1. CFL, Specialty CFL, and CFL Fixture UES Measures Regional Technical Forum October 15, 2013

2. Measure Overview Current Category: UES Current Status: Proven Current Sunset Date: CFLs and Fixtures - December, 2013 Specialty CFLs – January, 2014 Reason for Update/Review: Sunset dates approaching Subcommittee Review: No 2

3. Staff Highlighted Issues Baseline definition – – The baseline has become much more efficient Currently: incandescent baseline, no EISA or Incandescent Reflector Lamp (IRL) federal standards adjustment Proposed: RBSA mix of CFL/inc/hal, with EISA and IRL adjustments Storage rate – – We know stored bulbs eventually get installed. – How do we account for this? Removal rate – – Current estimates are with respect to all lamps ever removed – Some of this would be removal at end-of-life, which is included in EUL Categorization – – How categorizations from different data sources are mapped to one another – Granularity of category definitions Hard-wired fixtures – – Less certainty on how to characterize the baseline – Fixture wattage can vary – Propose as Small Saver, based on what we do know about these fixtures from RBSA 3

4. Current and Proposed Residential Lighting Measures 4

5. Delivery Mechanisms CFL and Specialty CFL Lamps – Retail – Direct Install – Mail by Request – Unsolicited Mailing – Limit to 4 lamps per customer – Give Away – NEEA Socket Count CFL Fixtures – Retail – [Direct Install was not considered, but could be if there is interest] 5

6. Changes from Current to Proposed Measures Changes have been made to – Utilize detailed data in RBSA and other recent datasets Savings vary by room type (direct install only) and by lumen level – Address baseline mix of incandescent/halogen/CFL lamps (previously incandescent baseline) – Remain consistent with the Residential LED analysis (RTF decision: August 2013) August 2013 6

7. Changes from Current to Proposed Measures Key Changes: – Baseline now includes CFLs- moving from an incandescent baseline to an EISA/IRL-adjusted RBSA baseline – More granularity in measures Previously not disaggregated by wattage, now in six lumen bins Direct install now broken out by five space type group and by replaced technology type (incandescent or halogen) – Cost data now from recent, rigorous regional efforts (ETO Shelf Survey and Simple Steps CFL program) – CFL and Specialty CFL ProCost workbooks consolidated – previously two separate workbooks, proposed as one. – Baseline data analysis (RBSA-based) done in separate workbook that could be used across residential lighting measures. 7

8. Data Sources 2011 Residential Building Stock Assessment (RBSA) – baseline lighting characteristics – storage rate 2012-2013 ETO Lighting Shelf Survey – incandescent and halogen prices, by lamp type and lumens 2012,2013 Simple Steps program data – CFL prices and wattages by lamp type and lumens Energy Star Qualified product list – CFL efficacy and rated lifetime 2012-2013 NEEA Northwest Residential Lighting Market Tracking Study – removal rate Corina Jump, et al., 2008 “Welcome to the Dark Side: The Effect of Switching on CFL Measure Life”, 2008 ACEEE Summer Study – CFL lifetime derating by room type 8

9. Methodology – Baseline Determination RBSA – Categorize all records by: 9

10. Methodology – Baseline Determination For each RBSA record, assign: – EISA adjusted wattage (based on lamp category, wattage) – hours of use, by room type (KEMA, DOE) – lamp lifetime, by lamp category. CFLs lifetimes are derated as a function of room type. – baseline lamp cost, by lamp category and lumen bin. Incandescent and halogen costs are from the ETO shelf survey, CFL costs are from BPA Simple Steps program database (includes additional utilities that contract with Fluid). – room type group, by room type. This collapses the number of room types from 15 to 5, while preserving most detail of HOU and space conditioning. 10

11. Map RBSA to ETO and Simple Steps data for baseline costs. Map RTF to RBSA to characterize baseline for each measure. 11 Methodology – Baseline Determination

12. For example, to assign costs to Decorative lamps in RBSA, use ETO incandescent Candelabra and Simple Steps CFL Candelabra. 12 Methodology – Baseline Determination

13. For example, to determine the baseline for a CFL Reflector measure, average the characteristics of the RBSA Flood, PAR, and Reflector lamp types. 13 Methodology – Baseline Determination

14. Group room types based on hours of operation and space conditioning 14

15. Consider all possible combinations of categories – For direct install, this is the combination of baseline technology type room type group lamp type lumen bin – For all other delivery mechanisms, this is the combination of lamp type lumen bin 15 Methodology – Baseline Determination

16. For each combination of categories – Determine the total regional weight of the category. The is the product of the number of lamps per fixture, number of fixtures per room, and the site survey weight of each record (i.e. how many bulbs each record represents) – Determine the weighted average Baseline EISA adjusted wattage HOU Lifetime HVAC interaction applicability (0% for “exterior” and “garage” room types, 100% for all other room types) Baseline lamp cost 16 Methodology – Baseline Determination

17. Excludes lamps less than 250 lumens and greater than 2600 lumens 17 Methodology – Baseline Characterization

18. Excludes lamps less than 250 lumens and greater than 2600 lumens 18 Methodology – Baseline Characterization

19. Excludes lamps less than 250 lumens and greater than 2600 lumens 19 Methodology – Baseline Characterization More blue implies larger reduction in baseline wattage

20. Accounting for Storage Rate To date, the RTF has not counted savings for energy efficient equipment that is installed later on. But there is evidence that most CFLs eventually get installed, probably within a few years of purchase or receipt. How should the RTF account for stored-but-eventually-used products? 20

21. Storage Rate – Lifetime Guidelines 1.2.2. Measure Lifetime Measure lifetime is defined as the median number of years during which at least half the deliveries of a measure are in place and operable, i.e., produce savings. Measure lifetime should not be confused with a measure’s sunset date, which is the period during which a measure’s savings estimation method is RTF-approved. 2.3.1. Factors Affecting Lifetime Many factors may have a substantial impact on measure lifetime. All substantial factors should be considered in the estimation. A factor is substantial if it would increase or decrease the measure lifetime by at least 20%. Factors that may be relevant to measure lifetime include, but are not limited to, the following. – Program delivery method. Measures directly installed may last longer than measures delivered via mail for self-install, because self-installers may be less skilled and may not install according to manufacturer expectations, such as appropriate placement. 21

22. Storage Rate – CFL Failure Lamps installed right away (e.g., direct install) 22 Source: Review of Massachusetts tracking data. Lynn Hoefgen et al., 2013, “Study It ‘til You’re Sick of It: CFL Research as an Example of Other Efficiency Markets”, 2013 International Energy Program Evaluation Conference.

23. Storage Rate – CFL Failure But not all retail lamps get installed right away 23 Assumes that 24% of lamps are installed at time of receipt, and 8% of lamps are installed in each of the subsequent 3 years.

24. Storage Rate – CFL Failure But not all retail lamps get installed right away 24 Note: 1)Installation rate increases in first few years 2)But some lamps installed in the first couple of years are already failing 3)The lifetime of the retail measure (6.1) is longer than that of the direct install measure (5.5).

25. Storage Rate – Savings Guidelines Roadmap 1.3.2. Savings “Savings is defined as the difference in energy use between the baseline (see section 3.2) and post (after measure delivery) periods, which is caused by the delivery of a measure.” – Not clear on how to specify savings with unusual decay functions. – Historically, RTF has used first year savings, except for Last Measure In (LMI) measures. 25

26. Storage Rate – Questions What should the savings value represent? – First year savings? – Maximum savings before end of EUL? – Average savings from measure start until death of last unit? – Something else? The answer to this should inform how to handle storage rates for CFLs, where we – know the patterns of failure overtime, and – think we know when stored bulbs eventually get used Staff proposal: – Use first year savings – Adjust the measure EUL to reflect [Lamp EUL]/(1 - [Storage Rate]) E.g., for a lame EUL of 5 years and a storage rate of 10%, the measure EUL would be 5.5 years – This gets the first year savings correct and lifetime savings correct – Use failure and installation patterns to estimate median time to 50% installation. This complies with the Guidelines. – Guidelines Issue: This does not lead to the correct lifetime savings (savings x EUL). Staff also received a proposal to disregard storage rate because the stored lamps tend to get installed within a few years. This has been discussed at previous RTF meetings. [RTF decision on how to account for storage rate in savings and lifetime] 26

27. Removal Rate Current measures use a removal rate of 4% – Based on NEEA Energy Star Consumer Products Program Market Progress Evaluation Report (2007). – Similar findings in NEEA 2012-2013 Northwest Residential Lighting Market Tracking Study This is the percentage of lamps “ever acquired” that have been removed. – Some of this removal would be end-of-life removal – This is already accounted for in the lifetime estimate Staff Proposal – Assume ½ of removal is before failure – This would be a 2% removal rate – This is a judgment call – We don’t have the empirical data to differentiate between pre-failure removal and post-failure removal. [RTF decision on what value to use for removal rate] 27

28. Take-back Rate Set to 0% by RTF in April, 2010 for Specialty CFLs. Later adjusted for CFLs. – Lack of quantitative evidence of this phenomenon Meta-study as part of NEEA residential lighting market tracking study identifies several articles discussing this phenomenon and estimating its impact: – Report recommends using a value of 5% – Citations not complete – RTF staff would need to follow up with authors Source: DNV KEMA, 2013, "2012-2013 Northwest Residential Lighting Market Tracking Study", for NEEA http://neea.org/docs/default-source/reports/2012-2013-northwest-residential-lighting-market-tracking- study.pdf?sfvrsn=10 – Report implies that citations are qualitative in nature Staff proposal – Continue to use 0% take-back value. [RTF decision on how to account for storage rate in savings and lifetime] 28

29. Categorization Analysis conducted at most granular level feasible. – Group parameters together only as much as needed to make the number of records sufficiently large and to keep the workbooks running. Staff did not include groupings in the analysis because there are too many possibilities – workbook explosion Guidelines: Roadmap, Section 3.1 Measure Identifiers – “Measure identifiers define relatively homogenous applications of the measure with respect to savings or the method used in estimating savings. In addition, separate applications of a measure may be defined in order in order to achieve homogeneity of measure costs or measure lifetime or the methods used to estimate cost or lifetime. The RTF will try to minimize the number of measure application, focusing on those identifiers that cause large differences in savings, but maintaining separate applications as needed in determining measure eligibility or reliably representing differences in cost, benefits or lifetime.” 29

30. Categorization 30 Staff Proposal – Results suggest that direct install incandescent and halogen results can be combined (600 -> 300 DI measures) – Other dimensions cannot be completely collapsed because of “large differences in savings” What about coarser groupings (e.g. “any lumen bin”)? – RTF staff would need a reliable estimate of the types and quantities of lamps in the coarser grouping. [RTF decision on categorization]

31. Hard-wired Fixtures Baseline is uncertain – many screw-base fixtures may not have a comparable pin-base fixture. Replacement candidates not identifiable from RBSA. RBSA does tell us about existing pin-base CFL hard- wired fixtures. – 49 records in RBSA – Excludes table lamps, floor lamps, torchieres, and ceiling mounted fixtures (couldn’t differentiate LFs from CFLs) 31

32. Hard-wired Fixtures Simple Steps program activity (2012 and 2013) suggests a lower average wattage 32

33. Hard-wired Fixtures Proposal – Small Saver Simple Steps illustrates low volume of program activity – Use Simple Steps average fixture wattage as the efficient case – Savings = [13.5W general purpose (GP) screw-base CFLs] x [20.1 / 13.5] – HOU = same as HOU for 13.5W GP CFL – Cost Retail - incremental cost of 13.5W GP CFLs x [20.1/ 13.5] Direct Install (if RTF is interested) – Staff would need to estimate a fixture plus lamp cost – Lifetime = 15 years This is the fixture lifetime – savings persist for the lifetime of the fixture [RTF decision on Hard-wired Fixtures] 33

34. Limitations of Analysis Retail measure assumes all lamps go to residential installations. There is evidence that about 15% of lamps may go to the commercial sector. – Reference: KEMA, December 2009, “Process Evaluation of 2006-2008 PG&E Mass Markets Program Portfolio and CFL, Swimming Pool Market Characterizations” – http://www.calmac.org/publications/PGE_Mass_Market_R eport_FINAL.pdf http://www.calmac.org/publications/PGE_Mass_Market_R eport_FINAL.pdf Insufficient quantitative data to include this effect in the analysis 34

35. Limitations of Analysis Efficacy of lamps (lumens/watt) is estimated for baseline lamps. As EISA-compliant products enter the market, this approach will be less accurate. – Wattage and technology type will not be sufficient to estimate lumens. E.g., Is a 40 watt incandescent a pre-EISA 40W lamp, or a post-EISA 60W equivalent? 35

36. Workbook [review workbook] 36

37. Review of Decisions Storage Rate – Staff recommendation - Use first year savings Estimate median time to failure from failure and installation rate estimates Removal Rate – Staff recommendation - 2% (assume 1/2 of removal is before failure) Takeback Rate – Staff recommendation - Keep it at 0% Categorization – Staff recommendation – Group DI incandescent and halogens Hard-wired Fixtures – Staff recommendation – Small saver as described in earlier slide 37

38. Decisions – General Purpose and Specialty CFL lamps “I _______ move to approve the updates to the General Purpose and Specialty CFL proven UES measures; – With the values for storage, removal, and takeback rates as decided earlier in the presentation; – With the categorizations as decided earlier in the presentation; – and change the sunset date to January 2017. 38

39. Decisions – CFL Fixtures “I _______ move to approve the CFL Fixtures UES measure; – Change the category to Small Saver; – With only a retail delivery mechanism; – With a savings value equal to the UES savings of a 800 lumen General Purpose (GP) CFL multiplied by the ratio of Simple Steps average fixture wattage to Simple Steps average 800 lumen GP CFL wattage (20.1 / 13.5); – and change the sunset date to January 2017.” 39