Model Conservation Standards and Surcharge Recommendation Economic Analysis for for New Single...

Model Conservation StandardsModel Conservation Standardsand Surcharge Recommendationand Surcharge Recommendation

Economic AnalysisEconomic Analysis

for for

New Single Family Home New Single Family Home ConstructionConstruction

April 17, 2009April 17, 2009

slide 3

What Are theWhat Are the “Model Conservation Standards”? “Model Conservation Standards”?

Act requires that Council’s Plan set Act requires that Council’s Plan set forth model conservation standards forth model conservation standards (MCS) for:(MCS) for:– New and existing buildingsNew and existing buildings– Utility and government conservation Utility and government conservation

programsprograms– Other consumer actionsOther consumer actions

slide 2

What is the “Surcharge Policy”?What is the “Surcharge Policy”?

The Council’s Plan must contain a The Council’s Plan must contain a recommendation to the Administrator recommendation to the Administrator regarding whether the a utility’s failure to regarding whether the a utility’s failure to achieve MCS savings should be subject to a achieve MCS savings should be subject to a surcharge on all of a its power purchases surcharge on all of a its power purchases from Bonnevillefrom Bonneville

Surcharges may not be less than 10%, nor Surcharges may not be less than 10%, nor greater than 50% of Bonneville’s rate.greater than 50% of Bonneville’s rate.

slide 4

Model Conservation Standards – Model Conservation Standards – Decision CriteriaDecision Criteria

The Act requires that the MCS be set The Act requires that the MCS be set at levels that:at levels that:– achieve achieve all regionally cost-effective power all regionally cost-effective power

savingssavings (i.e., cost less than new generation ); (i.e., cost less than new generation ); and,and,

– that are that are economically feasible for economically feasible for consumersconsumers, taking into account financial , taking into account financial assistance that may be made available assistance that may be made available through Bonnevillethrough Bonneville

The MCS - A Short History:The MCS - A Short History:Chapter 1Chapter 1

Council adopted first MCS April 27, 1983Council adopted first MCS April 27, 1983– Established space heating performance targets for new Established space heating performance targets for new

electrically heated residences for three Northwest electrically heated residences for three Northwest Climate ZonesClimate Zones

» Less than 6,000 Heating Degree Day (HDD)Less than 6,000 Heating Degree Day (HDD)» 6000 – 8000 HDD*6000 – 8000 HDD*» More than 8000 HDD*More than 8000 HDD*

– MCS requirements were 40% better than toughest MCS requirements were 40% better than toughest existing energy codes in regionexisting energy codes in region

– Recommended that MCS be adopted by January 1, Recommended that MCS be adopted by January 1, 1986 or BPA impose 10% surcharge on utilities serving 1986 or BPA impose 10% surcharge on utilities serving non-complying areasnon-complying areas

*Now Zone 2 = 6000 – 7499 HDD, Zone 3 = 7500 HDD and greater

slide 6

The MCS – A Short History: The MCS – A Short History: Chapter 2Chapter 2

1983 – 19911983 – 1991– Council sued by Seattle Master Builders contesting Council sued by Seattle Master Builders contesting

legality and level of the MCSlegality and level of the MCS» Conclusion – Ninth Circuit Rules for CouncilConclusion – Ninth Circuit Rules for Council

– Utilities demand that Bonneville sponsor “R&D” Utilities demand that Bonneville sponsor “R&D” project (RSPD) to test “cost-effectiveness” of MCSproject (RSPD) to test “cost-effectiveness” of MCS

» Conclusion – Bonneville finds MCS cost-effectiveConclusion – Bonneville finds MCS cost-effective

– Bonneville, following Council’s Plan, sponsors “early Bonneville, following Council’s Plan, sponsors “early code” adoption and “energy efficient” new homes code” adoption and “energy efficient” new homes marketing program (Super Good Cents)marketing program (Super Good Cents)

» Conclusion – Tacoma adopts MCS, the Region follows . . .Conclusion – Tacoma adopts MCS, the Region follows . . .

slide 7


Current StatusCurrent Status– Oregon and Washington have energy codes that meet Oregon and Washington have energy codes that meet

or exceed the original MCSor exceed the original MCS– Montana has adopted the 2003 International Energy Montana has adopted the 2003 International Energy

Conservation Code (IECC)Conservation Code (IECC)– Idaho jurisdictions commenced enforcement of 2006 Idaho jurisdictions commenced enforcement of 2006

the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) on the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) on January 1, 2008January 1, 2008

– The IECC codes require efficiency levels that are The IECC codes require efficiency levels that are within 15% of the original MCS, meeting Council’s within 15% of the original MCS, meeting Council’s 85% “achievability” target.85% “achievability” target.

Where Are We?Where Are We?(Thermal Shell Only)(Thermal Shell Only)

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Rela

tive U

se

Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3

1983 1986 1989 1992 2009 MCS

slide 8


It’s Time for Another Cost-Effectiveness ReviewIt’s Time for Another Cost-Effectiveness Review Issues:Issues:

– Are there additional thermal shell measures that are Are there additional thermal shell measures that are “regionally cost-effective” and “economically “regionally cost-effective” and “economically feasible”? (5feasible”? (5thth Plan did not identify any) Plan did not identify any)

– Are there non-thermal shell measures (e.g. HVAC Are there non-thermal shell measures (e.g. HVAC equipment, lighting, water heating, appliances) that equipment, lighting, water heating, appliances) that should be considered for inclusion?should be considered for inclusion?

– Should the MCS consider carbon mitigation cost risk Should the MCS consider carbon mitigation cost risk independent of the incorporating future energy cost into independent of the incorporating future energy cost into the economic analysis?the economic analysis?

Where Are We?Where Are We?Other MeasuresOther Measures

Oregon CodeOregon Code– Requires ~50% of lamps be “CFL” equivalentRequires ~50% of lamps be “CFL” equivalent– Requires use of PTCS duct sealing Requires use of PTCS duct sealing oror higher efficiency higher efficiency

Heat Pump (HSPF 8.5)Heat Pump (HSPF 8.5) Washington CodeWashington Code

– Will require (July 2010) “duct sealing” or interior ductsWill require (July 2010) “duct sealing” or interior ducts Montana & IdahoMontana & Idaho

– ““Scheduled” to adopt 2009 IECC which requires better Scheduled” to adopt 2009 IECC which requires better insulated above grade and below grade walls, duct insulated above grade and below grade walls, duct tightening (0.08 cfm/sq.ft) and limits some “loophole” tightening (0.08 cfm/sq.ft) and limits some “loophole” equipment tradeoffs. equipment tradeoffs.

slide 9

Analytical Approach – Analytical Approach – Regional Cost EffectivenessRegional Cost Effectiveness

Use forecast of future market prices and Use forecast of future market prices and load shape of savings to establish “energy load shape of savings to establish “energy value”value”

Include T&D Benefits to establish “capacity Include T&D Benefits to establish “capacity value”value”

Incorporate “risk” by adjusting future Incorporate “risk” by adjusting future market value (+/-) based on portfolio market value (+/-) based on portfolio analysis modeling resultsanalysis modeling results

Analytical Approach –Analytical Approach –Economic FeasibilityEconomic Feasibility

Use “lowest life cycle cost” code compliant home for each Use “lowest life cycle cost” code compliant home for each heating zone as “base case,” heating zone as “base case,” independent of space independent of space conditioning system type and including lighting.conditioning system type and including lighting.

Compute life cycle ownership cost of new home with Compute life cycle ownership cost of new home with increased levels of efficiency, including HVAC & lightingincreased levels of efficiency, including HVAC & lighting

Use “Monte Carlo” model to identify lowest average “life-Use “Monte Carlo” model to identify lowest average “life-cycle” cost package for each climate zone by testing cycle” cost package for each climate zone by testing multiple (1000+) combinations of values for major input multiple (1000+) combinations of values for major input assumptions, e.g. mortgage rates, retail electric rates, assumptions, e.g. mortgage rates, retail electric rates, marginal tax rates, thermal shell efficiency, HVAC marginal tax rates, thermal shell efficiency, HVAC equipment efficiency, lighting efficiency, etc.equipment efficiency, lighting efficiency, etc.

Scope of AnalysisScope of Analysis

New Single Construction New Single Construction Analysis covers thermal shell, HVAC & Lighting Analysis covers thermal shell, HVAC & Lighting

improvements to homes with:improvements to homes with:– Zonal Electric HeatZonal Electric Heat– Air Source heat pumps Air Source heat pumps – Electric Force-air furnaces with and without central air Electric Force-air furnaces with and without central air

conditioningconditioning Tested:Tested:

– Ten shell improvement measuresTen shell improvement measures– Two HVAC equipment efficiency levelsTwo HVAC equipment efficiency levels– Three HVAC duct efficiency levelsThree HVAC duct efficiency levels– Three lighting efficiency improvement levelsThree lighting efficiency improvement levels

Shell Efficiency ImprovementsShell Efficiency ImprovementsAbove Grade Wall R19 Std - R21 AdvAbove Grade Wall R19 Std - R21 Adv

Above Grade Wall R21 Std - R21 Std w/R5 Above Grade Wall R21 Std - R21 Std w/R5

Above Grade Wall R21 Std w/R5 - R30 (SSP)Above Grade Wall R21 Std w/R5 - R30 (SSP)

Above Grade Wall R30 SSP - R33 (DBL)Above Grade Wall R30 SSP - R33 (DBL)

Attic R38 - R49 AdvancedAttic R38 - R49 Advanced

Attic R49 Advanced - R60 AdvancedAttic R49 Advanced - R60 Advanced

Below Grade Wall R21 Std to R21 w/R5Below Grade Wall R21 Std to R21 w/R5

Floor R30 - R38 w/12" TrussFloor R30 - R38 w/12" Truss

Infiltration 0.35 ach - 0.20 ach w/HRVInfiltration 0.35 ach - 0.20 ach w/HRV

Slab R0 - R10 Full Slab w/R5 TBSlab R0 - R10 Full Slab w/R5 TB

Vault R30 - R38 HDVault R30 - R38 HD

Vault R38 HD - R40 (SSP)Vault R38 HD - R40 (SSP)

Window Class 30 - Class 25Window Class 30 - Class 25

Window Class 35 - Class 30Window Class 35 - Class 30

Other Efficiency ImprovementsOther Efficiency Improvements

Heat PumpHeat Pump– HSFP 8.5/SEER 14HSFP 8.5/SEER 14– HSPF 9.0/SEER 14HSPF 9.0/SEER 14

Heating/Cooling DuctsHeating/Cooling Ducts– PTCS Duct SealingPTCS Duct Sealing– PTCS Interior DuctsPTCS Interior Ducts

Heat Pump System Commissioning & ControlsHeat Pump System Commissioning & Controls Lighting Power Density (LPD) ReductionLighting Power Density (LPD) Reduction

– Base = 1.75 W/sq.ft.Base = 1.75 W/sq.ft.– Alternatives @ 1.0, 0.75 & 0.6 W/sq.ft.Alternatives @ 1.0, 0.75 & 0.6 W/sq.ft.

slide 10

Life Cycle Cost Input AssumptionsLife Cycle Cost Input Assumptions

Mortgage Rate and TermMortgage Rate and Term Consumer Discount RateConsumer Discount Rate Downpayment Downpayment Private Mortgage Insurance (for less than 20% down)Private Mortgage Insurance (for less than 20% down) Retail Electricity Price and Escalation RateRetail Electricity Price and Escalation Rate State and Federal Income Tax RateState and Federal Income Tax Rate Property Tax RateProperty Tax Rate Homeowner’s Insurance RateHomeowner’s Insurance Rate Measure Incremental CostMeasure Incremental Cost Measure Incremental SavingsMeasure Incremental Savings

slide 11

Life Cycle Cost –Life Cycle Cost – “Probability” Model “Probability” Model

ProblemProblem– All of the major input assumptions are known to vary All of the major input assumptions are known to vary

over a range, yet each new homebuyer will face unique over a range, yet each new homebuyer will face unique combination of financial conditions combination of financial conditions

– ““Point estimates” for each assumption result in Point estimates” for each assumption result in “Yes/No” answers, when the real conclusion is “Yes/No” answers, when the real conclusion is “sometimes OK, sometimes not so OK”“sometimes OK, sometimes not so OK”

Solution Solution – Use distributions of input assumptions that represent Use distributions of input assumptions that represent

the “probability” that a specific value for each input the “probability” that a specific value for each input will occur to compute the likelihood that a specific will occur to compute the likelihood that a specific level of efficiency is economically feasiblelevel of efficiency is economically feasible

Consumer Life Cycle Cost ModelConsumer Life Cycle Cost Model

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0%

Nominal Morgage Rate (% APR)

Pro

babil

ity (

%)

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

Downpayment (% )

Pro

babil

ity (

%)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

3.27% 3.80% 3.85% 3.93% 2.50%

Nominal Annual Electricity Price Escalation Rate

Pro

babil

ity (

%)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Retail Rate (2000$/ kWh)

Sh

are

of

Hom

eb

uyers

(%

)0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Under

$10,0

00

$10,0

00 t

o$19,9

99

$20,0

00 t

o$29,9

99

$30,0

00 t

o$49,9

99

$50,0

00 t

o$74,9

99

$75,0

00 t

o$99,9

99

$100,0

00 t

o$149,9

99

$150,0

00 t

o$199,9

99

$200,0

00 t

o$499,9

99

$500,0

00 t

o$999,9

99

$1,0

00,0

00

and a

bove

Sh

are

of

Ho

useh

old

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

10% 21% 27% 31% 39%

Marginal Federal Income Tax Rate

Sh

are

of

Hom

ebu

yers

(%

)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

0.0% 5.1% 7.0% 7.1% 7.8% 9.0%

Marginal State Income Tax Rate

Sh

are

of

Hom

ebu

yers

(%

)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Sh

are

of

Ho

meb

uyers

1.14% 1.23% 1.49%

Measure NameSavings (kwh/yr)

Capital Cost

WALL R21 ADV 995 313$ WINDOW CL35 729 243$ FLOOR R38 STD w/12"Truss 506 686$ ATTIC R49 ADVrh 369 557$ WINDOW CL30 720 1,265$ WINDOW CL25 714 1,351$ VAULT R38 HD 194 414$ WALL R21 STD+R5 681 1,786$ WALL 8" SSPANEL 751 2,444$ ATTIC R60 ADVrh 93 320$ WALL R33 DBL 82 1,253$ VAULT 10" SS Panel 26 1,444$

INPUT ASSUMPTIONSFrequency Chart

Dollars

Mean = $689.000

.011

.022

.032

.043

0

10.75

21.5

32.25

43

($3,509) ($1,131) $1,247 $3,625 $6,003

1,000 Trials 1,000 Displayed

Forecast: WALL R21 STD+R5

Nu

mb

er

of

Ob

serv

ati

ons

Cost for Input Set 2

Cost for Input Set 1

Distribution of Life Cycle Cost for Distribution of Life Cycle Cost for A Single Upgrade PackageA Single Upgrade Package

240 241 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250

Life Cycle Cost (NPV 2006 000$)

Mean LCCMean LCC

Probability Distribution ofProbability Distribution ofNominal Mortgage Rates*Nominal Mortgage Rates*

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

Nominal Morgage Rate (% APR)

Pro

babili

ty (

%)

*Source: Federal Housing Finance Board Monthly Interest Rate Survey APR for new homes 1985-2007

Mean = 6.2%Mean = 6.2%

Probability Distribution of Probability Distribution of Downpayment Amount*Downpayment Amount*

0%

1%

1%

2%

2%

3%

3%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Downpayment (%)

Pro

babili

ty (

%)

Mean = 27%Mean = 27%

*Source: Federal Housing Finance Board Monthly Interest Rate Survey for Oregon

Probability Distribution of Electricity Probability Distribution of Electricity Price Escalation Rates – Zone 1Price Escalation Rates – Zone 1

0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%3.5%4.0%4.5%5.0%

0.69

%

0.97

%

1.24

%

1.52

%

1.80

%

2.08

%

2.36

%

2.64

%

2.91

%

3.19

%

3.47

%

3.75

%

4.03

%

4.30

%

4.58

%

4.86

%

5.14

%


Pro

babili

ty (

%)

Source: Northwest Power and ConservationCouncil Draft 6th Power Plan


0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%3.5%4.0%4.5%5.0%

0.87

%

1.13

%

1.40

%

1.66

%

1.93

%

2.19

%

2.46

%

2.72

%

2.99

%

3.25

%

3.52

%

3.78

%

4.05

%

4.31

%

4.58

%

4.84

%

5.11

%


Pro

babili

ty (

%)



0.0%0.5%1.0%1.5%2.0%2.5%3.0%3.5%4.0%4.5%5.0%

0.46

%

0.72

%

0.98

%

1.24

%

1.50

%

1.76

%

2.02

%

2.28

%

2.54

%

2.79

%

3.05

%

3.31

%

3.57

%

3.83

%

4.09

%

4.35

%

4.61

%


Pro

babili

ty (

%)


Probability Distribution of Base Probability Distribution of Base Year Electricity Prices – Zone 1Year Electricity Prices – Zone 1

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

$0.0

22

$0.0

35

$0.0

41

$0.0

42

$0.0

44

$0.0

47

$0.0

48

$0.0

49

$0.0

51

$0.0

52

$0.0

53

$0.0

54

$0.0

55

$0.0

56

$0.0

58

$0.0

63

$0.0

73


Share

of

Hom

ebuye

rs (

%)

Source: Energy Information Administration residential retail revenue and customer count data for 2007. Shares based on share of new residential customers added between 2000 and 2007.

Probability Distribution of Base Probability Distribution of Base Year Electricity Prices Zone 2Year Electricity Prices Zone 2

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

$0.0

29

$0.0

31

$0.0

42

$0.0

45

$0.0

48

$0.0

49

$0.0

50

$0.0

52

$0.0

53

$0.0

56

$0.0

56

$0.0

57

$0.0

59

$0.0

64

$0.0

68

$0.0

77


Share

of

Hom

ebuye

rs (

%)


Probability Distribution of Base Probability Distribution of Base Year Electricity Prices Zone 3Year Electricity Prices Zone 3

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

$0.0

43

$0.0

46

$0.0

46

$0.0

47

$0.0

49

$0.0

49

$0.0

51

$0.0

59

$0.0

59

$0.0

60

$0.0

64

$0.0

68

$0.0

68

$0.0

69

$0.0

71

$0.0

72

$0.0

73


Share

of

Hom

ebuye

rs (

%)


Probability Distribution of Marginal Probability Distribution of Marginal Federal Income Tax Rates – Zone 1 Federal Income Tax Rates – Zone 1

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

10% 15% 20% 25% 26% 28% 29% 33% 35%


Share

of

Hom

ebuye

rs (

%)

Source: Internal Revenue ServiceIndividual Tax Returns Data for 2007

Probability Distribution of Marginal Probability Distribution of Marginal Federal Income Tax Rates – Zone 2Federal Income Tax Rates – Zone 2

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

10% 15% 20% 25% 26% 28% 29% 33% 35%


Share

of

Hom

ebuye

rs (

%)


Probability Distribution of Marginal Probability Distribution of Marginal Federal Income Tax Rates – Zone 3 Federal Income Tax Rates – Zone 3

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

10% 15% 20% 25% 26% 28% 29% 33% 35%


Share

of

Hom

ebuye

rs (

%)


Probability Distribution of Marginal Probability Distribution of Marginal State Income Tax Rates - IdahoState Income Tax Rates - Idaho

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

5.1% 7.1% 7.8%


Share

of

Hom

ebuye

rs (

%)

Source: Based on Internal Revenue Service for Idaho Individual Tax Returns Data for 2007

Probability Distribution of Marginal Probability Distribution of Marginal State Income Tax Rates - MontanaState Income Tax Rates - Montana

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

3.0% 5.0% 6.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0% 11.0%


Share

of

Hom

ebuye

rs (

%)

Source: Based on Internal Revenue Service for Montana Individual Tax Returns Data for 2007

Probability Distribution of Marginal Probability Distribution of Marginal State Income Tax Rates - OregonState Income Tax Rates - Oregon

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

7.0% 9.0%


Share

of

Hom

ebuye

rs (

%)

Source: Based on Internal Revenue Service for Oregon Individual Tax Returns Data for 2007

Probability Distribution of Probability Distribution of Property Tax RatesProperty Tax Rates

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3

Sh

are

of

Ho

me

bu

ye

rs

0.00%

0.10%

0.20%

0.30%

0.40%

0.50%

0.60%

0.70%

0.80%

0.90%

1.00%

Pro

pe

rty

Ta

x R

ateShare

Rate

Source: Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington Departments of Revenue Property Tax Statistics Fiscal Year 2008-2009

Private Mortgage Insurance Private Mortgage Insurance AssumptionsAssumptions

0.0%

0.2%

0.4%

0.6%

0.8%

1.0%

1.2%

1.4%

1.6%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

Downpayment Amount

PM

I (S

hare

of

Loan

Am

ou

nt)

http://www.westga.edu/~bquest/1997/costof.html

Probability Distribution of Incremental Probability Distribution of Incremental Cost for HSPF 7.7/SEER 13 Heat PumpCost for HSPF 7.7/SEER 13 Heat Pump

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

$3,015 $3,387 $3,759 $4,131 $4,502

Cost to Consumer (2006$)

Pro

babili

ty

Mean = $3875Mean = $3875

Source: Regional Technical Forum

Probability Distribution of HSPF 8.5/ Probability Distribution of HSPF 8.5/ SEER 14 Air Source Heat Pump CostSEER 14 Air Source Heat Pump Cost

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

$5,208 $5,726 $6,244 $6,762 $7,280


Pro

bab

ility

Mean = $6250Mean = $6250


Probability Distribution of HSPF 9.0/ Probability Distribution of HSPF 9.0/ SEER 14 Air Source Heat Pump CostSEER 14 Air Source Heat Pump Cost

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%

$5,464 $6,085 $6,707 $7,328 $7,949


Pro

bab

ility

Mean = $6940Mean = $6940


Probability Distribution of Duct Probability Distribution of Duct Sealing CostSealing Cost

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

$226 $246 $266 $286 $306 $326 $346 $366 $386 $406

Cost to Consumer

Pro

babili

ty

Mean = $325Mean = $325


Probability Distribution of Heat Probability Distribution of Heat Pump System Commissioning CostPump System Commissioning Cost

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

$200 $205 $210 $215 $220 $225 $230 $235 $240 $245

Cost to Consumer

Pro

babili

ty

Mean = $225Mean = $225


Zone 1 - Base CaseZone 1 - Base CaseLowest Life Cycle Cost Code Lowest Life Cycle Cost Code

Compliant PackageCompliant Package

ComponentComponent Base CaseBase Case

Wall –Above GradeWall –Above Grade R21 STDR21 STD

Wall –Below GradeWall –Below Grade R19R19

AtticAttic R38 STDR38 STD

Vault - JoistedVault - Joisted R30R30

Vault - TrussedVault - Trussed R38R38

FloorFloor R30R30

WindowWindow Class 35Class 35

DoorDoor R5R5

SlabSlab R10R10

Wall – Ext. Below Wall – Ext. Below grade grade

R10R10

HVAC System – ZonalHVAC System – Zonal DHW – EF90DHW – EF90 Average Use (kWh) –Average Use (kWh) –

– w/o DHW = 11,534w/o DHW = 11,534

– w/DHW = 15,190w/DHW = 15,190

First CostFirst Cost– w/o DHW = $1653w/o DHW = $1653

– w/DHW =$2294w/DHW =$2294

Minimum LCCMinimum LCC– w/o DHW = $308,827w/o DHW = $308,827

– w/DHW =$314,321w/DHW =$314,321


Compliant PackageCompliant PackageComponentComponent Base CaseBase Case






FloorFloor R30R30


DoorDoor R5R5

SlabSlab R10R10


R10R10


– w/o DHW = 16,285w/o DHW = 16,285

– w/DHW = 19,940w/DHW = 19,940


– w/DHW =$2294w/DHW =$2294


– w/DHW =$324,987w/DHW =$324,987


Compliant PackageCompliant PackageComponentComponent Base CaseBase Case






FloorFloor R30R30


DoorDoor R5R5

SlabSlab R10R10


R10R10


– w/o DHW = 19,999w/o DHW = 19,999

– w/DHW = 23,654w/DHW = 23,654


– w/DHW =$2294w/DHW =$2294


– w/DHW =$255,520w/DHW =$255,520

Zone 1: Life Cycle Cost Minimum Zone 1: Life Cycle Cost Minimum Thermal Shell PackageThermal Shell Package

ComponentComponent Regionally Cost-EffectiveRegionally Cost-Effective Base CaseBase CaseWall –Above GradeWall –Above Grade R21 Advanced FramingR21 Advanced Framing R21 STDR21 STD

Wall –Below GradeWall –Below Grade R19R19 R19R19

AtticAttic R38 STDR38 STD R38 STDR38 STD

VaultVault R30R30 R30R30

FloorFloor R38R38 R30R30

WindowWindow Class 30Class 30 Class 35Class 35

DoorDoor R5R5 R5R5

SlabSlab R10 Full Under SlabR10 Full Under Slab R10R10

Wall – Ext. Below grade Wall – Ext. Below grade R10R10 R10R10

Zone 1: Life Cycle Cost MinimumZone 1: Life Cycle Cost MinimumHVAC, Lighting & DHWHVAC, Lighting & DHW

HSPF 7.7 /SEER 13 Heat Pump w/ Interior Ducts & PTCS HSPF 7.7 /SEER 13 Heat Pump w/ Interior Ducts & PTCS System Commissioning & ControlsSystem Commissioning & Controls

Lighting Power Density = 0.6 Watts/sq.ft.Lighting Power Density = 0.6 Watts/sq.ft. Heat Pump Water HeaterHeat Pump Water Heater LCC SavingsLCC Savings First Cost IncreaseFirst Cost Increase

– w/o DHW = $4,284w/o DHW = $4,284 - w/o DHW = $7,697- w/o DHW = $7,697

– w/DHW = $6,403w/DHW = $6,403 - w/DHW = $8,562- w/DHW = $8,562 Energy SavingsEnergy Savings

– w/o DHW = 6,894 (60%)w/o DHW = 6,894 (60%)

– w/DHW = 8,595 (57%)w/DHW = 8,595 (57%)








DoorDoor R5R5 R5R5







– w/DHW = $8,817w/DHW = $8,817 - w/DHW = $8,562- w/DHW = $8,562 Energy SavingsEnergy Savings

– w/o DHW = 9,058 (56%)w/o DHW = 9,058 (56%)

– w/DHW = 10,610 (53%)w/DHW = 10,610 (53%)








DoorDoor R5R5 R5R5







– w/DHW = $12,746w/DHW = $12,746 - w/DHW = $8,562- w/DHW = $8,562

Energy SavingsEnergy Savings– w/o DHW = 10,569 (53%)w/o DHW = 10,569 (53%)

– w/DHW = 12,329 (52%)w/DHW = 12,329 (52%)

Model Conservation Standards and Surcharge Recommendation Economic Analysis for for New Single...

Documents

Transcript of Model Conservation Standards and Surcharge Recommendation Economic Analysis for for New Single...