Regional Technical Forum July 15, 2014

1. Applying SEEM Updates, Calibration, and Measure Interaction Decisions to: Single Family Weatherization and HVAC UES Measures Regional Technical Forum July 15, 2014

2. Presentation Outline • Measure Overview • Staff Highlighted Areas • Looking Ahead – Staff Recommendations • Measure Analysis • Results • Proposed Decision

3. Measure Overview

4. Missing, but will add: Attic R30-R38; Floor R19-R30 Intentionally removed: Attic R0-R19 (Attic R0-38 is required by specs) * This is a new measure

5. Missing, but will add: Zonal to ASHP conversion; FAF to DHP conversion (after BPA/Ecotope proposal) * Changed from kWh/0.1ΔACHn/ft2 to kWh/ΔCFM50

6. Staff Highlighted Areas • Results may not be intuitive • It’s difficult to conceptualize the compounding effects on savings of the new version of SEEM, calibration (Phases I and II), and Option 3. These paths, chosen by the RTF over the last few years, make sense, but the results may not (at first). • Calibration is intended to mimic results of an impact evaluation • Option 3 is intended to make savings additive and correct long-term • Staff has investigated many of these non-intuitive results. This has been useful QC. • Cooling Savings • Still uncalibrated, but now cooling savings make up a large percentage of most of the measures with heat pump heating systems.

7. Our Journey Are we there yet? More Data? Option 3 “Option 3” Phase I Phase II Uo-based SEEM Calibration LMI, Old Calibration, Old SEEM

8. RTF Staff Recommendations Conclusion • Many results look reasonable, but there are some weird ones, too (e.g. very low/negative floor insulation savings). What should be done about the weird results, if anything? • We think we’ve followed the previous decisions correctly. Recommendations • Heating Savings – Staff recommends either • Accepting the proposed values as is, even though they’re weird, because they are an outcome of the decisions the RTF has already made (and because we’ve acknowledged things aren’t perfect, but close on average) • We would still need a solution to the cooling savings issue for heat pump houses • Pursuing a reasonable, and well-thought out solution to fix the “weird” values • See next slide for a possible solution • Cooling Savings – Staff is still looking for ideas… • Measure Category – These measures should be moved to provisional or planning: • PTCS Duct Sealing • BPA evaluation still not finished, but preliminary results cause us to question current savings. • PTCS Commissioning, Controls, and Sizing • Need to research baseline and efficient-case (see earlier agenda item)

9. Possible Solution:Tweak How Option 3 Divvies Savings • This mostly fixes the low/negative floor insulation savings issue. • The Phase I calibration is causing much of this issue. • The calibration is a broad tool, and it looks like we’ve tried to use it too finely. Tweak How Option 3 Divvies Savings: • is currently LMI savings, calibrated using Phase I and Phase II. • Instead, if we use uncalibrated values for , we’ll avoid negative values.

10. Proposed Solution:Tweak How Option 3 Divvies Savings

11. Proposed Solution:Tweak How Option 3 Divvies Savings • Part “I” on its own, may cause heat pump conversion savings to dominate the “divvying up” (uncalibrated SEEM 69/64 heat pump conversion savings can be huge) • Staff will double-check that this is not an issue.

12. Measure UES Analysis and Results

13. Workbooks Wx UES Measure Workbook: “ResSFWx_v3_Proposed.x lsm” Savings Analysis Workbook: “SEEMruns_SingleFamilyExistingHVACandWeatheriz ation_all.xlsm” HVAC UES Measure Workbook: “ResSFHVAC_v1_Propose d.xlsm” PTCS Ducts SF Measure Workbook (provisional): “tbd.xlsm” PTCS CC&S Measure Workbook (provisional): “tbd.xlsm”

14. Key Drivers of Savings Calculations • SEEM • Updated with improved infiltration modeling • Phase I Calibration • Aligns SEEM heating energy use output with RBSA houses with well-known heating energy use • Phase II Calibration • Aligns SEEM heating energy use with program-eligible houses, making adjustments for partially occupied and unoccupied houses, non-electric fuels, etc. • Measure Interactions: Option 3 • Modifies the “last-measure-in” method to take into account starting point of RBSA houses. This allows measures to be additive. • Heating system type is a measure identifier

15. Adjustment factors are to be applied to the heating energy use output of RTF standard SEEM runs (69F/64F).

16. Phase II Adjustments • These adjustment factors are applied to the Phase I-adjusted heating energy use to determine a) heating energy use, and b) non-electric heat consumption (in kWh/yr).

17. Measure Interactions - Option 3 • Methodology • Do the following for each characteristic scenario*in the RBSA, then weight measure results: • Calculate “Total Actual Savings” where baseline = characteristic scenario, efficient-case = full measure package. • For each individual measure in the characteristic scenario, calculate “LMI Savings” where baseline = full measure package without the measure, efficient-case = full measure package. • Then, calculate the characteristic scenario savings for the measure (example: attics): * Houses in the RBSA were binned into ~100 unique “characteristic scenarios”. Each characteristic scenario represents the efficiency of the house (Attic, Wall, and Floor insulation, Window efficiency, and Heating system). Many houses in the RBSA share the same characteristic scenario definition, this simplifies the analysis.

18. Measure Interactions - Option 3 The analysis stopped short of bringing all RBSA houses up to the full measure package level – houses with moderate existing levels of insulation did not receive the full measure package levels (example: Existing R30 in the attics remained). Full Measure Package (Defining efficiency levels) Attic: R-38 Walls: R-11 Floors: R-25 Windows: u-0.30 Infiltration: 0.35 ACHn Duct Tightness: PTCS Duct Insulation: Existing Heat Pump HSPF: 9.0 HP CC&S: PTCS Limit on Full Measure Package (Maximum efficiency of starting point) Attic:R-19 Walls:R-0 Floors: R-0 Windows: Double Pane Metal Frame Infiltration: 0.35 ACHn Duct Tightness:n/a Duct Insulation: n/a Heat Pump HSPF: n/a HP CC&S:n/a

19. Heating System as Identifier – Savings Logic • Heat Pump Logic, Example using fake numbers

20. Other Things to Note • Measures with DHP heating systems use characteristic scenarios for zonal houses. • This is because there aren’t enough DHP houses in the RBSA to determine characteristic scenarios. • Analysis excludes electronic t-stats (zonal houses) and GSHP’s.

21. Results

22. Heating Savings:Attic Insulation

26. Heating Savings:Wall & Floor Insulation

31. Heating Savings:Windows

35. Heating Savings:Infiltration and Heat Pumps

38. Cooling Savings • Historically, cooling savings have been • Uncalibrated • A small fraction of heating savings • Now, cooling savings are • Still uncalibrated • Still a small fraction of heating savings • EXCEPT: Heat pumps • The adjustments that caused heat pump savings to fall brought them closer to the unadjusted cooling savings.

40. Measure Costs

41. The cost for infiltration reduction remains unchanged: $0.073/CFM50.

44. Measure Cost-Effectiveness

45. Proposed Measure Cost-Effectiveness Green=Cost-effective; Red=Not Cost-effective (Values are TRC B/C Ratio’s)

46. Proposed Measure Cost-Effectiveness Green=Cost-effective; Red=Not Cost-effective (Values are TRC B/C Ratio’s) “Heat Pump: FAF w/o CAC to HP” measures are currently run in ProCost as “retrofit” measures. However, their costs make them look more like a “lost opportunity measure”: Measure Cost (w/o CAC) = Heat Pump Installation Cost – FAF Replacement Cost Measure Cost (w/CAC) = Heat Pump Installation Cost – FAF Replacement Cost–CAC Cost Should they be run as a “lost-opportunity” measurewith the current cost structure? Or, should they be run as a “retrofit” with an estimated lifetime cost structure (full capital cost today, avoided FAF and CAC replacement cost at some time in the future)?

47. Changes to Cost-effectiveness

48. Changes to TRC B/C Ratio’s

49. Discussion on Cooling • Issue: The uncalibrated cooling savings are a significant portion of measure savings for measures with heat pumps. • Ideas?

50. Decision “I ____ move the RTF, for the Single Family Weatherization and HVAC measures, • For heating savings (Pick One): • Adopt as proposed, • Pursue the tweak to Option 3 using uncalibrated LMI savings, OR • Pursue the following alternative path ____. • Do the following for cooling savings _______, • For ASHP conversion measures (Pick One): • Set costs and avoided electric costs using “lost opportunity” assumptions, • Set costs and avoided electric costs using “retrofit” assumptions, OR • Continue using “lost opportunity” costs and “retrofit” avoided electric costs. • Change PTCS Duct sealing measures’ status to Under Review.