2013 sedi clothes dryers summit 5 tech session_neea
TRANSCRIPT
1 NORTHWEST ENERGY EFFICIENCY ALLIANCE
Efficient Clothes Dryers
Christopher Dymond, Sr. Product Manager Dryer Summit
November 14th , 2013
2
Outline
NEEA’s Approach
A Dryer Market Transformation Path
Research
Field Study Results
Recent Lab Testing Results
Near Term Activities
National Alignment
Developing Qualified Products List
Value Proposition for Manufacturers
3
NEEA’s Approach
4 4
Natural
Baseline
Efficient
Product or
Practice
Mark
et
Sh
are
Time
Dollars
Invested
Market Transformation Approach
Early Market Adoption Mainstream Market Adoption Emerging Technologies
US Heat Pump
Clothes Dyers
Market Today
Early: testing,
standards, identify
barriers
Next: pilot programs,
specifications, incentives,
market research and
strategy development
Incentives
Pilot
5
History of Successful Collaboration
2007 CFL sales
Top 18 Million
annually
ENERGY STAR
Windows Market
Share Hits 75%
2001
2000 VFD cold
Storage Fans
Reduce
Energy Use
by 61-86%
Efficient Washers
50% Market Share
1997
2004 NEEA Pioneers
80PLUS
1998 BacGen
Reduces
Wastewater
Treatment
Energy Use
by 50%
1997 Northwest
Energy
Efficiency
Alliance
Launched
2004 Northwest
ENERGY STAR
New Homes
Specifications
Food
processors
commit 50%
energy
reduction goal
2008
2009 13,000 DHPs
installed at a
savings of
40,500,000
kWh per year.
Strategic energy management
adopted in healthcare (30% of
“beds”)
2005
Energy Forward
Campaign. TVs
50% more
efficient than 3
years ago.
2010
6
The Future of Dryers
1938 Electric Resistance
Clothes Dryers
Solar Clothes Drying
1963 Auto Termination Sensors
2014 Energy Star Dryer
2029? Laundry System
Context
DOE rule making will begin (again) in
3-4 years. It will take about 2 years to
complete and can be implemented as
new federal minimum standard 5
years later. “Tier 2” Heat Pump Dryers
7
A Better Test Procedure N
um
ber
of P
roducts
2005 Test Protocol
Distribution
(little diversity)
Energy Efficiency
2013 Test Protocol
distribution
Heat Pump
Dryers
NEEA’s value is to
find and grow this
“bump”
Current
Federal
Minimum
Standards
Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
8
Leads to Product Evolution
Electric Resistance (ER)
Advanced Electric
Resistance (AER)
Heat Pump Dryers
Compact HP
CO2 HP
Condensing
Non-condensing Radio
Frequency
2005 Federal Standard
We don’t yet know
what the market will
ultimately look like
Tier 1
Compact AER Energ
y E
ffic
iency
Tier 2
Tier 3
9
Field Research
10
NEEA Laundry Field Study
Residential Building Stock Assessment Approximately 1,850 homes
Laundry Supplemental Study 50 sites for approximately 1 month
Statistically significant sample
2005 and newer models
3 weight measurements
kWh monitoring of both washer and dryer
Participants paid to provide load and setting
details
11
Drying time is longer
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0-15 16-30 31-45 46-60 61-75 76-90 91-105 106-120 121-135 136-150 151-165 166-180
Nu
mb
er
of
Load
s
Drying Time (minutes)
Real World Drying Time Histogram
2005 DOE Test Results
Questions
• What is a consumer acceptable
drying time?
• How do we translate between test
results and real world
12
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0-20 21-40 41-60 61-80 81-100 101-120 121-140 141-160
Nu
mb
er
of
Site
s
Flow Bins (CFM)
Typical DOE 2005 and 2011
Air flow rates are lower Questions
• What is the real world vent rate?
• How does this impact drying time?
• Does this make them similar in
performance to HP dryers?
24% of ducts had
substantial air flow
restrictions
13
Dryer Settings are not the same
Dryer Temperature Dryness Level
DOE Test Procedure “D” = High Heat, Normal Dryness
14
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Ene
rgy
Co
nsu
me
d P
er
Cyc
le (
kWh
/cyc
le)
Drying Time (minutes)
<5 lbs 5-10 lbs
10.1-15 lbs 15.1-20 lbs
>20 lbs DOE Test
NEEA Average
Energy Consumption vs Drying Time
NOTE: These are
not the same load
sizes, or weights
15
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0 5 10 15 20 25
Ene
rgy
Co
nsu
me
d P
er
Cyc
le (
kWh
/cyc
le)
Load Size (lbs)
<30 min 31-60 min
61-90 min 91-120 min
>120 min DOE Test
NEEA Average
Energy Consumption vs Load Size
Questions
• Is a singular test weight a good
representation?
• Does it allow relative comparison?
16
How People Use Their Dryers
n=1036
Temp
Low Medium High Total Avg. Load
Weight in Each Category (lbs)
Load Weight
*
0-6.5 lbs 6.6% 17.4% 16.5% 40.5% 4.3
6.5-10.5 lbs
3.0% 20.8% 13.1% 36.9% 8.5
10.5-25 lbs 3.0% 12.9% 6.7% 22.6% 13.1
Total 12.6% 51.1% 36.3% 100%
*Load weight represents the net weight of the dry load going into the washer
What Do Field Data Tell Us
about How People Use
Their Dryers? High
Temp/Medium Weight Is
Not Very Common,
Accounting for Only 13% of
Total Loads
Federal Test
Condition
17
Initial Moisture
18
Summary and Comparison Table
19
NEEA Study Summary
Energy use was higher than expected More loads per year DOE = 283/yr
NEEA = 337/yr
Longer run times (min) DOE = 27 min
NEEA = 58 min
Ventilation Rate Impact Negligible
Considerable Variability Between models
Owner behavior
Types of laundry loads
Auto termination doesn’t always work well
Consumer Behavior Medium heat is most common
Many selected “Extra Dry”
124% as many dryer loads as washer loads
20
Recent Lab Testing Results (Performed by Ecova)
21
Samsung DV457A1 Lab Testing
Testing to DOE Appendix D2 Auto termination, no wrinkle-guard, both
DOE test cloths and AHAM load
22
Lab Testing – Tier 2 Dryers
LG 24” HP
With Electric Resistance Boost
Panasonic
24” HP
With VS Compressor
Typical
27”
23
Recent HP Test Results
24 24
New Tech – RF Dielectric Heating
Company: CoolDry, LLC
Status: Alpha Prototype
Energy Savings: 15-30%
Non-Energy Benefits Very Low Temp (80 F)
1/10th Tumble Time
Even Drying
25
Near Term Activities
26
Other
Stakeholders
Kenmore (Sears)
General Electric
National Alignment
FTC DOE
Electrolux
Local Retailers
NYSERDA
Vermont
Energy
LIPA EPA
PG&E
LG
Panasonic
Miele
Bosch
Whirlpool
Home Depot
Lowes
Costco Sears
Samsung
NEEA
27
Developing a Qualified Products List
Utility Wants Energy Star Alignment w/D2
Additional Data (Cycle time, Heavy Load)
Real World Validation (field studies)
Consumer Preferences and Settings
Manufacturer Wants $$$$ incentive commitment
Marketing and consumer education
3rd party validation
28
Potential Market Support for Dryer*
Early-stage incentives* $400/unit x 100,000 = $40 million
Mid-stage incentives* $300/unit x 200,000/yr = $60 million/yr
Duration ~ 2-5 years
Late-stage incentives $150/unit x 1,000,000/yr = $150 million/yr
Duration ~2-10 years
* Assumes unit provides 400kWh/yr savings compared to electric resistance
Values are estimates reflective of similar types of efficiency investments and
participation by NW, CA, and NY utilities.
** Assumes broader nation wide incentive programs.
29
Discussion of Implications
30 30
Filling the
Energy
Efficiency
Pipeline
Accelerating
Market
Adoption
Delivering
Regional
Advantage
Thank You!
Christopher Dymond Sr. Product Manager
(503) 688-5454 – work (503) 428-2787 – mobile
Questions & Comments