ࡱ> EGD%` bjbjٕ 4*#^^^^^^^r8VjrC&h%%%%%%%$'h*%^%^^%j^^%%r#^^J% >U6$%&0C&$**J%*^J%xvTMD;%%FjC&rrD rr rrr^^^^^^ Summary of EUL-RUL Analysis for the April 2008 Update to DEER Prepared by KEMA Inc. The purposes of the DEER Update effective useful life (EUL) analysis were to: Review EULs in the DEER05 database to ensure that proper values were included Develop EULs for new measures not included in DEER05 Review and, if necessary, revise EULs for past DEER measures Develop estimates of remaining useful life (RUL) for early replacement measures Lifetimes were collected from a variety of sources, including: 6th and 9th year retention reports from California IOUs Other retention/EUL studies from non-California utilities and independent analysts Appliance Magazine Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Energy Star Food Service Technology Center Utility work papers The sources reviewed are listed in the accompanying spreadsheet along with preliminary recommended EUL values for the current DEER update. The number of EUL sources available for the different measures varied widely. We found no applicable sources for fifteen percent of measures under study, one EUL source for 13 percent of the measures, two sources for 10 percent of the measures, and three or more sources for 61 percent of the measures. In addition, many EUL sources in the industry are tautological, referring back to other sources. There are very few statistically robust cradle to grave studies of effective useful measure life. Measure EUL results obtained in this research, if any, were assessed in combination with: The reliability of the DEER05 EUL The reliability of the retention studies assessed in this current study EULs of similar measures Market trends Expert judgment The general approach for selecting EULs for this current DEER Update was to review the various data sources and their underlying strengths and weaknesses and provide EUL recommendations that were determined to be most appropriate, based on the information that was available. Factors that contributed to selection of an EUL for a given measure included: the technical strength of the study supporting an EUL, the appropriateness of the study for the measure and market under consideration, the number of studies recommending the same EUL (or similar EULs), and the reasonableness of the source EUL in light of EULs for similar measures. In some cases, EULs were extracted directly from source data, and in other cases, EULs from different sources were averaged. This second approach was used when there were a range of EUL estimates from different sources, and a preferred source could not be identified. For a number of measures, there was very limited information on EULs. For these measures, it was necessary utilize EULs from similar types of measures and to utilize judgment-based EUL estimates. RULs RULs (remaining useful lifetimes) are relevant for early replacement measures that are designed to retire equipment before the end of their useful live. Early replacement measures capture additional energy savings that result from the replacement of older, less efficient equipment with newer, higher efficiency equipment. Normally, energy savings for replace on burnout measures are calculated as the difference in energy use between the high-efficiency equipment and standard-efficiency equipment that would have been purchased without program intervention. For early replacement measures, energy savings are calculated in two parts: for the RUL of the old equipment, savings are calculated as the difference between the energy use of high efficiency equipment and the old equipment that is being replaced, and for the remaining measure live, savings are calculated as the difference in energy use for the high-efficiency equipment and the standard-efficiency equipment. For RULs we have proposed using 1/3 of the estimated EUL for a measure. This approach provides a reasonable RUL estimate without the requiring any a priori knowledge about the age of the equipment being replaced. It has also been proposed that RULs could be estimated as a function of the age of the equipment and the measure EUL. One simple equation is: RUL = EUL replaced equipment age. Alternate equations involve the use of survival functions. However, these equations all require knowledge about the age of the equipment being replaced, which is not available for program planning, but could be available for program reporting. One could use a combination approach to deal with situations where equipment age is known and where it is unknown: If replaced equipment age is known, use equation involving EUL and equipment age If replaced equipment is unknown, use 1/3 of the EUL The primary drawback to the combined approach is that it can be gamed to get higher lifetime measure savings. If the equipment age is less than 2/3 of the EUL, then one might want to use the equation approach. If the equipment age is greater than 2/3 of the EUL, then one could claim not to know the equipment age and thus use 1/3 of the EUL for the RUL. Given our limited current understanding about appropriate RULs to use for energy savings calculations, we believe that simple use of 1/3 the EUL to be appropriate for the current DEER update. We recommend that RULs receive additional study as part of ongoing program evaluation studies.     -  PAGE 1 - KEMA >?TU , yzST`afPkJWu_׺ƨ hcR,^Jh(h(5^J hW^J hc ^J h3A^J hQ^J hsY^J hL^J hu^J h3Rh3Rh3R h3R^Jhrh3R^J hrh3R h3R5hWh3R5:CJaJ9$>?UVW( e - B<gd3R $^a$gd3R $^a$gd3RB[iyz ~3()"$xx^a$gd3R $^a$gd3R $x^a$gd( $<^a$gd3R<gd3R_}"h$AEH˺˚hOh&f0JCJaJmHnHuh3RhO0JCJaJ!jh3RhO0JCJUaJh3RhOCJaJh|ojh|oUhWhc hW^Jh3R h3R^J hcR,^J""# !H$^gd3R $^a$gdW^gd3R $^a$gd3R21h:p3R/ =!"#$% Z@Z 3RNormal$h^ha$#CJOJQJ\_HaJmH sH tH DA@D Default Paragraph FontViV  Table Normal :V 44 la (k(No List 2O2 3RBullet1  & FB'B 3RComment ReferenceCJaJ<< 3R Comment TextCJaJH"H 3R Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJ4@24 3RHeader  !4 @B4 3RFooter  !.)@Q. 3R Page Number *$@0$>?UVW(e-B[iyz   ~3()"#0000000 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 0000 0  0  0  0 000000000000000000 0 0000h00@0H00@0H00@0H00@0H00@0@0H00$ $>?UVW(e-B[iy ~3()"#@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@0@0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@0@0@0@0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@ 0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@0@ 0@ 0@0@0 00"@0=8 00" """%_B"%!8@0(  B S  ?aLaϾa<aa׽aD~a|aLؽ9*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType=*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCity ^ ?T3By ,CnhC vxaDS]\d:9]fȧDpH^`pOJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo  ^ `OJQJo(hH  ^ `OJQJo(hHxx^x`OJQJ^Jo(hHoHH^H`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh ^`hH.h pLp^p`LhH.h @ @ ^@ `hH.h ^`hH.h L^`LhH.h ^`hH.h ^`hH.h PLP^P`LhH.pH^`pOJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo  ^ `OJQJo(hH  ^ `OJQJo(hHxx^x`OJQJ^Jo(hHoHH^H`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hHpH^`pOJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo  ^ `OJQJo(hH  ^ `OJQJo(hHxx^x`OJQJ^Jo(hHoHH^H`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJo(hH^`OJQJ^Jo(hHo^`OJQJo(hH CS]\d9]f vxa vxa vxa vxa vxa vxa vxa6)ڒ                6)ڒ        6)ڒ        (cR,(BO3R&f|o{Tx\1"+|(c QsYLW^I3AuI @8@UnknownGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial5& zaTahoma?5 z Courier New;Wingdings"1h9t&9t&8r& % %!4d2QHX ?3R2#Summary of EUL-RUL Analysis for the Fred CoitoJames J. Hirsch    Oh+'0 0< \ h t $Summary of EUL-RUL Analysis for the Fred Coito Normal.dotJames J. Hirsch2Microsoft Office Word@F#@(H@:@:՜.+,0 hp  KEMA% ' $Summary of EUL-RUL Analysis for the Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./012356789:;=>?@ABCFRoot Entry FjUHData 1Table*WordDocument4*SummaryInformation(4DocumentSummaryInformation8<CompObjq  FMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q