annual total of 640 hours were found in this outdoor temperature rage. Values for
compressor and condenser fan energy use were then multiplied by hours of economizer use to
arrve at annual estimated saving of 549 kWhton*yr.
When multiple controls are present for outdoor air dampers, such as DCV and economizer use, it
is more diffcult to isolate savings from just one control tye. With regard to determining the
amount of hours during which the compressors would have been running involves many factors.
The affect of DCV wil be to bring in more fresh air and could lower or raise the amount of time
a compressor wil run to provide space cooling. Precisely determining, the amount of time a
compressor would ru on an annual basis would require annual data logging or a detailed energy
model, and both were beyond the scope of this report.
The study area is a standalone restaurant building 2,140 SF in Jerome, Idaho. The business is in
operation from 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM Monday through Saturday and 11:00 AM to 6:00 PM on
Sunday.
Monitoring Period: August 13th to 28th, 2009
HVAC System: This building is served by two RTUs. One serves the kitchen and preparation
area (7.5 ton) and other serves the dining area (5 ton).
Logged data was used to determine monitoring period energy savings and from this data an
estimate of annual energy savings was calculated. Monitoring period and annual estimated
energy savings were based on a 24 hours basis as cooling can be called for anytime during the
day and preliminary analysis showed more than half of the economizer savings were recorded
after business hours.
of Root Units with
Lab~Boise
2009
is 24
The monitoring period energy savings were found by isolating hours in which the thermostat was
callng for cooling, the supply fan was on, and the compressor was off, these are deemed
economizer hours. The economizer hours were multiplied by the compressor and condenser fan
power in kW to arrive at a kWh value for energy saved due to the economizer.
Annual estimated saved energy was found by using TYM3 data, the balance point temperatue of
the building, compressor and condenser fan power, compressor run time frctions and the
economizer high limit shut-off. The TYM3 data were sorted for temperatures above building
balance point and below economizer high limit shut-off. Each hour in this range was assigned a
compressor run time fraction as determined from logged data. The compressor run time fractions
in hours were summed over the year to arrive at a total number of hours the compressor would
have been running without an economizer in use. This value (hours) was then multiplied by the
compressor and condenser fan power to arrve at estimated annual energy savings.
For the monitoring period it was found that the economizer was in use 11.1 hours and saved 42.5
kWh of energy. On an annual basis it is estimated that this economizer wil fuction 805 hours
and save 615kWhton*yr.
Graph 4 Eci:momizer fimctkiri,07-restimmt
Building 07-Resturant Ecoomizer Functon
-1"II
! 1
i 0.8
i:if
~ 0.6
l
l 0.4ou
i 0.2~
---l----'. ..._- .. -.-:-
Ii L" . -----.- ~,
I ' i I --._----------- I-! I r41 _.
I -------~ I q :1 I I ii.
ri .I.II i .
i I i I I:: i
t
i .i
:1. i i'I ;
I'I I
:i
i I
eI ! i i .I.. Ii .I .il i .If iI I:di .
70
60 -l:
SO
!
i.40 Q,
tito30..
eë..0
20 01::
10 0
o
6:57 7:12 7:26 7:40 7:55 8:09 8:24
o
8:38
- - T-sat - Compressor _. Fan ----OAT
Measurement and
of
of Root Units wìth Economizers; Advanced
Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-02)
Effciency 2009
Page 19 of 24
The high school studied is located in northern Canyon County, Idaho. This existing school was
newly remodeled and a new addition was made. A single classroom area was monitored.
Monitoring Period: September 22nd to October 19th, 2009
HVAC System: This school has 15 RTUs in the size rage to be eligible for incentives. These
units are all stand alone and are not part of an EMS.
Other: All 15 RTUs were tested for functionality. One unit was not operational due to a physical
jam in the economizer linkage and one unit was out of service due to an unidentifiable functional
problem. All other units were functionaL.
Economizer hours were found during the monitoring period by analyzing the outdoor air
fraction, compressor state, and fan state. The total monitoring period hours of economizer use
were then multiplied by the compressor and condenser fan energy to find the total energy saved
during the monitoring period.
On an annual basis TMY3 data were used to determine economizer hours. For every hour in
which the OAT was in the economizer temperature range a run time fraction for the compressor
was assigned to that hour. Compressor ru time fractions were found by analyzing logged data
based on OAT and time of day. The total compressor run times were summed and multiplied by
the compressor and condenser fan power.
For the monitoring period, the economizer was in use for 58 hour and saved 283 kWh of
energy. On an annual basis it is estimated that he economizer would be in use for 578 hours and
save 473 kWh/ton* yr.
The RTUs at this school are set up to run the fans only when there is a call for cooling or heating.
This arrangement leads to controls problems on several levels. The issue of most concern to
economizer functionality is the short cycling of compressors in economizer temperature ranges.
Sensors used to control economizers read properly only when air is moving over them. During
the cooling season, when ventilation fans are not running, sensor reads are higher than ambient
temperature conditions due to solar heat build up. When a call for cooling is made, the fan and
compressor wil turn on, and only after the outdoor air damper moves to minimum position can
the sensor report the correct OAT. At that time, usually 2-5 minutes later, the compressor wil
Measurement and Verification of Root 2009
20 of 24
shut off if the OAT is within the economizer range. Facilities operating in this manner do save
fan energy but this comes at a cost of shorter equipment life due to compressor short cycling and
reduced indoor air quality due to fans being off during some occupied hours. Two of the major
complaints in building with small rooftop units are localized temperature variations and a feeling
of stuffness (Jacob, 2003). These problems are only worsened when ventilation fans are not
running continuously during occupied hours. In addition a 2004 report (Fisk, 2004) suggested
that economizer use, or other methods that increase outdoor air rates, have the effect of reducing
airborne illness rates.
This High School is located in Boise, ID and is an existing building. A major remodel effort was
carred out during which the HV AC systems were updated. A classroom area was monitored in
this study.
Monitoring Period: July 2nd_23rd, 2009 and October 8th_30th, 2009.
HVAC System: The section ofthe school studied is served by 20 RTUs that are all
independently controlled and do not have a larger EMS.
Other: All 20 RTUs were fuctional tested. All units passed the functional test but units with
fans that were not continuously running all exhibited compressor short cycle issues. This wil be
discussed in Section 4.7.3.
Economizer use during the monitoring period was found by analyzing the logged data for periods
in which the thermostat called for cooling, the supply fan was on, the compressor was off and the
outdoor air temperatue was below 67 OF. The total monitoring period hours of economizer use
were then multiplied by the compressor and condenser fan energy to find the total energy saved
during the monitoring period.
On an annual basis, TMY3 data were used to determine economizer hours. For every hour in
which the OAT was in the economizer temperature range a run time fraction for the compressor
was assigned to that hour. Compressor ru time fractions were found by analyzing logged data
based on OAT and time of day. The total compressor run times were summed and multiplied by
the compressor and condenser fan power.
Measurement and of Root Top Uníts with
of Idaho, integrated Lab~Boíse
Advanced
# 20090205-02)
Efficiency 2009
21of 24
Forthe monitoring period, the economizer was in use for 20 hours and saved 87 kWh of energy.
On an annual basis, it is estimated that the economizer would be in use for 576 hours and save
490 kWhton* yr.
Graph 5 below shows some of the logged data from this site. Economizer function can be seen
early in the morning with the outdoor air damper opening and closing with calls for cooling
coming from the thermostat (T -stat). It can also be seen in this graph that this unit has an
integrated economizer. Around 8:00 AM, the economizer is open and the compressor is on. An
hour later the compressor is on and the outdoor air damper has moved to its minimum position.
5 Economizer data
Building 09High Scoo Emnomize Funcl
3.50 90
¡
13.00
~ 2.50
g
l I
~ 2.00.e IIi !- Iof LSO !~ ¡t IJI !
r LOOt I8 ,
f 0.50..
.____ ii. --"'.... --....---..._.-..~.-_.--..-.------..
...-.._-~..,",."---_/70------'.----..
-,
,
60 .&;!
f ~ j40 :i, ~'I 0
I.t 30 i
l 20¡ 10
¡100.00
4:19 5:31 6:43 7:S5 9:07
----T-st -Compresr ..__. OuAirFraetio. _. Supplyf.. ----OAT
This school is operated in the same manner as High School 08 and the same concerns centered on fan
operations apply. See section 4.6.3 for discussion on this schooL.
The condition of economizer functionality found in this study (21 % failure rate) was
significantly better than the previous study (64% failure rate) as reported by Jacobs (2003). It is
hypothesized that the buildings in our study were newer than those studied by Jacobs, however
Measurement and Verification of Root Units wíth
of Design Lab-Boise #
2009
22 of 24
no specific reference was as to the age of buildings involved in the earlier work. Ofthe reasons
that we were able to identify for economizers non-functionality, damper linkage/gear jams and
sensor issues were the most common. Damper linkage/gear issues can be addressed by unit
inspection. The problems noted with some sensors having large deadbands (NBI,2008) could be
overcome via contractor and building owner education and explicitly disallowed in economizer
incentive programs. Our study found deadband sensor issues in 15% (7) of the 47 units tested. At
the time of this publication, we have not encountered any HV AC technicians in Idaho that had
experience with the replacement sensor used to correct the large deadband issue. This suggests
that these problems could go unnoticed and cause actual economizer hours (and energy savings)
to be lower than expected.
Intermittent fan operation during business hours was found to be a common problem. It is our
interpretation that building operators see intermittent fan operation as an energy savings
measure. It is necessary to educate these operators of the problems associated with this practice.
Some R TU functionality is impaired when fans are not running on a continuous basis during
occupied hours. When units are equipped with DCV, this feature is only active when fans are on.
Cycling fans allow building and human contaminants to increase until there is a call for cooling
(or heating). One study showed that cycling fans provided one third of the effective ventilation
rate that the system was designed to provide (Jacobs, 2003). Fisk (2004) showed that increasing
outdoor air ventilation can lower airborne ilness transmission. Economizer sensors are designed
to read correctly when air is moving over them (Honeywell, 2008B). In our study, several
recorded instances indicated that compressor cycling occurred when the OAT was in the typical
economizer range due to the fact that sensors were not reading the correct OAT value. After
airfow started and the sensors began to read correct values, the units would switch back into
economizer mode. This increased cycling can lead to shortened equipment life.
NBI (2008). Bench Top Report: Commercial Rooftop HV AC Energy Savings Research
Program.
Fisk, Wiliam J.; Seppanen, Oll; Faulker, David; Huang, Joe. (2004). Economic Benefits of an
Economizer System: Energy Saving and Reduced Sick Leave (LNNL-54475). Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory.
IPMVP. (2007). Effciency Valuation Organization (EVO 10000-1.2007).
Measurement and Verificatìon of Root Units with
Lab~Boise (Report #
Jacobs, Pete. (2003). Small HV AC System Design Guide. California Energy Commission (500-
03-082-AI2)
Honeywell. (2008A). C7660 Dry Bulb Temperature Sensor. (Brochure) Doc. 67-7089. Golden
Valley, MN
Honeywell. (2008B). Solid State Economizer System. (Brochure) Doc. 63-2578-02. Golden
Valley, MN
Measurement and
of
with Advanced 2009
24 of 24#
MEASUREMENT AND VERIFICATION
OF DEMAND CONTROL VENTILATION 1:oc.
CD0:
Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
-
ca
CJ--c.c
CJ
CDl-
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Authors:
Acker, B.
Van Den Wymelenberg, K.
INTEGRATED DESIGN lAB
b 0 i s e
February 19, 2010
Date
20090205-03
Report No.
COLLEGE of ART and ARCHITECTURE
of Architecture lfiledr¡
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 1 of22
Prepared By:
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise
108 N 6th St. Boise ID 83702 USA
ww.uidao.edu/idl
Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Director
Brad Acker
Project Manager
1- Brad Acker
2- Kevin Van Den Wymelenberg
Authors
C0941O-P03
Contract No.
Prepared For:
Idaho Power Company
Bilie Jo McWinn
Project Manager
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored
by Idaho Power Company. It does not necessarily
represent the views of Idaho Power Company or its
employees. Idaho Power Company, its employees,
contractors and subcontrctors make no warrant, express
or implied, and assume no legal liability for the
information in this report; nor does any part represent
that the uses of this information wil not infrnge upon
privately owned rights. This report has not been approved
or disapproved by Idaho Power Company nor has Idaho
Power Company passed upon the accuracy or adequacy
of the information in this report.
Please cite this report as follows: Acker, B., Van Den Wymelenberg, K., 2009. Measurement
and Verifcation of Demand Control Ventilation; Technical Report 20090205-03, Integrated
Design Lab, University of Idaho, Boise, ID.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 2 of 22
This page left intentionally blank.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 3 of22
! BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................!..................5
1.1 LITERATUR REVIEW ......................................................................................................................................... 5
i METHODS .............~................................................................................................................ 7
2.1 SITE SELECTION ............................................................................_.................................................................... 7
2.2 METERING AND TESTING METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 7
2.3 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................. 8
2.3.1 FUNCTIONAL TESTING .........................................................................................................8
2.3.2 ESTIMATING ENERGY SAVINGS............................................................................................8
2.3.2.1 Monitoring Period Cooling Energy Saving .....................................................................8
2.3.2.2 Annual Estimated Cooling Energy Savings.....................................................................8
~ SUMMARIZED RESUL TS .......................................,....jl.........................................................9
3.1 FUNCTIONAL TESTING ........................................................................................................................................ 9
3.2 MONITORING PERIOD ENERGY SAVINGS ........................................................................................................ 10
~ DETAILED RESULTS.........................................................................................................13
4.1 BUILDING 01- OFFICE........................................................................................................................................ 13
4.1.1 RELEVANT SITE SPECIFIC DETAILS .................................................................................... 13
4.1.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................13
4.2 BUILDING 04 -oFFICEIMEDICAL...................................................................................................................... 14
4.2.1 STUDY AREA......................................................................................................................14
4.2.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................14
4.3 BUILDING 06 - ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ........................................................................................................... 15
4.3.1 STUDY AREA......................................................................................................................15
4.3.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................15
4.4 BUILDING 08 - HIGH SCHOOL........................................................................................................................... 18
4.4.1 STUDY AREA......................................................................................................................18
4.4.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................18
4.5 BUILDING 09- HIGH SCHOOL ........................................................................................................................... 19
4.5.1 STUY AREA.............................,........................................................................................19
4.5.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................19
4.6 BUILDING 10- OFFICE...................._..................................................................................................................19
4.6.1 STUY AREA......................................................................................................................19
4.6.2 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................20
~ DISCUSSION ............................................................,............................................................20
!! FUTURE WORK ..............:.................................................................................................... 2.1
1 REFERENCES......................................................................................................................21
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 4 of22
Demand control ventilation (DCV) is a building ventilation control strategy in which the quantity
of mechanically supplied intake air is regulated by some tye of occupant density sensing. DCV
is intended to save energy by means of supplying maximum design ventilation air to occupants
during periods of high occupancy and supplying the minimum required ventilation to dilute
building related contaminants during low occupancy periods. Reducing the amount of outside air
that needs to be conditioned can save energy. Specific outdoor conditions wil drve the amount
of energy savings. Carbon dioxide (C02) sensors are the industr standard to determined space
occupancy for DCV. It has been shown that CO2 levels are a good determination of space
occupancy (Turpin, 2001). It should be noted that CO2 is not considered an indoor air quality
(IAQ) concern at levels found in typical buildings (400-2000ppm) but is used solely as an
indication of occupancy level (Emmerich, 2001).
DCV systems can be incorporated into existing HV AC equipment and often times operate in
conjunction with existing economizer controls, sharing the same outdoor air damper (OAD).
Savings from DCV systems are achieved by the reduction in outdoor supply air (OSA) that
requires conditioning as compared to a fixed OSA flow rate durng all occupied hours.
DCV has been studied through computer simulations and through field studies. DCV has been
used for several decades but did not gain popular acceptance until the mid 1990's (Apte, 2006).
It was not until 1997 that an ASHRAE interpretation of ASHRAE 62-1989 affirmed that outdoor
air intake rates could be modulated based on CO2 levels to meet occupancy demand (Apte,
2006). This interpretation set the stage for DCV with CO2 sensors but ASHRAE 62-1989 did not
explain how to accomplish DCV and was not written in code enforceable language (Turpin,
2001). A specific problem of Standard 62-1989 was that it stated that minimum acceptable
ventilation rates must be maintained at all times but did not state what the minimum rate should
be. This left engineers il-equipped to determine and justify lower ventilation rates. In an attempt
to deal with this issue, engineers determined that a base ventilation rate of 20-30% of design
ventilation was acceptable to meet base contaminant loads (Turpin, 2001).
The greatest savings from DCV systems come from spaces that have high peak occupancy levels
and unpredictable occupancy patterns (PIER, 2003). Spaces such as auditoriums, theaters and
large retail stores are all examples of such occupancy types. It has also been shown that savings
due to DCV is greater in extreme climates as compared to more mild climates (PIER, 2003). The
reason for this is that DCV savings are often confounded with economizer savings during hours
of economizer use. In mild climates economizer hours have a larger impact than in extreme
climates. The greatest cooling energy savings due to DCV occur in regions with a very low
number of economizer hours (Brandemuehl et al. 1999).
A field study in Montreal, during the early 1990' 2 (Donnini et al. 1991, Haghighat and Donnini
1992) examined two floors in an offce building to identify the CO2-controlled DCV system. One
floor was equipped with a DCV system, while the other floor served as a baseline with
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 5 of22
continuous ventilation. The system was set to have the outdoor air dampers closed at
concentrations below 600 ppm, then progressively open to a maximum position at 1,000 ppm.
The study took place over the period of one year and monitored both CO2 concentrations and
other volatile organic compounds while keeping track of thermal comfort, ventilation system
pedormance, and occupant perception of comfort once per month. Anual energy savings of
12% were measured for the floor with the DCV system. The authors noted that the outdoor
dampers were closed most of the year because the occupant levels never produced CO2 levels
that exceeded the minimum 600 ppm setpoint.
Another demonstration project took place in a small bank in Pasco, Washington (Gabel et al.
1986). Pasco, W A is in ASHRAE climate zone 5, similar to much of southern Idaho. The study
monitored energy consumption and contaminant levels of nitrogen dioxide, formaldehyde,
carbon monoxide, other particulates, and occupant comfort response data. The building was
monitored during the winter, spring, and summer seasons. Based on a curve fit of the measured
energy consumption, average energy savings of7.8% were achieved for both the heating and
cooling seasons.
One generalized study (Roth et al. 2005) found a 10% savings in both heating and cooling
energy use through DCV. Specifically, this study reported a 6-22% cooling savings, which
depended on building location and building tye. They found greater savings in schools and
retail than in office spaces. This same study also pointed out confusion in ASHRAE 62-2001 and
described it as non-economic barrer to successful implementation of DCV. Roth et al. found a 2-
5 year simple payback for DCV systems. The varance in years is due to occupancy level
patterns, building type and climate zone.
An extensive computer based simulation study aimed at determining energy savings from DCV
and economizers was carred out in 1999 (Brandemuehl et al.). The simulation studied 20
locations in the U.S. and four building tyes (schools, offce, large retail, sit-down restaurant).
Albuquerque was one of the cities studied; the climate is warm, dr and is in ASHRAE Climate
Zone 5 as is much of southern Idaho. Brandemuehl et al. investigated the relationship between
DCV and economizer use. They found energy savings were maximized when DCV and
economizer are used together. Control logics enable economizer damper position to overrde the
DCV signal allowing for free cooling when the ambient temperature permits. Interestingly, their
study found greater energy consumption when DCV systems were not coupled with economizer
as compared to a fixed minimum ventilation system (no DCV) without economizer. This is due
to the reduction in free cooling when a DCV is used without economizer fuctionality. For tests
run using Albuquerque's climate data, a 14% cooling savings and 38% heating savings were
found when using DCV coupled with an economizer as compared to DCV without an
economizer. The effects of economizer mode did not playa role during the heating season and
the buildings studied used fixed minimum ventilation as a baseline when comparing DCV
system savings. This study suggests the diffculty in discerning electrical energy savings from
DCV alone when used in conjunction with economizers. Furthermore, energy savings from a
DCV system is very sensitive to the baseline minimum ventilation levels and occupancy patterns.
Another study highlighted the importance of the placement of CO2 sensors and how it affects
performance of the system (Emmerich, 2001) and subsequently the energy savings. According to
the Carrier Corporation (2001) sensors should be placed in the zones being controlled and if
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 6of22
placed in return air ducts they should be as close to the zone controlled as possible. Sensors
should not be placed in mixed air plenums of the RTU or air handlers of multi-zone systems
because they represent an average CO2 level of the entire space and do not represent the specific
zone controlled.
Six buildings were identified for DCV monitoring from a list provided by Idaho Power Company
including buildings that received economizer financial incentives. All buildings were newly
constrcted or new HV AC equipment was installed between 2005 and 2007.
01 Offce 68,000 One third of entire 22,600 Chubbuck, ID
buildin
04 OfficelMedical 21,104 Break room 300 Boise,ID
06 Elementa School 63,400 Classroom 1,000 Kuna,ID
08 Hi h School 65,000 Classroom 800 Middleton, ID
09 Hi h School 102,000 Classroom 780 Boise,ID
10 Office 15,750 Half of entire buildin 7,875 Meridian, ID
Functional testing of DC V systems was done in accordance with the basic control tye and
differed whether it was managed through an energy management system (EMS) or at the roof top
unit (RTU). EMS based control systems were tested by manually lowering the CO2 setpoints to
be below the current levels within a space and watching (on the EMS screen) for the OA damper
to open in that space. RTU based control systems were tested by having one person exhale
directly onto the C02 sensor and having another person located at the R TU watch for the damper
to respond and for the DCV indicator light to iluminate (if available) on the logic controller. In
addition to physical functional testing, trendlog data and other direct measurement data were
analyzed. Care was taken when analyzing data to find periods during which only the DCV
signals were dictating the OA damper position. Periods of economizer use or cold temperature
lockout of the OA dampers were avoided. Logged data included air stream temperatures of the
outside air, mixed air, return air, supply fan state (on/off), fan Amperage, C02 sensor signals,
compressor state (on/off), and compressor Amperage.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab.Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 7of22
Before detailed data analysis is carred out, it is first prudent to confirm DCV system
functionality. Functional testing was broken up into three system aspects. First, CO2 control
signal functional testing was conducted to confirm that the control link between CO2 sensors and
OA damper positioning was in place. Second, sensor placement fuctional testing was conducted
to confirm that the sensors accurately reported the CO2 levels of the controlled zone. Third, the
OSA level test was conducted by inspecting the air balance reports to determine the OSA rates
and to confirm that the system was balanced in accordance with DCV standards. Only when
DCV systems passed all three functional tests could energy savings estimates be carried out.
Energy savings from DCV come from reduced outdoor air loads on the HV AC equipment. For
constant volume RTU systems, energy savings come from reduced thermal conditioning loads of
the ventilation air. In effect DCV systems change mixed air temperature seen by the cooling coil
or heating element. With variable air volume (V A V) systems, some savings are delivered by
reduced fan speed.
The methods for determining cooling energy savings (only) are described below. Similar
methodologies are required to determine heating and fan energy savings, but these were beyond
the scope of this study.
2.3.2.1 Monitoring Period Cooling Energy Saving
Logged data for mixed, retu, and outside air temperatures are used. Constant supply air
temperature is assumed and the value used is confirmed with logged data. Only DCV periods
that occur independent form economizer periods are used in the analysis. The baseline cooling
coil load is determined using logged outdoor temperatures and return air temperatures to
compute the baseline mixed air temperatue. The baseline OSA percentage used is the maximum
logged OSA percentage since it corresponds to the design occupancy OSA rate. The cooling coil
load during the monitored period (with DCV) is calculated using air stream temperatures and
standard equations. This value is subtracted from the baseline value. Published cooling
equipment effciencies are applied to the difference between the two cooling coil loads in order
to arrve at cooling kWh saved during the monitoring period.
2.3.2.2 Annual Estimated Cooling Energy Savings
To estimate annual cooling energy savings associated with DCV it is necessary to model annual
occupancy patterns to determine OSA flow rates required and their affect on the mixed air
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 8 of 22
temperature on an hourly basis. Anual occupancy is estimated from logged CO2 patterns durng
the monitoring period. Next, it is necessary to determine the baseline cooling coil load. This is
determined using third generation Typical Meteorological Year (TMY3) data for outdoor air
temperature and an assumed constant return air temperature to compute the baseline mixed air
temperature. The baseline OSA percentage used is the maximum logged OSA percentage since
it corresponds to the design occupancy OSA rate. Then standard equations are applied to
determine cooling coil loads for the baseline and DCV case. Finally published cooling
equipment effciencies are applied to the difference between the two cooling coil loads in order
to arrve at estimated cooling kWh saved on an annual basis.
Table 2 below shows the result of the fuctional performance testing at all sites. One unit failed
CO2 control signal functional test. The exact reason for this failure could not be determined but it
is suspected that it was caused by a wiring problem given that the physical output from the CO2
sensor did not signal damper movement despite functional performance of both the sensor and
the damper individually. Two units failed the sensor placement fuctional test. These units had
C02 sensors placed in common mixed air returns from multiple zones. This configuration
disallows control of critical zones and is contrar to manufacturers' recommendations. Similar
errors have been identified in previous research (Carrer, 2001. Emmerich, 2001). CO2
concentrations for sensors placed in this manor tend to be below typical control levels due to this
zonal averaging. Graph 1 below ilustrates an example from Building 10 where the CO2 sensor
was located in a common return. It shows CO2 levels rising only 100ppm above ambient levels.
All systems studied failed the third functional test related to air balancing and DCV standards for
OSA rates. These results wil be discussed in detail in Section 3.2.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 9 of22
In
01 Offce 22,600 Entire Bldg.Common Pass Fail Fail
Return
02 Elementary 1,000 Classroom Wall Pass Pass FailSchool
04 Office/Medical 300 Break Wall Pass Pass FailRoom
04 Offce/Medical 1,000 Lobb Wall Fail Pass Fail
08 Hi h School 800 Classroom Wall Pass Pass Fail
09 Hi h School 870 Classroom Wall Pass Pass Fail
In
10 Offce 7,875 Entire Bldg.Common Pass Fail Fail
Return
h i Common return sensor location. CO2 levels
Building Code to-Offce C02 Levels
ii=i=-
540
530
520
510
500 .Nou 490
480
470
460
9°.00 9°'
9i23ri.O~i2iii20~ 125
'.00 090'.00 ()9 0'.00 09 0'.00 :9iQ"
liO 912ßI20 9129120 9130120 \f v
:Ol0090:00
Section 1.1 suggests that DCV has substatial potential to save energy, that economizers should
be used in conjunction with DCV, and both cooling and heating energy can be reduced on the
order of 10% or more when the system is designed and operated properly. The investigations
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofldaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 10 of22
reported in this paper took place in an interesting time in the evolution of DCV in Idaho. Due to
a series of issues ranging from system design to building operations, no measureable energy
savings could be determined due to DCV in the buildings examined. A summary explanation for
these findings wil be given in this section and a detailed explanation wil be offered for each
building in Section 4.
Six building were studied in this investigation. Descriptions of the study space and the installed
outdoor supply air (OSA) flow rate as determined from each building's balance reports along
with fan operation settings are presented in Table 3.
01 Office 68,000 Entire Bldg.22,600 Continuous 13
04 Offce/21,104 Break room 300 Continuous 12Medical
06 Elementary 63,400 Classroom 1,000 Continuous 10School
08 High 65,000 Classroom 800 Intermittent 12School
09 High 102,000 Classroom 800 Intermittent 12School
10 Offce 15,750 Entire Bldg.7,875 Continuous 17
Intermittent fan operation was discovered at two of the sites (both high schools). Intermittent fan
operation is a problem in many aspects of HV AC control systems and greatly affects DCV
pedormance. With intermittent fan operation, OSA dampers only function when the supply fan
is ruing, otherwise they move to a fully closed position. When supply fans are set to run only
during calls for cooling or heating, C02 levels go unchecked much of the time.
Graph 2 below depicts this problem over a sample of the study period at Building 08. Despite the
obvious intermittent fan operation, theoretically, it could be argued that during the period when
the fan is working, that one could associate savings due to DCV. This would be tre if the
minimum and maximum OSA dampers were set to operate according to a DCV strategy,
however, that was not the case for any buildings investigated in this study. This finding wil be
explained in more detail below.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 11 of22
2 hitennitent fan use.
Building 08-mgh School,- C02 and Supply Fan Relationship
2500 1.2
.. ,II I II II III II III II II..--+r.-......--Ii I III I IIi : I I
s-Iit:0.8 0..ßi:0.6 e.
i:
i:
0.4 oS
i;II
2000
â 1500
S;
C"
8 1000
500 I I I:I I I I
: I I I
0.2
o
7:12 8:24 9:36 10:48 12:00 13:12 14:24
o
15:36
-C02 - - Suly Fan Stae
By definition, energy savings from DCV comes in the form of reduced ventilation rates during
periods of low occupancy and the subsequent heating, cooling and fan energy savings. In order
to actually produce energy savings, DCV systems must be configured to provide a range of
ventilation rates from a minimum set point up to the design occupancy ventilation level as
dictated by the CO2 signals. Establishing the correct minimum setpoint has provided confusion
when using ASHRAE 62-1989, however best practices suggest the minimum set point should be
20-30% of the design occupancy (Turpin, 2001). The occupancy tyes encountered in this study
suggest this range should be between 3-6 cfiperson. As is shown in Table 3, the minimum
OSA levels found in this study ranged form 10-17 cfm/person, well above the recommended
minimum settings. In fact, these values are very close to the code desired minimum OSA as if
the building were using a fixed damper position without DCV.
In addition to the inappropriately high minimum OSA levels, reviewing the balancing reports
also suggested that DCV was not properly incorporated at the sites studied. Upon examination,
the balancing reports presented minimum OSA only. A balancing report that incorporated DCV
properly would, by definition, indicate the OSA flow rate at both the minimum damper position
and the maximum damper position. No distinction was found for any of the sites studied, or upon
examining the balancing reports.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 12 of22
This offce building is located in Chubbuck, ID. The building totals 68,000 SF and is four stories
tall. This facility uses a central EMS system for HV AC related controls. The building has three
large air handler units, each with a CO2 sensors in the common return air plenum. The EMS and
data loggers were used to collect data for analysis. RTU-l serves the interior and north zones of
floors two through four. RTU-2 serves the east, west and south zones of floors two through four.
RTU-3 serves the first floor. The entire building encompasses over 100 zones and has a fairly
steady and predictable occupancy. There are a few spaces in the building that have variable
occupancy rates (meeting rooms and training spaces) that are good candidates for DCV.
From the sequence of operations obtained, an adjustable setpoint threshold for DCV was found
to be 1,000 ppm of CO2. Graph 3 below shows the OA damper position and the return plenum
C02 level for RTU-3 for a sample of the monitorig period. C02 levels never approached the
specified CO2 theshold, and the damper position does not appear to have any correlation with
C02 levels. If these data represented a single zone, it would be a sign of excessive fresh air,
however, since these data encompass several zones, the CO2 data are not useful as an indicator
for DCV. As discussed previously, average CO2 levels across multiple zones are not an
appropriate control strategy. No energy saving could be attbuted to the DCV system.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 13 of22
imd
Building 01 -Office, C02 and OA Damper700 --~-
600
soo
i 400
,ëNo 300l;iIII~
l!i
l :i.'.. ..
IIIII
IIIIl!,..."
200
100
o
\ \li9/iOO9\~/i.li009 \~f¡~o/iOO\~/~/iOO \i:l~/\liOO ~m/iOO \i~iliOO~:m/iOO \i~3/i0090:00
-C02 pp ---- OA Dampe Position
90
80
70
60 iiIl0
SO ..
ii..
40 ill
30
20
10
0
This offce/medical building is located in Meridian, ID. The building is a single story and totals
21,1 04SF. Seven rooftop units provide heating and cooling to the main level medical offces and
basement sleep labs with RTU based control. Two spaces on the main floor are equipped with
DCV, the main reception area (RTU-l), and the employee break room (RTU-4). C02 sensing is
used to determine ventilation needs for each space. The CO2 sensors are wall mounted in each
space and send a 0-10 Volt signal to the RTU control package to adjust damper position. Each
RTU is equipped with an economizer/OA hood and control package. This control package
utilizes an economizer logic board and an OA damper actuator. It should be noted that it is
common to label these control packages as "Economizer Controls" but the logic board is.also
capable of setting maximum/minimum damper positions, power exhaust control, DCV settings
and various economizer control configurations.
DCV functional testing of the two systems (as described in Section 2.3) revealed that only one of
the two systems had functional DCV. The dampers on the R TV serving the reception area did
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrted Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 14 of22
not respond to elevated CO2 levels at the sensor. No control signal was detected at the Indoor Air
Quality (IAQ) terminals on the logic board (at the RTU), and no DCV light came on (on the
logic board) when the space sensor was reading i 000+ ppm. The DCV control system serving
the employee break room was found to be providing a control signal at the RTU. However, no
energy savings could be attributed to DCV for this unit due to high OSA supply rates at
minimum damper position. After examining air balance reports it became evident that the system
was designed, installed and balanced as if no DCV were present. From logged data, it was
determined that the system provided 18% fresh air at its minimum damper position. This results
in 288 cfm of fresh air at all times, which is in agreement with the 300 cfm specified for
minimum OSA on the drawings. Other RTUs without DCV systems were checked and found to
have close to the same OSA levels supporting the notion that this system was not installed in a
manner consistent with DCV installation. The problems with the high minimum OSA setting are
discussed in Section 3.2. Due to this high level of OS A, by definition, no savings could be found.
This school building is located in Kuna, ID. The building single story and totals 63,400 SF. This
school is controlled by an EMS. Each room has its own RTU and DCV system. Logged data
from both EMS trendlogs and equipment installed explicitly for this research were used for the
evaluation. The EMS data were used to confirm the functionality of the DCV system as
described in Section 2.2. This is an appropriate arangement with high potential for energy
savings.
Figure 1 below shows a screen shot from the EMS system. At the time of functional testing, the
CO2 level in the room was 425 ppm. The two parameters circled are the curent OA damper
position, labeled as Economizer, and the CO2 setpoint. Notice that at the current setpoint, the OA
damper is in its minimum position. The reason why this damper was at 0% OSA is given below.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 15 of22
Figure 2 below shows a screen shot after the CO2 setpoint had been manually adjusted for
functional testing purposes. The C02 setpoint was temporarly adjusted down to 300 ppm CO2
(the room was at 425 ppm COz), and the OA damper moved to 62% open. This shows that the
system is functionaL. Two other RTUs at the building were checked using this method and were
found to be fuctionaL.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 16 of22
The controls contractor did an excellent job in providing OA damper control based on C02
levels. Graph 4 below shows the OA damper position controlled by the C02 leveL. The design
minimum OA for this RTU was originally adjusted at 400 cfm. This level ofOA is not consistent
with DCV design; at this level ofOA no saving from DCV would be found. Shortly before our
first visit, OA damper positions were modified from this installed setting. Interviewing one of the
maintenance staff revealed that improper plumbing of the sewer vents had caused smells from
the kitchen grease trap to be emitted near the rooftop unit intake vents. This unpleasant smelling
air was drawn into the building through RTU OA dampers. To avoid this problem the
maintenance staff set all the minimum OA damper positions to zero. Unbeknownst to the
building operators, this change actually increased the potential savings due to DCV. However, it
is not recommend that systems operate with zero outside air as this too can cause indoor air
quality concerns.
No savings were recorded during the monitoring period due to economizer cooling. If the
minimum OSA level remains as is currently set (zero cfm), savings from DCV would be present
as the building moves into heating and cooling modes. This facility would benefit from an
engineer to determine the minimum building ventilation load for all spaces and set OA dampers
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Effciency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 17 of22
accordingly. Education of the maintenance staff is also required regarding the design intent of
the HV AC system.
Building 06- Elementary School, C02 Level and OA Damper Position
1200
,,,"
50
45
40
35 i
30 t
::~
25 ål
20 ii:.(015
10
5
0
15:36
1000 .. ," I',-- , '\,.. __a'I ' "'.'V'I ,I ,I '..
I,I,II
--800ii:.e"600t,.N0t.
400
iit, ,i ,I ,i \,
200
o
7:12 8:24 9:36 10:48 12:00 13:12
...- C02 - OA Damper % Open
14:24
This school building is located in northern Canyon County, ID. The building is a single story and
totals 65,000 SF. This existing school was newly remodeled and included an addition. A single
classroom area was monitored. This school uses RTU based control for DCV. Each classroom
has its own R TU and wall mounted CO2 sensor. This is an appropriate arrangement with high
potential for energy savings.
Data logging showed that the RTUs in this school are set to run only when there is a "call" for
heating or cooling. This is referred to as intermittent fan use or fan cycling. Fan cycling was
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 18 of22
found to be a problem in 38% of systems studied as part of a RTU field study (Jacob, 2003). This
arrangement may in fact use less energy due to lower fan power, but is contrary to current
standards and causes problems with OA sensor readings. This wil be further addressed in
Section 5.. Because of this control logic, if the supply fans are not on, DCV canot be utilized.
With this particular system, C02 sensors do not make "calls" for ventilation in the same way that
thermostats make "calls" for heating or cooling. The C02 sensors only send a control signal to
modulate the OA damper, and the OA damper can only be modulated if the fan is on. Therefore
no energy savings could be measured associated directly to DCV.
Graph 2 above shows that when the fan is not on, CO2 levels are elevated and uncontrolled.
When the fan is on the ventilation is effective at reducing the CO2 concentration levels. Due to
high minimum OSA levels savings during these times are not be present.
This high school building is located in Boise, ID. This single story building totals 102,000 SF.
The building completed a major remodel and new RTU based control systems were installed
throughout. Each classroom has its own R TU and CO2 sensor located on a wall near the
thermostat, however no EMS is present.
This school has a control sequence in place in which the supply fans only run when the space is
calling for heating or cooling. Graph 2 above shows tyical behavior from a system set up in
this fashion. The DCV only works on a call for cooling or heating. The air balance reports show
that the minimum outdoor airflow rate is set too high (Table 3). All RTUs were investigated and
found to operate in this fashion. For reasons explained in Section 3.2, no savings were reported
for this site.
This building is a 15,750 SF office facility in Meridian, ID. Two RTUs serve the building and
supply a multi-zone underfloor displacement ventilation system. The CO2 sensors are located in
common return air plenums.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University of Idaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 19 of22
This building has CO2 sensors placed in a common return air plenum for each RTU and therefore
failed the sensor placement functional test. This issue is discussed in Section 3.1. An
encouraging part about this design was that the engineer suggested consideration of base CO2
loads distinctly from occupant loads in the balancing report. Mechanical drwings noted
different C02 setpoints (450 cfm minimum, 1950 cfm maximum), however, the HV AC
schedules used by the air balance contrctors did not reflect this information. The HV AC
schedules labeled this unit simply as having 1300 cfm OSA, well above an appropriate 'base'
level for this tye of occupancy and size of building ifusing DCV. Graph 1 above shows the
CO2 levels during the study period. The levels are well below the CO2 setpoint. No energy
savings could be found from this building due to excessively high OSA flow rates.
This study has exposed several issues with regard to the design, installation, and operation of
DCV systems that prohibited the association of measured energy savings with the systems
monitored. While not found in this study, it is important to understand that DCV can sometimes
increase energy consumption during cooling periods when not used in conjunction with OSA
economizer functionality.
The main issue that prevented measured energy savings in this study stems from curent
mechanical code standards in Idaho, ASHRAE 62-1989, and the confusion about minimum OSA
therein. Roth (2005) also cited confusion regarding ASHRAE Standard 62 and indicated it was
as a primary barrer to implementation of DCV systems. ASHRAE 62-1989 was the first
standard that dealt with the concept of DCV and it was not until 1997 that an official
interpretation was offered by ASHRAE specifically allowing CO2 to be used to modulate outdoor
air intake levels based on occupancy (Apte, 2006). ASHRAE 62-1989 lacks a clear statement of
what minimum ventilation levels should be when occupancy is low in spaces. Results from our
investigation suggest that mechanical engineers commonly rely upon published tables to
determine ventilation rates by occupancy type. This could be for lack of better data in ASHRAE
62-1989, it could be simply out of habit, or perhaps it is to avoid conflcts with code officials.
For all DCV systems in this study typical design occupancy ventilation rates were supplied as the
minimum OSA level, contrary to the theory ofDCV.
Interviewing code offcials and air balance contractors in Idaho revealed low understanding of
DCV systems. This is an indicator of low market penetration of this technology. Education of all
parties involved would benefit the design, installation, and operation of DCV systems.
ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007 is much improved over ASHRAE 62-1989 and is wrtten in code
enforceable language. At the time of this publication, it is believed that the Idaho Division of
Building safety, HV AC Board wil adopt ASHRAE 62-2007 within the next year. The results of
this paper suggest this is an important step to improve pedormance of DCV systems in Idaho.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 20 of22
Fan cycling was also raised as an issue that affects the performance of DCV systems. Fan
cycling is perceived to be an energy savings measure by building operators. This is an incorrect
perception that requires education to overcome. Operators need to understand that fan cycling
reduces indoor air quality, occupant comfort, diminishes accuracy of sensor signals, and reduces
DCV functionality.
In addition to the education of mechanical engineers, building operators and code officials
regarding proper implementation of DC V, opportnities for future work in this area include
tracking and monitoring key indicators regarding DCV market penetration. For example,
tracking current workloads of local air balance contractors with regard to DCV would provide
insight as to the effectiveness of adoption of ASHRAE 62.1-2007 going forward. This would
also provide insight to decision makers as to the effectiveness of adopting current standards par
way through a code cycle. Furthermore, a follow up study designed to correct the errors found in
the specific DCV systems investigated through this research (i.e. commissioning) coupled with
follow up examination of post-commissioning data would ilustrate the tre potential of DCV at
the sites investigated and result in verified energy savings. Finally, future work examining the
performance of DCV should focus on buildings, and zones within buildings, with highly variable
occupancy patterns-that have the greatest energy savings potentiaL.
Apte, Michael G., (2006), A Review of Demand Control Ventilation (NBNL-60170). Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory.
Brandemuehl, M.J., Braun, lE., (1999) "Impact of Demand-Controlled and Economizer
Ventilation Strategies on Energy Use in Buildings". ASHRAE Journal. 01 July 1999.2 - 14.
Carrer, (2001). Demand Control Ventilation System Design Guide (Doc. 1001 811-10088).
Syracuse, NY.
Donnini, G., F. Haghighat, and V.H. Hguyen. 1991. Ventilation Control of Indoor Air Quality,
Thermal Comfort, and Energy Conservation by C02 Measurement. Proceedings of the 12th
AIVC Conference Air Movement & Ventilation Control within Building: 311-331.
Emmerich, Steven J. Persily, Andrew K., (2001). State-of-the-Art Review of C02
Demand Controlled Ventilation Technology and Application National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NISTIR 6729).
Gabel, S. D., J.E. Janssen, J. o. Christoffel, and S. E. Scarborough. 1986. Carbon Dioxide-Based
Ventilation Control System Demonstration. U. S. Department of Energy, DE-AC79-84BPI5102.
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 21 of22
Haghighat, F. and G. Donnini. 1992. IAQ and Energy-Management by Demand Controlled
Ventilation. Environmental Technology. 13: 351-359.
Jacobs, Pete. (2003). Small HV AC System Design Guide. California Energy Commission (500-
03-082-AI2)
PIER Building Program., (2003). Commercial Buildings Breath Right with Demand Control
Ventilation., Tech Brief (on-line). Available: ww.energy.ca.gov/pier. Full report 2003-11-18-
500-03-096-A8
Roth KW. et al. (2005). "Energy Impact of Commercial Building Controls and Performance
Diagnostics: Market Characterization, Energy Impact of Building Faults and Energy Savings
PotentiaL. Prepared for the US Departent of Energy Building Technologies Program. TIAX
LLC, Cambridge, MA No. D0180.
Turpin, Joanna., (2001) The Dilemma Over Demand Control Ventilation, Engineered Systems
Magazine (on-line ), Available: www.esmagazine.com
Measurement and Verification of Demand Control Ventilation; Advanced Energy Efficiency 2009
University ofIdaho, Integrated Design Lab-Boise (Report # 20090205-03) Page 22 of22
Easy Upgrades
for Simple Retrofits
1 of 8
2of8
30f8
40f8
50t8
6 of 8
7of8
80t8
Easy Upgrades
for Simple Retrofits
10f8
2ot8
30f8
40f8
50t8
60tB
7of8
8 at8
Easy Upgrades Trade Ally Survey
10f9
20f9
30f9
4of9
50f9
6of9
7of9
8of9
90f9
1SIDA~PO.
An lDP compa
Darlene Nemnich
Senior Pricing Analyst
Priing & Regulatory Servces
[phone]
FAX [phone]
E-MAIL dnemnich(Sidahopr.com
February 26, 2010
Ms. Jean D. Jewell, Secretary
Idaho Public Utilties Commission
P.O. Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0074
RE: FlexPeak Management Demand Response Program Report
Dear Ms. Jewell:
Enclosed please find a copy of the FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary
Report. In accordance with the proviion in Idaho Public Utlities Commission Order No.
30805, this report addresses the Commission's request for a preliminary evaluation of the
program prior to making a request for a Commission determination of the prudency of the
Company's expenditures for the FlexPeak Management Program. In light of the fact that
the program has been in efect for only one season, a full scale evaluation is premature.
The Company wil report furter on the Program in the 2010 DSM Annual Report to be
file March 15, 2010, and intends to request a prudency determination for 2009
expenditures for the FlexPeak Program subsequent to the March 15,2010, filing.
If you have any questions regarding this report, feel free to contact Bilie McWinnat
208-388-5871 or myself at 208-388-2505.
Sincerely,~
Darlene Nemnich
cc: Randy Lobb
Lynn Anderson
P.O. Box 70 (83707)
1221 W.ldaho St.
Boise, 1083702
\!
An II:ACORP tompri
FlexPeak Management
2009 Preliminary Report
February 24, 2010
Idaho Power
Table of Contents
Program Summary .....................................................................................;...........................................3
2009 Demand Reduction Event Results...... ..... .... ....................................... ..... .................. .............. .....4
Marketing and Public Relations.............................................................................................................4
Customer Recruitment ...........................................................................................................................5
Metering.................................................................................................................................................6
Event Initiation. ............. ... ..................... ..... ..... ...... ...... ........................ ..... ................................ .... ..........7
Event Monitoring.............. .............................. .............................................. .... .................. ..... ......... .....7
Customer Satisfaction .................................................................................................... ........................9
Payment Reconciliation .......................................................................................................................10
Cost-Effectiveness ...............................................................................................................................11
Conclusion............ .... ... .... .......... ....... ...... ...... ..... ....... .... .......... ..... .......... ..... ..... .............. .... ..... .......... ...12
FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary Report Page 2
Idaho Power
Program Summary
FlexPeak Management is a voluntary demand response program targeting Idaho Power's industrial and
large commercial customers that are capable of reducing their electrical energy loads for short periods
during summer peak days. The program became available to the company's Idaho customers in May
2009. The program objective is to reduce the demand on Idaho Power's system during peak times
through customers' voluntary electrical use reduction. The program is active June 1 to August 31,
between the hours of 2:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on non-holiday weekdays. Customers receive notification of
a demand reduction event two hours prior to the start of the event, and events wil last anywhere
between two to four hours, with a maximum of 60 hours per season.
In November 2008, Idaho Power selected EnerNOC, Inc. through a competitive Request for Proposal
(RFP) process, to implement the program. Idaho Power entered into a five-year agreement with
EnerNOC in February 2009, pending the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (IPUC) approval. In May
2009, the IPUC approved the contract in Order No. 30805 and requested that Idaho Power submit a
preliminary report.
EnerNOC is responsible for developing and implementing all marketing plans, securing all paricipants,
installing and maintaining all equipment behind Idaho Power's meter used to reduce demand, tracking
participation, and reporting results to Idaho Power. Idaho Power initiates demand response events by
notifying EnerNOC, who then supplies the requested load reduction to the Idaho Power system.
EnerNOC meets with prospective customers to identify their potential to reduce electrcal energy load
during active program hours without negative impact to their business operations. Customers enroll in
the program by entering into a contract with EnerNOC. EnerNOC then installs energy monitoring
equipment at the customer site, simulates a demand response event to ensure customer satisfaction and
performance, and officially enrolls the facility in the program.
Contractually, EnerNOC has agreed to a target annual demand reduction amount for the five year
contract length. Each week, EnerNOC commits a demand reduction level in megawatts (MWs) to Idaho
Power that EnerNOC is obligated to meet in a demand reduction event. When Idao Power anticipates
the need for capacity, it schedules the date and time of the event and notifies EnerNOC.
Idaho Power has access to an EnerNOC web site that shows near real-time energy usage data of the
aggregated load, and can continually monitor the success of the demand reduction event. Customers can
also continuously monitor their demand reduction performance using their individual near real-time
energy usage data available to them through the EnerNOC web site.
FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary Report Page 3
Idaho Power
2009 Demand Reduction Event Results
Durng 2009, the first customers enrolled in the program in May and EnerNOC committed their initial
reduction amount of 0.30 MW to Idaho Power by the second week of June. The target reduction for the
season was 2 MW. By the end of the season, EnerNOC had enrolled 22 participants across 33 facility
sites and had committed to a maximum weekly reduction of 15.2 MW. In July, participants achieved an
actual reduction of 17.1 MW, surpassing the progrm target reduction by more than eight times.
Idaho Power initiated eight demand response events in July. In each case EnerNOC exceeded the
committed MW reduction by the percentages shown in the table below.
FlexPeak 2009
Demand Reduction Percent Penormances
173%
6
~:.
3::t
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th
Event
II Committed Capacity (MW) II Avg Actual Reduction (MW)
Marketing and Public Relations
EnerNOC was responsible for the development of all marketing collateraL. Idaho Power worked with
EnerNOC to co-brand marketing materials, and reviewed and edited materials such as a "Frequently
Asked Questions" Sheet and press releases. Idaho Power continues to work with EnerNOC on the
development of a Utility Case Study, which wil discuss the program development and rapid ramp-up
process.
FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary Report Page 4
Idaho Power
Customer Recruitment
EnerNOC began the recruitment process by engaging customers with a demand of 500 kW and above.
Idaho Power Customer Representatives contacted most of these customers prior to contact from
EnerNOC in order to inform them of the program. EnerNOC employees reached out to customers first
by phone, and then set up on-site meetings to determine a customer's potential for demand reduction.
Idaho Power Customer Representatives often attended the on-site meetings.
EnerNOC worked with each participant to develop a demand reduction plan that could be implemented
at the site without negatively impacting the participant's business. Customers then were invited to sign
a contract with EnerNOC to enroll in the program.
A breakdown ofMW reduction committed by customer segment for 2009 is shown below.
FlexPeak 2009
Committed MW Reduction by Customer Segment
Primary /Secoodary
School
1%
Water & Wastewater
Treatment Facility
2%
Composting/Recycling/W
as.te Removal
2%
Other Ught Industrial
4%
College/University
4%
FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary Report Page 5
Idaho Power
Metering
Once customers enrolled in the progrm by signing a contrct with EnerNOC, EnerNOC submitted
requests to Idaho Power to enable the customers' electrc meters to transmit KYZ-pulse outputs. Some
customer's meters were already enabled for pulse outputs. For each customer not receiving pulse
outputs, Idaho Power metering technicians enabled the meters to trnsmit these outputs, and EnerNOC
reimbursed Idaho Power for the associated costs. EnerNOC then installed monitoring equipment to
obtain and transmit the pulse output to their servers. By using EnerNOC's proprietary software,
PowerTrak, customers could then monitor their near real-time energy use on a continual basis. Below
are examples of information participants can access at all times through the EnerNOC web site using
their unique login and password. In these examples the reduction in energy use occurs on a Saturday
and Sunday.
FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary Report Page 6
Idaho Power
Event Initiation
Idaho Power's Power Supply group monitored system demand forecasts and evaluated up to date
conditions in order to determine when demand reduction events would be initiated to reduce an expected
peak on the system. Idaho Power sent e-mails to EnerNOC to initiate each event, and EnemNOC in
turn, notified customers two hours prior to the event. In 2009, all of the demand reduction was achieved
manually by the participants at their sites, with EnerNOC retaining no automatic control of the reduction
processes.
Idaho Power initiated a test event on July 7, 2009 in order to test the dispatch process and monitoring
capabilities. To the participants, this event was treated as a normal demand reduction event. The next
seven events in July were initiated in response to system demand needs.
Event Monitoring
EnerNOC submitted weekly reduction commitments to Idaho Power by the Friday proceeding the event
week. During each event, participants had access to near real-time electrc use data, which displayed
their baselines and reduction commitments through EnerNOC's web site. Below is an example of what
a customer might see during a demand reduction event.
FlexPeak Managemènt 2009 Preliminary Report Page 7
Idaho Power
During each event Idaho Power had access to aggregate performance as shown below. The graph
displays the current near real-time event performance, as well as the average performance throughout
the event.
. Perforllnce IZ MW No Reportng - Commild C.apadly
FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary Report Page 8
Idaho Power
Customer Satisfaction
EnerNOC conducted a post-event customer satisfaction survey after the July 7th test event, and while
only a few customers were enrolled in the program at that time, results were positive. Six customers
were enrolled across 10 sites for this event. Ofthe 19 contacts made, 4 responded to the survey, for a
response rate of 21 %. On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most prepared, the average level of
preparedness was 8.5. On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most satisfied, the average level of overall
satisfaction was 8.5. On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most likely to recommend, all four customers
were at a 10. Results are shown below.
Post-Event Survey Results
July 7, 2009 Event
10
1
. Overall Satisfaction
. likely to Recommend
Ii level of preparation
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
o
Customer "A"Customer "B"Customer "C"Customer "0"
Three of the four customers said the level of difficulty in the reduction plan was about what they
expected, and the fourth said it was easier than expected. One general comment was submitted,
requesting more advanced notice.
EnerNOC plans to conduct a 2009 post-season survey within the first quarter of2010. Results of the
survey will be made available to Idaho Power.
All 22 customers who enrolled and participated in the 2009 season are enrolled to participate in 2010.
FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary Report Page 9
Idaho Power
Payment Reconciliation
EnerNOC invoiced Idaho Power on a monthly basis. Invoices consist of both a capacity payment
component, based on the amount of reduction available during active program times, and an energy
payment component, based on measured reductions during each event. In June and August, there were
no demand reduction events, so charges were based on a simple capacity payment calculation using
EnerNOC weekly reduction commitments. During the month of July, in which eight demand reduction
events were called, biled amounts had an energy component and a capacity component which were both
based on actual participant reductions.
The overall demand reduction was determined by totaling the demand reduction of each participating
facility. The demand reduction of each paricipating facility was determined by subtracting their actual
use from a calculated baseline. The baseline in a demand reduction program is used to measure
response and establish appropriate compensation for program participants. It estimates what would have
happened on an event day, absent the demand reduction event, which then allows Idaho Power to
determine how much load was reduced as a result of the program. Specifically, a baseline is calculated
by selecting the three highest load days of the preceding ten non-event business days. A "day-of-
adjustment" is then applied to the baseline to shift or scale the baseline based on electricity usage in the
hours prior to an event so that electrcity usage predicted by the baseline most closely matches actual
electrcity usage on the day of an event (absent any demand reduction program response). These
adjustments are used to account for the impact that temperature has on a participant's expected load.
Without this adjustment, the baseline could underestimate expected electrcity usage on the event day.
EnerNOC provided customer baseline and reduction data to Idaho Power with the July invoice, and
Idaho Power worked in parallel, using the actual five minute interval data received from EnerNOC to
determine baselines and reductions independently. Where there were discrepancies, the two companies
worked together to determine the cause and correct any mistakes. Discrepancies were due to a
misinterpretation of the day-of-adjustment calculation and a misunderstanding as to whether or not past
event days would be included in the baseline. At the end of the reconciliation process, both companies
agreed upon the individual reductions and composite reductions for each event.
FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary Report Page 10
Idaho Power
Cost..Effectiveness
In the initial cost-effectiveness analysis, Idaho Power estimated that the commercial demand response
program would be cost-effective, both from the Utility Cost (UC) and Total Resource Cost (TRC)
perspectives, beginning in year two (2010). Year one of the program was viewed as a ramp up year. It
was projected that the TRC benefit-cost (b/c) ratio in year one would fall below 1.0, but that building the
program foundation would contrbute to a cost-effective program in ensuing years.
EnerNOC's initial goal was to achieve 2 MW of demand reduction, and the cost-effectiveness analysis
indicated that under normal circumstances the program must reach 15 MW for the value in demand
savings to be greater than program costs and for the program to be cost-effective.
However, after determining actual expenses and MW demand reductions achieved in 2009, the program
was cost-effective in its first year. Lower expenses and higher demand reduction contrbuted to the
program's cost-effectiveness in year one. Following are some ofthe reasons:
· Program administration costs were one-third of what was originally projected.
· Despite the late start, EnerNOC experienced a higher paricipation rate than what was originally
expected. This resulted in higher demand reductions than were assumed in the original cost-
effectiveness analysis.
· Most notably, the assumption in the cost-effectiveness analysis was that EnerNOC would
achieve the exact MW demand reduction they committed to provide to Idaho Power. In
actuality, EnerNOC achieved a much greater reduction than the committed MW reduction.
The actual TRC b/c ratio in 2009 was 1.60, and not the 0.51 originally predicted, as shown below.
2009Fl P kM.C Efjexeaanaj!ement ost ectiveness
MW Reduction TRC Ratio
Projected 2 0.51
Actual 11.1 1.60
The actual cost of the program in 2009 was $528,681. In the remaining years of the contract, the
program is expected to be cost-effective with a projected contract life b/c ratio of 1.11 from the TRC
perspective.
FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary Report Page 11
Idaho Power
Conclusion
Given the speed with which FlexPeak Management was implemented and given demand reduction
results that far exceeded expectations, Idaho Power considers 2009 to be an extremely successful year.
Not only was the company able to offer customers a quality progrm with multiple benefits, but
FlexPeak Management's contrbution to Idaho Power's system peak reduction was more than eight
times the original forecast capacity of the program. Going forward, Idaho Power wil continue to
evaluate the best use of the program in order to meet the program objectives. Results wil be reported
anually in the Demand Side Management Anual Report.
FlexPeak Management 2009 Preliminary Report Page 12
An IDACORP company
Irrigation Peak Rewards
Program Report
December 1, 2008
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. 2
Summary of Results ...................................................................................................................... 3
Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... '4
REVIEW OF PARTICIPATION, OPERATIONS, AND LOAD REDUCTION .................................. 5
Map 1.
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
Table 8.
Graph 1.
Graph 2.
Graph 3.
Graph 4.
List of Maps
Idaho Power service territory and regions...............................................................5
List of Tables
Service points by area................................................................................................6
Interruption option distribution by service point ....................................................7
Equipment problem resolution..................................................................................8
Realization rates by period ........................................................................................9
Enrolled load by area ................................................................................................10
Average MW reduction utilzing realization rates by period ................................11
Program costs ...........................................................................................................14
Benefit-cost model input ...........................................................................................15
List of Graphs
Participant distribution in each area.........................................................................6
Average metered demand (kW) ...............................................................................12
Average metered demand (kW) 2nd half of June ....................................................12
Demand impact on Company system load ............................................................13
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Irrigation Peak Rewards Program (the Program) is a voluntary demand
response program available to Idaho Power's agricultural irrigation customers
since 2004. The Program is designed to reduce peak load by turning off
participating irrigation pumps during peak demand hours through the irrigation
season in return for a financial incentive. Through this Program, the Company
has been successful in reducing load during the summer afternoon hours when
overall costs to provide energy are typically higher.
On September 18, 2006, Idaho Power (the Company) filed with the Idaho Public
Utilities Commission (the Commission) a request for authorization to implement
certain changes to the Program to improve participation. The first proposed
change was to increase the demand credits offered to participating customers.
Second, the Company proposed to allow more customers to participate by
decreasing the pump horsepower (hp) limit from 100 hp to 75. On November 30,
2006 the Commission approved the proposed changes through Order No. 30194
and subsequently, the Company implemented the changes during the 2007
irrigation season. The Commission's Order No. 30194 directed the Company to
file a report annually on December 1 for three years. This report provides the
Commission with the 2008 operational results of the Irrigation Peak Rewards
Program, and is filed in compliance with Order No. 30194. The operational
results presented in this document represent a review of the Program's
performance in 2008 on a system-wide basis.
The 2004 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) set an initial load reduction target for
the Program of 30 MW. The 2006 changes to the Program were estimated to
achieve an additional 4.5 MW load reduction for a total of 34.5 MW at the
generation level, which is adjusted for line losses. At the customer level this
equates to an overall load reduction of 30.5 MW, which removes line losses. The
peak reduction numbers reported throughout the remainder of this document are
for Idaho Power's service territory in Idaho and Oregon and are presented at the
customer leveL.
The Program enrollment for 2008 was 897 service points across five geographic
regions of the Company's Idaho and Oregon service territories. Within these five
regions, there were 3,955 eligible metered service points with at least 100
cumulative hp. Another 949 service points were eligible with pumps ranging from
75-99 cumulative hp, with 75 hp being the minimum amount eligible under the
Program. Approximately 1,340 customers operated the 4,904 eligible service
points
The Program utilizes pre-programmed, electronic, time-activated switches to turn
off pumps of participating irrigation customers during pre-determined intervals in
exchange for a financial incentive. Customers can choose to participate one, two,
or three weekdays per week during the months of June, July, and August. The
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 2
following are the interruption options (reported in Mountain Standard Time)
available to customers with the corresponding incentive amounts:
· One weekday per week, 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.
. Two weekdays per week, 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.
· Three weekdays per week, 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.
$2.01 per kW Demand
$3.36 per kW Demand
$4.36 per kW Demand
The monthly incentive amount credited to customers was calculated for each
metered service point by multiplying the monthly biling demand for the months of
June, July, and August by the corresponding incentive amount based on the
interruption option selected by the customer.
Throughout 2008, the Company continued to share Program information and
progress with the Energy Efficiency Advisory Group (EEAG) members through
Program updates. Members of EEAG represent a cross-section of customer
interests including residential, industrial, commercial and agriculturaL. In 2008,
EEAG membership also included Company representation, Commission Staff
members (Staff) and a representative from the Idaho Irrigation Pumpers
Association (IIPA).
In the spring of 2008 Idaho Power convened a workshop with the IIPA and Staff
to discuss ideas to improve the Program. The outcome of this workshop resulted
in a proposal that was presented to the EEAG and is currently before the
Commission seeking approval for significant changes to the Program. Among the
proposed changes are increased incentives offered to Program participants. It is
anticipated by the Company that the proposed changes wil provide increased
peak demand reduction through the Program. If the proposal is approved by the
Commission, the results of the proposed changes will be presented in the 2009
Irrigation Peak Rewards Report to be submitted by December 1,2009.
Summary of Results
The following items summarize the key results of the Program on a system-wide
basis:
i: In 2008 the Program achieved a maximum peak load reduction of 34.5
MW.
i: Two hundred sixty (260) customers, or 19.4% of the 1,340 eligible
customers, chose to participate in the Program.
i: Eight hundred ninety-seven (897), or 18.3%, of the 4,904 eligible metered
service points were enrolled in the Program.
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 3
(J Of the 897 enrolled service points, seventy-three (73) were pumps with
75-99 hp. All other enrolled pumps were 100 hp or greater.
(J The Program achieved a total biling demand enrollment of 164,733 kW.
(J The Program produces substantial and measurable impacts on peak
demand. The total load reduction from 4-8 p.m. associated with the
Program averaged 27.8 MW in June, 29.6 MW in July, and 21.1 MW in
August.
(J The Program costs as of October 31,2008 were $1,420,307.
(J The Program results show a 30-year average benefit cost (B/C) ratio of
1.09.
Conclusions
(J The Company plans to continue the Program because it is a cost-effective
way to reduce customer demand at the optimal time of day. However, the
company has recently filed with the Commission to add a dispatchable
option to this Program.
(J In 2008, continued participation of eligible service points enrolled in the
Program helped the Company to achieve its 2004 Integrated Resource
Plan (IRP) targets for peak load reduction.
(J The Program achieved a maximum peak load reduction that occurred
during the last two weeks in June of 34.5 MW at the customer leveL. The
average peak reduction in July was 29.6 MW. The Program had a target
load reduction of 30.5 MW at the customer leveL.
2008 Irrgation Peak Rewards Report Page 4
REVIEW OF PARTICIPATION, OPERATIONS, AND LOAD REDUCTION
1. Participation
Informational letters were mailed in February of 2008 to eligible customers. The
letters were the primary method of marketing the Program. Each customer letter
included a Program explanation, the Program's incentive structure, a listing of the
customer's eligible service points, and a Program application. In addition, follow
up telephone calls were made in March 2008 to all prior Program participants
that had not yet sent in their application. Significant effort, including customer
visits, was made to enroll as many customers as possible.
Map 1 portrays Idaho Power's service territory divided into five regional areas
("region"). The regions are titled Western, Canyon, Capital, Southern, and
Eastern. These regions wil be used throughout this report referring to Program
information.
Map 1. Idaho Power service territory and regions.
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 5
Graph 1 represents the distribution of Program participants by area.
Graph 1. Distribution of Participants.
Program Participation by Area
Eastern
53%
Western
3%
Southern
34%
Table1 lists the total number of eligible service points and the participation levels
by area.
Table 1. Service points by area.
ELIGIBLE SERVICE ENROLLED
IDAHO POWER SERVICE POINTS PECENTAGE
REGION POINTS ENROLLED BY AREA
Western 217 26 12.0%
Canyon 340 23 6.8%
Capital 512 64 12.5%
Twin Falls 1,222 134 11.0%
Southern
Mini-Cassia 1,035 171 16.5%
Eastern 1,578 479 30.4%
TOTAL SERVICE 4,904 897 18.3POINTS
2008 Irrigation. Peak Rewards Report Page 6
Table 2 compares how the participating service points were distributed across
the Company's service territory, along with the interruption options for each area.
Table 2. Interruption option distribution by service point.
INTERRUPT INTERRUPT INTERRUPT
OPTION 1 OPTION 2 OPTION 3
IDAHO POWER 1 2 3
REGION DayslWeek DayslWeek DayslWeek TOTAL
Western 6 6 14 26
Canyon 14 0 9 23
Capital 38 8 18 64
Twin Falls 31 49 54 134
Southern
Mini-Cassia 138 13 20 171
Eastern 255 119 105 479
TOTAL SERVICE POINTS 482 195 220 897
2. Program Opt-out
During the 2008 irrigation season, twelve (12) service points were removed from
Program participation after June 1 due to various unforeseen circumstances by
customers. Under the Program, if a service point is taken out of the Program
after June 1, the participant is assessed a fee of $100. This resulted in a total of
$1,200 which was credited to the Energy Efficiency Rider funding account to
offset the initial Program costs.
3. Interruption Failures
Electronic timers manufactured by Grasslin Controls Corp. (Model GMX-891-0-
24) were used to interrupt power to the customers' pumps during the interruption
period. The timers were installed in the pump motor control circuit to prevent the
pump from running during the interruption period. In order to meet the load
reduction targets of the Program, the Company tries to minimize interruption
failures. However, there were a small number of interruption failures discovered
in 2008. In most cases the failures were corrected quickly with little or no impact
to Program performance.
Most of the electronic timers operated without incident with less than 3% percent
of participants requesting a follow-up visit. The timer issues requiring a follow-up
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 7
visit are detailed in Table 3. Table 3 lists the types of problems resolved by either
Company personnel or contracted electricians.
Table 3. Known equipment problem resolutions.
ISSUE QUANTITY
Replaced faulty time clock*45
Electrician troubleshooting calls 50
TOTAL 95
*Replaced during re-programming in the spring.
While each of the known timer related problems detailed in Table 3 were
resolved in a timely manner, a review of the Company's load research meter data
revealed that there were some failures that went undetected for the entire
irrigation season. Fifty-four (54) load research meters are distributed among the
897 participating service points in order to study the usage patterns of the
customers and the load impact of the Program. The data showed that the energy
demand that failed to be included in scheduled interruptions increased from 2007
by about 16%. The interruption failures are evident in the load reduction graphs
provided in this report. Upon further investigation, it was found that these failures
were due to various mechanical problems. The Company continues to address
this issue through monitoring of load research data along with an increased
number of site visits for electronic timer inspections.
4. Load Reduction Achieved
The Program load reduction impacts were determined by utiizing information and
conclusions from the impact evaluation conducted in 2004 by Summit Blue
Consulting, LLC. The evaluation utiized load research meter data for both
Program participants and non-participants. This information was used in a
regression analysis to develop a statistical kW load modeL. The model
considered weather conditions, time of day, day of week, and month in
determining realization rates for six 2-week periods during the course of the
irrigation season. The Company has utilzed these realization rates since the
2005 season.
The realization rate is defined as the likelihood an irrigation service point is
operating during the interrupt period, and provides a clear picture of Program
impacts. The realization rate can be characterized as simply the percentage of
monthly biling demand that is expected to result in an actual load reduction on
the system during a given interruption period. The realization rate is highest at
the end of June and the beginning of July when most irrigation pumps are
operating nearly 24 hours-a-day, 7 days-a-week. The realization rate is lower
later in the irrigation season when irrigation pumps are turned off due to crop
maturity.
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 8
Table 4 shows the Program evaluation results from the Summit Blue impact
analysis for each of the six 2-week time periods. The highest realization rate
occurred during the second half of June, with a realization rate of 64%. The
lowest realization rate occurred during the second half of August, with a
realization rate of 32%. The average total realization rate is 50%. These
realization rates were used to calculate the Program load reduction for this year.
The Company verified the realization rates prepared by Summit Blue through
past and current analyses, including analysis of the 2008 load research data.
Based on these analyses, Idaho Power believes the realization rates from the
Summit Blue study continue to be a reliable and accurate means to estimate the
Program's load reduction. Idaho Power does not propose any changes to the
realization rates at this time, but wil continue to review the realization rates in the
future.
Table.4. Realization rates by period.
Idaho Power
PERIOD Realization Rate
1 st half of June 41%
2nd half of June 64%
1st half of July 60%
2nd half of July 53%
1 st half of August 49%
2nd half of August 32%
AVERAGE 50%
The Company attempts to distribute the enrolled kW evenly throughout each
weekday. However, due to service point size variability, enrollment requests by
customers, and enrollment opt-outs, etc., the load cannot be exactly balanced.
The peak billng demand data for the months of June, July, and August 2008
were used to estimate the amount of load enrolled in the Program. The total
biling demand enrolled in the Program was 164,733 kW. Table 5 shows how the
enrolled load was distributed by region.
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 9
Table 5. Enrolled load by area.
ENROLLED BILLING DEMAND BY REGION (KW*)
IDAHO POWER REGION 1 2 3 TOTALDayslWeekDayslWeekDayslWeek
Western 967 702 977 2,646
Canyon 1,924 0 882 2,806
Capital 16,991 1,193 2,929 21,113
Twin Falls 6,956 8,213 8,615 23,784
Southern
Mini-Cassia 29,476 2,877 3,717 36,070
Eastern 44,555 18,489 15,271 78,315
TOTAL SERVICE POINTS 100,869 31,474 32,390 164,733
*It is important to note that this biling demand level would be achieved only if 100% of the pumps
enrolled in the Program were all running at the scheduled interruption time.
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 10
Table 6 shows the average MW reduction by day for each two week period
achieved utilizing the realization rates.
Table 6. Average MW reduction utilzing realization rates by period.
Realization
Rate MON TUE WED THUR FRI Average
%(MW)(MW)(MW)(MW)(MW)(MW)
1 st half of June 41 20.45 22.60 22.19 22.33 21.78 21.87
2nd half of June 64 31.32 35.15 34.35 34.55 33.71 33.82
1 st half of July 60 29.13 32.90 31.96 32.39 31.20 31.52
2nd half of July 53 25.44 29.06 27.94 28.61 27.27 27.66
1 st half of August 49 23.52 26.87 25.83 26.45 25.22 25.58
2nd half of August 32 15.36 17.55 16.87 17.27 16.47 16.70
As reported earlier, the Company has a sample of 54 load research meters
installed on participating service points. These meters are distributed in a manner
similar to participation rates for each area. This data was collected and analyzed
and is shown in the following graphs.
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 11
Graph 2 displays the average hourly kW for all days in June, July, and August
and shows the average load reduction per participating metered service point
within the load research sample. The graphed data represents all interrupt days
in 2008.
Graph 2. Average metered demand (kW).
TOTAL LOAD RESECH DATA FOR 2008
200
175
~ 150
't 125cco
Ii 100o
l 75
~ 50
.. ~.~r
r 1__ Awrage Interrpt Dayl
25 \I
o
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of Day (Hour)
Graph 3 displays the average hourly kW for all days in the second half of June
and shows the average load reduction per participating metered service point
within the load research sample. The graphed data represents all interrupt days
in the second half of June 2008.
Graph 3. Average metered demand (kW) second half of June.
SEOl HALF OF JU 2008
LOAD REH tI TA
200
175 _..~ --~.~.- .-.. ...~ 150
:; 125i:CD
l 100CD
r 75oC 50
/
1__ Averag k1lerrl Day I
25 ..
o
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of Da (Hour)
Another way to view program impact is to look at total system firm load data. The
system firm load during the summer months has the greatest electrical demand
of the year. The highest peak load historically occurs in late June or July between
4-8 PM.
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 12
Graph 4 represents demand response impact to the entire Company system firm
load on various days in July 2008. The reduction in system firm load as a result
of the Program occurs at 4 PM for the corresponding days and is approximately
30-40 MW for each day. However, July 3rd includes system load impacts from the
AlC Cool Credit program. The AlC Cool Credit program was initiated at 3:00 pm
on July 3rd. The line representing July 9th also includes impacts from the AlC Cool
Credit program. The AlC Cool Credit program was utilized beginning at 4:00 pm
on July 9th.
Graph 4. Demand response impact on Company system firm load.
Program Impac on System Load
3,200
3,100
3,000
~2,900
~2.800"II0 2,700..
E 2.600Sl/;:2,500t/
2,400
2,300
-1-Jul.08
-3.Jul-08
-9-Jul-08
2,200
~ ~ q,~ q,~ q,~ q,~ q,~ q,~ q,~ q,~ q,~ q,~ q,~ q,~ ~
..i:~ .."~ ..1-~ ,,~"" 1-~"" oj~ i;~"" (,~"" r¿~"" '\~"" qj~"" oj~"" ..i:~ .."~ ..1-~
Time
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 13
COST EFFECTIVENESS
1. Program Costs
Table 7 displays the annual Program costs as of October 31, 2008. Program
costs remain consistent on a year to year basis. However, the administration
costs for 2008 include additional time spent on the proposed Program re-design
for 2009.
Table 7. Program costs.
ITEM PROGRAM COSTS
Electronic timers $20,064.20
Contracted electricians $67,318.42
Incentive payments $1,241,494.75
Marketing and $91,479.51Administration
TOTAL $1,420,307.20
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 14
2. Benefit-Cost Analysis
The 2008 Peak Rewards Program results were applied to the cost~effectiveness
model that was used when the Program was developed. Table 8 summarizes the
inputs that were used in the cost effectiveness modeL. In 2008, the Program
results yielded a 30-year average benefit~cost ratio of 1.09.
Table 8. Benefit-cost model inputs
DESCRIPTION INPUT
Number of metered service points 897
Overall Program realization rate 50%
Average service point, biling kW (peak
month)184
Enrolled peak, kW 164,733
Average July peak reduction (MW)29.6
Participant distribution by area
Western 3%
Canyon 3%
Capital 7%
Southern 34%
Eastern 53%
Service point interruption option
1 day per week 54%
2 days per week 22%
3 days per week 24%
Actual Program Cost (as of Oct. 31, 2008)$1,420,307.20
2008 Irrigation Peak Rewards Report Page 15
An IOACOP Company
Irrigation Peak Rewards
Program Report
December 1,2009
rg 2009 Idaho Power
.-y'-I
This document printed on recycled paper.
Idaho Power
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................. ................................................ i
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. iiL. fF. ..1St 0 igures .................................................................. .... ........................ .......... .... ............. ........ 11
Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................1
Summary of Program Results ..........................................................................................................2
Program Details .........................................................................................................................2
Timer Option........................................................................................................................2
Dispatch Option ...................................................................................................................3
Program Incentives ........................................ ......................................................................4
Program Opt-out ..................... .............................................................................................4
Review of Program Results .............................................................................................................5
Participation........... ....... ....... ................................. ..... .... ..................... ... ...... ..... .............. ...........5
Operations ..................................................................................................................................8
Equipment and Monitoring ..................................................................................................8
Timer Option............................................................... ...................................................8
Dispatch Option .............................................................................................................8
Program Analysis.............. ..... ....................... .... .......... ........ ..................... ... ...... .............. ............. ..1 0
Load Reduction Analysis............................. ........... ....... ...... ................ ....... .... .... ................... ..1 0
Load Research Analysis-Timer Option.............................. .............................................11
Load Research Analysis-Manual Dispatch Option .........................................................12
Load Research Analysis-Automatic Dispatch Option ....................................................13
M2M Communications Device Analysis-Automatic Dispatch Option........................... i 4
Substation Data Analysis......................................... ................ ........ ...... .... ...................... ..15
System Load Data Analysis ............................................................................................... i 6
Load Reduction Achieved......................................... ........................ ... ...... .... ......................... .19
Cost-Effectiveness .........................................................................................................................21
Program Costs............. ..... ............. ............................... ................ ............. .... ..... ... ... .,. ... .... ..... .21
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Pagei
Idaho Power
Benefit-Cost Analysis ..............................................................................................................21
Customer Satisfaction Survey Results ............ .......... ... .... ...... ... ........... ... ..... ........ ......................... .22
Conclusions... .... ..................................... .... ..... ..... .................... ..... ....... ...... ................... .............. ...25
List of Tables
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Op.. . 4tion incentives. . .... ....... ...... ............... .... ....... .............. ... ........ ................... .... ........
Service points by area. ..... ........... ... ....... ............ ... ... ..... ... ....................... .... ...... ........7
Dispatch and Timer Options interrption distrbution by service point. .................7
Status of automatic control devices during dispatch events. .................................10
Realization rates by period for Timer Option participants. ...................................12
Table 6. Realized rate of automatic devices that turned off during load control
dispatch events. ....... ... .... .............. .... .......... ....... ...... ... ... ......... ... ........ ... ... ...... ......................... ... ..15
Table 7. Enrolled biling demand by region (kW). ..............................................................20
Table 8. Realization rates used for program options. ..........................................................20
Table 9. Total program daily MW reduction using realization rates. ..................................21
Table 10. Anual program costs. ...........................................................................................21
Table 11. Benefit-cost model inputs. .....................................................................................22
List of Figures
Figure 1. Idaho Power service areas........................................................................................6
Figure 2. Distrbution of participants. .....................................................................................6
Figure 3. Average metered demand (kW) Timer Option. .....................................................11
Figure 4. Average metered demand (kW) Manual Dispatch Option. ...................................12
Figure 5. Average metered demand (kW) Dispatch Option for July 2, 16, and 17...............13
Figure 6. Average metered demand (kW) Dispatch Option for July 22,23, and 27.............14
Figure 7. Load data from a particular substation in the Eastern area on July 16. .................15
Page ii Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Figure 8. Total system load on July 16. ................................................................................16
Figure 9. Demand response impact on Idaho Power system firm load. ................................17
Figure 10. Demand response program impact on system load early- to mid-July..................18
Figure 11. Demand response programs impact on system load late July................................19
Figure 12. Overall satisfaction with Irrgation Peak Rewards program. .................................23
Figure 13. Approximate percent of acres irrgated by pumps by crop. ...................................23
Figure 14. Information provided by the electrcian.......... .... ................. .... ....... ..................... ..24
Figure 15. Likelihood to participate in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program in the
future. ................................................................................................................................24
Figure 16. Barrers to participating in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program in the
future. ................................................................................................................................25
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page ii
Idaho Power
This page left blank intentionally.
Page iv Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Executive Summary
The Irrgation Peak Rewards program (the program) is a voluntary demand response program
that has been available to Idaho Power's agricultural irrgation customers since 2004.
The program is designed to reduce peak load by turning off participating irrgation pumps during
peak demand hours through the irrgation season in return for a financial incentive. Though
this program, Idaho Power has been successful in reducing load during the summer afternoon
hours, which are the hours that are drving Idaho Power's need for new resources.
A major change in the demand response program occurred in 2009. This change expanded
the dispatch capability of Idaho Power to reduce system demand during critical summer peak
load events. The Irrgation Peak Rewards program, originally identified as a resource in 2004,
was trnsitioned to act primarily as a direct load control or dispatch program. In prior years,
demand reduction through the progrm was controlled only with programmed timers that
provided demand reduction from irrgation pumping systems from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on
weekdays in June, July, and August. Options added to the program in 2009 allowed direct load
control or dispatch capabilities to match demand response resources with actual system peaks.
The change in the program has increased the programs peaking resource capacity from its
previous range of34 to 37 megawatt (MW) to a forecasted impact of 260 MW at program
matuty in 2012. Actual demand reductions from the revised program wil depend on the level
of irrgation customer participation and Idaho Power need.
This report provides the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (IPUC) with the 2009 operational
results of the Irrgation Peak Rewards program, and is filed in compliance with IPUC Order
No. 30194. The operational results presented in this document represent a review ofthe
program's pedormance in 2009 on a system-wide basis.
The redesigned Irrgation Peak Rewards program was introduced at the October 2, 2008, Energy
Efficiency Advisory Group (EEAG) meeting. Members of EEAG represent a cross-section of
customer interests, including residential, industrial, commercial, and agriculturaL. IPUC staff are
also members of the EEAG. Idaho Power proposed that the Irrgation Peak Rewards program
include a dispatch demand response option offered to Idaho Power customers in Idaho and
Oregon. Three options would be available for customers to choose between: 1) the Timer Option,
2) an Automatic Dispatch Option that allows Idaho Power to remotely turn participants' pumps
on or off, or 3) a Manual Dispatch Option for large service location with 1,000 horsepower (Hp)
or greater option that allows participating customers, after being notified by Idaho Power, to tu
pumps off manually during summer peak hours.
Based on the success of the current Irrgation Peak Rewards program and the potential for
substantially increased cost-effective, peak-demand reduction, the EEAG recommended that
Idaho Power expand the program. Throughout 2008, Idaho Power researched various equipment,
options, and costs for dispatch equipment for use on irrgation pumps.
The Irrgation Peak Rewards program, which included the dispatch demand response option, was
fied with the IPUC on November 10,2008, and approved by the IPUC on January 14,2009.
The program was approved in Oregon by the Public Utility Commission of Oregon (OPUC) on
February 25, 2009. Idaho Power offered the program to all agricultual customers receiving
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 1
Idaho Power Company
service under Irrgation Rate Schedule 24 in 2009. Thoughout 2009, Idaho Power continued to
share program information and progress with EEAG members through program updates.
Details on the approved Irrgation Peak Rewards progrm changes are listed as part of Case
No. IPC-E-08-23 on the IPUC Web site, and are identified as Schedule 23 in both Idaho
and Oregon.
Summary of Program Results
The following items summarize the key results of the program on a system-wide basis:
· In 2009, the program achieved a maximum peak load reduction of 160 MW.
· Three hundred seventy-four (374) customers, or 6% ofthe 6,379 eligible customers,
chose to participate in the progrm.
· One thousand five hundred and twelve (1,512), or 8.6%, of the 17,621 eligible metered
service points were enrolled in the progrm.
· Of the 1,512 enrolled service points, 382 were enrolled in the Timer Option, and
1,130 were enrolled in the Dispatch Option.
· The program achieved a total billng demand enrollment of301,839 kilowatts (kW),
of which 58,057 kW were enrolled in the Timer Option and 243,782 kW were enrolled in
the Dispatch Option.
· The program costs as of October 31,2009 were $9,636,796.
· Results show a 20-year average benefit cost (B/C) ratio of 1.54.
· Customer Satisfaction Survey results indicated that almost 90% of the responding
participants were satisfied with the program.
Program Details
Timer Option
The pre-programmed Timer Option, offered previously, was made available to all irrgation
customers. Installation fees between $250 and $500 were applied to paricipating service
locations less than 75 Hp.
· Customers could choose to have all irrgation pumps on a single metered service point
turned off on one, two, or three weekdays per week.
Page 2 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
· Idaho Power determined the specific weekday or weekdays to schedule the interrption
of all pumps at each service point.
· Interrptions occurred from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Dispatch Option
The Dispatch Option allowed Idaho Power to initiate load control events that prevented pumps
from operating at participating metered service points. Installation fees between $500 and $1,000
applied to participating service points less than 30 Hp. Customers could participate in one of
three ways:
· Have a one-way communication device installed that allowed Idaho Power to control all
the customer's pumps at a single metered service point.
· Have a two-way communication device installed that allowed both Idaho Power and
the customer to control all the pumps at a single service point.
· Service points with multiple pumps and over 1,000 cumulative Hp were eligible to
participate as a Large Service Location. Customers under this classification could choose
to manually control which pumps were controlled during a load control event.
The parameters of the Dispatch Option, which limits the impact on customers, include the
following:
· Idaho Power wil initiate control (dispatch) events on a customized M2M
Communications Web site.
· Dispatch load control events can occur any weekday, excluding July 4, between the hours
of 2 p.m. and 8 p.m.
· Load control events can occur up to 4 hours per day and up to 15 hours per week, but no
more than 60 hours per program season.
· Idaho Power wil give notice by 4 p.m. the day prior to the initiation of a control event.
· If prior notice of a load control event has been sent, Idaho Power may choose to cancel
the event by 1 :30 p.m. on the scheduled day ofthe event.
· Idaho Power wil give 30 minutes notice prior to start of all actual events and prior to
the end of all actual events.
· The provisions for this program wil not apply for any time Idaho Power interrpts
the customer's load for a system emergency or any other time that a customer's service is
interrpted by events outside the control of Idaho Power.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 3
Idaho Power Company
Program Incentives
A customer's incentive appeared as a bil credit that summed the demand credit and energy
credit applied to a customer's monthly bils for the calendar months of June and July. .
The demand credit is calculated by multiplying the monthly billng kW by the demand-related
incentive amount for the interrption option selected by the customer. The energy credit is
calculated by multiplying the monthly biling kilowatt-hour (kWh) usage by the energy-related
incentive amount for the interrption option selected by the customer. Incentives offered are
listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Option incentives.
Option
Demand Credit
($ per biling kW)
Energy Credit
($ per biling kWh)
One Weekday
Twò Weekdays
Three Weekdays
$3.15
$4.65
$4.65
plus
plus
$0.002
$0.007
$4.65 plus $0.031
All customer incentives participating in the Timer or Dispatch options are calculated using
Idaho Power meter biling data. Idaho Power's Customer Information System (CIS) calculates
the bil credits though contrct riders. Installation fees and incentives for service points
classified as Large Service Locations are completed though manual adjustments using interval
meter data.
Program enrollment for 2009 was 1,512 service points across five geographic regions of
Idaho Power's Idaho and Oregon service areas. Approximately 6,379 customers operated
the 17,621 eligible service points. There were 750 potential Oregon customers and
5,629 potential Idaho customers.
Program Opt-out
During the 2009 irrgation season, one service point paricipant in the Timer Option and
one service point participant in the Dispatch Option requested removal from the program.
Both requests occurred after June 15. Under the program, if a service point is taken out of
the Program after June 15, the participant is assessed a fee. The fee for each service point
removed is $100 for the Timer Option and $500 for the Dispatch Option. This resulted in a total
of $600, credited to the Energy Efficiency Rider (Rider) funding account to offset the initial
program costs.
Under the rules of the Dispatch Option, participants have the ability to opt-out of dispatch events
five times per service point. Each opt-out incurs a fee of $0.005 per kWh based in the current
month's biling kWh, which may be prorated to correspond with the dates of program operation.
Page 4 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
During the 2009 irrigation season, 24 services points opted out 38 times. These penalties were
also credited to the Rider account.
Review of Program Results
Participation
During winter 2009, Idaho Power began program marketing strategies. Ten program workshops
were sponsored across Idaho Power's service area, and Idaho Power staff participated in
five agriculture shows. New program offerings were presented, and demonstrations of the new
dispatch demand response option were provided.
In February 2009, over 6,000 customer mailings were sent to all eligible Idaho Power irrgation
customers. The mailing included a program explanation, a program application, the program's
incentive strcture, a listing of the customer's eligible service points, and a potential incentive
estimate for each program option based on the customer's 2008 usage. Additionally, one~on~one
training with Idaho Power agrculture representatives familiarized customers with the new
technology and program details.
Idaho Power experienced great interest in the program and installed all of the available control
devices, which totaled 1,274 by the end ofthe season. Program participation exceeded
the number of available devices. After July 31, 2009, when more devices became available,
51 additional devices were installed for customers desiring to participate in the progrm in 2010.
Figue 1 portrays Idaho Power's service area divided into five regional areas-Western, Canyon,
Capital, Southern, and Eastern. These areas are used throughout this report in reference to
program information.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report PageS
Idaho Power Company
Figure 1. Idaho Power service areas.
Figure 2 represents the 374 irrgation customers that operated the enrolled service points in
the program and their distrbution by Idaho Power's regional service areas.
Figure 2. Distribution of participants.
Program Participation by Area
Eastern
34%
Western
9%Capital
14%
Southern
37%
Page 6 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Table 2 lists the total number of eligible service points and the participation levels by area.
Table 2.Service points by area.
Idaho Power Area Eligible Service Points
3,249
Service Points Enrolled
62
0(8)=50 Tlb)=12
75
0=70 T=5
148
0=129 T=19
263
0=223 T=40
301
0=242T=59
663
0=416 T=247
1,512
Western
Canyon 2,307
Capital 1,584
Southern Twin Falls 4,975
Mini-Cassia 2,221
Eastern 3,285
Total Service Points
(a) D= Enrolled in Dispatch Option
(b) T= Enrolled in Timer Option
17,621
Enrolled
Percentage by
Area
1.9%
3.3%
9.3%
5.3%
13.6%
20.2%
8.6%
Table 3 compares how the 1,512 participating service points were distrbuted among the different
program options across Idaho Power's service area.
Table 3.Dispatch and Timer Options interruption distribution by service point.
Dispatch Option Timer Option
Interrupt Interrupt Interrpt
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Idaho Power Area Automatic Manuai(a)Dispatch 1 2 3 Total
Device Total DayslWeek DayslWeek DayslWeek Timers
Western 50 0 50 1 1 10 12
Canyon 66 4 70 1 2 2 5
Capital 111 18 129 15 1 3 19
Southern Twin Falls 220 3 223 12 19 9 40
Mini-Cassia 242 0 242 50 2 7 59
Eastern 416 0 416 105 102 40 247
Total Service Points 1,105 25 1,130 184 127 71 382
(atarge service locations (~1000 Hp) selecting manual control.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Pagel
Idaho Power Company
Operations
Equipment and Monitoring
Timer Option
Electronic timers manufactured by Grasslin Controls Corp. (Model GMX-891-0-24) were used
to interrpt power to customers' pumps during the interrption period. The timers were installed
in the pump motor control circuit to prevent the pump from running during the interrption
period.
To meet the load reduction tagets ofthe program, Idaho Power tres to minimize interrption
failures. Most of the electronic timers operated without incident with 21 (5.5%) of service points
needing a follow-up visit by a contract electrcian to resolve a problem prior to the program start
date on June 15,2009. All 382 serice points paricipating in the Timer Option were checked and
re-programmed for the 2009 irrgation season. While each known timer problem was resolved,
a review of Idaho Power's load research data shows some issues went undetected and unreported
by customers. These failures were due to mechanical and electrcal problems. Idaho Power
continues to address these issues through equipment monitoring and site visits.
Dispatch Option
M2M Communications was selected as the equipment provider, based on having the best
equipment for the lowest price of the options Idaho Power researched. Currently, Idaho Power
buys the equipment from M2M Communications and pays to have it installed on Idaho Power
customers' pump panels.
Irrgation Load Control, LLC (ILC) formed as a joint venture between M2M Communications
and Sparan Energy Control Systems to provide installation and service for Idaho Power.
ILC's managing partners have a record of accomplishment of working together and have
successfully implemented the Rocky Mountain Power Irrgation demand response program
in 2008. Idaho Power initiates Irrgation Peak Rewards dispatch control events on a customized
M2M Communications' Web site.
A Web-to-wireless remote control system, developed by M2M Communications utilized the
Loadstar(ß Model MI0lcontrol device installed in customers' pump motor control circuit to turn
off or prevent the pump from ruing durng an interrption event. This equipment provided
remote cellular communication or remote satellte communication. The Web service allowed
Idaho Power to dispatch interrption events on the days Idaho Power determined to be system
peak days. Two-way communication from the device provided the feedback used by
Idaho Power to determine the status of the customers' equipment surrounding an interrption
event. Customers had the option of using the equipment for their own management purposes
outside of interrption events and received a detailed user's guide.
The combination of M2M utilization of new hardware, softare, and communications
equipment, in addition to Idaho Power launching a new dispatch option, resulted in challenges
described below. Idaho Power responded to the emerging challenges by working closely with
Page 8 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
M2M to correct concerns in preparation for the 2010 season. No additional costs to the Rider or
Idaho Power were incurred because of the solutions.
The Irrgation Peak Rewards dispatch load control system experienced a number of different
issues that affected Idaho Power's ability to fully realize its load-shedding potentiaL.
The system experienced highly inconsistent performance from load control devices equipped
with satellte network communications. In spring 2009, the satellite company experienced
problems properly placing a group of newly deployed communications satelltes into their
intended orbits. These problems resulted in the satelltes operating on reduced power,
which introduced gaps in coverage during which the dispatch load control devices could not
communicate with any satellite. Performance inconsistencies were characterized by
unpredictable latencies between the sending of dispatch commands to control units in the field
and receipt of those commands by the field units. These latencies resulted in variable-length
delays in shutting off irrgation pumps during load control events. In a few cases,
issued commands did not reach the intended devices for more than one day.
In response to these satellite communication issues, prior to the load control season for 2010,
all existing satellte-based dispatch load control devices wil be replaced with similar devices that
use a different satellte network.
Nearly all ofthe load control units were equipped with cellular radio modems. Several
configurable operating parameters in these cellular modems were pre-programmed by M2M
Communications during device manufacture. A significant number of these devices experienced
events that caused the radios to be restored to their factory default values. The result was that
the M2M Communications embedded firmware could no longer properly communicate with
the cellular modem. An average of 24% of all devices did not provide any communication on
whether or not they were functioning. The impact that this problem had on turning off pumps
during power dispatches is unclear. Testing at M2M Communications showed that some of
these devices could stil receive and execute the commands to turn off pumps, but they coulq not
call out to acknowledge and verify that the power had been controlled. A new version of
embedded firmware was developed to correct this problem. As of November 2009,
approximately 30% of the cellular-based units have received this firmware upgrade.
A small number of dispatch load control devices were wired incorrectly into the control circuit
on the pump electrcal service paneL. This resulted in several cases where the load control device
would operate properly, but the associated pump would continue to run. All such problem
devices are believed to have been identified and the wiring corrected.
Various load control units experienced intermittent performance due to weak cell signal strength.
A new, more strngent standard has been implemented that increases the minimum acceptable
signal strength from -100 decibels (dB) to -95dB. Cell signal strength is being tested as par of
the firmware upgrade process, and load control devices wil be upgraded with high-gain antennas
as necessary.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 9
Idaho Power Company
Table 4 provides a status summary of devices during each dispatch load control event, based on
the total number of installed devices and status of the service point at the time of the dispatch
event.
Table 4. Status of automatic control devices during dispatch events.
Status of automatic Date of 2009 Dispatch Load Control Events
devices at the time
of the dispatch
event
7/2/2009 7/16/2009 7/17/2009 7/21/2009 7/2212009 7/23/2009 7/27/2009
Number of devices that 280 291 281 319 302 295 358
did not record any
communication
Number of devices that 91 90 91 78 90 77 63
had communication but
did not work
Number of devices that 352 34 370 310 368 379 384
described pumps at
service point as
already off
Number of devices that 87 99 108 65 73 73 97
described pumps at
service point as
manually turned off at
beginning of dispatch
event
Number of devices that 372 434 408 400 424 439 372
turned pumps off
Total number of 1,182 1,258 1,258 1,172 1,257 1,263 1,274
devices
Program Analysis
Load Reduction Analysis
While total load reductions from this program were impactful, determining exact amounts for
each day was challenging. Load reduction impacts were determined by reviewing four different
sets of data and past information contained in an impact analysis done by Summit Blue
Consulting, LLC, in 2004. The four data sets reviewed and summarized in this section are
M2M Communication data, Idaho Power Load Research data, Idaho Power sample substation
data, and system load data. This information was used to determine realization rates to estimate
load reduction achievement.
Realization rate is defined as the likelihood an irrgation service point is operating during
the interrpt period and can represent program equipment failures, which is used to determine
program impacts. The realization rate can be characterized as the percentage of monthly biling
demand expected to result in an actual load reduction on the system durng a given interrption
Page 10 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
period. This rate is highest at the end of June and the beginning of July when many irrgation
pumps are operating nearly 24x7. The realization rate is lower later in the irrgation season when
many irrgation pumps are turned off due to crop maturity.
Load Research Analysis- Timer Option
Each year Idaho Power reviews the realization rates, from the impact evaluation prepared by
Summit Blue Consulting, LLC, through analysis of current load research data. This year,
Idaho Power had 16, 15-minute interval load research service points in the Timer Option.
Figure 3 shows the average hourly kW for all days in July and shows the average load reduction
per participating metered service point under the Timer Option within the load research sample.
The graphed data represents the average demand (kW) for all interrpt days in 2009.
Figure 3. Average metered demand (kW) Timer Option.
Timer Option
Average Participant Load Reduction (kW)
70 ,...-..~~,r~(
"..... . .. .. .. .. . .
60
§'
:: 50
"Ci:co 40
E
OJ
£:30OJb.
~ 20OJ
~ 10
o
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of Day (Hour)
Analysis of the data used to create this graph results in an average 63 kW before the events and
9 kW during the events. When compared to the average biling demand of 139 kW for these
service points, the analysis yields an estimated 39% reduction because of the timers. This is
the lowest percentage Idaho Power has achieved for the Timer Option. Furher analysis indicated
this was caused primarily by the extremely low realization rate (6%) in the second half of June.
The rate was impacted by the high amounts ofrain across Idaho Power's service area in late
June. Based on these analyses, Idaho Power believes the realization rates from the impact
evaluation continue to be a reliable and accurate means to estimate the program's load reduction
for Timer Option participants. Table 5 shows the program evaluation results from Summit Blue
Consulting, LLC's impact evaluation for each two-week period applicable to the 2009
program season.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 11
Idaho Power Company
Table 5. Realization rates by period for Timer Option participants.
Period Idaho Power Realiztion Rate
2nd half of June
1st half of July
2nd half of July
Average
64%
60%
53%
59%
Load Research Analysis-Manual Dispatch Option
For the Manual Dispatch Option, Idao Power used l5-minute load research interval data from
each of the 25 participants to determine the amount of load reduced. Figure 4 displays
the average hourly kW for all days in July and shows the average load reduction per participating
metered service point under the Manual Dispatch Option. The graphed data represents the
average demand (kW) for all interrpt days in 2009.
Figure 4. Average metered demand (kW) Manual Dispatch Option.
Manual Dispatch Option
Average Large Service Participant Load Reduction (kW)
1800
1650
~1500~
'0 1350i=II
E 1200Q)0
Q)1050tiIIL-
Q)900:;c(
750
600
""r
1 I
L
'\..-
..T -.. . . ..
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of Day (Hour)
Analysis of the data used to create this graph results in an average of 1,646 kW before the events
and 812 kW during the events. When compared to average biling demand of2,765 kW,
the analysis results in an estimated 30% reduction by this group of customers for all events
in 2009. The 30% is an expected number for this group because they were able to leave pumps
on during events. Because this data represents all service locations in this group, the load
reduction calculation for this group is easily obtained.
Page 12 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Load Research Analysis-Automatic Dispatch Option
The Automatic Dispatch Option represents the rest of the program participation. This was
the largest participation group with 1,105 service points enrolled. Idaho Power had l5-minute
load research meters on 54 service points throughout this group.
Figure 5 shows the average hourly kW for the days in July when the load was dispatched at
the same time from 4:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m. It also shows the average load reduction per
participating metered service point under the Automatic Dispatch Option.
Figure 5. Average metered demand (kW) Dispatch Option for July 2,16, and 17.
Automatic Dispatch Option
Average Participant Load Reduction (kW)
July 2, 16, 17
400
350
~300.:-
"'250c:II
E 200(10
(1 150tl
II..100(1~c:
50
0
--....--
,/-
,j
o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of Day (Hour)
Figure 6 shows the average hourly kW for the days in July when the program was dispatched in
two staggered blocks from 2:30 p.m. though 6:30 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m. It also
shows the average load reduction per participating metered service point under the
Dispatch Option.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 13
Idaho Power Company
Figure 6. Average metered demand (kW) Dispatch Option for July 22, 23, and 27.
400
~350
==300"'c 250lt
E 200Q)0
Q)150tllt100..
Q);:c:50
a
~./r/
(\~
. .
Automatic Dispatch Option
Average Participant Load Reduction (kW)
July 22,23, 27(8)
a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Time of Day (Hour)
(')July 21 was omitted because it was dispatched at a different time and did not include the Canyon area.
Analysis of the data used to create the prior two graphs result in an average 347 kW before
the events and 63 kW during the events. When compared to average biling demand of 474 kW,
the analysis results in an estimated 60% reduction by this group of customers for all events
in 2009.
M2M Communications Device Analysis-Automatic Dispatch Option
For the Automatic Dispatch Option, Idaho Power also used device communication data from
M2M Communications. A complete log of the operational data for each automatic device was
analyzed for each day a dispatch event occurred.
The realization rates determined in Table 6 show the number of control devices that were turned
off during each dispatch event in 2009. The analysis of this data resulted in an average
realization rate of 40% for all events. This low realization rate is primarily a result of issues
already described.
Page 14 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Table 6. Realized rate of automatic devices that turned off during load control dispatch events.
Status of automatic Date of 2009 Dispatch Load Control Events
devices at the time
of the dispatch
event
7/2/2009 7/16/2009 7/17/2009 7/2112009 7/22/2009 7/23/2009 7/27/2009
Total number of 459 533 516 465 497 512 469
devices that turned off
for the dispatch event
Total number of 1,182 1,258 1,258 1,172 1,257 1,263 1,274
devices
Realization rate 39%42%41%40%40%41%37%
Substation Data Analysis
An additional way in which Idaho Power chose to calculate the potential load reduction from
the program was to analyze specific substation data where there were substantial numbers of
participants in the program. As an example, Figue 7 describes the load data on the event day of
July 16 from a particular substation in the Eastern area in which there were 30 paricipants with
a total biling demand of 5.6 MW.
Figure 7. Load data from a particular substation in the Eastern area on July 16.
Substation Load in Eastern Idaho (MW)
10
9
8
3"7~-
"0 6
IV0..5c:0~4IV..VI.0 3:JVI
2
1
0
.-..\..\_...-~
,,
...-
~ ~ Ç.~ Ç.~ Ç.~ Ç.~ Ç.~ Ç.~ Ç.~ Ç.~ Ç.~ Ç.~ Ç.~ Ç.~ ~
c:~(; ..~ ~~ ..~ 'î~(; 'l~(; ti~ (,~ fô~ A\~(; q;~ o;~ c:~ ..~ ".~~ ") ") ~ ") ")"
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 15
Idaho Power Company
The data represents 7.9 MW of load before the event and 4 MW durng the event, which equates
to a total load reduction of3.9 MW. When compared to the total biling demand of program
participants on this particular substation, Idao Power calculated a realization rate of 66%.
System Load Data Analysis
Another way to view the total program impact is to look at total system firm load data.
The system firm load during the summer months has the greatest electrical demand of the year.
The highest peak load historically occurs in late June or July in the afternoon.
Figure 8 represents demand response impact to the entire Idaho Power system firm load on
July 16, 2009. On this date, load control events were initiated using the Irgation Peak Rewards,
FlexPeak Management, and A/C Cool Credit progrms. Interrptions occurred from 4:00 p.m.
through 8:00 p.m. at paricipating service locations in all regions under the irrgation Dispatch
Option, the Timer Option, and the FlexPeak Management progrm. The AlC Cool Credit
program interrptions occurred from 4:00 p.m. though 7:00 p.m. Based on the current day
forecast, it was estimated that loads would have reached 200 MW higher than the actual loads at
peak hour. Using this information, the calculated load reduction attbutable to Irrgation Peak
Rewards is estimated to be 162 MW, which results in an overall program realization rate of 47%.
Figure 8. Total system load on July 16.
Demand Response Impact
on System Load (MW) July 16,2009
2,550~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(.)Estimated system load with no demand response.
After observing the impact that the control event days of July 2, 16, and 17 had on Idaho Power's
total system load durng the traditional hours of 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m., the company decided to
modify the dispatch procedure slightly to improve the effectiveness of the program.
Simultaneously tuing off all pumps enrolled in the Dispatch Option created the problem of
Page 16 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
moving the peak time to outside of the 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. period. To resolve this problem,
the Dispatch Option participants were grouped to allow Idaho Power to turn off approximately
half of the pumps between 2:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. and the other half ofthe pumps between
4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. This spread the dispatched load reduction over a longer period,
but provided one and one-half hours of overlap in which both groups were dispatched during
the time Idaho Power typically experiences its highest system loads.
Figure 9 represents demand response impact to the entire Idaho Power system firm load on
July 22,2009. On this date, load control events were initiated using the Irgation Peak Rewards
program and FlexPeak Management program. Under the irrgation dispatch option, participating
service locations in the Southern, Western, and Canyon areas were interrpted from 2:30 p.m.
through 6:30 p.m. The Capital and Eastern areas, the Timer Option, and the FlexPeak
Management program interrptions were interrpted from 4:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m.
Figure 9. Demand response impact on Idaho Power system firm load.
Demand Response Programs
Impact on System Load (MW)
3,060
3,040
~3,020
~3,000-~I10 2,980-l
E 2,960Q)..VI;:2,940VI
2,920
~~~~S)S)
rt~nj~
~~S)
t;~
~~S)
(,~
~~S)
ro~
~~S)
A\~
~~
co~
~~S)
ci~
-July 22 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards - Western, Southern, and
Canyon 2:30-6:30 p.m., Eastern and Capital 4:00-8:00 p.m.; and FlexPeak Management 4:00
8:00 p.m.
Figures 10 and 11 demonstrate the program's impact on system firm load for all irrgation
demand response events initiated in 2009. Figure 10 depicts the impacts on days when load
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 17
Idaho Power Company
control events were called from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., while Figure 11 includes days when
events occurred from 2:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.
Figure 10. Demand response program impact on system load early- to mid-July.
Demand Response Programs
Impact on System Load
July 2, 16, 17
3,200
3,000
~2,800~
"'2,600n:0..
E 2,400Q)-V'~lJ 2,200
2,000
$ $ ,,~ ,,~ ,,~ ,,~ ,,~ ,,~ L'~ ,,~ ,,~ ,,~ ,,~ L'~~ L ~ L _C' " ~ " ~ " 5:" .c.N.5:" ¿;.... " ....._.C' '\ 5: '\ _C' '\ 5: " 5: '\ 5: '\
~ç:~ ~..~ ~rf~ ..~ rf~ n¡~ ,¡'J ~,;\;- ..\J "\~ q;~ f:~ ~ç:~ ~..~
-July 2 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards 4:00-8:00 p.m.
-July 16 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards 4:00-8:00 p.m.; AC Cool Credit
4:00-7:00 p.m.; and FlexPeak Management 4:00-8:00 p.m.
-July 17 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards 4:00-8:00 p.m.; AC Cool Credit
4:00-7:00 p.m.; and FlexPeak Management 4:00-8:00 p.m.
Page 18 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Figure 11. Demand response programs impact on system load late July.
Demand Response Programs
Impact on System Load
July 21, 22, 23, 27
3,200
3,000
3:2,800:E
-0
co 2,6000..
E
Q)2,400..II;:ti
2,200
2,000
e e ~~~ ~ ~..çjt: .."t: ..rrt:
(l~ ~~ ~~ ~~ (l~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..~ ~ ~"t: rrt: njt: .,t: f,t: röt: A.t: qjt: ÓjY ..çjt: .."t:
-July 21 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards - Western and Southern 3:00-
6:00 p.m., Eastern and Capital 5:00-8:00 p.m.; AC Cool Credit 4:00-7:00 p.m.; and FlexPeak
Management 4:00-8:00 p.m.
-July 22 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards - Western, Southern, and
Canyon 2:30-6:30 p.m., Eastern and Capital 4:00-8:00 p.m.; and FlexPeak Management 4:00-
8:00 p.m.
-July 23 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards - Western, Southern, and
Canyon 2:30-6:30 p.m., Eastern and Capital 4:00-8:00 p.m.; AC Cool Credit 4:00-7:00 p.m.;
and FlexPeak Management 4:00-8:00 p.m.
-July 27 Demand Response Events: Irrigation Peak Rewards - Western, Southern, and
Canyon 2:30-6:30 p.m., Eastern and Capital 4:00-8:00 p.m.; AC Cool Credit 4:00-7:00 p.m.;
and FlexPeak Management 4:00-8:00 p.m.
After reviewing the results from each different method used to analyze load reduction,
Idaho Power concluded that the substation data, load research data, and system load data all
resulted in a similar realization rate for July 16. Idaho Power chose to use the realization rates
calculated from load research data to determine progrm load reduction. These results are
described in the following section.
Load Reduction Achieved
Idaho Power attempted to distrbute the Timer Option participating service points evenly
throughout each weekday, based on cumulative load reduction potentiaL. However, due to service
point size variability, enrollment requests by customers, enrollment opt-outs, and other variables,
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 19
Idaho Power Company
the load canot be exactly balanced. All paricipants in the Dispatch Option were grouped into
five areas to be dispatched on each scheduled event day.
Peak biling demand data for the months of June and July 2008 were used to estimate the amount
of load enrolled in the program. The total biling demand enrolled in the program was
301,839 kW. Table 7 shows how the enrolled load was distrbuted by area.
Table 7. Enrolled billng demand by region (kW).
Timer Option (1,2,3)(8)
1 2 3
Idaho Power Area DayslWeek Daysleek DayslWeek
Western 79 88 532
Canyon 20 221 248
Capital 2,673 79 353
Southern Twin Falls 1,902 2,937 718
Mini-Cassia 9,758 424 1,009
Eastern 17,078 15,810 4,128
Total kW 31,510 19,559 6,988
Dispatch Option(8)
Automatic Manual
Dispatch Dispatch
Option Option
12,301 0
7,323 10,748
20,823 50,777
23,752 2,311
51,900 0
63,847 0
179,94 63,836
Total All
Options
13,000
18,560
74,705
31,620
63,091
100,863
301,839
(a)lt is important to note that this biling demand level wold be achieved only if 100% of the pumps enrolled in the program were all
running at the scheduled interrption time.
Table 8 indicates the realization rates Idaho Power used to determine the load reduction for each
day of the summer 2009. As previously described, Idaho Power uses the realization rates from
Summit Blue Consulting, LLC, for the Timer Option. However, due to extremely wet weather in
June, Idaho Power's load research data analysis resulted in a lower realization rate of6% in
the second half of June. Therefore, Idaho Power applied this realization rate for this time period.
Table 8. Realization rates used for program options.
Automatic Dispatch
Period Timer Options Option Manual Dispatch Option
2nd half of June 6%N/A N/A
1 st half of July 60%62%29%
2nd half of July 53%60%30%
Table 9 shows the MW reduction achieved daily on a week-by-week basis.
Page 20 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Table 9. Total program daily MW reduction using realization rates.
Mon Tue Wed
June 15-19 1.3 1.2
June 22-26 1.3 1.2
June 29~uly3 12.6 12.1
July 6-10 12.6 12.1
July 13-17 12.6
July 20-24
July 27-31
Thur
1.3
1.3
Fri
(a)Shaded cells are days when dispatch events occurred
13.2
1.2
1.2
11.6
11.6
Cost-Effectiveness
Program Costs
This program had a total cost of$9.63 milion, with customer incentives and device installation
the largest two expenditures. Customer incentives were 71 % of the total costs. In future years,
when previously installed devices are utilized, the customer incentive wil make up a larger
percentage of the overall costs. Customers paricipating in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program
realized an average annual bil savings of 22% on each service point enrolled. Customers
enrolled in the Timer Option realized an average annual bil savings of 10%, and Dispatch
Option customers realized a 27% savings. The average incentive on a per-Hp basis across all
options was $16.50. Table 10 displays the annual program costs as of October 31,2009.
Program costs remain consistent on a year-to-year basis.
Table 10. Annual program costs.
Item Program Costs
$972,073
$1,695,611
$6,826,581
$142,531
$9,636,796
Materials and Equipment
Installation and Contract Services
Incentive payments
Marketing and Administration
Total
Benefit-Cost Analysis
The B/C analysis for the Irrigation Peak Rewards progrm is based on a 20-year model that uses
financial and DSM alternative costs assumptions from Appendix D-Technical Appendix for
the 2006 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP). As published in the 2006 IRP, for peaking alternatives,
such as demand response programs, 162 MW simple cycle combustion turbine is used as a cost
basis. The levelized capacity cost factors applied are $64.92/kW/yr. The benefit for shifted
energy use in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program is calculated using demand-side management
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 21
Idaho Power Company
(DSM) alternative energy costs as determined by Idaho Power's Power Supply model,
AURORAxmp(ß and published in the 2006 IRP. Idaho Power's cost-effectiveness model for
the Irrgation Peak Rewards program is updated annually with actual benefits and costs. In 2009,
the updating of the cost-effectiveness model resulted in a utility B/C ratio of 1.54. For demand
response programs, the utility cost test is the most relevant B/C analysis. For the Irrgation Peak
Rewards program and other demand response programs, the paricipants have little or no cost.
The majority of the costs (Table 9) are the incentive payments made by the utility, and almost all
other expenses are incurred by the utility. The benefits are based on peak reduction and shifted
energy use.
Table 11 summarizes the inputs that were used in the cost-effectiveness modeL. In 2009,
the program results yielded a 20-year average B/C ratio of 1.54.
Table 11. Benefit-cost model inputs.
Description
Number of metered service points
Overall program realization rate for July
Average service point, billng kW (peak month)
Enrolled peak (kW)
Average July peak reduction (MWia)
Actual Program Cost (as of Oct. 31, 2009)
(')Dispatch days only.
Input
1,512
49%
200
301,839
154
$9,636,796
Customer Satisfaction Survey Results
Idaho Power conducted a customer satisfaction survey, Idaho Power Peak Rewards Program
Follow-up Survey, from November 4 to November 19,2009. The purose of the survey was to
solicit feedback regarding the progrm. The ten-question survey was mailed to all 374 irrgators
enrolled in the Irgation Peak Rewards progrm during summer 2009. Durng the two-week
period, 129 participants responded, yielding a 34% response rate.
Figure 12 indicates the percentage of overall satisfaction with the program by participant
responses. Almost 90% of the responding participants were either very satisfied or somewhat
satisfied with the program. Nearly 5% of the respondents indicated dissatisfaction with
the program, for a variety of reasons related to details of progrm operation and other
considerations.
Page 22 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Figure 12. Overall satisfaction with Irrigation Peak Rewards program.
Overall Satisfaction
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%
Very satisfied 52%
Somewhat satisfied
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
Somewhat dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
The 129 respondents reported approximately 84,257 acres of crops under irrgation. Acreages of
grain, wheat, and barley accounted for an estimated 30,166 acres, or 36%. Conversely, there
were slightly more farmers indicating hay and alfalfa as a crop in the program, though the total
acreage was 23,261 estimated acres, or 28% of the irrgated acreage in the program. This data is
usable by Idaho Power in marketing the program to customers who are unsure of whether they
can implement the program for the crops they grow. Figure 13 details tye of crops irrgated by
pumps and approximate percent of acres reported.
Figure 13. Approximate percent of acres irrigated by pumps by crop.
Approximate Percent of Acres Irrigated by Pumps by Crop
Potatoes
Grain/Wheat/Barley
Hay/Alfalfa
Sugar Beets
Corn
Beans/Peas 1.76%
Onions 0%
Pasture 3%
Orchards
Mint
Seed Crops
Other
Thousands
10 15 20 25 30 35
8%
36%
28%
15%
8%
o 5
The respondents' perceived level of information provided by the electrcian installing the pump
technology is indicated in Figure 14. Of the responding participants, nearly 50% indicated that
the electrician involved in the installation provided adequate information, while 20% indicated
the electrcian provided some, but not enough, information. A reason for these perceptions was
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 23
Idaho Power Company
possibly due to the work volume of the electricians installing a large amount of devices in a short
time frame. Idaho Power plans on working closely with the ILC to improve customer
communications durng installation in the future.
Figure 14. Information provided by the electrician.
Information Provided by Electrician
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
No information
Adequate information 50%
Some but not enough
No interaction with electrician
Figure 15 displays respondents' likelihood to participate in the Irgation Peak Rewards program
in the future by percentage. Approximately 94% of the respondents indicated they were either
very likely or somewhat likely to participate in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program in
the future. Idaho Power plans to increase electrcian and customer training in 2010 to address
the results.
Figure 15. Likelihood to participate in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program in the future.
Likelihood to Participate in the Future
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%
Very likely 72%
Somewhat likely
Neither likely nor unlikely
Somewhat unlikely
Very unlikely
Page 24 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power
Barrers to participating in the Irrgation Peak Rewards program in the future were addressed in
the study. Respondents' barrers by percentage are listed in Figure 16. When provided a list of
potential reasons that might prevent them from participating in the program in the future, almost
37% indicated the program worked fine. Nearly 38% indicated the incentive was too small,
30% indicated too much risk for crops, almost 23% indicated too much trouble to coordinate,
and 14% indicated it was inconvenient.
Idaho Power continues to evaluate this program and the potential incentive levels by using
the overall costs of the program and comparing them to the capacity costs and shifted energy
costs as published in the Appendix D-Technical Appendix for the 2006 IRP. The incentive level
is a major factor when irrgators consider program participation and is balanced with offering
a cost-effective program, thus the current incentive levels are near the maximum allowable
amount while maintaining a cost-effective program.
Figure 16. Barriers to participating in the Irrigation Peak Rewards program in the future.
Barriers to Participating in Peak Rewards in the Future
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Wasn't beneficial this year
37%
38%
Nothing - Program worked fine for me
Incentive too small
Too much risk for crops
Too much trouble to coordinate (system/labor)
Inconvenience
30%
23%
Lastly, more than 55% of the respondents indicated they also participated in Idaho Power's
Irrgation Efficiency Program, and almost 39% of the respondents had attended an Idaho Power
workshop during winter 2009.
Conclusions
· The Irrgation Peak Rewards program, which included the new Dispatch Option, increased
participation and allowed Idaho Power to achieve greater load reductions.
· Idaho Power plans to continue the program because it is a cost-effective way to reduce peak
demand on Idaho Power's electrcal system at the optimal time of day.
· The combined Timer and Dispatch Options of the program achieved a maximum peak load
reduction of 160 MW on July 2, at the generation leveL.
Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report Page 25
Idaho Power Company
· Irrgation customers make significant contrbutions to Idaho Power's demand response
programs.
· Customer Satisfaction Survey results indicated that approximately 94% of the respondents
indicated they were likely to participate in the Irgation Peak Rewards program in the futue.
Page 26 Irrigation Peak Rewards Program Report
Idaho Power Peak-Rewards Program Follow-up Survey
1 of 5
2of5
30f5
40f5
50f5
Idaho Power Company Supplement 2: Evaluation
This page left blank intentionally.
V!.~..
Demand-Side Management 2009 Annual Report Page 1060