1 NORTHWEST ENERGY EFFICIENCY ALLIANCE TV Initiative Webinar Ty Stober & Praveen Chalise March 25, 2014

2 Desired Outcomes You leave the webinar understanding:  the “why” behind the TV initiative  lessons learned through Market Progress Evaluation Reports (MPERs) – and adjustments made along the way  the rationale behind transitioning out of the market and the hand off to long term monitoring and tracking

3 How it all began

4 Why a TV Initiative  Plasma TVs consuming 2x energy CRTs  98% TV penetration of US Households  # sets per household climbing  DTV Transition 6/12/2009  More efficient technology existed

5 Initiative Background  Pilot TVs with CA  Business Plan  Pilot TVs with CA  Business Plan  ENERGY STAR 5.3  9 months early  108 watt cap  ENERGY STAR 5.3  9 months early  108 watt cap  Initiative winds down  TVs Transfer to RPP Pilot  Regional Plug Load Platform Discussion  ENERGY STAR 3.0  Regional Plug Load Platform Discussion  ENERGY STAR 3.0  5 National + Regional Retailers  ENERGY STAR 4.0  5 National + Regional Retailers  ENERGY STAR 4.0  Target Joins Program

66 Televisions – Market Transformation Leverage mid-stream incentives to influence retailer buying practices, ultimately driving the manufacturing, product specifications and standards of energy-efficient televisions.  Consumers weren’t aware or concerned  So, manufacturers and retailers didn’t care  Resistance to standards  Marketing links EE and Advanced Technology  Super Regional market power to influence retailers  Drive ENERGY STAR specification INTERVENTIONSOUTCOMES MARKET BARRIERS  Consumers pay attention  Dominant market share for TVs that meet program specifications  ENERGY STAR assists standards implementation

7 Market Progress Evaluation Report 2 (MPER2)  Covers 2011, Published 2013  Initiative influenced retailers’ assortment decisions  Products on the shelf led to increased sales  Initiative influenced ENERGY STAR specifications

8 MPER2 (2011) Other Points of Interest  Validated savings model  In-store video increased sales at one retailer  Retailers valued in-store activities

9 Critiques from MPER2 (2011)  Not seeing retailers buying formulas, limits ability to quantify program influence  Regional impact measurement hindered by limited data set and lack of control groups  No short-term impact on product design  Initiative did not impact store associate behavior  Retailers didn’t promote TVs beyond initiative activities

10 Televisions – Market Transformation Leverage mid-stream incentives to influence retailer buying practices, ultimately driving the manufacturing, product specifications and standards of energy-efficient televisions.  Consumers weren’t aware or concerned  So, manufacturers and retailers didn’t care  Resistance to standards  Marketing links EE and Advanced Technology  Super Regional market power to influence retailers  Drive ENERGY STAR specification INTERVENTIONSOUTCOMES MARKET BARRIERS  Consumers pay attention  Dominant market share for TVs that meet program specifications  ENERGY STAR assists standards implementation

Highlights  Compensated on 20% above ENERGY STAR 6.0 and on Most Efficient 2013  Focused on market pull activities  Laid groundwork for transferring assets to Retail Products Portfolio

12 TV Energy Savings Total Regional Savings Today 2013 Goal 27.7 aMW

13 Tier Progression

14 TVs – Market Transformation in Action % Market Share of TVs

15 TVs – Market Transformation in Action % Market Share of TVs Transformation Market

16 TVs – Market Transformation in Action % Market Share of TVs We are here.

17 Average TV Energy Consumption TV’S: Use 56% Less Energy Than Pre-Program! ENERGY STAR 5 Effective ENERGY STAR 5 Effective

18 Changes in TV Energy Intensity over time

19 Next Steps  Transition Complete milestone June 30  Monitor effects of new DOE test spec  Participate in ENERGY STAR 7.0 process  Participate in DOE standards process  Support state standards

20 Review Desired Outcomes Are you leaving the webinar understanding:  the “why” behind the TV initiative?  lessons learned through Market Progress Evaluation Reports (MPERs) – and the adjustments made along the way?  the rationale behind transitioning out of the market and the hand off to long term monitoring and tracking?

21 Wrap-up  Questions  Ty Stober, Initiative Manager