From the Lab to the Marketplace (1995)

DOE-2 Buildings Design Tool

Notes for the table above:

Savings from lighting, windows, and appliance standards do not, in general, overlap. Savings gained by using DOE-2 are achieved by a variety of building technologies.

• The time frame adopted for each case spans the first year of a product's use through the year 2015. Savings are computed with respect to a dynamic business-as-usual baseline (i.e., efficiency improvements attained without the new technology).
  • For electronic ballasts, the baseline is core-coil magnetic ballasts and T12, 40-watt lamps up to 1990 and energy-efficient magnetic ballasts and T12, 34-watt lamps (mandated by standards) from 1990 forward. The efficiency case reflects electronic ballasts and T8, 32- watt lamps—3500 hours-per-year use.
  • For windows, the baseline is dual-glazed windows for the residential sector and tinted single-glazed windows for the commercial sector. This baseline tends to underestimate savings in the early years for households (when single-glazed windows are still prevalent). Significant savings are attributed to daylighting made possible by the higher visible light transmission achieved by the advanced glazings in commercial buildings. No savings from gas fillings or from stick-on retrofit coatings are assumed.
  • For appliance standards, the baseline is a market projection of price-driven improvements in energy efficiency. Minimum efficiency standards for each appliance are then implemented in the year called for by legislation.
  • For DOE-2, the survey of major DOE-2 users indicated that they achieve 20% energy savings beyond what would have been the case without DOE-2. DOE-2 (or its descendants) will eventually be used for at least 50% of commercial construction, and energy performance standards will continue to be tightened based on analysis performed with DOE-2. However, it is too difficult to estimate the prospective savings. These savings would also include parts of the impacts shown here for windows, lighting, and equipment.
• Retail value is based on the incremental cost of the efficient technology compared to the baseline technology, e.g., comparing a $10 magnetic ballast with an $18 electronic ballast yields an incremental cost (retail value) of $8 per ballast. Market share is the percentage of all related product sales (e.g., ballasts) captured by the efficient technology or service shown. As the industry matures, low-e coatings decline in cost from $4 per square foot in 1985 to $1.20 per square foot in 2015. Spectrally selective coatings drop from an initial cost of $5.60 per square foot in 1995 to $1.70 per square foot in 2015. The retail value of DOE-2 design services is estimated based on a fee of $0.10 per square foot.
• Value of energy savings, excluding added cost of efficient equipment. A 7% real discount is used to convert savings to a present value in 1993 dollars.
• Present value of energy savings, net cost of efficient equipment. A 7% real discount rate is used to convert savings to present value in 1993 dollars. Net present values include lifetime savings of technologies installed in each year. The extra efficiency investment ("retail value") for buildings designed using DOE-2 to date is inferred based on a three-year payback; values for the future have not been estimated.
• Excludes savings achieved by building standards based on DOE-2 analyses.