Analysis of Weatherization Measures

Savings Methodology and Costs: Updated from 6th Plan

Regional Technical ForumJune 1st, 2010

Savings Methodology Existing vs. New Method

2

Method Existing New

How Measures are Defined:Individually, by Htg Zone

(i.e. “R0 to R11 Wall Insulation” saves x kWh/sqft for Heating Zone y)

Individually, by Htg Zone(i.e. “R0 to R11 Wall Insulation” saves

x kWh/sqft for Heating Zone y)

How Savings Determined Modeled Modeled

Model Calibrated to Whole House Use? Yes Yes (updated at Nov 2009 RTF mtg, see next slide)

Measure-Specific Savings Calibrated to Impact Evaluations? No No

Modeling Software: SUNDAY SEEM

Last Measure In Analysis Used? Yes Yes

Last Measure In Approach:1. Determine ∆kWh/∆UA at the prototype’s cost-effective limit.

2. Apply ∆kWh/∆UA to each measure.

Individually model savings for each measure, with remainder of house at

cost-effective limit*.

Number of Weather Stations: 5(Portland, Seattle, Boise, Spokane, Missoula)

5(Kalispell replaces Missoula)

Number of Prototypes: 3 (850 ft2, 1350 ft2, and 2184 ft2) 3 (1350 ft2, 2200 ft2, and 2688 ft2)

Number of Heating Systems Modeled: 1(Zonal)

3(Zonal, FAF, Heat Pump)

Separate Measures for each Heating System Type?

No(applies to any htg. system)

No(applies to any htg. system)

* Note: Upcoming slide (4) shows how cost-effective weatherization limits will be determined.

Calibrating SEEM Model with Billing Analyses (from Nov 2009 RTF meeting)

AverageHeat Pumps and Gas FAF 70/64 4% 0% 2% -7% -8% -2%Electric FAF and Zonal 66/66 -6% 1% 12% 8% 4%

Each StudyResults: SEEM Model kWh/sqft differs from Studies by x%

Heating System TypeHeating

Setpoints

Billing Study LocationHeating System

Sample SizeData Source

(goal)SEEM Model

ResultData

SourceSEEM Runs

Residential New Construction Bill ing Analysis Market Research Report

(RLW for NEEA, 2007)WA Gas FAF 114 13,979 14,927 948 7%

Used WA gas heated homes due to large sample size and ability to disaggregate

space and water heating use.5.7 5.9

Zonal 305 4,728 4,468 -260 -6% 3.0 2.9

Heat Pump 36 7,835 7,876 40 1% 3.4 3.4

Zonal 346 4,907 4,954 47 1% 3.1 3.2

Heat Pump 53 8,055 8,114 60 1% 3.0 3.0

Electric FAF 212 11,539 12,896 1,357 12% 4.9 5.5

Heat Pump 212 7,383 6,888 -495 -7% 3.2 2.9

Electric FAF 169 9,631 10,375 744 8% 5.0 5.4

Heat Pump 169 6,168 5,680 -488 -8% 3.2 2.9

Data Source

Portland

Seattle

TriCities

RTF/NEEA Heat Pump StudyAssumed houses are weatherized.

Wood heat?HP controls estimated.

NW WA

Amount of wood heat unknown.Super Good Cents

Metered Data Report

Space Heat Use (kWh/year)

Difference(kWh/yr & %)

positive = SEEM overestimates

use

NotesHeating kWh/sqft

– Uses the following SEEM inputs for the heating temperature setpoints:• Heat Pumps and Gas FAF

– 70 degrees daytime– 64 degree night setback

• Electric FAF and Zonal Electric– 66 degrees day and night

3

Defining Roles and Clearing up Confusion from Last Meeting

• Under the existing method, the following were determined jointly by the Council (Tom) and by the RTF (Tom), without clearly defined roles

– cost-effective insulation limits and – insulation measure savings

• In the new method, since potentially significant costs are at stake, roles are defined as follows:

– Council: determine cost-effective weatherization limits– RTF: determine insulation measure savings

• What this means:– Council to generate and document measure optimization methodology that incorporates SEEM

• Who’s on Point: Tom and Ecotope, with input from Adam and RTF• Level of effort = $$$; timeline = longer

– RTF to generate and document measure savings methodology that incorporates SEEM• Who’s on Point: Adam, with input from Tom, Ecotope and RTF• Level of effort = $; timeline = shorter• (Draft calculation spreadsheet for site built single family retrofit weatherization measures attached to today’s agenda)

– Both systems feed each other, so collaboration is required.• Note: Since Council portion won’t be completed soon enough for October PTR update, cost-effective weatherization

limits will initially be estimated from 6th Plan analysis, and updated when available.4

Insulation Measure Costs

• Existing Method (from 5th Plan)– Average of four sources

• PSE Reported Costs• EWEB Reported Costs• Pacific PUD Reported Costs• 1996 Power Plan Costs

• New Method– Median of ETO Program Data (electric)

• May 2007 through July 2008

– Cost per ft2 = [Median (ETO cost/ft2/∆R)] × [∆ R]

5

ETO Cost Data for Ceiling Insulation

6

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1 51 101 151 201 251 301 351 401 451

SQFT

$-

$0.02

$0.04

$0.06

$0.08

$0.10

1 51 101 151 201 251 301 351 401 451

Delta $/SF/R

0

10

20

30

40

50

1 51 101 151 201 251 301 351 401 451

R-Value Added R

BEGINR

$-

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

1 51 101 151 201 251 301 351 401 451

COST INSTALL

Median: 2.3¢/ft2/∆R

ETO Cost Data for Floor Insulation

7$-

$0.02

$0.04

$0.06

$0.08

$0.10

1 51 101 151 201 251

Delta $/SF/R

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1 51 101 151 201 251

SQFT

$-

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

1 51 101 151 201 251

COST INSTALL

0

10

20

30

40

50

1 51 101 151 201 251

R-Value Added R

BEGINR

Median: 4.7¢/ft2/∆R

ETO Cost Data for Wall Insulation

8$-

$0.05 $0.10 $0.15 $0.20 $0.25 $0.30 $0.35 $0.40

1 51

Delta $/SF/R

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1 51

SQFT

$-$500

$1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000

1 51

COST INSTALL

0

10

20

30

40

50

1 51

R-Value Added R

BEGINR

Median: 9.1¢/ft2/∆R

Window Measure Costs• Used ETO Program data for

Multifamily– Multifamily costs

expected to best convey the cost of the efficiency improvement

– Single Family costs expected to be biased high due to additional “features”

• U-0.30 to U-0.25 assumed to be $2.00/ft2

– Recommend change to $1.36/ft2 per June 2009 RTF meeting decision

• Gary Curtis’ research on costs for a 0.30 window package versus 0.22.

9

Single Family (Conversions)U-Factor Mean (/sqft) Median (/sqft) 25th Percentile N

0.35 25.91$ 24.03$ 17.58$ 480.34 28.15$ 26.98$ 23.16$ 270.33 28.55$ 28.02$ 23.92$ 140.32 32.20$ 26.08$ 18.46$ 1910.31 30.85$ 26.12$ 20.86$ 2910.30 32.78$ 27.42$ 20.17$ 3980.29 41.45$ 40.18$ 27.29$ 1560.28 35.44$ 29.18$ 21.31$ 310.27 39.45$ 36.70$ 30.27$ 100.26 44.13$ 44.13$ 28.53$ 20.25 74.09$ 94.93$ 63.57$ 30.24 49.85$ 49.85$ 42.21$ 20.23 31.27$ 31.27$ 29.40$ 20.22 28.77$ 28.77$ 28.77$ 10.21 66.94$ 67.32$ 55.48$ 30.20 79.15$ 81.97$ 73.68$ 270.19 91.75$ 93.63$ 90.46$ 3

Single Family (Upgrades)U-Factor Mean (/sqft) Median (/sqft) 25th Percentile

0.35 to 0.30 6.87$ 3.39$ 2.60$ 0.30 to 0.25 41.31$ 67.51$ 43.40$ 0.25 to 0.20 5.05$ (12.96)$ 10.11$

Multifamily (Conversions)U-Factor Mean (/sqft) Median (/sqft) 25th Percentile N

0.35 19.20$ 20.76$ 17.24$ 40.34 24.74$ 24.91$ 21.40$ 60.33 17.73$ 17.73$ 17.73$ 10.32 23.33$ 21.93$ 17.73$ 150.31 22.01$ 17.22$ 14.11$ 160.30 22.26$ 21.63$ 18.15$ 620.29 23.11$ 22.56$ 18.00$ 120.25 40.39$ 40.39$ 40.39$ 2

Multifamily (Upgrades)U-Factor Mean (/sqft) Median (/sqft) 25th Percentile

0.35 to 0.30 3.06$ 0.87$ 0.90$ 0.30 to 0.25 18.13$ 18.77$ 22.24$

ETO Data

10

$-

$20.00

$40.00

$60.00

$80.00

$100.00

$120.00

0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40

Co

st/

sq

.ft.

(2

00

6$

)

U-Factor

Single and Multifamily Retrofit Window Cost

Single Family Window Cost

Multi-family Window Cost

Cost Comparisons

11$-

$0.20

$0.40

$0.60

$0.80

$1.00

$1.20

$1.40

$1.60

$1.80

ATTIC R0-R19 ATTIC R0-R38 ATTIC R0-R49 ATTIC R38-R49 FLOOR R0-R19 FLOOR R0-R30 WALL R0-R11

Mea

sure

Cos

t (20

06$'

s pe

r squ

are

foot

)Single Family Costs - 6th Plan vs PTR Values PTR

6th Plan

Window Replacement (Not Shown)

PTR: $24.18 6th Plan: $20.07

RTF Review

• Updated deemed savings will be shown to RTF when complete (goal: August RTF meeting)

• Any recommendations for changes to methods or data sources for savings or costs?

12