1. www.ecotope.com BPA Pre-Pilot, Monmouth  14 homes with installed DHP, single zone, single compressor.  11 Monmouth, 2 Moses Lake, 1 Tacoma  Savings measured in 13 homes, over 40% space heat savings (on average)  Total savings of 4442 kWh  Large variation and a small sample

2. www.ecotope.com Monmouth Analysis CasePre-BillsSubmeteredSavings Monmouth 1991768023115 Monmouth 2 40112356 1655 Monmouth 34557 Monmouth 41251388933620 Monmouth 5566939521717 Monmouth 61770180819620 Monmouth 7701850501968 Monmouth 818561100528509 Monmouth 9526437971467 Monmouth 1024253724617007 Monmouth 11539124202971 MosesLake 143083540768 MosesLake 21038469023482 Tacoma 1410322591844 Average(of 13)1040055374442 Average (of 11)993054884863

3. www.ecotope.com Monmouth Analysis

4. www.ecotope.com Comparison, Two Winter Weeks

5. www.ecotope.com Comparison, two winter weeks

6. www.ecotope.com  Analysis assumed cooling if temperature was above 65°  Cooling was calculated in base load to correspond the existing cooling equipment  Very minor offsets were apparent in the very mild year (2008)  No real evidence of substantial cool increase during cooling months Monmouth Cooling Offset

7. www.ecotope.com

8.  Characteristics and full bill record is important  Occupant previous cooling behavior and supplemental heating behavior should be available  A signal to identify cooling in the DHP very important  Use of sub-metered data without a sub-metered base case is workable  Savings vary from 30-70 percent of heating load  Average Savings 45% Monmouth Lessons

9. Progress Report on Regional Ductless Heat Pump Evaluation Ecotope RTF Presentation November 9, 2009

10. Project Goals  Provide a technical evaluation of DHP  Develop computational procedure  Extend and verify deemed savings tables  Evaluate achieved energy savings  Using detailed metering to review the interaction with electric zonal heating and temperature control  Using Billing analysis to develop the net savings  Develop cost/benefit analysis  Using cost from implementation  Savings generalized from metering and billing analysis  Assess market response from customers distributors, and installers  Evaluate program delivery and alternatives

11. Field Monitoring Approach  Quad metering, DHP, DHW, Elect. Heat, Total use  Develop in situ measurement of Heat Pump COP  Recruit participants from targeted localities  Willamette, Puget Sound: random samples  Inland Empire, Boise/Twin Falls & Eastern Idaho: Engineering samples  Target about 100 sites  Pre-Bill screening for “wood” heat  Install heat pump COP measure on 35 sites  On site audit: age, type, heat loss, infiltration  Upload data daily, one year minimum

12. Lab Testing & Analysis  Lab testing critical to assessing manufacturers’ ratings and to establishing air flow and COP  Testing underway at Herrick Labs, Purdue University  Initial data expected in December

13. Billing Analysis  Develop realized savings from comparison with pre-installation energy use  Account for weather variation  Include impact of fuel switching, other occupant take- backs  Collect utility bills from participants and non- participants  Use a PRISM-like regression analysis  Results by climate zone, house type, etc.  Separate impacts of supplemental fuels

14. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis  Develop cost and benefit matrix  Savings by climate, house type  Costs by DHP size, zones  Use ProCost model  TRC and utility cost/benefit analysis  Develop consumer economics analysis

15. Market and Process Analysis  Surveys of consumers, installers, manufacturers, and project stakeholders  Data to augment impact evaluation findings  Two Waves: Early read, one year later

16. Schedule Milestones  Field Monitoring  Complete Installs, Dec. 2009  Complete data collection Spring 2011  Billing Analysis  Begin utility coordination, Spring 2009  Complete data collection, Fall 2011  Lab Testing & Analysis: Fall 2010  Process, Market Evaluation  Two waves, Spring 2009, Fall 2010  Cost-Effectiveness Report, Spring 2012  Final Report: Spring 2012

17. Data Summaries, Heating, Cooling Ductless Heat Pump Evaluation Data collected: July to November, 2009

18. www.ecotope.com  Early 2009 Heating data: Each Climate “Cluster”  Idaho Falls temperature similar to peak Portland temperatures.  Considerable diversity in mild temperature in DHP usage and heating fraction.  COP measurements for heating conditions show potential  Current Data Summaries for Heating Operation

19. Puget Site, heating & cooling

20. Puget Site: DHP heating

21. Puget Site: shoulder heating

22. Portland Site: 73% DHP Heating

23. Boise Site 1: 57% DHP Heating

24. Spokane Site: Heating

25. Spokane Site: All Electric loads

26. Idaho Falls Site: 38% DHP Heating

27. Idaho Falls Site: DHP COP

28. www.ecotope.com  Summer 2009 very hot with a substantial cooling load  Several comparisons made between cooler summer weeks and the Portland “heat storm,” July 25-31  Two different heat pumps are shown here a large Mitsubishi and a small Fujitsu.  The Mitsubishi used in the initial runs two years ago (HSPF 8.2 EER 8.8)  The Fujitsu released in mid 2008 (HSPF 10.0 EER 10.4) Current Data Summaries for Summer Operation

31. www.ecotope.com Newer Unit, More Aggressive Set-Points

32. www.ecotope.com 2006 Model, EER: 8.8

33. www.ecotope.com 2008 Model, EER: 10.4

34. www.ecotope.com 2009 Model, EER: 12.8

35. Contact Information: Poppy Storm Ecotope, Inc. 4056 9 th Avenue NE Seattle, Washington 98105 PH: (206) 322-3753, FAX: (206) 325-7270 www.ecotope.com