Battery Chargers and External Power Supplies Framework Document Public Meeting Issues for Comment for
5 Pages
English

Battery Chargers and External Power Supplies Framework Document Public Meeting Issues for Comment for

Downloading requires you to have access to the YouScribe library
Learn all about the services we offer

Description

 Public  Meeting  for  Energy  Conservation  Standards  for  Battery  Chargers  and  External  Power  Supplies  July  16th,  2007  –  Washington,  DC   Issues  for  Stakeholder  Comment  The  U.S.  Department  of  Energy  (DOE)  published  a  document  on  its  website  in  conjunction  with  this  public  meeting:  Energy  Conservation  Standards  Rulemaking  Framework  Document  for  Battery  Chargers  and  External  Power  Supplies.  While  DOE  invites  comments  from  stakeholders  on  all  aspects  of  the  material  presented  in  this  document,  there  are  several  issues  in  particular  on  which  DOE  seeks  comment.  These  are  highlighted  in  issue  boxes  throughout  the  document  and  the  associated  public  meeting  presentation.  The  list  of  issues  to  be  presented  during  today’s  public  meeting  is  reproduced  below,  grouped  according  to  the  session  at  which  they  will  be  discussed.   Within  those  groupings,  the  issues  are  numbered  according  to  their  appearance  in  the  framework  document.   Unnumbered  items  are  additional  issues  that  do  not  appear  in  the  Framework  Document.   1.   Welcome  [No  Issues]  2.   Introduction  and  Agenda  Review  [No  Issues]  3.   Regulatory  Overview  [No  Issues]  4.   Energy  Conservation  Standards  Rulemaking   [No  Issues]  5.   Stakeholder  Comments  [No  Issues]   6.   Scope  of  Analysis  Additional  Item  DOE  welcomes  comments  ...

Subjects

Informations

Published by
Reads 30
Language English
Public
Meeting
for
Energy
Conservation
Standards
for
Battery
Chargers
and
External
Power
Supplies
July
16th,
2007
Washington,
DC
Issues
for
Stakeholder
Comment
The
U.S.
Department
of
Energy
(DOE)
published
a
document
on
its
website
in
conjunction
with
this
public
meeting:
Energy
Conservation
Standards
Rulemaking
Framework
Document
for
Battery
Chargers
and
External
Power
Supplies.
While
DOE
invites
comments
from
stakeholders
on
all
aspects
of
the
material
presented
in
this
document,
there
are
several
issues
in
particular
on
which
DOE
seeks
comment.
These
are
highlighted
in
issue
boxes
throughout
the
document
and
the
associated
public
meeting
presentation.
The
list
of
issues
to
be
presented
during
today’s
public
meeting
is
reproduced
below,
grouped
according
to
the
session
at
which
they
will
be
discussed.
Within
those
groupings,
the
issues
are
numbered
according
to
their
appearance
in
the
framework
document.
Unnumbered
items
are
additional
issues
that
do
not
appear
in
the
Framework
Document.
1.
Welcome
[No
Issues]
2.
Introduction
and
Agenda
Review
[No
Issues]
3.
Regulatory
Overview
[No
Issues]
4.
Energy
Conservation
Standards
Rulemaking
[No
Issues]
5.
Stakeholder
Comments
[No
Issues]
6.
Scope
of
Analysis
Additional
Item
DOE
welcomes
comments
on
the
scope
of
the
rulemaking.
Item
6
DOE
requests
comment
on
its
interpretation
of
the
definition
of
“detachable
battery,”
and
the
impact
on
EPSs
excluded
from
Class
A.
Page
1
of
5
Issues
for
Comment
Item
5
DOE
welcomes
comment
on
any
products
with
detachable
batteries
that
are
not
motor
operated,
the
wall
adapters
of
which
should
also
be
excluded
from
Class
A
EPS
standards.
Item
4
DOE
seeks
comments
on
including
DC-powered
battery
chargers
within
the
scope
of
the
BC
standards
rulemaking.
Item
13
DOE
is
seeking
input
on
these
and
any
additional
criteria
it
should
consider
in
determining
the
presence
of
wall
adapter
charge
control
functions.
Item
10
DOE
welcomes
comment
on
additional
functionality
provided
by
some
wall
adapters
for
battery
chargers
that
may
impede
their
ability
to
meet
the
same
standards
as
comparable
wall
adapters
for
other
applications
(considered
EPSs).
Item
9
DOE
seeks
comments
on
the
four
approaches
to
interpreting
the
BC
and
EPS
definitions
to
resolve
ambiguities
in
the
scope
of
the
analyses.
Item
11
DOE
welcomes
comment
on
the
manufacturer
burden
of
compliance
with
current
EISA
Class
A
EPS
standards
under
each
of
the
four
approaches
and
seeks
information
on
how
DOE
can
minimize
this
burden
while
ensuring
that
the
standards
are
being
met
consistently
by
the
industry.
Item
12
DOE
also
welcomes
comment
on
the
likely
manufacturer
burden
of
compliance
with
possible
future
EPS
and
BC
standards
under
each
of
the
four
approaches.
To
this
end,
DOE
also
seeks
information
from
the
industry
regarding
how
the
monitoring
of
compliance
with
these
standards
can
be
accomplished.
7.
Test
Procedures
Additional
Item
The
Department
invites
stakeholder
comments
on
changes
to
the
standby
and
off
mode
measurement
period.
Additional
Item
The
Department
invites
stakeholder
comments
on
changes
to
the
single-voltage
EPS
test
procedure
to
accommodate
USB-compliant
wall
adapters.
Additional
Item
The
Department
invites
stakeholder
comments
on
the
above
changes
to
the
previously
proposed
multiple-voltage
EPS
test
procedure.
Item
22
DOE
seeks
comments
on
how
DOE
should
amend
its
BC
test
procedure
to
measure
energy
consumption
in
active
mode.
Additional
Item
The
Department
invites
stakeholder
comments
on
directly
measuring
charger
output
energy
versus
battery
output
energy.
Additional
Item
The
Department
invites
stakeholder
comments
on
categorizing
BC
usage
profiles
using
capacity
characteristics.
Additional
Item
The
Department
invites
stakeholder
comments
on
shortening
of
active
and
maintenance
mode
testing
periods,
in
particular
regarding
typical
charging
times
for
consumer
products
that
use
rechargeable
batteries.
Additional
Item
The
Department
invites
stakeholder
comments
on
representative
depths-of-discharge
for
common
end-use
consumer
product
applications.
Page
2
of
5
Issues
for
Comment
8.
Market
Assessment
Item
56,
57
DOE
welcomes
comments
on
its
lifetime
estimates
and
data
for
all
applications
that
use
EPSs
and
BCs.
Item
17
DOE
seeks
comments
and
input
on
BC
and
EPS
shipments.
Additional
Item
DOE
seeks
data
on
the
distribution
of
BC
and
EPS
efficiency
across
the
market.
Additional
Item
DOE
seeks
comment
on
drivers
of
BC
and
EPS
efficiency,
such
as
technological
advances,
consumer
demands
for
portability,
or
international
agreements
and
standards.
9.
Product
Price
Determination
Item
52
DOE
seeks
comments
on
the
methodology
for
calculating
the
product
price
for
BCs
and
EPSs,
including
assumptions
about
the
percent
of
shipments
passing
through
each
distribution
channel
and
the
markups
associated
with
each
channel.
10.
Energy
Use
and
End
Use
Load
Characterization
Item
46
DOE
requests
comments
on
the
use
of
24-hour
charge
cycles
for
estimating
energy
consumption
for
BCs
in
active
mode.
Additional
Item
DOE
seeks
input
on
methods
for
separating
active
mode
time
from
maintenance
mode
time.
Item
45
DOE
seeks
alternate
sources,
databases
or
methodologies
with
which
to
develop
BC
usage
profiles.
Additional
Item
DOE
requests
comments
on
its
working
assumption
that
the
highest
active
mode
application
state
requires
80
percent
of
nameplate
output
power
and
that
the
lowest
active
mode
application
state
requires
15
percent
of
nameplate
output
power.
Additional
Item
DOE
requests
alternative
sources
for
application
state
loading
points.
Item
50
DOE
requests
comments
on
its
proposed
methodology
for
calculating
energy
consumption
at
output
levels
below
25
percent
of
nameplate
output
power.
11.
Technology
Assessment
Additional
Item
DOE
seeks
comment
on
the
above
impacts
of
energy
type,
capacity,
and
performance-related
features
on
topology.
Item
23
DOE
seeks
comments
on
BC
product
class
divisions,
including
whether
battery
voltage
is
the
appropriate
product
classification
criterion,
and/or
whether
DOE
should
take
into
account
other
factors,
such
as
charge
rate,
battery
capacity,
or
battery
chemistry.
Page
3
of
5
Issues
for
Comment
Item
26
DOE
seeks
comments
on
how
to
consider
output
voltage
in
developing
product
classes,
and
how
the
low-voltage
division
should
vary
with
EPS
output
power.
Item
27
DOE
seeks
comments
on
the
possible
approaches
discussed
concerning
EPS
product
classes,
and
invites
interested
parties
to
propose
alternative
approaches
and/or
other
factors
DOE
should
consider
in
developing
product
classes
for
the
preliminary
analyses
Item
30
DOE
seeks
comments
on
the
preliminary
technology
options
identified
in
this
section
and
whether
there
are
other
technology
options
it
should
consider.
12.
Screening
Analysis
Item
31
DOE
seeks
comments
on
how
the
four
screening
criteria
might
apply
to
the
technology
options
discussed
in
section
3.7
in
the
Framework
Document,
as
well
as
any
additional
technology
option(s)
that
an
interested
party
recommends
to
DOE.
13.
Engineering
Analysis
Item
34
DOE
invites
comments
on
the
identification
and
selection
of
representative
product
classes
and
on
models
that
may
serve
as
good
representative
units
within
each
product
class.
DOE
also
seeks
comments
on
appropriate
scaling
relationships
among
product
classes
for
both
BCs
and
EPSs.
Item
35
DOE
seeks
comments
on
representative
product
classes
and
selection
of
representative
units
from
those
representative
product
classes.
Item
33
DOE
seeks
recommendations
on
possible
candidate
standard
levels
to
use
when
analyzing
EPSs
and
BCs.
Item
38
DOE
seeks
comments
on
methods
for
normalizing
cost
and
efficiency
data
for
EPSs
with
output
power
and
output
voltage
that
differ
from
those
of
the
representative
units.
Item
37
DOE
invites
manufacturers
to
work
with
DOE
in
the
interviews
to
help
develop
aggregated
curves
of
manufacturer
selling
price
versus
efficiency
for
the
various
representative
units.
Item
36
DOE
seeks
comments
on
the
scaling
of
findings
from
representative
product
classes
to
other
product
classes
that
DOE
may
not
explicitly
analyze.
14.
Preliminary
Manufacturer
Impact
Analysis
[No
Issues]
Page
4
of
5
Issues
for
Comment
15.
Life-Cycle
Cost
Analysis
Item
53
DOE
seeks
comments
on
its
intention
to
focus
its
preliminary
LCC
analysis
on
the
residential
sector,
and
not
the
commercial
or
industrial
sectors
Item
54
DOE
seeks
comments
on
the
use
of
the
EIA
national
average
electricity
price
and
the
AEO
forecast
of
electricity
prices
over
the
analysis
period.
16.
National
Impact
Analysis
[No
Issues]
17.
Next
Steps
and
Closing
Remarks
[No
Issues]
Page
5
of
5
)