Laserfiche WebLink
7.A. - Page 217 of 285 2019 Nonresidential New Construction Reach Code Cost Effectiveness Study <br />♦ 2—All-Electric Federal Code -Minimum Reference: <br />♦ This all -electric design does not comply with the Energy Commission's TDV performance <br />budget. Packages achieve between -50% and -4% compliance margins depending on climate <br />zone. This may be because the modeled HW system is constrained to having an artificially low <br />efficiency to avoid triggering federal pre-emption, and the heat pump space heating systems <br />must operate overnight when operation is less efficient. <br />♦ All packages are cost effective in all climate zones. <br />3A— All -Electric + EE: Packages achieve positive compliance margins in all Us ranging from 0% to <br />+17%, except CZ16 which had a -18% compliance margin. All packages are cost effective in all <br />climate zones. The improved degree of cost effectiveness outcomes in Package 3A compared to <br />Package 1A appear to be due to the significant incremental package cost savings. <br />♦ 3B — All -Electric + EE + PV + B: All packages are cost effective. Packages improve in B/C ratio when <br />compared to 3A and increase in magnitude of overall NPV savings. PV appears to be more cost- <br />effective with higher building electricity loads. <br />♦ 3C — All -Electric + HE: <br />♦ Packages do not comply with Title 24 in all Us except CZ15 which resulted in a +0.04% <br />compliance margin. <br />♦ All packages are cost effective. <br />Wj <br />2019-07-25 <br />469 <br />