851 SW 6th Ave, Suite 1100
Portland, Oregon 97204-1348
503-222-5161  fax 820-2370

Table 1	Climate Adjusted HSPF
ARI Rated HSPF	Portland	Seattle	Boise	Spokane	Missoula
6.8	7.1	7.1	6.3	6.2	6.1
7.1	7.4	7.5	6.5	6.5	6.3
8.0	8.3	8.4	7.4	7.3	7.1
8.1	8.4	8.5	7.5	7.4	7.2
8.3	8.6	8.7	7.6	7.6	7.4

Table 2	Climate Adjusted HSPF
Location	Portland	Seattle	Boise	Spokane	Missoula
% of ARI Rated HSPF	104%	105%	92%	91%	89%

Table 3	Non-PTCS Installation Adjusted HSPF
ARI Rated HSPF	Portland	Seattle	Boise	Spokane	Missoula
6.8	6.1	6.3	4.3	4.2	4.0
7.1	6.4	6.6	4.5	4.4	4.2
8.0	7.2	7.4	5.1	5.0	4.7
8.1	7.3	7.5	5.2	5.0	4.8
8.3	7.4	7.7	5.3	5.2	4.9

Table 4	Non-PTCS Installation Adjusted HSPF
Location	Portland	Seattle	Boise	Spokane	Missoula
% of ARI Rated HSPF	90%	93%	64%	62%	59%

?           Background (1.2 million commercial ice-makers currently in service in the U.S., 50,000-75,000 of which are here in the Northwest; only five major manufacturers; energy efficiency varies over a wide range; FEMP has set ?recommended? levels of efficiency; CEE has proposed a two-tiered efficiency level different from FEMP's; no available ?sales-weighted? efficiency data to establish a baseline from which to measure savings)

?          Data on energy consumption rates for air-cooled ice-making heads

?          Data on energy consumption rates for water-cooled ice-making heads

?          Data on energy consumption rates for remote condensing ice-making heads (air cooled)

?          Data on energy consumption rates for self-contained ice-making heads (air cooled)

?          Data on energy consumption rates for self-contained ice-making heads (water cooled)

?          Recommendations (1): use ?Power Curve? fit to establish ?average? efficiency by ice-maker type and capacity, use ?Power Curve? fit to ?above-average? efficiency models to establish minimum efficiency needed to qualify for C&RD; use ?power Curve? fit to below-average efficiency models to establish baseline efficiency compute savings for C&RD

?           Recommendations (2): Adopt ?deemed calculator? to determine savings and C&RD credit for commercial ice-making equipment; use ARI rating as the basis for unit efficiency (kWh/100 lbs); use 3,000 hrs/yr (approximately 34% load factor) as the basis for computing annual savings.

            Copies of these overheads are available from Eckman upon request or may be downloaded from the RTF's web site; please refer to this document for further details of this presentation.

            Eckman then demonstrated the proposed deemed calculation method for commercial ice-makers, using the overhead projector. The group offered a variety of questions; comments and suggestions, one of which was that Eckman produce a model-based version of the calculator. Another participant noted that it would be helpful to be able to factor cost information into this tool. The group agreed that the ?average efficiency? performance should serve as the baseline for computing energy savings and that the ?upper quartile? efficiency should serve and the minimum level of performance needed to qualify for C&R Discount program rate credits. Eckman said he would incorporate the comments received at today's meeting into the finished version of the deemed calculator and past the group's recommendations on to BPA.

Recommendation - The RTF recommends that ?energy efficient commercial ice-making equipment? be added to the list of measures and activities eligible for the C&R Discount credit. The RTF recommends that Bonneville adopt the ?deemed calculation method? for Commercial Ice-Making Equipment (IceMakerCalcv1_1.xls) for purposes of estimating the savings from the installation of more efficient ice-makers.

5. Presentation, Discussion and Decision on Proposed Deemed Calculation Method for Earth Advantage Single Family Homes.

            Eckman noted that several months ago, the RTF was petitioned by PGE to develop a deemed calculator for the Earth Advantage program.  This tool attempts to aggregate across a wide range of appliances, lighting, HVAC, shell and other measures to produce a single Earth Advantage ?Deemed Savings? calculation for a houseful of measures.  Eckman also indicated that we would need to develop a similar calculation method for Super Good Cents/Energy Star homes in the future.

            Eckman went through the questions he asked PGE, and the answers to those questions:

?          What does it take to meet the Earth Advantage standard? (A 15% improvement over code

?          Whose code? (Yet to be determined)

?          Do you have to meet Super Good Cents to qualify for Earth Advantage? (No)

?          At least one appliance must be Energy Star

?          Water heater must be EF93 if less than 60 gallons and EF94 if more than 60 gallons

?           A minimum of three CFL lighting fixtures are required, one in the kitchen, one outside and one inside.

?           Heat pumps are not required

?           PTCS installation for ducts or system commissioning (i.e., refrigerant charge and air flow checks)

            What this calculator is set up to do is to look at the minimum configuration for the house, taking each measure separately, then adding them up, Eckman explained; obviously, it was not a simple tool to develop. He then spent a few minutes demonstrating the proposed deemed calculation method, using the overhead projector. Eckman noted that the proposed Earth Advantage deemed calculation method is available via the RTF website; please refer to this tool for further details of its operation. In general, the comments received on the proposed tool were quite favorable, particularly with respect to its ease of use.

            The group devoted a few minutes of discussion to the issue of the lack of viable energy efficiency standards for soil-sensing dishwashers; ultimately, Eckman said he would revise the calculator to include only those qualifying dishwasher models that are non-soil-sensing if and when the Oregon Office of Energy makes such a list available. He added that he would further modify the calculator to include refrigerator configuration selection (side-by-side, top/bottom etc.).  Most importantly he will use an air-source heat pump as the base case heating system for any case where the user selects an air-source heat pump as one of the qualifying measures. Once these changes are made, Eckman said he will post this calculator to the RTF website for review. He will also provide the RTF one more chance to review the calculator prior to passing along a formal recommendation to BPA.

6. Presentation, Discussion and Decision on Revised ?Deemed Values? for GFX Wastewater Heat Recovery.

            Charlie Grist led this presentation, reminding the group that this passive heat recovery technology, which was initially discussed at last month's RTF meeting, consists of a copper coil wrapped around a shower's drainpipe. The heated water passing through the drainpipe warms cold water passing through the coil; this pre-heated water then feeds into the hot water heater, reducing the amount of energy needed to bring the water up to temperature. Grist estimated that this long-lived (40 years) measure yields estimated annual energy savings of 500-600 kWh/year for an average single-family home.

            With respect to what has changed since the last time this measure was discussed, Grist said he had used American Water Works Association (AWWA) metered end-use data for water use from a study of 1,200 homes, adjusted the data for Northwest household size, to yield estimated 28 gallons per household per day of shower water usage. Grist said he had also calculated an average ambient inlet temperature for the Northwest (52 degrees F), and had revised the installation cost estimate for this measure upward, based on input from installers.

            Grist said he had added labor costs to the table for sizing and estimating the recovery factor; had revised the multi-family cost regime downward, and had also calibrated shower volume and energy to whole-house DHW by end-use for all hot-water appliances. Grist noted that, based on his analysis, this measure does appear to be cost-effective for most electric resistance applications.

            Grist offered the following potential next steps for this measure:

?          Possible residential code measure

?          Commercial applications also exist ? gyms, hotels, schools, laundries, hospitals, restaurants, others

?           Lots of gas heat

?           Generally, this measure is unlikely to be deemable.

            The group devoted a few minutes of discussion to the GFX wastewater heat recovery technology; in particular, the question of how many of these systems would optimally be installed in homes with multiple baths and showers. The group also discussed what percentage of the installation cost of this measure it would be appropriate to rebate; there was general agreement that 30%-40% of the installation cost should be the maximum tax credit. Ultimately, in response to the comments received at today's meeting, Grist said he would adjust his estimate of shower gallons recoverable per household downward to assume heat recovery capture of not more than two showers per day per unit. It was agreed that this would be a per-unit, rather than a per-dwelling, credit.

Recommendation - The RTF recommends that ?gravity film hot water heat recovery devices? be added to the list of measures and activities eligible for the C&R Discount credit. The RTF further recommends that Bonneville adopt ?deemed savings values? for gravity film hot water heat recovery devices use in residences. These values are listed in the spreadsheet entitled ?ResDHWHeatRecovery.xls.?

 

7. Presentation, Discussion and Decision on Petition to Add Seattle City Light's ?Built Smart? to Deemed Savings List.

            Eckman explained that Seattle City Light has petitioned the RTF to add its ?Built Smart? program, the successor to the Long-Term Super Good Cents Program, to the deemed savings list. The program is designed to encourage builders of new multifamily residential dwellings with electric space heat to exceed the provisions of the Washington State Energy Code and the Seattle Energy Code. Mike Little provided an overview of the ?Built Smart? program; after a brief discussion, Seattle City Light's petition was approved.  Little noted that all of the specifications and details of the Built Smart program are available via the Seattle City Light website; Little asked anyone with specific questions or concerns to contact him directly. Eckman indicated that he will use the RTF's ?Generic? C&R Discount Credit calculator to determine the amount of the rate discount credit for the measures in the ?Built Smart? program using the savings estimates from Seattle's evaluation of the Long-Term Super Good Cents program. The group agreed with this approach.

Recommendation - The RTF recommends that the ?Built Smart? program be added to the list of measures and activities eligible for the C&R Discount credit. The RTF further recommends that Bonneville adopt ?deemed savings values? for ?Built Smart? program measures that are based on Seattle City Light's Long-Term Super Good Cents program evaluation. These values are shown in the table below along with the recommended C&R Discount credits and measure lives.

 

 

8. Presentation, Discussion and Decision on Petition to Recommend BPA Rate Discount Credit for Proposed Residential Space and Water Heating Load Control Conservation Research and Development Project.

            Eckman explained that Portland General Electric has petitioned the RTF to recommend to Bonneville that a BPA rate credit be awarded for its proposed residential space and water heating load control conservation R & D project. Essentially, he said, this project would evaluate the use of load control devices (with consumer overrides) for certain types of residential equipment in conjunction with time-of-day pricing.

            Eckman said he had asked Ken Corum to evaluate the proposal PGE has submitted in the context of the criteria the RTF has developed for conservation R & D acceptance. Eckman noted that PGE has requested that the RTF notify them of their decision on this petition, favorable or unfavorable, before that decision is communicated to BPA, so that PGE can evaluate its next steps internally. Eckman said he is willing to honor that request.

            Corum went briefly through the proposal, explaining that, essentially, the utility would have control of the customer's space heating thermostat and water heater. He reiterated that the customer would be able to override that control. PGE would like to evaluate the extent to which customers would be willing to accept this technology, and to scale it up if acceptance is high.

            Corum noted that there is some question about whether or not this proposal fits the RTF's criteria for conservation R & D acceptance. He said he has been following demand response for the Council for several years, and said that, in his opinion, the general concept of reducing use during peak load hours makes a great deal of sense for a power system. Is, this a worthwhile avenue of conservation research and development? Corum asked, noting that, in his opinion, the answer to that question is yes. The other question, however, is whether this particular study fits the RTF's conservation R & D criteria, Corum said; the answer to that question is, it depends on how hard we want to push it.

            The group devoted a few minutes of discussion to the details of PGE's load control R & D proposal, in particular, to the questions of whether or not the mechanism described in the proposal fits the definition of ?conservation,? and, if so, whether or not the activity would have a high probability of expanding the use of conservation in the Pacific Northwest. Other participants expressed the concern that this proposal would not add significantly to the existing load control or consumer acceptance data.  Eckman summarized this discussion by saying that, while the proposal as written might ultimately yield useful information; it does not fit the RTF's criteria for the acceptance of conservation R&D proposals.  The group agreed with Eckman's summary.  The RTF's recommendation to PGE on their petition to have this R&D proposal eligible for C&R Discount Credit will therefore be negative, Eckman said.

9. Other.

            Eckman said the RTF has been asked to determine whether or not it would be appropriate to accept the Oregon State tax credit certification for PCTS duct installation as an equivalent to the Climate Crafters certification for the purposes of calculating the rate credit in Oregon. After a few minutes of discussion, the RTF agreed that while the two specifications are equivalent it was not clear that the quality assurance programs were. Eckman indicated that further research was needed before this issue could be resolved conclusively. Mark Johnson and several others also indicated that even if the two were equivalent there might be other reasons to require PTCS certification related to the market transformation aspects of the PTCS program.

            The group also discussed another issue: whether or not there should be a cap on rate credits for site-specific protocol-based savings and for premium motor replacements. Should there be some adjustment on how much money the region is willing to spend on premium-efficiency motors, given the evidence that premium-efficiency motors are the norm? Eckman asked. After a few minutes of discussion, focused mainly on the economics of rewind vs. new motor purchase, there was no clear RTF consensus on this issue.

10. Next RTF Meeting Date.

            The next meeting of the Regional Technical Forum was set for Monday, July 8. Meeting summary prepared by Jeff Kuechle, NWPPC contractor.

 

Regional Technical Forum Attendees
June 18, 2002