Upload
jonathan-wilkins
View
215
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Residential Clothes Washers and DryersTechnical Subcommittee
Ryan Firestone & Christian DouglassRegional Technical Forum
March 10, 20151-3 PM
2
Presentation Outline
Today’s Objective: Guidance on Clothes Washer measure development, guidance on developing a Clothes Dryer research plan
• Interaction between Washer and Dryer measures
• Updates to Clothes Washer measure• Developing a Clothes Dryer measure
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)
• ENERGY STAR has its first Dryer specification (v.1.0), effective January 1, 2015– ENERGY STAR resistance and heat pump based dryers are available
– NEEA is conducting research on dryers to support an RTF Dryer UES measure
• There is a significant interaction between Washer and Dryer measures– 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
5
Washer/Dryer Interaction
• Dryer energy consumption is determined by – Amount of moisture to be removed from clothing
– Energy efficiency of removing moisture from clothing
moi
stur
e (lb
s)
1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)
Washer EE
Dryer EE
dryer energy (kWh)
Washer/Dryer Interactionm
oist
ure
(lbs)
1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)
dryer energy (kWh)
Baseline WasherBaseline Dryer
moi
stur
e (lb
s)
1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)
EE WasherEE Dryer
dryer energy (kWh)
Baseline WasherEE Dryer
moi
stur
e (lb
s)
1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)
dryer energy (kWh) sa
ving
s
moi
stur
e (lb
s)
1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)
EE WasherBaseline Dryer
dryer energy (kWh)
savingsWasher savings
Dryer savings
?
Washer/Dryer Interaction7m
oist
ure
(lbs)
1 / dryer efficiency (kWh/lb)
EE WasherEE Dryer
dryer energy (kWh)
Washer savings
Dryer savings
?
• 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
– Is there interest in combined washer/dryer measures?
9
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%
– 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
Remaining Moisture Content
• This has a huge impact on estimated drying energyNEEA Field
Study findings
clothing (lbs/year) 2342 2342 assume NEEA value
RMC out of washer 71% 36% average in CEC DB
RMC out of dryer 7% 4%DOE test procedure assumption
moisture removed (lbs/year) 1494 741 computed
kWh/lb moisture 0.62 0.50DOE test procedure assumption
dryer energy (kWh/year) 920 370 computed
DOE Washer Test Procedure
Impact of a 10% reduction in RMC (faster spin cycle)
Improved RMC 64% 32%dryer energy (kWh/year) 817 329dryer energy savings (kWh/year) 102 42
11
Market Share
• NEEA sales data from 2014 suggests very high penetration of ENERGY STAR 7.0 qualifying washers – This version of the specification effective March 7, 2015
• Final numbers not yet available, but preliminary analysis is ~70% of combined top- and front- loading– Current RTF measure assumes 54%, based on 2013 sales
and ENERGY STAR v6.1
12
Measure Grouping• Use a combined Top/Front load baseline (as in current UES measure)?• If so, ENERGY STAR top loader is less efficient than the baseline
– Exclude ENERGY STAR top loader?
• Note: CEE Tier 1 top loaders are scarce, Tier 2 / 3 top loaders aren’t available
14
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
15
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
16
Residential Clothes Dryers
• NEEA Proposed Tiers– Standard – dryers that satisfy the federal standard
by don’t qualify for ENERGY STAR
– 1 – ENERGY STAR qualifying, probably not heat pump
– 2 – today’s hybrid heat pump (LG, Whirlpool and Kenmore)
– 3 – likely hybrid heat pump limit
– 4 – pure heat pump dryer (e.g., Blomberg)
17
Available Data• CEC Database
– Products registered for sale in CA• Washer performance metrics: IMEF, IWF, RMC
• Add date
• NEEA Washer/Dryer field study– Metered energy consumption, log book of clothing weights and machine settings.
• NEEA / PG&E lab study– Lab testing 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 Tier 2 / 3 / 4 dryers for now
Tier 1 Dryers• No clear correlation between D1 and D2
• NEEA investigating D2 / UCEF relationship– 9 Standard dryers
– 2 Tier 1 dryers
• Should the RTF pursue a Tier 1 Dryers measure?– Would likely require Tier 1 lab testing
Current Data
Energy Consumption Metric
Data Source What kind? How many? D EF D1 CEF D2 CEF UCEF Field
CEC DB/Other product DBs
Standard X
Tier 1, 2 X
2011 DOE X X
NEEA Washer/Dryer Field Study
~46x Standard (some Tier 1?)
X (field)
X (field) X
Baseline Dryer Study
9x Standard X
(Durango)X
(Durango) 2x Tier 1
HP Dryer testing Tier 2,3,4 X X X
20
What the RTF needs• A reliable metric of real-world energy use of dryers
– UCEF is a good candidate, might be adjusted based on field test findings
– Need confidence that UCEF values from lab(s) are comparable
• Significant samples of machines in all performance tiers tested to this metric– RTF needs confidence the samples are representative of the tier
– CEF and UCEF for each tier are averages of representative products
• Current Practice baseline performance level– If not using DOE metric, need a means of estimating market share of sampled
machines
– Current Practice Baseline CEF and UCEF are the weighted averages of all tiers.• Weighted by current market share
21
Questions for Subcommittee and RTF
• Is UCEF a sufficient metric for estimating energy consumption
• Is the Durango lab testing sufficient for estimating baseline UCEF?– If so, should the UCEF be adjusted for altitude?– Is there sufficient data to estimate Tier 1
consumption and savings?• If existing data is not sufficient for a proven
measure, what does research need to provide?