1. 1Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy David Carroll APPRISE National WAP Evaluation: Savings and Opportunities for Baseload Electric

2. 2Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Presentation Overview  WAP PY 2008 Electric Baseload Installation Rates  WAP PY 2008 Electric Baseload Savings Estimates  Opportunities – Electric Usage by Low Income Households  Missed Opportunities – Behavior Related Savings Opportunities

3. 3Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy WAP PY 2008 ELECTRIC BASELOAD INSTALLATION RATES

4. 4Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Climate Zones

5. 5Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Electric Baseload Measure Installation Rates by Climate Zone LightsRefrigerators TOTAL 60%17% Very Cold 68%26% Cold 59%19% Moderate 54%9% Hot/Wet 57%5% Hot/Dry 61%11%

6. 6Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Electric Baseload Measure Installation Rates by Building Type LightsRefrigerators TOTAL 60%17% Single Family 55%12% Multifamily 75%33%

7. 7Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Refrigerator Replacement  PY 2008 Installation Rate – 17% of weatherization clients  2005 RECS Data: – Households with refrigerator 20 years or older = 14% – Households with refrigerator 10-19 years = 24%  20 Years or older will be pre 1992 and have highest savings potential

8. 8Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy CFL Installation  PY 2008 Installation Rate – 60% of weatherization clients  2005 RECS Data: – Households with 1 or more CFLs = 31%

9. 9Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy WAP PY 2008 ELECTRIC BASELOAD SAVINGS ESTIMATES

10. 10Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Electric Baseload Savings Estimates kWh per Installation in Single Family Homes Average for all Single Family WAP Clients TOTAL 527 kWh Refrigerators 661 kWh112 kWh Lights 220 kWh132 kWh Other 283 kWh

11. 11Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy 2005 ELECTRIC USAGE BY LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS IN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES

12. 12Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Electric Usage – Low Income Single Family with Gas Main Heating Fuel Single Family DetachedSingle Family Attached Average 9,331 kWh / year6,632 kWh / year < 4,000 kWh 12%27% 4000-<8000 37% 8000-<12,000 27%29% 12,000 or More 24%7%

13. 13Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy MISSED OPPORTUNITIES – BEHAVIOR RELATED ELECTRIC ENERGY SAVINGS

14. 14Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy ECW Plug Load Study Potential Education Savings Computers – Potential Savings from Power Management % of Homes Estimated Average Savings Always on 20%400 kWh Long idle periods 40%190 kWh Off when not used 25%15 kWh Not used much 15%2 kWh Average Savings 160 kWh

15. 15Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Dehumidifier  Incidence – 6% of low income households have a dehumidifier  Potential Savings – 2 kWh per day * 180 days = 360 kWh

16. 16Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Projection TV  Incidence – 18% of low income households have a large screen tv  Potential Savings – 20 W per hour * 12 hours = 240 Wh –.24 kWh per day * 365 days = 91.25 kWh

17. 17Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Projections vs. Impacts  Basic Projection Methodology – Assumptions  Measure installation rates  Measure retention rates  Pre installation usage  Measure effectiveness 17

18. 18Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Projections vs. Impacts  Basic Projection Methodology – Calculation  Average household saving = Measure Installation Rate * Measure Retention Rate * (Pre Installation Usage – Post Installation Usage) 18

19. 19Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Projections vs. Impacts  Basic Projection Methodology – Calculation  Pre Installation Usage per bulb per hour = 60 watts *.001 =.06 kWh  Post Installation Usage per bulb per hour = 13 watts *.001 =.013 kWh  Change per Bulb per hour =.06 -.013 =.047 kWh 19

20. 20Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Projections vs. Impacts  Basic Projection Methodology – Calculation  Change per bulb per day =.047 kWh * 2.5 hours/day =.1175 kWh/day  Change per bulb per year =. 1175 kWh/day * 365 days = 43 kWh/year 20

21. 21Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Projections vs. Impacts  Basic Projection Methodology – Calculation  Number installed per home = 43 kWh * 8 bulbs = 344 kWh  Retention rate = 344 kWh *.8 = 275 kWh saved per home per year 21

22. 22Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Projections vs. Impacts So simple, what could go wrong…  Incorrect assumptions – Measure installation rate – Measure retention rate  Bulbs left for occupants to install  Bulbs removed  Bulbs broken – Existing bulb kWh – Hours of use 22

23. 23Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Projections vs. Impacts So simple, what could go wrong…  Interactions – Adding up individual measure savings can overstate results – Need to account for reduced heat gain from CFLs  Increase heating usage  Reduce cooling usage 23