1. Residential Clothes Washers and Dryers Ryan Firestone, My Ton, and Christian Douglass Regional Technical Forum April 14, 2015

2. Overview Today we are seeking approval of residential washers and dryers UES measures. – a decision on addressing measure interaction between washers and dryers – an updated proven Residential Washers UES measure – a new planning Residential Dryers UES measure 2

3. Overview RTF Clothes Washer UES measure is due for an update – Sunset date June 2015 – New federal standard, and ENERGY STAR and CEE specifications effective March 7, 2015 – New market data (NEEA) – New field data on washers and dryers (NEEA) – New cost data (PacifiCorp) ENERGY STAR has its first Dryer specification (v.1.0), effective January 1, 2015 – ENERGY STAR resistance and heat pump dryers are available – NEEA is conducting research on dryers to support an RTF Dryer UES measure Washer and Dryer measures interact – Much of the Washer savings come from reductions in drying energy required after washing (higher spin) – Dryer savings are dependent on the moisture content of incoming clothes 3

4. Subcommittee Activity RTF Residential Washer and Dryer Subcommittee Met on March 10, 2015 Discussed – washer/dryer interaction – use of NEEA field study results in Washer measure – use of NEEA 2014 Washer market share findings – addressing top vs front load washers – review of available dryer data, and findings – Utility Combined Energy Factor (UCEF) as a dryer performance metric 4 Attendees Janice Boman, Ecova Will Brandt, PSE Joe Colett, Ecova Bob Davis, Ecotope Christian Douglass, RTF CAT Christopher Dymond, NEEA Ryan Firestone, RTF CAT Ben Hannas, Ecotope Sean Williams, CLEAResult Aaron Winer, CLEAResult

5. Subcommittee Activity RTF Research and Evaluation Subcommittee Met on April 3, 2015 Discussed CAT proposed Residential Dryer UES Research Strategy General agreement with direction of Strategy, but significant feedback Subcommittee expressed need for more time to review materials and iterate before endorsing Strategy [details of meeting later in presentation] 5 Attendees Jennifer Anziano, RTF Andie Baker, Abacus Research Todd Blackman, Franklin PUD Richard Cole, Grant PUD Bob Davis, Ecotope Christian Douglass, RTF Christopher Dymond, NEEA Tom Eckhart, UCONS Jennifer Finnegan, Snohomish PUD Ryan Firestone, RTF Christopher Frye, NEEA Adam Hadley, RTF Sabrina Haggerty, CLEAResult Erin Hope, BPA Greg Kelleher, EWEB Philip Kelsven, BPA Tom Lienhard, Avista Eli Morris, PacifiCorp Graham Parker, PNNL Jim Perich-Anderson, Puget Sound Energy Bob Ramirez, Itron Dan Rubado, Energy Trust Josh Rushton, RTF My Ton, RTF Robert Weber, BPA Jim White, Chelan PUD Aaron Wiener, CLEAResult

6. Washer / Dryer Interaction 6

7. Dryer energy consumption is determined by – Amount of moisture to be removed from clothing – Energy efficiency of removing moisture from clothing 7 moisture (lbs) 1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb) Washer EE Dryer EE dryer energy (kWh)

8. Washer/Dryer Interaction 8 moisture (lbs) 1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb) dryer energy (kWh) Baseline Washer Baseline Dryer moisture (lbs) 1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb) EE Washer EE Dryer dryer energy (kWh) Baseline Washer EE Dryer moisture (lbs) 1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb) dryer energy (kWh) savings moisture (lbs) 1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb) EE Washer Baseline Dryer dryer energy (kWh) savings Washer savings Dryer savings ?

9. Washer/Dryer Interaction 9 How to deal with these savings? – Measure identifiers Would require washer specs for Dryer measure, and dryer specs for Washer measure – Distribute across both measures E.g., Option 3 Guidelines call for considering all cost effective measures in “full measure package” Method would not handle Washer and Dryer tiers – We’d need to simplify to a single EE level for the analysis – Assume order of measures CAT/Staff propose to assume EE washer goes in first or at same time as EE dryer – ENERGY STAR (2015 spec) penetration of Washers was already ~70% in 2014 – Significantly EE Dryers (i.e., heat pump) are an emerging technology in U.S. markets – Subcommittee also interested in combined washer/dryer measures Subcommittee majority recommendation moisture (lbs) 1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb) EE Washer EE Dryer dryer energy (kWh) Washer savings Dryer savings ? BPA and ETO expressed support for this approach after the subcommittee meeting. Efficient washers are much more common than efficient dryers.

10. Washer/Dryer Interaction 10 Guidelines, Interaction Between Measures – Significant interaction: “The UES for each measure should account for all significant interactions with any of the other measures that are currently RTF approved. Interaction is significant if the RTF determines that it could change a measure’s savings estimate by more than ± 10%... – Measure identifiers: “…To the extent practical, identifiers should be used to account for significant measure interactions...” – “Option 3”: “…When measure identifiers do not account for all significant interactions, the savings can be estimated using the following steps: …Estimate efficient-case energy use assuming the delivery of the measure and full adoption of all cost- effective current RTF approved interactive measures… – Other methods: “…Other methods may be used if the RTF determines that they more reliably account for measure interactions.” (Savings, 2.3.3.4) moisture (lbs) 1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb) EE Washer EE Dryer dryer energy (kWh) Washer savings Dryer savings Difference in dryer savings from baseline to CEE Tier 3 washer is only 7% Not practical for programs to collect washer details for dryer measure. Some dryer measures are not cost effectiveness. Option 3 makes sense when we don’t know the order of measure installation. Here, we expect the EE dryer to almost always go with the EE washer, or after.

11. Washer/Dryer Interaction 11 Staff proposal – Assume efficient washer goes in first – Do not create package washer/dryer measures This bundles a cost effective measure (washer) with one that’s not (dryer) to make a cost effective measure Programs have the data they need to create bundled measures on their own moisture (lbs) 1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb) EE Washer EE Dryer dryer energy (kWh) Washer savings Dryer savings

12. Updates to Residential Clothes Washers Measure 12

13. Measure Overview 13 Measure DevelopersRTF Staff CAT ReviewYes (Ryan Firestone, Christian Douglass) Tech Sub-Com ReviewYes R&E Sub-Com ReviewYes – CAT proposed Research Strategy NotesNew federal standard and ENERGY STAR and CEE specs in March 2015 NEEA washer/dryer field study published in November 2014 2014 sales data (NEEA) 2012-2014 cost data (PacifiCorp)

14. Data Sources CEC Appliance Database – Average performance characteristics, by efficiency tier Integrated Modified Energy Factor (IMEF) Integrated Water Factor (IWF) Remaining Moisture Content (RMC) DOE Washer Test Procedure – Assumed dryer efficiency – Assumed water heater efficiency – Used to disaggregate energy consumption indicated by IMEF (machine, DHW, dryer) DOE Technical Support Document, Washer standard rulemaking – Average machine energy portion of washer energy NEEA field study – Real-world cloth moisture, annual laundry volume PacifiCorp 2012-2014 program cost data – Covers all efficiency tiers as of March 2015 14

15. Remaining Moisture Content NEEA Washer/Dryer field study found that real-world clothing retains moisture more than DOE test cloth – Clothing coming out of washer are wetter than test clothes. Average rated remaining moisture content (RMC) in CEC DB: 36% Field study average: 71% – Clothing coming out of dryer are wetter than test clothes. DOE test procedure: 4% Field study average: 7% – More dryer energy is required to remove a pound of moisture from clothing than test clothes (higher kWh/lb moisture) DOE Washer test procedure assumes 0.5 kWh/lb Field study average 0.62 kWh/lb 15

16. Remaining Moisture Content How to apply increase RMC finding to rated RMCs (e.g., multiplier, adder, other)? 16 RMC as a function of centrifuge speed for several cloth types Source: Daniel Larry Carter, "Savings of Time and Energy in the Laundry Process: Importance of Dynamic Surface Tension, Micelle Stability and Surfactant Adsorption". Dissertation presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida. 2006. Range of interest for clothes washers Arrows are same height In the centripetal force range of washing machines, differences in RMC by cloth type appear fairly constant as the centripetal force varies. This suggests that the same cloth-type correction to RMC should be applied to all washers, regardless of the speed of their spin cycle. In the measure assessment, rated RMCs are scaled up by 36 percentage points to reflect real world cloth.

17. Disaggregating Rated Energy Consumption Steps 1.Filter CEC Appliance database for recent (2012 and newer), unique records 2.Categorize by efficiency tier 3.Compute average performance by efficiency tier 4.Disaggregate rated energy consumption as per DOE Test Procedure and Technical Support Document 5.Adjust energy consumption to reflect wetter clothes going into dryer more energy required to remove moisture 17

18. The net effect of this is to lower the baseline efficiency (because of the increased representation of top loaders) Market Share NEEA sales data from 2014 – Approximately 45% of regional sales – Mix of urban and rural areas – Key findings: ~50% ENERGY STAR qualifying penetration for top loaders 100% ENERGY STAR qualifying penetration for front loaders ~60% of market is top loaders Current RTF measure assumes: – 51% ENERGY STAR penetration (vs. ~70% for proposed measure) – 32% top loaders (vs. 60% for proposed measure) 18 The net effect of this is to lower the baseline efficiency (because of the increased representation of top loaders)

19. Measure Grouping 19 Use a combined Top/Front load baseline (as in current UES measure) – subcommittee approves – This assumes that there is a single market for washing machines, not separate markets for top and front loading machines. Exclude ENERGY STAR top loader – savings are insignificant relative to combined baseline Note: CEE Tier 1 top loaders are scarce, Tier 2 / 3 top loaders aren’t available

20. Measure Costs 20 Data from 2012-2014 PacifiCorp program Covers all efficiency tiers as of March 2015 Database does not differentiate between costs with and without delivery/installation – Assume that this doesn’t affect incremental cost Use lower quartile costs to mitigate influence of non-energy features on incremental costs Normalize costs to average tub size

21. Non-Energy Benefits 21 Water – Water and Wastewater as in Standard Information Workbook – 5.29 kWh/1000 gallons: embedded energy for transportation and treatment – $13.84/1000 gallons: retail cost of water, net of value of embedded energy Detergent – Detergent use assumed to be proportional to water use – $0.19/baseline load – $0.13/CEE Tier 3 load … $17/year benefit – This is how RTF has handled detergent savings historically, but there is little direct evidence of this correlation in practice – HE (low suds) and traditional laundry detergent cost about the same per ounce and also have the same recommended dosage. – RTF Staff propose to remove this Benefit

22. Fuel Type Measure Identifier 22 Fuel Type Measure Identifier: – Electric DHW / Electric Dryer – Electric DHW / Gas Dryer – Gas DHW / Electric Dryer – Gas DHW / Gas Dryer – Any Fuel Should programs be limited to using either specific fuel type measures or “any”, but not both?

23. Results - Savings 23 Results show for electric DHW, electric dryer. Measures also include gas DHW, gas dryer, and any fuel variants

24. Results - Cost 24 Results show for electric DHW, electric dryer. Measures also include gas DHW, gas dryer, and any fuel variants Current RTF measure uses average costs, proposed method uses lower quartile costs

25. Cost Effectiveness 25 Results show for electric DHW, electric dryer. Measures also include gas DHW, gas dryer, and any fuel variants Negative incremental cost

26. Proposed Motion 26 – Residential Clothes Washers “I __________ move the RTF approve the updates to the savings and cost of the Residential Clothes Washers UES measure as presented and: – [Limit/don’t limit] use of “any” fuel type measure to programs that don’t use specific fuel type measures – Disregard laundry detergent savings as a non-energy benefit; – Keep the Category at ‘Proven’; – Keep the Status at ‘Active’; – Set the sunset date to December 31, 2017” New federal standard effective January 1, 2018

27. Residential Clothes Dryer Planning UES 27

28. Measure Overview 28 Measure DevelopersRTF Staff CAT ReviewYes (Ryan Firestone) Tech Sub-Com ReviewYes – limited to initial discussions on measure R&E Sub-Com ReviewYes – CAT proposed Research Strategy. Strategy has been revised to reflect input at the meeting NotesNew federal standard effective January 1, 2015 ENERGY STAR specs (v1.0) also effective January 1, 2015 NEEA washer/dryer field study published in November 2014 NEEA/PG&E laboratory testing

29. Residential Clothes Dryers Federal standard: – New standard effective January 1, 2015 ENERGY STAR v1.0 – Effective January 1, 2015 Heat Pump (HP) Dryers introduced to U.S. market in Q4 2014 29

30. Residential Clothes Dryers Energy efficiency metrics – Federal standards D (Energy Factor (EF))– from previous standard. Pounds of clothes dried per kWh at highest temperature, 66% ΔRMC, assumed impact of auto- termination, no cool down D1 (Combined Energy Factor (CEF) – current standard. Pounds of clothes dried per kWh at highest temperature, 53.5% ΔRMC, assumed impact of auto- termination, no cool down Optional D2 (CEF) – current standard. Pounds of clothes dried per kWh at highest temperature, 55.5% ΔRMC, tested with auto-termination and cool- down – required for ENERGY STAR – NEEA proposal UCEF (lab testing) – Average of 5 modes (D2 plus 4 with more representative test cloth). Annual energy and frequency of modes aligns with field study. – Technical working group decided not to weight the modes differently. Field testing – estimated annual kWh and average pounds cloth/kWh 30

31. Residential Clothes Dryers Utility Combined Energy Factor (UCEF) – Five modes, equally weighted 31 Test Common Test NameLoad Type Cycle Setting Cycle Temp Nominal Weight (lbs)IMCRMC DOE TestD2DOE Test ClothsDefaultHigh8.4557.5%2% OneSmall Supplemental Test Load NormalMedium4.262%4% TwoLarge Supplemental Test Load NormalMedium16.862%4% ThreeEco Supplemental Test Load Mfr Defined 8.462%4% FourFastest Supplemental Test Load Heavy Duty High8.462%4% Supplemental Test Loads comprised of clothing available in the Land’s End catalogue DOE Test Cloth

32. Standard Size Dryer Types 32 TechnologyVentedVentlessExpected UCEF Resistance conventional dryers 2.56 to 3.14 Resistance, improved auto-termination ENERGY STAR, non-heat pump dryers 3.0 to 3.4 Hybrid (Resistance + Heat Pump) LG EcoHybridWhirlpool Duet3.4 to 5.5 Heat Pump Blomberg*, Miele5.5 + *Blomberg and Miele dryers are slightly smaller than a standard size dryer as defined by the DOE

33. Residential Clothes Dryers 33 Laboratory UCEF results – Units are lbs clothing per kWh

34. Available Data NEEA Washer/Dryer field study – Metered energy consumption, log book of clothing weights and machine settings. – N = 50, all resistance dryers NEEA / PG&E lab study – Lab testing of 11 units (standard and ENERGY STAR non-heat pump) to determine D2, UCEF – Estimated market share per unit to estimate market average performance – Durango factor – laboratory at 6,500 ft. Unquantified impact on CEF, UCEF (likely improves metric a few percent) – Durango lab has since closed Ongoing NEEA lab and field testing of HP Dryers – NEEA will certify heat pump dryers for now 34

35. ENERGY STAR Non-Heat Pump Dryers 35 ENERGY STAR qualifying No clear correlation between D1 and D2 – DOE attempted and couldn’t do this NEEA investigating D2 / UCEF relationship – 9 Standard dryers – 2 ENERGY STAR Non-Heat Pump dryers D2 does not correlate well to UCEF Significant research is required to prove this measure – Need to lab test enough ENERGY STAR non-Heat Pump dryers to estimate average UCEF – BPA, PSE, EWEB, ETO have expressed interest The actual measure would be technology-neutral: “UCEF 3.00 to 3.39”

36. Current Data 36 Energy Consumption Metric Data Source What kind? How many? D EFD1 CEFD2 CEFUCEFField CEC DB/Other product DBs Standard X Tier 1, 2 X 2011 DOEXX NEEA Washer/Dryer Field Study ~46x Standard (some Tier 1?) X (field) X (field) X Baseline Dryer Study 9x Standard X (Durango) 2x Tier 1 HP Dryer testing Tier 2,3,4 XXX

37. Technical Subcommittee Feedback UCEF is a sufficient metric for estimating energy consumption Durango lab testing is sufficient for estimating baseline UCEF – If possible, some of the same machines should be tested at NW elevations to confirm this. 37

38. Research Strategy Summary 38 Link to Research Strategy v3 DeficiencyNotesResearch Needs Reliable and unbiased performance metric UCEF is a good candidate: Predicted annual energy consumption is comparable to field study findings. However, UCEF and actual consumption have not been measured on the same machines. And very few efficient machines have been tested. Lab & field test of 10 conventional models Lab & field test of 10 ENERGY STAR non-Heat Pump models Lab & field test of the ~4 heat pump models available Models within each Tier should have a range of tub sizes. Market average performance within each Tier Baseline is based on 11 data points. Efficient tiers have uncertainty because we don't know where within the defined UCEF range the average product will fall. 10 additional baseline UCEF data points 20 additional ENERGY STAR Non-Heat Pump data points Testing of all heat pump machines for measure qualification Units tested above would count towards this research need. HVAC Interactions Vented dryers increase infiltration (increased heating and cooling loads) Ventless dryers increase internal gains (reduced heating, increased cooling loads) Rough SEEM analysis has been conducted and coupled with RBSA SF HVAC system and fuel type data to estimate average HVAC interactive effects. More detailed engineering analysis, to address range of home energy performance, locations. Frequency of dryer location in unconditioned and under-conditioned spaces. Impact of dryer location in unconditioned and under-conditioned spaces. Quantification of uncertainty in engineering analysis. If this indicates more than 10% uncertainty in measure savings, laboratory and/or field testing would be required. Note: Here “heat pump” refers to both hybrid heat pump and pure heat pump dryers.

39. Research and Evaluation Subcommittee Feedback 39 Subcommittee feedback at meetingResearch Strategy modifications Non-energy Benefits are important to address Removed non-energy benefits research from the Strategy because they do not affect the unit energy savings, which is the focus of the Research Strategy Research should include the effect of drum size on energy consumption Added drum size as a variable to investigate in field testing for validation of UCEF Research should include HVAC interactions and their sensitivity to location within the home Described research needs more clearly Research the effect of washer RMC on dryer energy There is a 7% difference in moisture (and dryer energy) between baseline washer and most efficient. This is not significant enough to require additional research.

40. Research and Evaluation Subcommittee Feedback At meeting, no significant concerns, but Subcommittee needed more time to review Strategy and revisions before endorsing Staff/CAT distributed revised version one week ago – received feedback from Ecotope – Addressed several comments in revised Research Strategy – Recommendation to use RBSA sub-metered dataset for baseline Staff/CAT concern: – We don’t have UCEF values to align with models from RBSA, – We don’t have field test data on all models used to construct baseline and efficient cases. – Can’t compare apples to apples. – Could use RBSA to calibrate UCEF-based annual energy estimates » RBSA values are about 7% less 40

41. Planning Measure Baseline UCEF from NEEA/PG&E laboratory study HVAC interaction as modeled in SEEM – All baseline models are vented – Separate measures for vented and ventless products Incremental costs from online retailer DOE average lifetime from secondary research (12 years) 41

42. Measure Order In coordination with Washers measure, assume Dryers measure is installed after (or at same time) as washer measure There is only a 7 percent reduction in savings after adjusting UCEF energy consumption estimates to account for drier clothes coming in 42

43. HVAC Interactions SEEM analysis of incremental effect of increase infiltration (vented dryers) and increased internal gain (ventless dryers) Heating Zone 1, Cooling Zone 2, medium insulation and leakage Weight results by RBSA stock of HVAC system types and fuels Reduce impacts by 20% to account for dryers in unconditioned spaces Further reduce impacts by 35% to account for imperfect thermal coupling to HVAC system. Consistent with HPWH measure 43 HVAC interaction effects Baseline Dryer (Vented) Hypothetical Ventless Baseline Dryer Increased infiltration 130 CFM x 55 minutes x 311 loads Internal gain (kWh) 937 Heating (kWh) electricity8-64 gas21-166 other fuel10-82 Cooling (kWh) electricity0.5117

44. Measure Costs Online costs for all dryers available at Home Depot, via Beaverton, OR store on April 5, 2015. Vented – UCEF 3.00 to 3.39: [Matched pair analysis of ENERGY STAR and non- ENERGY STAR models] x [fraction of baseline this not ENERGY STAR] $53 (2015$) – UCEF 3.40+: [Matched pair analysis of Heat Pump and non-Heat Pump models] + [Incremental cost of UCEF 3.00 TO 3.39] $638 (2015$) Ventless – UCEF 3.00 to 3.39: [Vented measure cost] + [DOE TSD incremental cost from compact vented to compact ventless] $401 (2015$) – UCEF 3.40+: [Vented measure cost] $638 (2015$) 44

45. Compact Dryers Federal definition of standard size dryer is 4.4 ft 3 – All usage and performance data we have is from standard size dryers Models popular in other countries tend to be smaller than U.S. dryers Blomberg Heat Pump Dryer is 4.1 ft 3 – Appears to have very good performance in lab test As heat pump dryers become more common, more compact dryers may enter the market Dryers at the high end of the compact range may be of sufficient size for most families (NEEA judgement) Dryer efficiency improves with fullness of drum – There’s an efficiency argument for smaller dryers 45

46. Compact Dryers Should the RTF develop Compact Dryer measures? If so, consider: – Performance Metric: Is the UCEF metric sufficient for smaller dryers? – Baseline Performance: Should the baseline be limited to compact dryers? Or would some consumers in the market for a standard size dryer purchase a compact heat pump dryer? – Usage: NEEA suggests assuming 75% of standard size clothing load Measure category options: – Small Saver (based on current market share) – Planning (would require Research Strategy to address questions above) – Redefine Standard size dryer to include larger compact dryers (e.g. Standard = 4.0 ft 3 or greater) 46

47. Electric Savings 47

48. Cost 48

49. Miele HP (compatct) Cost Effectiveness 49 ENERGY STAR, non-heat pump Whirlpool Duet LG EcoHybrid Blomberg HP (compact) LG EcoHybrid (different labs, different generation, same model number)

50. Proposed Motion 50 “I __________ move the RTF approve the Residential Standard-size Clothes Dryers Research Strategy and UES measure as presented and: – Set the Category to ‘Planning’; – Set the Status to ‘Active’; – Set the sunset date to April 30, 2018.” Additionally, direct staff to develop a [small saver, planning] Compact-size Dryer measure (vote not required) Or Revise definition of standard size dryer (vote required)