N ETWORK PC P OWER M ANAGEMENT June 28, 2011 Regional Technical Forum Presented by: Bob Tingleff SBW Consulting, Inc.

Status Provisionally deemed UES since May, 2010 SBW presented an update May, 2011  Incorporated Cadmus/PSE and Avista studies  Minor changes based on review of literature  HVAC factor findings Different than lighting Difficult to pin down RTF Decision: Use lighting HVAC factors  Large office, K-12, Other (small office/RTU HVAC)  This path incorporates an impact appropriate to building type/HVAC system 5/3/2011

Measure Definition – 9 measures rather than 1 due to HVAC factors 3 building/business types  Large Office (central HVAC)  K-12  Other, represented by Small Office (RTU) 3 HVAC system types  Electric  Heat pump  Gas 5/3/2011

Key Parameters Power draw of desktop  Mix of Class A, B, C, D, Energy Star compliant and not Power draw of monitor  2008 E-Star LCD (lower power when sleeping) Baseline time spent in low and high power Shift in annual hours due to measure  23% of annual hours shift from high to low power  Supported by Cadmus/PSE study  Consistent with earlier studies 5/3/2011

Key Parameters Rate of successful installation of power management software  May change over time – new computers, software defeated intentionally or accidentally, bugs, IT diligence  No empirical basis for measure persistence  Load shapes show far from complete success (next slide)  Previous analysis derated savings based on an assumed installation rate Current analysis already includes the installation rate in the average hourly shift 5/3/2011

Do we need to adjust savings by business type? Because of HVAC factors we now have K-12, Large Office, Other (small office HVAC) Annual and daily schedules differ  Adjusting the overall load shape to match K-12, office results in an annual savings difference of 5%  Other schedules are hard to quantify => Use office hours for all measures Two Procost load shapes: Office, K-12 5/3/2011

Savings Impact Without HVAC factors: 26% increase  Monitor savings increased from 11 kWh/yr. to 18 Lower power draw in sleep mode in newer monitors  Previous analysis derrated savings by assumed installation rate of power management software This analysis finds that empirical studies already incorporate this factor  Newer computers have lower sleep-mode power  New studies find a couple more percent shifted to low power by measure 5/3/2011

Savings Impact: Difference with Cadmus/PSE study Cadmus: 128 kWh/yr. This analysis: 145 kWh/yr. Monitor savings: 18 kWh/yr. vs. 11 Idle power draw of desktop: 64W vs. 60W  64W is based on sales data  Could argue that schools and other likely environments will buy smaller computers  Don’t really know the mix  Cadmus data show many computers at 80W or more (63W average at non-participant sites) 5/3/2011

Recommendations Set status to Active Sunset criteria  Desktop power draw will change  Baseline rate of power management may change  2 years max 5/3/2011

RTF Proposed Motion: “I _________ move that the RTF approve the Network PC Power Management UES measure to Active status with a sunset date of July, 2013.”