1. 1 Analysis of Cost and Savings Values for Revised Energy Star Dishwasher Specifications June 6, 2006 Revised August 8, 2006

2. 2 Outstanding Issues from June Meeting Issue 1 – What should be the baseline efficiency assumption? Revised analysis proposal – Baseline should be “sales weighted efficiency data” from AHAM for 2004 – RTF decision needed Issue 2 – Allocation of efficiency improvement between water use and machine energy Revised analytical tool permits alternative assumptions regarding allocation of savings – RTF decision needed Issue 3 – Retail Incremental Cost of EF65 (and above) Dishwashers Revised analysis assumes there is – RTF decision needed

3. 3 Energy Efficiency Trends for Dishwashers 2004 Sales Weighted EF-60 Source: AHAM

4. 4 Distribution of Efficiency Levels for Models Listed in FTC 2005 Data Base Weighted Average for Models w/EF<.65 = EF59 Weighted Average for All Models = EF61

5. 5 Baseline Options Staff Proposal: Use AHAM “Sales Weighted” average => EF60 –Advantage: Accounts for “free ridership” in computation of savings –Disadvantage: Undervalues “per unit” savings and (may) understate cost of purchasing Energy Star Alternative: Use Average EF of Non-Energy Star compliant models from FTC data base => EF59 –Advantage: Does not undervalues “per unit” savings and understate cost of purchasing Energy Star –Disadvantage: Does not accounts for “free ridership” in computation of savings and isn’t much different than EF 60

6. 6 Refresher: Allocation of Savings For Dishwashers using water heated with electricity Dishwasher EF = cycles/kWh –1/EF = kWh/cycle e.g., 215 cycles/year / 371 kWh/yr = EF 58 Machines with the same EF can have differing shares of water use and “machine” (i.e., motor, pump, drying) electricity use –This means lowering hot water is not the only way to increase electricity savings

7. 7 Reduced Hot Water Use Increases Energy Factor – but it’s not the only way

8. 8 Alternative Hot Water Use Assumptions Energy FactorCurve Fit to Water Use vs EF – All Models (gals/cycle) Average of Actual Models Water Use by EF “Bin” (gals/cycle) 0.605.974.37 0.655.206.04 0.684.816.02 0.933.313.40

9. 9 Impact of Alternative Hot Water Use Assumptions on Annual Savings

10. Results Assuming EF 65 Incremental Cost of $8 – Curve Fit Water Use MeasureElectricity Savings - Motor/Pump (kWh) Electricity Savings - DHW (kWh) Total Electricity Savings (kWh) Annual Gas Savings - DHW (Therms) Annual Water Savings (gals) EF65 - Electric Water Heater-835280164 EF65 - Gas Water Heater-8 - 1.61164 EF65 - Any Water Heater-823150.58164 EF68 - Electric Water Heater-1989700249 EF68 - Gas Water Heater-19 - 2.45249 EF68 - Any Water Heater-1942230.89249 EF93 - Electric Water Heater-162131970572 EF93 - Gas Water Heater-16 - 5.62572 EF93 - Any Water Heater-1698822.04572 Any Energy Star - Any Water Heater -1138270.87245

11. Results Assuming EF 65 Incremental Cost of $8 – Actual Model Water Use MeasureElectricity Savings - Motor/Pump (kWh) Electricity Savings - DHW (kWh) Total Electricity Savings (kWh) Annual Gas Savings - DHW (Therms) Annual Water Savings (gals) EF65 - Electric Water Heater105-78280-360 EF65 - Gas Water Heater105 - -3.54-360 EF65 - Any Water Heater105-5056-1.28-360 EF68 - Electric Water Heater224-155700-355 EF68 - Gas Water Heater224 - -3.5-355 EF68 - Any Water Heater224-15470-1.27-355 EF93 - Electric Water Heater306-1101970209 EF93 - Gas Water Heater306 - 2.05209 EF93 - Any Water Heater306-1961110.74209 Any Energy Star - Any Water Heater 159-9267-0.95-266

12. Impact of Alternative Water Use Assumptions on Savings and Cost-Effectiveness Measure Incremental Capital Cost (2000$) Model Average Water Use Assumptions Site Savings (kWh) Curve Fit Water Use Assumptions Site Savings (kWh) Model Average Water Use Assumptions TRC B/C Ratio Curve Fit Water Use Assumptions TRC B/C Ratio EF65 - Any Water Heater$8.1954150.712.01 EF65 - Electric Water Heater$8.1926280.302.87 EF65 - Gas Water Heater$8.19104-71.81.59 EF68 - Any Water Heater$63.2268240.320.40 EF68 - Electric Water Heater$63.2268710.310.74 EF68 - Gas Water Heater$63.22223-181.140.38 EF93 - Any Water Heater$505.05112850.110.14 EF93 - Electric Water Heater$505.051981990.190.24 EF93 - Gas Water Heater$505.05307-130.260.12 Any Energy Star - Any Water Heater $99.0466280.230.27

13. 13 So What Should We Assume About the Allocation of Efficiency? Staff Proposal: Use regression based estimate of hot water use based on all models –Primary Advantage - Avoids tying savings to current model’s design features Alternative : Use “model specific” hot water use –Primary Advantage – It’s real data

14. Is There Really An Incremental Retail Cost?

15. 15 Oregon Tax Credit Dishwasher Retail Price Data

16. 16 So What Should We Assume for Incremental Cost of EF 65 vs EF 60 Staff Proposal - Use 2 nd order polynomial curve fit to minimum retail price vs efficiency data  Incremental Price = $9.19 (2005$) Alt 2 – Use 3 rd order polynomial curve fit to average retail price vs efficiency data  Incremental Price = $23 (2005$) Alt 3 – Use Average Difference in Retail Price  EF 60 Retail Price is $227 LESS than EF 65 Alt 4 – Use Minimum Difference in Retail Price  EF60 Retail Price is $113 LESS than EF 65