Grocery Measure: EC Motors for Display Cases Regional Technical Forum June 16 th, 2015 Mohit Singh-Chhabra

Presentation Objective Approve proposed measure analysis, change measure category to Small Saver 2

Measure Background Measure Name:Grocery: ECMs for Display Cases Current Measure Category: UES Proposed Measure Category: Small Saver Current Measure Status:Active Proposed Measure Status:Active Measure Sector:Commercial End Use:Grocery- Refrigeration Current Sunset Date:August,

Staff Highlighted Area CAT proposal of multiple savings and cost over measure life (and beyond) – Applies to all pre-conditions measures with RUL < EUL 4

What is this measure? Replace Shaded Pole motors with ECM (Electronically Commutated Motors) driving the evaporator fan for grocery display cases 5

How is energy saved? EC Motors are more efficient (~66%) than Shaded Pole (~20%) – More efficient EC Motor generate less heat less interaction with the refrigeration system Although these motors are small (<1 HP), they run all year long (8760 hours) 6

Proposed Measure Category: Small Saver Total savings claim calculated using CLEAResult (PECI) motor install count since mid-2013 is 0.14 aMW Bonneville estimates approx. 1 aMW remaining savings potential for all motor measures in grocery stores in its territory – Grocer Market Opportunity Assessment (6/13) study conducted by Cadmus Note: Other RTF Grocery Motor measures are categorized as small savers as well (ECMs for walk-ins, Compressor head fan motor retrofit) CAT proposal: update measure status for ECM in Display Case to Small Saver 7

Engineering Analysis Details Energy savings calculated as follows: – fan kWh savings component is a result of motor upgrade – the other part of the formula accounts for interactive effects with the refrigeration equipment 8

Data Used to Update Measure CLEAResult provided CAT with data on ECM installs in display cases starting in mid-2013 – Motor count 32 different motor type, ~1800 total – Rated watts – Installed cost/ motor – Install date and other relevant fields Recent data show higher average installed motor watts than existing estimate – Expect savings to go up 9

Key Assumption: Motor Efficiency EC Motors are assumed to be 66% efficient, SP Motors are assumed to be 20% efficient Source: US DOE Report: Energy Savings Potential and Opportunities for High-Efficiency Electric Motors in Residential and Commercial Equipment (December, 2013) Same as existing workbook 10

Key Assumption: Annual Hours of Operation Proposed Assumption: 8,760 Hours (motors operate all year round) – Reason: evaporator motors in refrigerated display cases operate continually to: circulate cold air in the case and Develop an air curtain in open display cases – US DOE Technical Support Document for Commercial Refrigeration also advises that these motors run continually US DOE Technical Support Document for Commercial Refrigeration 11

Key Assumption: EER of Refrigeration System The following EER values were adopted based on PECI EER analysis presented to the RTF on 3/14: – Medium temperature cases EER = 11 – Low temperature cases EER = 4 Decision: RTF approve the EER analysis as presented and, following a diligent review by the Grocery Subcommittee, include the final EER results table in future updates of the Standard Information Workbook for use in UES measure assessments. – A review of the EER analysis measure spreadsheet conducted, the DOE 2R models used to generate data for the spreadsheet were not reviewed 12

Key Assumption: EER of Refrigeration System (contd.) Savings sensitivity to EER using high and low range presented to the RTF – Medium temperature case % – Low temperature case… +-8% Measure is proposed as a Small Saver, CAT recommends these updated EER values be used, if RTF decides to review the DOE 2R models, the EER values will be updated as necessary 13

Key Assumption: Case Temperature Savings vary based on temperature of the display case EC Motors are retrofitted in – Refrigeration interaction Existing workbook used actual installation data to understand distribution of installation between low temp (LT) and med temp (MT) case – This data does not exist anymore Low – medium temperature ratio calculated using data in CBSA for walk-ins, – Data for reach ins, not available – 65% MT, 35% LT. – Distribution almost identical to existing workbook 14

Measure Lifetime EUL = 15 years (DEER) RUL needs to be estimated for pre-conditions – DEER provides estimate of 5 years – DEER assumption: RUL = EUL/3 – CAT proposal to go with that. No real reason to choose a different number What is current practice at end of RUL? – Combination of shaded pole and ECM. As per CBSA, all ratio of all SP to EC evaporator fan motors is 84% to 16% Full savings and cost assigned during RUL period Reduced savings and cost assigned for remaining EUL period 15

Energy Savings 16

Incremental Cost Data on motor cost provided by CLEAResult – Average weighted motor installed cost = $82 (2006$) Incremental cost is calculated by summing PV of all capital costs incurred and avoided over the measure EUL (15 years) – Assumption: at the end of the shaded pole motor life, it would have been replaced by a current practice motor – Same as the methodology presented in the Res Lighting presentation, Ref Decommissioning presentation earlier today – Timeline diagram on next slide…. 17

18 No Risk Mitigation Credit Incremental Cost of EC Motor = PV(A) – { PV(B – C)}

Incremental Cost Results 19

Cost Effectiveness Results 20

Delivery Verification Guidance Measure Identifier: Check motor installed is an electronically commutated motor Savings Baseline (Pre-Conditions): Check measure replaced a shaded pole motor Consistent with what was adopted for Walk- Ins on May’15 Meeting 21

Decision Slide “I __________ move the RTF approve the Display Case EC Motors measure as presented and: – Set the Category to ‘Small Saver’; – Set the Status to ‘Active’; – Set the sunset date to March, 2019.” 22