Residential Clothes Washers and Dryers Ryan Firestone, My Ton, and Christian Douglass Regional Technical Forum April 14, 2015

2

Overview

•

Today we are seeking approval of residential washers and dryers UES measures.

– a decision on addressing measure interaction between washers and dryers – an updated proven Residential Washers UES measure – a new planning Residential Dryers UES measure

3

Overview

• RTF Clothes Washer UES measure is due for an update – – Sunset date June 2015 New federal standard, and ENERGY STAR and CEE specifications effective March 7, 2015 – – New market data (NEEA) New field data on washers and dryers (NEEA) – New cost data (PacifiCorp) • ENERGY STAR has its first Dryer specification (v.1.0), effective January 1, 2015 – ENERGY STAR resistance and heat pump dryers are available – NEEA is conducting research on dryers to support an RTF Dryer UES measure • Washer and Dryer measures interact – Much of the Washer savings come from reductions in drying energy required after washing (higher spin) – Dryer savings are dependent on the moisture content of incoming clothes

4

Subcommittee Activity

• •

RTF Residential Washer and Dryer Subcommittee

Met on March 10, 2015 Discussed – – – – – – washer/dryer interaction use of NEEA field study results in Washer measure use of NEEA 2014 Washer market share findings addressing top vs front load washers review of available dryer data, and findings Utility Combined Energy Factor (UCEF) as a dryer performance metric

Attendees

Janice Boman, Ecova Will Brandt, PSE Joe Colett, Ecova Bob Davis, Ecotope Christian Douglass, RTF CAT Christopher Dymond, NEEA Ryan Firestone, RTF CAT Ben Hannas, Ecotope Sean Williams, CLEAResult Aaron Winer, CLEAResult

5

Subcommittee Activity

Attendees

• • • • • RTF Research and Evaluation Subcommittee Met on April 3, 2015 Discussed CAT proposed Residential Dryer UES Research Strategy General agreement with direction of Strategy, but significant feedback Subcommittee expressed need for more time to review materials and iterate before endorsing Strategy

[details of meeting later in presentation]

Jennifer Anziano, RTF Andie Baker, Abacus Research Todd Blackman, Franklin PUD Richard Cole, Grant PUD Bob Davis, Ecotope Christian Douglass, RTF Christopher Dymond, NEEA Tom Eckhart, UCONS Jennifer Finnegan, Snohomish PUD Ryan Firestone, RTF Christopher Frye, NEEA Adam Hadley, RTF Sabrina Haggerty, CLEAResult Erin Hope, BPA Greg Kelleher, EWEB Philip Kelsven, BPA Tom Lienhard, Avista Eli Morris, PacifiCorp Graham Parker, PNNL Jim Perich-Anderson, Puget Sound Energy Bob Ramirez, Itron Dan Rubado, Energy Trust Josh Rushton, RTF My Ton, RTF Robert Weber, BPA Jim White, Chelan PUD Aaron Wiener, CLEAResult

6

Washer / Dryer Interaction

7

Washer/Dryer Interaction

•

Dryer energy consumption is determined by

–

Amount of moisture to be removed from clothing

–

Energy efficiency of removing moisture from clothing dryer energy (kWh)

1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)

Dryer EE

8

Washer/Dryer Interaction

Baseline Washer Baseline Dryer Baseline Washer EE Dryer

dryer energy (kWh)

1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb) EE Washer Baseline Dryer

savings dryer energy (kWh)

1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)

dryer energy (kWh)

1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb) EE Washer EE Dryer

Washer savings

?

dryer energy (kWh)

1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)

9

EE Washer EE Dryer

Washer savings

dryer energy (kWh)

Washer/Dryer Interaction

•

How to deal with these savings?

?

1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)

– – – Measure identifiers • Would require washer specs for Dryer measure, and dryer specs for Washer measure

Subcommittee majority recommendation

Distribute across both measures • E.g., Option 3 • Guidelines call for considering all cost effective measures in “full measure package” • Method would not handle Washer and Dryer tiers – We’d need to simplify to a single EE level for the analysis BPA and ETO expressed support for this approach after the subcommittee meeting. Efficient washers are much more common than efficient dryers.

– Assume order of measures • CAT/Staff propose to assume EE washer goes in first or at same time as EE dryer – ENERGY STAR (2015 spec) penetration of Washers was already ~70% in 2014 – Significantly EE Dryers (i.e., heat pump) are an emerging technology in U.S. markets Subcommittee also interested in combined washer/dryer measures

10

EE Washer

Washer/Dryer Interaction

•

Guidelines, Interaction Between Measures

savings from baseline to CEE Tier 3 washer is only 7%

dryer energy (kWh)

washer details for dryer measure.

1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)

Some dryer measures are not cost effectiveness.

– – – Significant interaction: “The UES for each measure should account for all significant interactions with any of the other measures that are currently RTF approved. Interaction is significant if the RTF determines that it could change a measure’s savings estimate by more than ± 10%...

Measure identifiers: “…To the extent practical, identifiers should be used to account for significant measure interactions...” “Option 3”: “…When measure identifiers do not account for all significant interactions, the savings can be estimated using the following steps: …Estimate efficient-case energy use assuming the delivery of the measure and full adoption of all cost effective current RTF approved interactive measures… Option 3 makes sense when we don’t know the order of measure installation.

Here, we expect the EE dryer to almost always go with the EE washer, or after.

– Other methods: “…Other methods may be used if the RTF determines that they more reliably account for measure interactions.” (Savings, 2.3.3.4)

11

Washer/Dryer Interaction

•

Staff proposal EE Washer EE Dryer

Washer savings – Assume efficient washer goes in first – Do not create package washer/dryer measures

dryer energy (kWh)

1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)

• This bundles a cost effective measure (washer) with one that’s not (dryer) to make a cost effective measure • Programs have the data they need to create bundled measures on their own

12

Updates to Residential Clothes Washers Measure

13

Measure Overview

Measure Developers CAT Review Tech Sub-Com Review R&E Sub-Com Review Notes

RTF Staff Yes (Ryan Firestone, Christian Douglass) Yes Yes – CAT proposed Research Strategy New federal standard and ENERGY STAR and CEE specs in March 2015 NEEA washer/dryer field study published in November 2014 2014 sales data (NEEA) 2012-2014 cost data (PacifiCorp)

14

Data Sources

• • • • • CEC Appliance Database – Average performance characteristics, by efficiency tier • • • Integrated Modified Energy Factor (IMEF) Integrated Water Factor (IWF) Remaining Moisture Content (RMC) DOE Washer Test Procedure – Assumed dryer efficiency – Assumed water heater efficiency – Used to disaggregate energy consumption indicated by IMEF (machine, DHW, dryer) DOE Technical Support Document, Washer standard rulemaking – Average machine energy portion of washer energy NEEA field study – Real-world cloth moisture, annual laundry volume PacifiCorp 2012-2014 program cost data – Covers all efficiency tiers as of March 2015

15

Remaining Moisture Content

• NEEA Washer/Dryer field study found that real-world clothing retains moisture more than DOE test cloth – Clothing coming out of washer are wetter than test clothes. • Average rated remaining moisture content (RMC) in CEC DB: 36% • Field study average: 71% – Clothing coming out of dryer are wetter than test clothes. • DOE test procedure: 4% • Field study average: 7% – More dryer energy is required to remove a pound of moisture from clothing than test clothes (higher kWh/lb moisture) • DOE Washer test procedure assumes 0.5 kWh/lb • Field study average 0.62 kWh/lb

16

Remaining Moisture Content

•

How to apply increase RMC finding to rated RMCs

(e.g., multiplier, adder, other)?

RMC as a function of centrifuge speed for several cloth types

Range of interest for clothes washers Arrows are same height • • • In the centripetal force range of washing machines, differences in RMC by cloth type appear fairly constant as the centripetal force varies.

This suggests that the same cloth-type correction to RMC should be applied to all washers, regardless of the speed of their spin cycle. In the measure assessment, rated RMCs are scaled up by 36 percentage points to reflect real world cloth.

Source: Daniel Larry Carter, "Savings of Time and Energy in the Laundry Process: Importance of Dynamic Surface Tension, Micelle Stability and Surfactant Adsorption". Dissertation presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida. 2006.

17

Disaggregating Rated Energy Consumption

Steps 1. Filter CEC Appliance database for recent (2012 and newer), unique records 2. Categorize by efficiency tier 3. Compute average performance by efficiency tier 4. Disaggregate rated energy consumption as per DOE Test Procedure and Technical Support Document 5. Adjust energy consumption to reflect • wetter clothes going into dryer • more energy required to remove moisture

• • 18

Market Share

NEEA sales data from 2014 – – – Approximately 45% of regional sales Mix of urban and rural areas Key findings: • • • ~50% ENERGY STAR qualifying penetration for top loaders 100% ENERGY STAR qualifying penetration for front loaders ~60% of market is top loaders

Efficiency tier Top Load below March 2015 federal standard March 2015 federal standard compliant ENERGY STAR (March 2015) CEE Tier 1 (March 2015) CEE Tier 2 (March 2015) CEE Tier 3 (March 2015)

3% 47% 49% 3% 0% 0%

total 100%

Top loaders were approximately 60% of all sales

Front Load

0% 0% 59% 13% 28%

100%

Current RTF measure assumes: – 51% ENERGY STAR penetration (vs. ~70% for proposed measure) – 32% top loaders (vs. 60% for proposed measure) lower the baseline efficiency (because of representation of top loaders)

19

Measure Grouping

• • • Use a combined Top/Front load baseline (as in current UES measure) –

subcommittee approves

– This assumes that there is a single market for washing machines, not separate markets for top and front loading machines.

Exclude ENERGY STAR top loader – savings are insignificant relative to combined baseline

Note: CEE Tier 1 top loaders are scarce, Tier 2 / 3 top loaders aren’t available

20

Measure Costs

• • • • • Data from 2012-2014 PacifiCorp program Covers all efficiency tiers as of March 2015 Database does not differentiate between costs with and without delivery/installation – Assume that this doesn’t affect incremental cost Use lower quartile costs to mitigate influence of non-energy features on incremental costs Normalize costs to average tub size

Efficiency Tier IMEF minimum IMEF maximum count average 25% percentile 50% percentile 75% percentile below federal standard 0 1.28

0

below ENERGY STAR 1.29

2.05

3,099 $573 $500 $551 $626

Top Load ENERGY STAR Front Load ENERGY STAR below below 2.06

2.37

3,227 $574 $504 $558 $636

CEE Tier 1 CEE Tier 2 CEE Tier 3 2.38

2.75

243 $626 $556 $659 $690

2.76

2.91

0

2.92

0

federal standard 0 1.83

2 $1,175 $1,153 $1,175 $1,197

ENERGY STAR 1.84

2.37

748 $819 $684 $787 $878

CEE Tier 1 CEE Tier 2 CEE Tier 3 2.38

2.75

7,724 $747 $651 $721 $831

2.76

2.91

1,736 $781 $696 $749 $828

2.92

514 $785 $695 $784 $873

21

Non-Energy Benefits

• • Water – Water and Wastewater as in Standard Information Workbook – 5.29 kWh/1000 gallons: embedded energy for transportation and treatment – $13.84/1000 gallons: retail cost of water, net of value of embedded energy Detergent – Detergent use assumed to be proportional to water use – $0.19/baseline load – $0.13/CEE Tier 3 load … $17/year benefit – This is how RTF has handled detergent savings historically, but there is little direct evidence of this correlation in practice – HE (low suds) and traditional laundry detergent cost about the same per ounce and also have the same recommended dosage.

– RTF Staff propose to remove this Benefit

22

Fuel Type Measure Identifier

• Fuel Type Measure Identifier: – Electric DHW / Electric Dryer – Electric DHW / Gas Dryer – Gas DHW / Electric Dryer – – Gas DHW / Gas Dryer Any Fuel • Should programs be limited to using either specific fuel type measures or “any”, but not both?

23

Results - Savings

• • Results show for electric DHW, electric dryer.

Measures also include gas DHW, gas dryer, and any fuel variants

24

Results - Cost

• • • Results show for electric DHW, electric dryer.

Measures also include gas DHW, gas dryer, and any fuel variants Current RTF measure uses average costs, proposed method uses lower quartile costs

25

Cost Effectiveness

Negative incremental cost • • Results show for electric DHW, electric dryer.

Measures also include gas DHW, gas dryer, and any fuel variants

26 – Residential Clothes Washers

Proposed Motion

• “I __________ move the RTF approve the updates to the savings and cost of the Residential Clothes Washers UES measure as presented and: – [Limit/don’t limit] use of “any” fuel type measure to programs that don’t use specific fuel type measures – Disregard laundry detergent savings as a non-energy benefit; – Keep the Category at ‘Proven’; – Keep the Status at ‘Active’; – Set the sunset date to December 31, 2017” New federal standard effective January 1, 2018

27

Residential Clothes Dryer Planning UES

28

Measure Developers CAT Review Tech Sub-Com Review R&E Sub-Com Review Notes

Measure Overview

RTF Staff Yes (Ryan Firestone) Yes – limited to initial discussions on measure Yes – CAT proposed Research Strategy. Strategy has been revised to reflect input at the meeting New federal standard effective January 1, 2015 ENERGY STAR specs (v1.0) also effective January 1, 2015 NEEA washer/dryer field study published in November 2014 NEEA/PG&E laboratory testing

29

Residential Clothes Dryers

•

Federal standard:

–

New standard effective January 1, 2015

•

ENERGY STAR v1.0

–

Effective January 1, 2015

•

Heat Pump (HP) Dryers introduced to U.S. market in Q4 2014

30

Residential Clothes Dryers

• Energy efficiency metrics – Federal standards • D (Energy Factor (EF))– from previous standard. Pounds of clothes dried per kWh at highest temperature, 66% ΔRMC, assumed impact of auto termination, no cool down • D1 (Combined Energy Factor (CEF) – current standard. Pounds of clothes dried per kWh at highest temperature, 53.5% ΔRMC , assumed impact of auto termination, no cool down • Optional D2 (CEF) – current standard. Pounds of clothes dried per kWh at highest temperature, 55.5% ΔRMC, tested with auto-termination and cool down – required for ENERGY STAR – NEEA proposal • UCEF (lab testing) – Average of 5 modes (D2 plus 4 with more representative test cloth). Annual energy and frequency of modes aligns with field study.

– Technical working group decided not to weight the modes differently.

• Field testing – estimated annual kWh and average pounds cloth/kWh

31

Residential Clothes Dryers

•

Utility Combined Energy Factor (UCEF)

–

Five modes, equally weighted

Test DOE Test One Two Three Four Common Test Name

D2 Small Large Eco Fastest

Load Type

DOE Test Cloths Supplemental Test Load Supplemental Test Load Supplemental Test Load Supplemental Test Load

Cycle Setting

Default Normal Normal Mfr Defined Heavy Duty

Cycle Temp

High Medium Medium Mfr Defined High

Nominal Weight (lbs)

8.45

4.2

16.8

8.4

8.4

IMC

57.5% 62% 62% 62% 62%

RMC

2% 4% 4% 4% 4% DOE Test Cloth Supplemental Test Loads comprised of clothing available in the Land’s End catalogue

32

Standard Size Dryer Types

Technology Resistance Vented

conventional dryers

Ventless Resistance, improved auto-termination

ENERGY STAR, non-heat pump dryers

Hybrid (Resistance + Heat Pump)

LG EcoHybrid Whirlpool Duet

Expected UCEF

2.56 to 3.14

3.0 to 3.4

3.4 to 5.5

Heat Pump

Blomberg*, Miele 5.5 + *Blomberg and Miele dryers are slightly smaller than a standard size dryer as defined by the DOE

33 •

Residential Clothes Dryers

Laboratory UCEF results – Units are lbs clothing per kWh

Source Baseline Dryers

2014 Ecova 2014 Ecova 2014 Ecova 2014 Ecova 2014 Ecova 2014 Ecova 2014 Ecova 2014 Ecova 2014 Ecova 2014 Ecova 2014 Ecova Amana NED4600YQ Conventional* Maytag MEDC300BW Conventional Admiral AED4675YQ Conventional WP-WED4800 Conventional Samsung DV45H7000EW Conventional* GE GTDP220 Conventional Hotpoint HTDX100EDWW Conventional Maytag Maxima MED3100DW Conventional FrigidAir FARE1011MW Conventional** Kenmore 81382 Conventional* Whirlpool WGD94HEXW0 Conventional 20%

D2

3.49

3.08

3.27

3.86

3.32

3.52

3.49

4.06

3.19

3.57

4.02

20% Mode weight 20% 20%

Small

1.53

1.50

1.77

2.23

2.05

1.84

2.23

2.32

2.16

2.39

2.20

Large

3.23

2.05

3.15

3.01

3.60

3.59

3.59

3.55

3.49

3.64

3.82

Eco

2.48

3.13

2.64

2.36

3.04

3.10

2.50

2.56

3.61

3.23

3.00

20%

Fast

2.08

3.16

2.31

2.12

2.44

2.65

3.15

2.49

2.50

2.87

2.40

UCEF

2.56

2.58

2.63

2.72

2.89

2.94

2.99

2.99

2.99

3.14

3.09

Straight average Weighted average

3.53

3.46

2.02

1.93

3.34

3.24

2.88

2.84

2.56

2.54

2.87

2.80

Price Paid

$315 $403 $315 $423 $629 $448 $404 $899 $539 $863 $809 $633 $480

Mkt Wt*

14% 12% 13% 10% 10% 9% 10% 5% 9% 4% 4%

34

Available Data

• • • NEEA Washer/Dryer field study – Metered energy consumption, log book of clothing weights and machine settings.

– N = 50, all resistance dryers NEEA / PG&E lab study – Lab testing of 11 units (standard and ENERGY STAR non-heat pump) to determine D2, UCEF – Estimated market share per unit to estimate market average performance – Durango factor – laboratory at 6,500 ft.

• Unquantified impact on CEF, UCEF (likely improves metric a few percent) – Durango lab has since closed Ongoing NEEA lab and field testing of HP Dryers – NEEA will certify heat pump dryers for now

35

ENERGY STAR Non-Heat Pump Dryers

• • No clear correlation between D1 and D2 – DOE attempted and couldn’t do this NEEA investigating D2 / UCEF relationship – 9 Standard dryers – 2 ENERGY STAR Non-Heat Pump dryers The actual measure would be technology-neutral: “UCEF 3.00 to 3.39” ENERGY STAR qualifying • • D2 does not correlate well to UCEF Significant research is required to prove this measure – Need to lab test enough ENERGY STAR non-Heat Pump dryers to estimate average UCEF – BPA, PSE, EWEB, ETO have expressed interest in this measure

36

Current Data

Data Source What kind? How many?

CEC DB/Other product DBs Standard Tier 1, 2 D EF 2011 DOE NEEA Washer/Dryer Field Study ~46x Standard (some Tier 1?) Baseline Dryer 9x Standard Study 2x Tier 1 HP Dryer testing Tier 2,3,4

X (field)

Energy Consumption Metric D1 CEF D2 CEF UCEF

X X X X X (field) X (Durango) X X (Durango) X

Field

X X

37

Technical Subcommittee Feedback

• •

UCEF is a sufficient metric for estimating energy consumption Durango lab testing is sufficient for estimating baseline UCEF

–

If possible, some of the same machines should be tested at NW elevations to confirm this.

38

Research Strategy Summary

Deficiency Reliable and unbiased performance metric Notes Research Needs

• UCEF is a good candidate: Predicted annual energy consumption is comparable to field • Lab & field test of 10 conventional models •Lab & field test of 10 ENERGY STAR non-Heat study findings.

Pump models •Lab & field test of the ~4 heat pump models •However, UCEF and actual consumption have available not been measured on the same machines. And

Models within each Tier should have a range of tub

very few efficient machines have been tested.

sizes.

Market average

• Baseline is based on 11 data points. Efficient tiers have uncertainty because we don't know

performance within

where within the defined UCEF range the

each Tier

average product will fall.

•10 additional baseline UCEF data points •20 additional ENERGY STAR Non-Heat Pump data points •Testing of all heat pump machines for measure qualification

Units tested above would count towards this research need.

HVAC Interactions

•Vented dryers increase infiltration (increased heating and cooling loads) •Ventless dryers increase internal gains (reduced heating, increased cooling loads) •Rough SEEM analysis has been conducted and coupled with RBSA SF HVAC system and fuel type data to estimate average HVAC interactive effects.

•More detailed engineering analysis, to address range of home energy performance, locations.

•Frequency of dryer location in unconditioned and under-conditioned spaces.

•Impact of dryer location in unconditioned and under-conditioned spaces.

•Quantification of uncertainty in engineering analysis. If this indicates more than 10% uncertainty in measure savings, laboratory and/or field testing would be required.

Link to Research Strategy v3

Note: Here “heat pump” refers to both hybrid heat pump and pure heat pump dryers.

39

Research and Evaluation Subcommittee Feedback

Subcommittee feedback at meeting Research Strategy modifications Non-energy Benefits are important to address.

Removed non-energy benefits research from the

Disagreement on whether they should be addressed in the Research Strategy, though.

Strategy because they do not affect the unit energy savings, which is the focus of the Research Strategy

Research should include the effect of drum size on energy consumption

Added drum size as a variable to investigate in field testing for validation of UCEF

Research should include HVAC interactions and their sensitivity to location within the home

Described research needs more clearly

Research the effect of washer RMC on dryer energy

There is a 7% difference in moisture (and dryer energy) between baseline washer and most efficient. This is not significant enough to require additional research.

40

Research and Evaluation Subcommittee Feedback

• •

At meeting, no significant concerns, but Subcommittee needed more time to review Strategy and revisions before endorsing Staff/CAT distributed revised version one week ago – received feedback from Ecotope

– Addressed several comments in revised Research Strategy – Recommendation to use RBSA sub-metered dataset for baseline • Staff/CAT concern: – – We don’t have UCEF values to align with models from RBSA, We don’t have field test data on all models used to construct baseline and efficient cases. – – Can’t compare apples to apples.

Could use RBSA to calibrate UCEF-based annual energy estimates » RBSA values are about 7% less

41

Planning Measure

• • • •

Baseline UCEF from NEEA/PG&E laboratory study HVAC interaction as modeled in SEEM

–

All baseline models are vented

–

Separate measures for vented and ventless products Incremental costs from online retailer DOE average lifetime from secondary research (12 years)

42

Measure Order

• •

In coordination with Washers measure, assume Dryers measure is installed after (or at same time) as washer measure There is only a 7 percent reduction in savings after adjusting UCEF energy consumption estimates to account for drier clothes coming in

43 • • • • •

HVAC Interactions

SEEM analysis of incremental effect of increase infiltration (vented dryers) and increased internal gain (ventless dryers) Heating Zone 1, Cooling Zone 2, medium insulation and leakage Weight results by RBSA stock of HVAC system types and fuels Reduce impacts by 20% to account for dryers in unconditioned spaces Further reduce impacts by 35% to account for imperfect thermal coupling to HVAC system. Consistent with HPWH measure

HVAC interaction effects Increased infiltration Baseline Dryer (Vented) Hypothetical Ventless Baseline Dryer

130 CFM x 55 minutes x 311 loads

Internal gain (kWh)

937

electricity Heating (kWh) gas other fuel Cooling (kWh) electricity

8 21 10 0.51

-64 -166 -82 17

44

Measure Costs

• • • Online costs for all dryers available at Home Depot, via Beaverton, OR store on April 5, 2015.

Vented – UCEF 3.00 to 3.39: [Matched pair analysis of ENERGY STAR and non ENERGY STAR models] x [fraction of baseline this not ENERGY STAR] • $53 (2015$) – UCEF 3.40+: [Matched pair analysis of Heat Pump and non-Heat Pump models] + [Incremental cost of UCEF 3.00 TO 3.39] • $638 (2015$) Ventless – UCEF 3.00 to 3.39: [Vented measure cost] + [DOE TSD incremental cost from compact vented to compact ventless] • $401 (2015$) – UCEF 3.40+: [Vented measure cost] • $638 (2015$)

45

Compact Dryers

• • • • • • Federal definition of standard size dryer is 4.4 ft 3 – All usage and performance data we have is from standard size dryers Models popular in other countries tend to be smaller than U.S. dryers Blomberg Heat Pump Dryer is 4.1 ft 3 – Appears to have very good performance in lab test As heat pump dryers become more common, more compact dryers may enter the market Dryers at the high end of the compact range may be of sufficient size for most families (NEEA judgement) Dryer efficiency improves with fullness of drum – There’s an efficiency argument for smaller dryers

46

Compact Dryers

• • Should the RTF develop Compact Dryer measures? If so, consider: – Performance Metric: Is the UCEF metric sufficient for smaller dryers?

– Baseline Performance: Should the baseline be limited to compact dryers?

• Or would some consumers in the market for a standard size dryer purchase a compact heat pump dryer? – Usage: NEEA suggests assuming 75% of standard size clothing load Measure category options: – Small Saver (based on current market share) – Planning (would require Research Strategy to address questions above) – Redefine Standard size dryer to include larger compact dryers (e.g. Standard = 4.0 ft 3 or greater)

47

Electric Savings

48

Cost

Incremental Cost

$600 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 UCEF 3.00

to 3.39

UCEF 3.40

to 3.99

UCEF 4.00

to 4.99

UCEF 5.00

to 5.99

UCEF 6.00

to 6.99

UCEF 7.00

to 7.99

UCEF 3.00

to 3.39

UCEF 3.40

to 3.99

UCEF 4.00

to 4.99

UCEF 5.00

to 5.99

UCEF 6.00

to 6.99

UCEF 7.00

to 7.99

Vented Ventless

49 2,50 2,00 1,50 1,00 0,50 0,00 2,29 ENERGY STAR, non-heat pump

Cost Effectiveness

Miele HP (compatct) LG EcoHybrid (different labs, different generation, same model number) Whirlpool Duet 0,40 0,63 0,82 0,96 1,06 0,71 0,62 0,82 1,00 Blomberg HP (compact) 1,12 1,21 UCEF 3.00

to 3.39

UCEF 3.40

to 3.99

UCEF 4.00

to 4.99

UCEF 5.00

to 5.99

Vented UCEF 6.00

to 6.99

UCEF 7.00

to 7.99

UCEF 3.00

to 3.39

UCEF 3.40

to 3.99

UCEF 4.00

to 4.99

UCEF 5.00

to 5.99

Ventless UCEF 6.00

to 6.99

UCEF 7.00

to 7.99

50

Proposed Motion

• “I __________ move the RTF approve the Residential Standard-size Clothes Dryers Research Strategy and UES measure as presented and: – Set the Category to ‘Planning’; – Set the Status to ‘Active’; – Set the sunset date to April 30, 2018.” • • Additionally, direct staff to develop a [small saver, planning] Compact-size Dryer measure

(vote not required) Or

Revise definition of standard size dryer

(vote required)