DOE Distribution Transformer DOE Distribution Transformer Efficiency StandardsEfficiency Standards

IEEE Rural Electric Power ConferenceCharleston, SCApril 29, 2008

Bob Saint – Principal Distribution Engineer, Energy Policy

NRECA

Transmission & Distribution

Engineering Committee (T&DEC)

DOE – Appliances and DOE – Appliances and Commercial Equipment Standards Commercial Equipment Standards ProgramProgram• Develops test procedures and minimum

efficiency standards for residential appliances and commercial equipment

• Applies to products manufactured for sale in as well as those imported into the United States

Laws and Regulations

• The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) of 1975 established an energy conservation program for major household appliances.

• The National Energy Conservation Policy Act of 1978 amended EPCA to add Part C of Title III, which established an energy conservation program for certain industrial equipment.

• The Energy Policy Act of 1992 amended EPCA to add certain commercial equipment, including distribution transformers.

Residential ProductsResidential Products

• Battery Chargers & External Power Supplies

• Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

• Clothes Dryers

• Clothes Washers

• Cooking Products

• Dehumidifiers

• Dishwashers

• Furnaces & Boilers

• Fluorescent & Incandescent Lamps

• Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts

• Plumbing Products

• Pool Heaters

• Refrigerators & Freezers

• Room Air Conditioners

• Small Duct, High Velocity Air Conditioners

• Torchieres

• Water Heaters

Commercial EquipmentCommercial Equipment

• Heating, Air Conditioning and Water Heating Equipment Clothes Washers

• Distribution Transformers • Electric Motors • Furnaces & Boilers • High Intensity Discharge Lamps • Refrigerated Beverage Vending Machines • Refrigeration Equipment • Small Electric Motors • Unitary Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps • Water Heaters

• Determination Analysis – Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 1994-1996 White

Papers– "Based on its analysis of the information now

available, the Department has determined that energy conservation standards for transformers appear to be technologically feasible and economically justified, and are likely to result in significant savings" (October 22, 1997).

DOE Actions on Distribution DOE Actions on Distribution TransformersTransformers

DOE Actions on Distribution DOE Actions on Distribution TransformersTransformers

• Test Procedure – started in 1998.– NOPR – November 12, 1998– SNOPR – Public Meeting, September 27,

2004– Final Rule, published on April 27, 2006.– Technical Correction, October 16, 2006

DOE Actions on Distribution DOE Actions on Distribution TransformersTransformers• Energy Conservation Standard – started in 2000.

– Framework Document Workshop, November 1, 2000– Draft analyses published 2001 through 2003– ANOPR published July 29, 2004

• Public Meeting, September 28, 2004

– EPAct 2005 establishes standards for Dry-type Transformers effective January 1, 2007

– NOPR, August 4, 2006• Public Meeting, September 27, 2006

– Final Rule Published October 12, 3007• Effective January 1, 2010

NRECA T&DEC System Planning Subcommittee Involvement

• Ken Winder - Moon Lake EA, Utah (lead)

• Commented on ANOPR and NOPR

• Met with Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Team – February 22, 2005

• http://www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act directs DOE to take into The Energy Policy and Conservation Act directs DOE to take into consideration seven factors when setting energy conservation consideration seven factors when setting energy conservation standardsstandards

Factor Analysis

1. Economic impact on consumers and manufacturers

Life-cycle cost analysisManufacturer impact analysis

2. Lifetime operating cost savings Life-cycle cost analysis

3. Total projected energy savings National impact analysis

4. Impact on utility or performance

Engineering analysisScreening analysis

5. Impact of any lessening of competition

Manufacturer impact analysis

6. Need for national energy conservation

National impact analysis

7. Other factors the Secretary considers relevant

Environmental assessmentUtility impact analysisEmployment impact analysis

DOE Efficiency CalculationsDOE Efficiency Calculations

Efficiency = Power OUT/Power IN%EFF = 100 x kVA x 0.5

kVA x 0.5 + ((NL + LL x 0.91x 0.52)/1000)Where:%EFF = Efficiency means the ration of the useful power

to the total power input; for DOE Rule it is calculated at 50% Load

kVA = Transformer Capacity in kilo-volt AmperesNL = No Load (Core) Losses corrected to 20oCLL = Load Losses corrected to 85oC0.091 = Load Loss Temperature correction from 85oC to

55oC

Trial Standard Levels (TSLs) span levels from the Trial Standard Levels (TSLs) span levels from the voluntary industry standard to maximum voluntary industry standard to maximum technologically feasible.technologically feasible.

• Six Trial Standard Levels were considered:– TSL1 = NEMA TP 1-2002 (industry voluntary standard)– TSL2 ~1/3 of the efficiency between TP 1 and Min LCC

(TSL4)– TSL3 ~2/3 of the efficiency between TP 1 and Min LCC

(TSL4)– TSL4 ~minimum life-cycle cost (LCC)– TSL5 ~maximum energy savings with no change in LCC– TSL6 = maximum technologically feasible

• Similar to the Candidate Standard Levels published in the ANOPR

• On liquid-immersed, some TSLs slightly modified for consistency or for core steel grouping

Industry Positions

• DOE NOPR, NRECA T&DEC – TSL2

• NEMA – TSL1 (NEMA TP-1)

• EEI, APPA, Environmental Groups, ABB – TSL4

Single Phase Efficiency (%) kVA NEMA TP-1 TSL2 Final Rule TSL4

10 98.40 98.40 98.62 98.48

15 98.60 98.56 98.76 98.63

25 98.70 98.73 98.91 98.79

37.5 98.80 98.85 99.01 98.91

50 98.90 98.90 99.08 99.04

75 99.00 99.04 99.17 99.08

100 99.00 99.10 99.23 99.14

167 99.10 99.21 99.25 99.25

250 99.20 99.26 99.32 99.45

333 99.20 99.31 99.36 99.49

500 99.30 99.38 99.42 99.54

667 99.40 99.42 99.46 99.57

833 99.40 99.45 99.49 99.60

Single Phase Efficiency

97.80

98.00

98.20

98.40

98.60

98.80

99.00

99.20

99.40

99.60

99.80

10 15 25 37.5 50 75 100 167 250 333 500 667 833

KVA

%

NEMA TP-1

TSL2

Final Rule

TSL4

Three Phase Efficiency (%)kVA NEMA TP-1 TSL2 Final Rule TSL4

15 98.10 98.36 98.36 98.68

30 98.40 98.62 98.62 98.89

45 98.60 98.76 98.76 99.00

75 98.70 98.91 98.91 99.12

112.5 98.80 99.01 99.01 99.20

150 98.90 99.08 99.08 99.26

225 99.00 99.17 99.17 99.33

300 99.00 99.23 99.23 99.38

500 99.10 99.32 99.25 99.45

750 99.20 99.24 99.32 99.37

1000 99.20 99.29 99.36 99.41

1500 99.30 99.36 99.42 99.47

2000 99.40 99.40 99.46 99.51

2500 99.40 99.44 99.49 99.53

Three Phase Efficiency

97.80

98.00

98.20

98.40

98.60

98.80

99.00

99.20

99.40

99.60

99.80

15 30 45 75 112.5 150 225 300 500 750 1000 1500 2000 2500

KVA

%

NEMA TP-1

TSL2

Final Rule

TSL4

Fraction of Transformers Purchased by Rural Fraction of Transformers Purchased by Rural Electric Cooperatives that will be Affected byElectric Cooperatives that will be Affected by TSL2 TSL2

Design Line kVA Phase Affected, %

LCC Savings, $

Payback Period, years

1 50 1 49.8 $ 79 12.4

2 25 1 38.0 $ 66 7.6

3 500 1 35.1 $ 1,525 5.7

4 150 3 61.5 $ 370 22.2

5 1500 3 37.6 $ 3,013 8.4

Fraction of Transformers Purchased by Rural Fraction of Transformers Purchased by Rural Electric Cooperatives that will be Affected by Electric Cooperatives that will be Affected by TSL4TSL4

Design Line kVA Phase Affected, %

LCC Savings, $

Payback Period, years

1 50 1 98.0 $ 58 25.2

2 25 1 48.1 $ 63 14

3 500 1 97.7 $ 1,579 22.5

4 150 3 93.9 $ 183 25.4

5 1500 3 79.2 $ 3,239 17.4

Summary of Distribution Transformer Analytical Summary of Distribution Transformer Analytical Results*Results*

Description TSL2Final Rule TSL4

Energy Saved (quads) 2.3 2.74 3.4

Emission Reductions - CO2 (million tons) 158.2 232 232.8

400 MW power plants not built 11 6 16

*During the period 2010-2038

Legal Actions

• The State of California along with Sierra Club, and NRDC filed a lawsuit against DOE, claiming that it failed to follow the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act– The States of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut as

well as New York City have filed to intervene on the side of California

– NEMA filed to intervene on the side of DOE

• NEMA does not anticipate a ruling before year end 2008

• Consensus is that the current DOE Rules will be implemented as stated in 1/1/2010, with possible increased efficiencies to follow