ENERGY STAR HVAC Quality Installation Program

March 11, 2008

Potential Losses per Installation

• Air Flow over Indoor Coil (70% inadequate)• Refrigerant Charge

(62% improperly charged)• Equipment Sizing

(50% oversized)• Duct Leakage is significant (Total leakage

averaged 35% in the pilots)

Source: C. Neme, J. Proctor, S. Nadel, National Energy Savings Potential from Addressing Residential HVAC Installation Problems, 1999

Installation issues reduce capacity by up to 30 percent!

Or put another way…

a SEER 13 performs like a SEER 10

% of Cooling Delivered

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

Quality Installation Low airflow Low Airflow +Improper Charge

Low Airflow +Improper Charge +

Duct Leakage

Co

oli

ng

Del

iver

ed

The HVAC Market

More than 53 percent of all existing homes have central air conditioning (Source CEE)

Four out of five new homes constructed today are built with central air conditioners (Source CEE)

In 2006, 7,069,296 unitary air conditioners and heat pumps were shipped from U.S. factories (Source ARI)

ACCA estimates that 60% to 70% of the shipments were for replacement

Reason for System Replacement (Source Decision Analyst)

• 49% due to system failure• 39% planned replacement

Residential AC Market (Source CEE)

Annual BTUs 0.55 quadrillion

% of U.S. Residential Site Electricity Consumption 14%

Annual Consumer Cost $13.8 billion

How HVAC QI Meets Utilities' Goals

Average estimated savings from HVAC QI

Estimated peak electricity demand savings

Homes Annual per-house savingsNorth (Indianapolis, IN) South (Jackson, MS)

Existing 1300 kWh 1900 kWh

National

New 1000 kWh

Assumptions: New system corrects typical install problems

•Duct leakage reduced from 35%to 20%•Duct insulation increased from R2 to R6•Proper charge•Proper airflow•Proper sizing

Location Per-house peak AC demand savings

Fort Worth, TX 1.3 KW

Jacksonville, FL 1 KW

Cost Benefit of QI

Location 13 SEER Annual Operating Cost

30-percent Savings from QI

QI Savings over 5 Years

Boston $163 $48 $244

Washington, DC $261 $78 $390

Dallas, TX $488 $146 $732

Los Angeles, CA $261 $78 $390

Miami $782 $234 $1174

•Savings based on 10 cents/kWh electricity price

Comparison of SEER versus QI

Equipment SEER Savings Due to Equipment Efficiency*

Savings Due to Quality Installation

13 0% 30%

14 7% 30%

15 13% 30%

16 19% 30%

*13 SEER Baseline efficiency used for 3 ton unit

Barriers to Market Correction

Even though there are large potential savings from improving installation practices the market has not corrected itself because: Consumers are unaware that improper installation affects efficiency and

comfort (view HVAC similar to an appliance) Consumers do not know their performance is low (If cold air is blowing they

don’t usually complain) Installation technicians rely on “rules of thumb” “Time is money” business model Manufacturer’s are willing to absorb warranty claims for units that have failed

because of installation issues Definition of a quality installation is not defined

Program Development Strategy

Stakeholder Market Barrier Strategy

Contractor/technician -Lack of qualified technicians-Rule of thumb practices-Time is money business model-Lack of defined elements that constitute a quality installation

-Training is a program entry requirement-Proper measurement and reporting will help with system evaluation and minimize call backs-Worked with ACCA and other stakeholder to create HVAC QI Spec (now ANSI recognized)

Customer - Lack understanding of HVAC installation and its relation to efficiency and comfort

-Marketing material will make ES trusted 3rd voice during sales call-Working with ACCA and CEE to improve consumer education

Manufacturer - Warranty Claims - Working on technical solution for HVAC diagnostics

Program Scope

Residential installations New and replacement systems Central air conditioning and air-source heat pump Rated capacity up to 65,000 BTU/H Homes with multiple systems must verify each unit separately ENERGY STAR qualified equipment encouraged

Stakeholder Roles in ES HVAC QI Utility

Develop program standards, policies and procedures

Manage program Recruit and train qualified contractors Program marketing Ensure installations meet program

standards Contract and manage verifiers Issue ENERGY STAR certificates to

homeowners Track and evaluate program success Report data to EPA

Verifier Provide QA Provide feedback to contractors

Contractor Fulfill program training

requirements Fulfill program participation

agreement as written by program administrator

Provide marketing material to homeowner

Perform installation to program standards

Document and report installation information

EPA Provide 3rd party voice Assist with training development Provide technical support Work with stakeholders to

improve installation practices

Third Party Basis for Program Design

Implementation guide Marketing material Sample commissioning and

verification reports Certificate Training for participating

contractors

ENERGY STAR HVAC QI Guidelines Minimum requirements for installations

under the program must meet the ANSI/ACCA HVAC Quality Installation Specification

The QI Specification identifies consensus requirements associated with quality installations, acceptable procedures for measuring or verifying the attainment of those requirements, and acceptable forms of documentation to show compliance to the requirements.

Program Details – Sizing and Equipment Selection

Requirements: Total capacity between 95% and

115% of calculated system load or next largest nominal piece of equipment

Provide evidence of matched system

Verification: Check to make sure load

calculations were performed Check to make sure calculations

are reasonable (dimensions and sketches, orientation, assumed duct leakage)

Check for an ARI matched coils set

Program Details – Refrigerant Charge

Requirements: Provide evidence that the system

was properly charged via superheat, subcooling or a method specifically stated by the OEM.

Verification: Refrigerant charge should be verified

using the superheat or subcooling method.

Check the commissioning report to ensure that system conditions were within requirements at time of test.

Program Details – Air Flow

Requirements: Airflow across the coil is within the

range recommended by the OEM product data (typically between 350 to 450 CFM per ton)

Verification: Check the airflow across the coil

using the pressure matching method, flow grid measurement method, or anemometer traverse.

Program Details – Duct Leakage

Requirement (existing construction): The total duct leakage must be less

than or equal to 20 percent airflow, or at least a 50 percent improvement ‑over existing conditions. Or per local code if they exceed the specification

Verification: Duct sealing should be verified using

Duct pressurization test Blower door subtraction method Hybrid duct

pressurization/blower door subtraction method

Program Details - Additional Elements

Electrical Amperage, voltage check Wire sizing Grounding Self certified

Controls Compatibility Sequencing Self certified

Pilot Results

SizingResults - Replacement units were

typically 0.5 to 1.0 Tons smaller but still oversized per the guidelines

Issues - Sizing is essentially self reporting (difficult to verify) - 1% Design temperatures

Strategy - Focus on downsizing not right-sizing

- Allow for micro climate design temperatures- Manual J training is an entry requirement

Air FlowResults - 90% of verified sites passed

the in- field verification

Issues - Guidelines are not standard practice

- Lack of proper equipment

Strategy - Approved air flow technique training is an entry requirement

- Verifier should use same method to ensure consistency

Airflow per ton of Installed Capacity

250

300

350

400

450

500

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Unit Number

Airfl

ow (C

FM)

Percent of Load Installed

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

95%

100%

105%

110%

115%

120%

125%

130%

135%

140%

145%

150%

155%

160%

165%

170%

175%

180%

185%

190%

200%

Coun

t

Pilot Results

ChargeResults – 70% of verified sites passed in-field

verification

Issues - Timeliness of verification (leaks)- Gauge calibration

Strategy - Educate participants on the importance of calibration and make it part of the entry training

Duct LeakageResults – 100% of verified sites passed in-field

verification

Issues - Standard practice in TX and CA but not elsewhere- Duct may need major repair which is expensive

Strategy - Possible exclusion of duct leakage in the NE if ducts are in conditioned space

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Level 1 - Data Review Level 2-Field Verification

Submitted

Passed

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29

Sites

Po

st S

eal

Lea

kag

e

= >50% reduction

Cost of HVAC QI

• Baseline Installation– sized (rule of thumb), airflow not

measured, refrigerant charge is estimated based on “beer can cold”, and ducts are not tested.

• EPA Guidelines for Quality Installation

– Based on $75 per hour for technician

HVAC QIElement

AdditionalTime (Hours)

Additional Cost ($)

Sizing 0.5 $37.50

Charge 0.5 $37.50

Air Flow(Measure)

0.5 $37.50

Air Flow(Correct)

0 to 2 $0 - $150

Duct Testing 1 $75

Duct SealingVariable

$300 for boot seal to over $1,000 for return duct installation

Total Cost (Low End) $200

Total cost (Mid Range) $550

Total Cost (High End) $1200

Average Cost $650

Cost Effectiveness of HVAC QI(ACO of SEER 13 - $782)

Payback of HVAC QI (Miami)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% 24% 26% 28%

% Savings

Pay

bac

k (y

ears

)

Low End ($200) Mid Range ($550) High End ($1200) Average Cost ($650)

Verification

Level 1 Verification:Data review of Manual J calculations and commissioning report. The data review will include confirming that all required installation elements were performed using an approved method and check for data inconsistencies

Level 2 Verification:In-field verification of the installation that follows established protocols.

ACCA has established a committee that is currently working on HVAC QI verification protocols

Sampling Rates

Program requirements:1. All sites receive a Level 1 verification

2. Level 2 verification sampling protocols:Phase 1 - Level 2 verification protocols will be conducted on 3 of

the first 5 installations submitted by a new contractor participant. Phase 2 – Level 2 verification protocols will be conducted on 20%

of the next 25 installation submittals. Phase 3 – After successful completion of Phase 1 and 2 the

partner may use Level 2 verification protocols at a rate of 5%.

Cost of verification

Verifications cost approximately $300 per system

Costs could decrease with the use of an automated remote verification systems (i.e. Checkme, Enalasys, Testo)

Paid by the program administrator

Contractors can not self verify