RTF Management Updates Jennifer Light Regional Technical Forum February 17, 2016

Topics for Today Updates from QA/QC Review – Residential Showerheads – Manufactured Homes Weatherization and HVAC Subcommittees – Seeking member sign ups Upcoming Work 2

QA/QC Review Updates Showerheads 3

Overview Updated measure (v2.2) approved by RTF on 10/20/15 – Residential Showerheads measure updated to align with Thermostatic Shower Restriction Valve UES parameter values approved at July 2015 RTF meeting. – Commercial: There is a separate Commercial Showerheads UES measure. No changes have been proposed to this measure recently QC Contractor identified errors in calculation of the annual number of showers per primary and secondary showerhead – Correction does not affect “any showerhead” measure applications – Correction increases savings for “primary showerhead” and “secondary showerhead” measure applications by 11% – No effect on cost or lifetime – All measures remain cost effective 4

ParameterCurrentProposedSource Baseline showerhead flow rate (gpm) Current: Seattle City Light (2007) - In situ measurement of existing showerheads Proposed: RBSA (2011) - In situ measured flow rate Shower duration (minutes) Current: "Seattle Home Water Conservation Study. The Impacts of High Efficiency Plumbing Fixture Retrofits in Single-Family Homes". For Seattle Public Utilities and the U.S. EPA. Prepared by: Peter W. Mayer, William B. DeOreo, David M. Lewis of Aquacraft, Inc. (December 2000) Proposed: LBNL metered data from San Francisco Bay Area used for Thermostatic Shower Restriction Valve measure (2013) - this dataset was needed to look at time-varying shower temperature signature Showers per person per year Current: Seattle City Lights, 1993 Proposed: Residential End Uses of Water Study (1999) and EPA New Homes study (2011) Annual usage (showers/showerhead) - Any showerhead Current: "Seattle Home Water Conservation Study. The Impacts of High Efficiency Plumbing Fixture Retrofits in Single-Family Homes". For Seattle Public Utilities and the U.S. EPA. Prepared by: Peter W. Mayer, William B. DeOreo, David M. Lewis of Aquacraft, Inc. (December 2000) Proposed: RBSA counts of showerheads and residences Annual usage (showers/showerhead) - Primary showerhead Maintained same ratio of primary to secondary usage Annual usage (showers/showerhead) - Secondary showerhead Percentate of showerheads that are Primary67%59% Current: Implicit in results Proposed: RBSA Electric efficiency98%100% Current: Only considered electric resistance water heaters, not HPWH. Proposed: Small market share of HPWH bumps up efficiency slightly. % Electric DHW64%62% Current: 6th Plan assumptions Proposed: RBSA Water/wast water costs ($/1000 gallons)$10.03$13.20 Current: Assumptions used in 6th Plan Proposed: Assumptions used in (draft) 7th Plan Water/wast water embedded energy (kWh/1000 gallons) Updated Parameter Values 5 Most significant changes Slide from 10/15 presentation

Savings 6

7

8

QA/QC Review Updates MH Weatherization and HVAC 9

MH Window Upgrade Measure- Calculation Error Measures affected: U35 – U30 Upgrade U35 – U22 Upgrade Calculation error: Full measure package savings not distributed correctly causing erroneous Option 3 (measure interactive) savings estimate. Calculation update resulted in: Increased energy savings Two of six affected measures now cost effective 10

Comparison of Energy Savings 11

Regional Cost Effectiveness Analysis 12

MH Weatherization – Other QC Updates Excel error rectified during QC have resulted in changes to all window retrofit measures Single Pane to U30 Single Pane to U22 Regional cost effectiveness status change for only Single Pane to U30 retrofit for Heating Zone 1 TRC was 0.9; is 1.0 post QC 13

MH Weatherization – Other QC Updates (contd.) Excel based QC updates also affect: Attic R0 – R22 Heating Zone 2 – No change to regional cost effectiveness status Attic R11 – R30 Heating Zone 3 – Incremental cost updated from 0.5 to 0.74 $/ s.f. – Measure Cost effective status change; 1.5 to 0.7 Floor R0 – R22 Heating Zone 2 – No change to regional cost effectiveness status 14

Comparison of Energy Savings 15

MH Commissioning Controls and Sizing Measure is planning, savings values set to Planning values adopted for SF measure Values updated in SF workbook from time of development to now; MH values were updated accordingly. No change in cost effectiveness status; all measures are and were cost effective 16

RTF Subcommittees 17

Engaging in Subcommittees Below is a list of active subcommittees. Please let Jennifer know if you want to be included on any of these subcommittees going forward: Guidelines Implementers Group New Homes Standard Protocol Non-Residential Lighting Residential Behavior Research and Evaluation Small and Rural Utilities Note: As other subcommittees emerge, we will seek RTF member involvement. But, please let Jennifer know if there are specific topics that you want to be sure to engage on in the future 18

Upcoming RTF Work 19

Upcoming Meeting Topics Anticipated at RTF or Subcommittee in next few months Multifamily Calibration, Weatherization, and New Construction Guidelines Revisions Standard Protocol for VFD – Irrigation Pump Motor Electronic Thermostats New Homes Standard Protocol Residential Behavior Non-Residential Lighting (Retrofits) Guidelines development for non-energy impacts 20