Conference Call Meeting Notes 6/29/00 : LUSENET : Commercial and Industrial Transformers : One Thread

CEE C&I Distribution Transformer Working Group June 29, 2000 11:00 EDT.

Participants: Dave Korn, Courtney Peverell, Adam Hinge, Matt Brown, Bob Huang, Ted Jones Mahri Lowinger

Purpose: To discuss recent developments and review strategy for the initiative.

Key Comments: The transformers session and Energy Star Transformers booth at the Electric Expo 2000 in June went well and the group would like to have the Energy Star booth at 5-6 more conferences this year. Possible trade shows include the Electric West Show, February 27  March 1, 2001 and at the ACEEE Summer Study, August 20-25, 2000. The group would also like to do some outreach to state officials, conduct informal interviews about codes/standards, and contact editors of trade publications to run articles on transformers.

Ted circulated a draft strategy outline prior to the meeting and the group filled-in possible actions to realize the strategy presented in that outline listed below.

1. Promoting the Market for Products Meeting NEMA TP-1/ENERGY STAR Lead: ENERGY STAR (Steve Ryan, Courtney Peverell, Dave Korn, Bob Huang)

Key Audiences: A&E, Building Owners, Procurement, Electrical Design Firms State and Local Policymakers and Procurement Representatives Regional, State, and Utility Program Administrators

Activities: Material Development, Article/Editorial Placement, Discussion Panels and Trade Shows for Booth Case Studies  Needed (see below) Person-to-person contact

Resources: E* Transformers Booth E* TRANSFORMERS FOLDERS  E* TRANSFORMERS Brochure  Calculator Software  On-line and CD version  2- Case Studies (waiting for approval)  Cadmus Article  E* Transformers Product List  E* Transformers Information Sheet  Purchasing Sheet  FAQ Sheet  CEE Fact Sheet  CEE Update  Bob Arthur article

Timeline:Current Energy Star support contract to Cadmus and ICF Consulting runs through Sept. 30th. Uncertain beyond that time for ENERGY STAR contractors.

Action: Need Inventory of Resources  on Website (CEE or EPA). Courtney and Mahri to lead.

Action: Current case studies are based on simulated data only; we need Case Studies of actual installations. Dave Korn will outline the information that is needed by July 12. Ted and Dave will call on contacts to provide information on installations, such as Phil Hopkinson, Chris Pruess, Tom Crowley, and to send to utility and ENERGY STAR partner contacts.

Action: Courtney will send CEE 30 E*Transformers folders to forward to CEE transformer contacts (specifically those listed in the Update and annual report). The folder will have a note explaining where the resources came from and include Courtneys contact information.

2. Promoting the Adoption of Model Transformer Programs This activity is an area of overlap with CEE and ENERGY STAR both working to educate the market transformation community about the distribution transformer opportunity.

Lead: CEE

Key Audiences: Market Transformation Program Administrators CA, OR, NW, NJ

Types: Prescriptive  like National Grid, Statewide  like NYSERDA New Construction  like SMUD Standard Offer- like CA, NJ, etc.

Materials: CEE Initiative CEE Update Program Information Timeline:

Notes: While National Grid will be supporting marketing, education and training activities for TP 1 transformers. It will not be offering rebates for TP 1 transformers because technically they are required by law in all new construction projects. Rebates will offered in Rhode Island.

A Statewide New Construction program that includes distribution transformers is expected in New Jersey in Sept. or October, 2000.

Ted Jones explained that California is on track to offer transformers as part of the Savings by Design program in 2001. Three of California's largest utilities Pacific Gas & Electric Co., Southern California Edison Co., and San Diego Gas & Electric have recently introduced this program to encourage high performance nonresidential building design and construction. "Savings By Design" offers design assistance tailored to the needs of specific projects to help design more efficient buildings. Part of the project is to offer incentives to owners to offset some of the costs associated with high efficiency design and construction. Design team incentives are also provided to reward designers who meet ambitious energy efficiency targets. At the present time the program is only available for projects within the service territories of the three utility companies. (see below)

SAN DIEGO, CALIF. USA. Three of California's largest utilities Pacific Gas & Electric Co., Southern California Edison co., and San Diego Gas & Electric have introduced a program to encourage high performance nonresidential building design and construction.

The program is called, "Savings By Design" and offers design assistance tailored to the needs of specific projects to help design more efficient buildings. Part of the project is to offer incentives to owners to offset some of the costs associated with high efficiency design and construction. Design team incentives are also provided to reward designers who meet ambitious energy efficiency targets.

At the present time the program is only available for projects within the service territories of the three utility companies. For additional information, contact George Bauschelt at 619-641-7149; Chip Fax at 619-641-7164; or Chuck Poindexter at 619-641-7148.

Action: Mahri and Adam will update the group on the details of Rhode Islands program.

Action: Dave Korn will follow-up with Saving by Design Contacts at the three CA IOUs: PG&E: Grant Duhon: (see attached) SDG&E: . Chuck Angyal, Chief Architect, New Construction and Tenant Improvement Programs ( 619.641.7154) SoCal Ed: ???

Action: CEE needs to investigate when it will be updating its transformer update. All new or corrected information should be sent to Ted Jones or Mahri Lowinger

Action: It was requested that CEE develop a map of states/utilities offering transformer programs with rebate information where applicable.

3. Recommendations for Medium-Voltage Market Lead: CEE Working Group

Key Audience: NEMA, ENERGY STAR

Activities: Research Market and Energy Saving Potential

Outcome: Analysis and Recommendations

Timeline: July 19th Conference Call (11:00 AM EDT)

Notes: Several issues complicate the market transformation efforts for the medium-voltage market. Supposedly 80 percent of the Medium-voltage market already meets NEMA TP-1, which means TP-1 may not be aggressive enough for this market. ENERGY STAR does not address Medium Voltage. It is not clear how large this market is or what the energy savings potential is. See Attached memos from Adam and Margaret for an outline of issues.

Action: Dave Korn volunteered to take an initial stab at answering some of the questions outlined by Adam and Margaret. His responses will be distributed and discussed at conference call on July 19th. Several sources should be consulted including: NEMA, ORNL, Phil Hopkinson, and Steve Nizinski. The goal is for the working group to be in position to offer recommendations to both ENERGY STAR and NEMA on what appropriate levels of efficiency should be differentiated in this market. If suitable answers are not available, the working group will begin defining a market research task for further discussion at CEEs September Program Committee Meeting in Portland, OR.

4. Monitor State and National Codes and Standards Activity Lead: CEE Working Group

In-Effect: MA, WI, MN

In Process: WA - ? OR - ? CA  Title 24 will be reviewed in 2005 NY  under consideration for 200? ASHRAE 90.1  Deferred for more study at most recent meeting based on letter from NEMA and ORNL (see Adam for copies) ORNL contact is Evelyn Baskin. DOE-National Standard Setting Process  Update?? Canada  National Standard to take effect 2001

Next Steps: 1. Courtney and Mahri will do an inventory of CEE/EPA resources. 2. Dave Korn will outline information needed for case studies by July 12. Dave and Ted will call contacts for information. 3. Courtney will send 30 Energy Star Transformers folders to CEE transformer contacts. Mahri will give Courtney those contacts. 4. Mahri and Adam will get an update on the details of Rhode Islandss prescriptive program. 5. Dave Korn will follow-up with the Savings by Design contacts. 6. Ted and Mahri will determine when CEE will be doing the next version of the UPDATE. 7. Mahri will develop a map of states/utilities offering transformer programs. 8. Conference call on July 19 at 11 Eastern Time to discuss the market for medium voltage. 9. Dave Korn will distribute answers to some of the questions outlined by Adam and Margaret at the July 19 conference call. 10. Conference call on Sept. 7 at 11 am Eastern Time to open up the working group again for more discussion.

Adjourn Message from PG&E on Distribution Transformers

-----Original Message----- From: Duhon, Grant Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 4:27 PM To: Krieg, Betsy Cc: Livingston, Jon; Hickman, David; Bhalla, Jay; Bruceri, Misti Subject: RE: CEE Transformers Betsy: We do encourage installation of high efficiency dry-type transformers in our outreach, but Savings By Design (SBD) does not (yet) have a program component which addresses them directly. We have, however,had plans to do so when the baseline-vs-high-efficiency values were finally agreed upon. At PG&E's insistence, a "transformer place-keeper" was included in the California New Construction Calculator (CaNC) developed for SBD. We planned to include transformers in the program on the same estimated-performance basis as all other program components (traditional prescriptive incentives for individual components are not included in the statewide SBD approach). Because Title 24 does not establish transformer efficiency standards, we had, at the time, neither an agreed-upon baseline nor defined "energy-efficient" values to include. However, we were aware that CEE was working with manufacturers on the issue. The place-keeper left in the original DOE 2 matrix allows transformers to be incorporated in the next CaNC update. We anticipate that we will run the CaNC series again in late 2000 or early 2001. Because updating the baseline values underpinning SBD requires in excess of 1,000,000 DOE2 runs, we wait until we have collected all possible updates and changes and run them simultaneously. I will ask the SBD partners to include transformers in the next series. We will simultaneously update program literature to include the changes. Grant Duhon Issues regarding Medium Voltage Transformer Efficiency

Fundamental Issues/Questions: 1. There seems to be a significant difference between dry-type and liquid immersed medium voltage transformer efficiency. Does this difference exist, and how big is it? 2. The savings potential estimated by ORNL (97 Supplement, Table 4.8, p4-14) shows relatively small relative savings from non-utility Liquid MV (215 million kWh) vs Dry MV (1041 million kWh); is this due to higher sales volume for dry, or efficiency gap? 3. What are loadings on MV models? Does the typical load vary for dry vs. liquid?

Questions for NEMA/Manufacturers 1. How many units and total kVa of MV, Liquid are sold to non-utility purchasers? What are most typical/representative non-utility sizes? 2. Could we get data like ORNL 97 Supplement Table 5-4 for non-utility MV, Liquid and Dry? 3. Is there any data available on typical/average efficiency levels for non-utility MV liquid? 4. Is there any data available on typical/average efficiency levels for non-utility MV dry? 5. Who are top 5 manufacturers of non-utility MV liquid? What market share do these 5 represent? Same info for MV dry? 6. Code issues: are there cases when dry type are required over liquid, or is this just designer/customer preference?

Strategy for medium-voltage transformers

Recommendation to NEMA and Energy Star on moving forward (or information that needs to be collected.)

Are medium dry and liquid really two different markets - C&I and utility, respectively and that Energy Star should adopt the NEMA TP-1 Dry spec for the C&I market. This may prove reasonable if utilities do indeed buy mostly liquid filled products which have higher efficiencies anyway. We need the data.

Another issue is that the liquid-dry distinction may be getting blurry with new technologies hitting the market - such as amorphous core. This development offers the opportunity for Energy Star to target efficiencies higher than TP-1.

In addition, Margaret and Ted have identified the following areas where we need additional data on the medium-voltage market: 1. How highly (on average) are medium-voltage products loaded? 2. What is the breakdown of medium-voltage purchases by utility and non-utility consumers? 3. How often is life-cycle costing used for purchase decisions in either case? 4. In what states are there fire code provisions (or insurance terms) that dictate/influence the purchasing decision? 5. In how many instances are medium-voltage products custom-built?

Comments from M. Suozzo on Medium-Voltage Transformers Research My take on the issues you present is that there is too much emphasis on the liquid immersed (LI) market. Yes we need to understand to what extent C&I purchasers are purchasing LI MV transformers and the trends, but more importantly, given the estimated potential, I think we need to concentrate on MV dry-type (DT) transformers. I recommend the starting point be gathering informationation that confirms (or denies) the ORNL data which basically indicates that utilites purchase LI transformers and the C&I sector purchases largely DT. Assuming the data we collect, with industry cooperation supports ORNL's conclusions, we should focus on DT, given the potential. So I would suggest focusing on a small subset of the issues you raise as follows:

**** MARKET Are medium dry and liquid really two different markets - ORNL says yes; we need additional confirmation/update from the industry. If confirmed, we should also suss out the "why." Do codes drive the tendency for C&I customers to purchase largely DT MV? What are the other factors at play. You mention, Energy Star, but the utility program has already adopted TP-1 for MV LI transformers. Perhaps the MOU needs to be revisited if C&I users are exhibiting an increasing trend toward purchases of LI transformers.

*** TECHNICAL What is the opportunity in the DT market -- starting with real measured loadings (in comparison with the F0% used in NEMA TP1. Here we REALLY need the data. What are typical efficiencies (core and winding losses) and what is the range available from manufacturers (best case/worst case). We need this less, since ORNL collected this (see Table 5.8) although confirmation and current data would be helpful. This table provides manufacturer survey data on load losses and load losses for non evaluated transformers (e.g., the worst efficiency case) and transformers designed to meet TP-1. Hence with accurate loadings -- which to date we don't have, we could calculate efficiencies.

Because this information is available, several of your under questions from NEMA have already been answered by NEMA manufacturers -- albeit updating is in order.

Also, on your point about savings potential, both sales volume and efficiency gap contribute to the gap in savings potential between DT and LI MV transformers sold to non utility customers. All of the data to support this statement is in the ORNL report.

I reiterate the following recommendations that Ted and I discussed, which are mostly consistent with the above, in a slightly different order than presented in your memo:

1. What is the breakdown of medium-voltage DRY TYPE (and less importantly LIQUID IMMERSED) purchases by utility and non-utility consumers? 2. How highly (on average) are medium-voltage DRY TYPE products loaded? 3. What are the code provisions that influence transformers purchases (again DRY TYPE) 4. Also, we need a better understanding about whether these are commodity vs custom products and together with this, the typical purchasing behavior of C&I customers -- to what extent is lifecycle costing used for these larger transformers.

-- Mahri Lowinger (, July 12, 2000

Moderation questions? read the FAQ