Design & Engineering Services

Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I

ET 03.03 Final Report

D104259 - One Week Power Consumption

with Power Management without Power Management

200.00

180.00

160.00

140.00

120.00

100.00

80.00 Power (Watts)

60.00

40.00

20.00

0.00 2:35 PM 2:35 PM 7:30 PM 3:30 PM 8:30 PM 4:30 PM 9:30 PM 1:30 4:35 PM 4:35 PM 9:35 PM 1:35 PM 6:35 PM 5:30 5:35 PM 5:35 4:35 AM 4:35 AM 9:35 AM 5:30 AM 1:30 AM 6:30 AM 2:30 AM 7:30 AM 3:30 AM 8:30 2:35 AM 2:35 AM 7:35 AM 3:35 AM 8:35 11:35 PM 12:30 PM PM 10:30 12:35 PM 12:35 10:35 PM 12:30 AM AM 10:30 11:30 AM

Prepared by:

Leonel P. Campoy Design & Engineering Services Group Customer Service Business Unit Southern California Edison Company

June 1, 2009

Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Acknowledgements Southern California Edison’s (SCE) Design & Engineering Services (D&ES) group is responsible for this evaluation project. The project was conducted as part of the SCE Emerging Technology program under internal project number ET 03.03. D&ES Project Manager Leonel P. Campoy conducted this technology assessment project with technical support from Verdiem Corporation and the assistance and collaboration of individuals within the SCE Information Technology (IT) Department and the Design & Engineering Services group.

For more information regarding this project, contact [email protected].

Disclaimer This report was prepared by Southern California Edison and funded by California utility customers under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission. Reproduction or distribution of the whole or any part of the contents of this document without the express written permission of SCE is prohibited. This work was performed with reasonable care and in accordance with professional standards. However, neither SCE nor any entity performing the work pursuant to SCE’s authority make any warranty or representation, expressed or implied, with regard to this report, the merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose of the results of the work, or any analyses, or conclusions contained in this report. The results reflected in the work are generally representative of operating conditions; however, the results in any other situation may vary depending upon particular operating conditions.

Southern California Edison Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ACPI Advanced Configuration and Power Interface

APM Advanced Power Management

BIOS Basic Input-Output System

CRT Cathode Ray Tube

CTZ California Thermal Zones

DEER California Database for Energy Efficiency Resources

EIA Energy Information Administration

EUL Effective Useful Life

IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers

LAN Local Area Network

LCD Liquid Crystal Display

LBNL Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

MMC Microsoft Management Console

NEEA Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance

PC Personal Computer

PCI Peripheral Component

SID Security Identification

USB Universal Serial Bus

Quad Unit of energy equal to one quadrillion (1015) British thermal units (BTU). The quad is a convenient unit for describing national and world energy resources.

EPA Environmental Protection Agency kWh kilowatthour

Southern California Edison Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

FIGURES

Figure 1 Example Power Draw of a Personal Computer With and Without Power Management Enabled...... 2 Figure 2 EIA Forecast of Office Personal Computer Energy Use ...... 3 Figure 3 Mean Computer On-time Before and After Application of Reminder Stickers ...... 4 Figure 4 External PC Power Management Hardware ...... 5 Figure 5 Mean Computer On-time Before and After Application of Power Management Hardware ...... 6 Figure 6 Motion Sensor Controlled Power Strip ...... 6 Figure 7 PC Power Management Related Specifications Timeline ...... 7 Figure 8 Windows XP Power Options Properties Dialog Box ...... 12 Figure 9 Surveyor Modified Power Options Properties Dialog Box ...... 12 Figure 10 Surveyor Admin Tool Examples ...... 13 Figure 11 Group Profile and Profile Scheme Dialog Boxes ...... 14 Figure 12 Surveyor Reporting Tool...... 14 Figure 13 Surveyor Report Default Assumptions Dialog Box...... 15 Figure 14 Consumption Report Parameters...... 15 Figure 15 Example Surveyor Consumption Report, Page 1...... 16 Figure 16 Example Surveyor Report, Page 2...... 16 Figure 17 Example Surveyor Report, Page 3...... 17 Figure 18 Example Surveyor Report, Page 4...... 17 Figure 19 Surveyor Evaluation Process ...... 18 Figure 20 Power Measurement Setup ...... 19 Figure 21 Docked Laptop and Monitor Power Measurements ...... 20 Figure 22 GX240 Desktop and Monitor Power Measurements ...... 20 Figure 23 GX200 Desktop and Monitor Power Measurements ...... 21 Figure 24 GX1 Desktop and Monitor Power Measurements...... 21 Figure 25 Power Quality Logger Model PQL 120 ...... 23 Figure 26 Comparisons of Fluke 43B DMM and PQL 120 Power Quality Logger Power Measurements ...... 24 Figure 27 Comparison of Surveyor and Logger Average Hourly Demand for one Workstation...... 25 Figure 28 One-Minute Average Demand Logger Data: Noon Hour ...... 26 Figure 29 Networked Computer and Display Average 15-Minute Demand...... 27 Figure 30 Logger Data for Surveyor Client 14 ...... 30 Figure 31 Surveyor Report for 4-day Comparison Using Group Average Power State Values ...... 31 Figure 32 Phase I Logger Baseline and Managed Workstation Data ...... 33 Figure 33 Small Group Average Weekly Demand Profiles Based on 15-Minute Logger Data...... 34 Figure 34 Small Group Baseline Peak Demand Estimate ...... 35 Figure 35 Surveyor Client 14 Baseline Logger Data ...... 38

Southern California Edison Page i Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

TABLES

Table 1 Computers and Monitors Used in the Laboratory Power Demand Measurements...... 19 Table 2 Power Measurements Comparison Between a Fluke 43B DMM and a PQL 120 Power Quality Logger ...... 24 Table 3 Average Power Values Used in the Surveyor Report for the Single Workstation Accuracy Test ...... 25 Table 4 Single Workstation Average Hourly Demand Accuracy Test ...... 26 Table 5 Average Peak Demand for the Single Workstation Accuracy Test ...... 27 Table 6 Phase I Evaluation Workstations ...... 28 Table 7 Phase I Evaluation: Detailed Surveyor and Logger Data Comparison ...... 29 Table 8 Surveyor Default Assumptions...... 32 Table 9 Phase I Logger and Surveyor Measurement Error Estimates...... 32 Table 10 Measurement Error Using Phase I Corrected Surveyor Client Data ...... 33 Table 11 Small Group Logger Results: Average Impacts per Workstation...... 36 Table 12 Small Group Evaluation Logger and Surveyor Data Comparisons: Baseline Case ...... 37 Table 13 Small Group Evaluation Logger and Surveyor Data Comparisons: Monitors Only Case...... 37 Table 14 Small Group Evaluation Logger and Surveyor Data Comparisons: Evening Hibernate Case...... 38 Table 15 Small Group Evaluation: Surveyor Estimated Energy Usage and Savings ...... 39 Table 16 Differences in Power State Hours Between Surveyor and Logger Data ...... 40 Table 17 Small Group Evaluation Surveyor Corrected Data Comparisons: Baseline Case ...... 41 Table 18 Small Group Evaluation Surveyor Corrected Data: Monitors Only Case...... 41 Table 19 Small Group Evaluation Surveyor Corrected Data: Evening Hibernate Case ...... 42 Table 20 Small Group Evaluation: Surveyor Estimates Corrected With Logger Data ...... 42 Table 21 Impacts of Single Set Averages for the Baseline Case ...... 43 Table 22 Impacts of Single Set Averages for the Monitors Only Case...... 43 Table 23 Impacts of Single Set Averages for the Evening Hibernate Case ...... 43

Southern California Edison Page ii Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Table 24 Small Group Evaluation: Surveyor Results Based on Individual Workstation Data...... 43 Table 25 Summary Comparison of the Small Group Evaluation Results ...... 45

Southern California Edison Page iii Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ______1

INTRODUCTION ______2

BACKGROUND ______3 A Manual Attempt at PC Power Management ...... 4 Bridge Technologies: External Hardware Approaches ...... 5 Built-in Power Management ...... 7

ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES ______9

PRODUCT EVALUATED ______11 Surveyor Network Energy Manager ...... 11

EVALUATIONS AND RESULTS______18 Laboratory Power Measurements ...... 19 Data Accuracy for a Single Workstation ...... 25 Phase I Evaluation: Small Group Tests ...... 28 Four-Day Energy Use Comparisons ...... 28 Small Group Tests ...... 33 Correcting the Surveyor State Data ...... 39 Using Workstation Specific Data ...... 42 IT Preliminary Evaluation and Acceptance ...... 44

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ______45

APPENDICES ______47 Appendix A. Additional Phase I Workstation Logger Charts...... 47 Appendix B. Phase I Logger Detailed Data Analysis...... 52

REFERENCES ______72

Southern California Edison Page iv Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

omputer workstations represent almost 6% of the electricity consumed in the commercial building sector. Computer energy usage is among the fastest growing end uses within the office sector. According to the U. S. Energy Information CC Administration (EIA), office personal computer (PC) energy usage in 2006 stood at 0.68 Quads. The EIA projects that by 2015, office computer energy consumption will reach 0.86 Quads, a 26% increase. In addition, the majority of office workstations are connected to networks that share printers, databases, documents and folders, internet access, etc. Essentially, all office PCs and monitors in use today comply with the voluntary Energy Star guidelines, i.e., they are capable of entering low-power modes. However, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) found during on-site audits of commercial buildings that only 6% of desktop computers that were left turned-on after normal working hours had their power management options enabled. The surveys also found that close to 25% of monitors that were on did not have their power management options enabled. Since many workstations are idle during a portion of normal office hours, the annual energy savings and peak demand reduction potential from workstation power management enforcement is significant. This Emerging Technology Assessment project evaluates the use of a client-server software application to manage the power option settings of networked Windows-based computers. This report presents the project’s Phase I results and the framework developed to measure the accuracy of the evaluated software solution: Surveyor Network Energy Manager. The Phase I evaluation used a group of ten workstations from a single workgroup. The energy usage was recorded, at 15-minute intervals, using a power quality datalogger on each workstation. Based on the logger data, the Surveyor enforced computer monitor sleep mode, after 20 minutes of inactivity, and yielded a 32% reduction in workstation annual energy usage. The addition of an evening computer hibernation option increased the annual energy usage reduction to 52%. Also, average peak demand reductions close to 11% and 19%, respectively, were observed. However, the Phase I Small Group evaluation’s average demand profiles cast doubts on the reliability of the peak demand reduction results. The Phase II Large Group evaluation report better addresses the peak demand reduction issue. In addition to managing the power option settings over a network, the Surveyor software records each workstation’s usage in a central database. Using the database, the Surveyor reporting tool estimates the total energy consumption of the managed workstations. The Phase I evaluation compared the Surveyor energy consumption estimates to those obtained through logger measurements, and created a procedure to determine the software tool’s measurement error. During Phase I testing, known limitations to the software’s ability to discern the correct computer monitor power mode and a computer user setting back their workstation system date, necessitated manual corrections to the cumulative power state hours Surveyor recorded. After these issues were corrected, the annual energy usage and savings estimates based on the Surveyor reporting tool were acceptable. The Phase I assessment results cannot be generalized due to several reasons centered around sample size, representative workstation configurations, possible user baseline bias, and security identifier (SID) parsing problems with Surveyor version 1.4. The SID parsing issues were resolved with Surveyor version 2.1 for the Phase II assessment project. The Phase I assessment recommends several improvements, some of which are part of the current Surveyor releases (Version 5.2 as of this writing). The foremost recommendation is that the default power mode demand values in the Surveyor reporting tool are not used to estimate savings. Only a set of averages that closely reflects the actual workstations power draws should be used to estimate the annual energy savings.

Southern California Edison Page 1 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

INTRODUCTION

Office equipment such as PCs, monitors, printers, fax machines, copiers, scanners, and multi-function devices are common in today’s office environment, and represent a significant portion of the electricity consumed in the commercial sector. Since the late 1990s, most manufacturers have incorporated low-power modes into their products that can save significant amounts of electricity when the equipment is idle. But for these savings to accrue, the power management options must be enabled. This is particularly true in regards to personal computers. Figure 1 illustrates the dramatic potential for energy savings. The chart shows the electric demand, recorded using a power quality datalogger, of a typical, 2003-vintage, networked Windows-based desktop computer and a 17” cathode ray tube (CRT) monitor left on continuously during the course of a full work week and weekend. The recorded energy consumption was over 26.7 kWh.

One Week Power Consumption

with Power Management without Power Management

200.00

180.00

160.00

140.00

120.00

100.00

80.00 Power (Watts)

60.00

40.00

20.00

0.00 2:35 PM 7:30 PM 3:30 PM 8:30 PM 4:30 PM 9:30 PM 1:30 PM 4:35 PM 9:35 PM 1:35 PM 6:35 PM 5:30 PM 5:35 PM 4:35 AM 9:35 AM 5:30 AM 1:30 AM 6:30 AM 2:30 AM 7:30 AM 3:30 AM 8:30 AM 2:35 AM 7:35 AM 3:35 AM 8:35 AM 11:35 PM 12:30 PM 10:30 PM 12:35 PM 10:35 PM 12:30 AM 10:30 AM 11:30 AM

FIGURE 1 EXAMPLE POWER DRAW OF A PERSONAL COMPUTER WITH AND WITHOUT POWER MANAGEMENT ENABLED

The same computer and monitor with power management enabled consumed only slightly more than 5.3 kWh over the course of the following week: an 80% decrease in direct energy consumption. When also considering the amount of heat computer equipment releases into an air-conditioned office environment, additional indirect energy savings accrue due to the reduced cooling loads. Despite these advantages, many companies fail to enable the complete set of available power management options, in particular for those computers linked into an office computer network. The overall assessment project reviews not only the potential energy savings and demand reduction opportunities in typical office environments, but also the perceived market barriers and misconceptions surrounding the technology and its implementation.

Southern California Edison Page 2 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

BACKGROUND

When they were first adopted in the early 1980’s, office PCs were shared tools among employees and the ratio of computers to employees was significantly less than one, and there were no PC networks. By 2003, according to one survey, the ratio of office computers to office employees was well over one at many office sites.1 Hence, electrical energy use for office computer equipment has grown dramatically. By 1992, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) estimated that office equipment had grown between 7% and 8% for five to ten years.2 EPRI estimated that in 1990, computers and monitors used close to 5% of the commercial sector electrical energy usage.3 By one estimate, in 1992 there was close to 35 million desktop computers in use.4 Also in 1992, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) launched the voluntary Energy Star program. The program’s primary objective is to reduce air pollution by labeling energy efficient products, encouraging a switch to more energy efficient products, and reducing the amount of emissions from power plants. To qualify for the Energy Star label, computers and monitors must be capable of entering low power states after a period of inactivity, and either meet or exceed the maximum power requirements prescribed for sleep, standby, and idle modes. The EPA launched the initial program with eight charter manufacturing partners.5 Arthur D. Little, Inc. in 2002, now TIAX, indicated that by the year 2000 well over 71 million computers were in use in offices across the United States.6 In 2001, the EIA projected that office computer energy use would grow 4.1% annually. The 2008 EIA forecast indicates that office personal computers used close to 0.56 Quads in 2005 and about 0.68 Quads in 2006, with growth projected at an annual rate of 1.9% through 2030.7 Figure 2 illustrates the EIA forecast for office PC energy usage through 2030.8

Total Enegy Consumption of Office Personal Computer Equipment (Source: EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2008, Table A5)

1.2 1.08 1.02 1.0 0.93 0.86 0.80 0.8 0.68

0.6 0.56

0.4

Energy Consumption (Quads) Consumption Energy 0.2

0.0

15 2005 2006 2010 20 2020 2025 2030 Year

FIGURE 2 EIA FORECAST OF OFFICE PERSONAL COMPUTER ENERGY USE

Although there are significant differences in the approaches used by different groups to estimate office computers total energy usage, for example some estimates include air

Southern California Edison Page 3 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03 conditioning impacts; it appears that the EPA’s Computer Energy Star program did indeed slow somewhat the growth of PC energy consumption. However, the mid 1990’s saw the introduction and rapid adoption of the internet, local area networks, and computers on the majority of office desks. Needless to say, office computers today represent a large proportion of the commercial building sector’s total energy consumption. The Energy Analysis Department at LBNL supports the Energy Star program. As part of that support, LBNL has conducted night-time surveys of office equipment in commercial buildings. The most recent survey results date back to 2003. The surveys collected information on the after-hours power state of computers, monitors, printers, copiers, scanners, fax machines, and multi-function devices.9 The survey included data on 1,683 computers in 12 commercial buildings in California (San Francisco), Georgia (Atlanta), and Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh). The buildings included offices, schools, and health care facilities. It is important to note that the goal of the LBNL study was not to create a statistically valid sample of office and miscellaneous equipment across commercial building types, but to better identify and categorize, by numbers and types of units present, the equipment loads present in commercial buildings.10 LBNL found that Energy Star compliant office equipment had a large market share, yet the actual number of devices that enabled the power management (PM) options was low. The survey found that of those desktop computers that were powered on after-hours, only 6% had PM options enabled, while respectively, 71% and 75% of CRT and Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) monitors that were on after-hours had PM options enabled. Further, the most recent report on the savings estimates for the Energy Star program11 states that “office computers spend approximately 70% of the annual operating time in idle mode compared to only 4% of the annual operating hours in sleep mode.” Hence, the potential for energy savings through effective office PC power management are significant.

A MANUAL ATTEMPT AT PC POWER MANAGEMENT Since the early 1990’s, prior to today’s built-in power management options in computers and monitors, it was recognized that power management for personal computers represented cost-effective electricity savings for utilities and customers. One early test effort conducted circa 1992 by the National Research Council of Canada (NRCC) evaluated the effectiveness of an information campaign using reminder stickers in government offices.12 Figure 3 shows the “before” and “after” results from the test. Although initially successful, user behavior and savings did not persist throughout the entire test period.

NRCC Turn-off Reminder Test  Conducted on 33 computers at one site, both PC and Mac.  Stickers placed either on or near computers urged users to switch off machines when not in use.  Initial Average Computer Energy Savings: 14%.  Initial Average Computer Peak Demand Reduction: 3%.  Savings disappeared by week seven.

FIGURE 3 MEAN COMPUTER ON-TIME BEFORE AND AFTER APPLICATION OF REMINDER STICKERS

Southern California Edison Page 4 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

BRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES: EXTERNAL HARDWARE APPROACHES Sleep and standby modes first appeared in laptop and notebook computers as a means to extend battery life. In the early 1990’s, desktop computers and monitors built without power management options prevailed in the office place, and newer hardware with power management innovations were expected to take between five to ten years to penetrate the market fully.13 There were only two basic options available to reduce the energy usage of the older stock of hardware: either turn them off manually, or install after-market, external devices that would turn them off automatically. As the NRCC “sticker reminder” evaluation test demonstrated, shown in Figure 3, savings based on a manual turn-off, user behavior approach, lacked persistence. Thus, retrofit products were seen as an important bridge to power management for existing office computers and monitors until the advent of energy saving features in new office equipment. Figure 4 shows two products from the early 1990’s designed to automatically turn off computers and monitors when idle.

FIGURE 4 EXTERNAL PC POWER MANAGEMENT HARDWARE

The researchers at NRCC also conducted a test using retrofit hardware of the type seen on the left in Figure 4.14 The hardware was installed on 16 office computers and monitored for eight weeks with an inactivity turn-off of 60 minutes. In addition, the option to not switch off the computer if a software program was open was enabled. The power management hardware test reduced the average computer energy consumption by 63% along with an average 41% peak power demand reduction. The computer monitors average energy consumption was reduced by 82%. Figure 5 illustrates the “before’ and “after” mean computer on-times obtained during the test. As Figure 5 attests, the savings persisted for the entire course of the evaluation.

Southern California Edison Page 5 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

NRCC External Power Management Hardware Test  Inactivity Turn-off Delay set to 60-minutes for computers and 15-minutes for monitors  Users allowed to change settings  No turn-off if an application open  Average Computer Energy Savings: 63%  Average Computer Peak Demand Reduction: 41%  Average Computer Monitor Energy Savings: 82%

FIGURE 5 MEAN COMPUTER ON-TIME BEFORE AND AFTER APPLICATION OF POWER MANAGEMENT HARDWARE

As shown in Figure 4, an optional infrared motion sensor could be plugged into the device to provide occupancy control to one of the power outlets. A variety of power strips with outlets controlled by occupancy sensors are available today. Figure 6 shows one example of a power strip with both controlled and uncontrolled outlets. The California Database for Energy Efficiency Resources (DEER) contains an efficiency measure for electrical plug loads based on an occupancy sensor-controlled power strip. The DEER provides a complete set of “deemed” savings values, effective useful life and costs for the “plug load sensor” measure.15,16

DEER Plug Load Sensor Measure The DEER plug load sensor measure (D03-857) assumes control of 50 Watts of task lighting and a computer monitor. A weighted average demand of 40 Watts is assumed for the computer monitor, representing both CRT and LCD screens, and the likelihood that the monitor may be in a low power sleep mode when the occupancy sensor turns off power to the controlled plug loads. The computer monitor assumptions are based on the 2003 office equipment surveys conducted by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.1 Without the sensor control, equipment is assumed on 2,500 hours/year, and left on 20% of the time when the occupant leaves for evenings or weekends for a total of 3,700 hours/year. The sensor is assumed to turn off the equipment 2,450 hours/year. The measure was last updated in 2004 and a calculation error, uncovered since, has yet to be corrected; as well as the near complete switch over to LCD monitors in the office sector.

FIGURE 6 MOTION SENSOR CONTROLLED POWER STRIP

The retail price for the external power management hardware in 1992 ranged from $119 to $358 per computer depending on selected options.17 At that time, Ontario Hydro offered a $60 energy conservation rebate for installing these devices. These high price points, together with the anticipated power management capabilities of newer computers and monitors that met the initial Energy Star guidelines, contributed to the poor market

Southern California Edison Page 6 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03 penetration of the bridge technologies. In addition, certain practical limitations could not be satisfactorily addressed with the state of the technologies and efficiency program uncertainties at that time, such as:18  Delays and loss of productivity as users waited for computers to reboot, monitors or printers to warm up, restart times needed to be seconds,  Turn offs before an open file could be saved could cause serious loss of data,  Networked computers powered off at the wrong time preventing system backup operations and other network problems,  To avoid potential network problems, many suggested that the safest strategy would shut-down only computer monitors and printers,  Inflexibility of the user-programmable power management features, and  Concern over the persistence of savings from measures that might be reprogrammed, disconnected, or disabled by the user.

BUILT-IN POWER MANAGEMENT The computer industry is not monolithic. There are a myriad of system designers, integrators, peripheral designers, operating system programmers, device driver programmers, application software programmers, etc. that must coordinate the hardware and software designs correctly for PC power management to actually function. Voluntary industry specifications are used to ensure that the diverse parts can actually work together as intended. Figure 7 traces the evolution of the specifications that define and affect the development of PC power management, in particular the Advanced Power Management (APM) and the Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) specifications.19

FIGURE 7 PC POWER MANAGEMENT RELATED SPECIFICATIONS TIMELINE

The first APM specification and technology was created in 1992 as a power management technology for laptop computers. The intent was to coordinate between the computer’s Basic Input-Output System (BIOS) hardware and the operating system.20 In 1993, the APM specification addressed the voluntary Energy Star guidelines. Power management features aimed specifically to desktop computers were added under APM version 1.2 in 1996. Systems based on the APM specification monitored the standard hardware interfaces for activity, including the keyboard and mouse, but could not monitor software and interfaces not on the computer motherboard.

Southern California Edison Page 7 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

The APM specification lacked the ability to ensure that power state changes were robust and reliable. Users had to reboot their computers to access the BIOS setup program to change power management settings. In addition, many features were optional such as notifying the operating system before entering suspend mode. Failure to notify the operating system left systems unable to prevent inappropriate state changes and unable to recover after full operation was restored. These problems, along with some implementations that simply failed to work, led many computer users and corporate Information Technology (IT) departments to not enable power management functions as a matter of policy. The failures of the APM specification taught the industry what was needed to get PC power management right. The lessons learned lead to the creation of the ACPI specification in 1997. There are four key improvements in the ACPI specification:21  All components in the system can be power managed,  The operating system makes all the power management decisions,  The BIOS has no executable power management code, and  A standard approach describes the power management capabilities. The ACPI specification gives the computer operating system the responsibility for power management with support from the BIOS hardware and device drivers. Only the operating system can collect information from both software applications and active devices in use. With the ACPI specification, systems designers can reduce power draw to less than three watts in suspend mode and maintain communication capabilities. Power draw could be reduced to near zero with the new “save-to-disk” hibernation state. The first computer system based on the specification was demonstrated in 1997. Today, essentially all PCs implement the ACPI specification.22 In addition, the ACPI specification makes it possible for local area network (LAN) adapters, modems, and other devices to wake a computer from its sleep state. The Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) specification defines the requirements for attaching peripherals to a computer motherboard. In 1999, revision 2.2 of the PCI specification simplified the system integration and eliminated the need for cables from a network adapter card to the motherboard to enable “Wake-on-LAN” functionality. Together, the PCI power management specification and the ACPI specification allow the operating system going through its wake up sequence to determine the source of the wake-up event while enumerating the cards on the bus. Lastly, specifications and standards such as the Universal Serial Bus (USB) specification and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) 1394 standard have extended power management capabilities outside the computer system box to devices like cameras, hard drives, speakers, etc.23 The ACPI specification continues to evolve and improve. Among the additions that appeared under Revision 3.0, dated September 2004, was support for: multiple CPUs, the PCI Express bus, ambient light sensor and user presence devices, etc.24 The current ACPI specification is Revision 3.0b, dated October 10, 2006, and Revision 4.0 is under development.

Southern California Edison Page 8 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES

This Emerging Technology Assessment project on network-wide approaches to PC power management seeks to answer several specific questions:  How much electrical energy can be saved during the normal operation of a networked office computer using PC power management?  Is there any peak electrical demand reduction?  How much does it cost?  What are the impacts on existing systems, facilities, and users?  Can you measure the impacts?, and  How long will the savings last? The overall assessment project addresses these and other questions from three main perspectives:  The viewpoint of an IT organization that must maintain and ensure the reliable operation of the network, computers, and software applications for a company;  The viewpoint of office workers that must rely on their networked computers to accomplish their tasks and conduct the company’s business; and  The viewpoint of an Energy Efficiency (EE) Program that must know, with a large degree of certainty, that any energy savings and peak demand reduction predictions for a measure are reliable. In addition, due to logistics and other constraints, the assessment is divided into two parts:  Phase I encompasses testing using a small group of workstations in a single SCE workgroup and facility, and the development of an analytical approach, and  Phase II expands the evaluation to a large number of workstations across multiple SCE workgroups and facilities, and the generalization of the overall results. With the above points in mind, the following issues are considered during either the Phase I or Phase II evaluations:  From the IT perspective, this assessment considers issues regarding: . Compatibility and stability with existing computer hardware and corporate software applications (Phases I and II), . Computer resource and configuration requirements (Phases I and II), . Large scale deployment requirements (Phase II), . Ongoing maintenance and interface requirements between IT administrators and the Energy Manager of the power management application (Phase II), . Impacts on IT tasks such as security and application updates pushed across a network (Phases I and II), and . Any potential benefits that may accrue to a company and its IT organization (Phase II).  From the EE Program perspective, this assessment aims to: . Demonstrate that networked PC power management applications work (Phases I and II),

Southern California Edison Page 9 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

. Determine the accuracy of the PC power management application’s reported annual energy consumption estimates (Phases I and II), . Determine the accuracy of the application’s average demand estimates (Phases I and II), . Estimate the average peak demand reduction and annual energy savings for a large office computer network (Phase II), . Create an average usage profile for office computer networks (Phase II), . Project the impacts due to newer computers, LCD flat-screens, and workstations with multiple monitors (Phase II), . Estimate the Effective Useful Life (EUL) for networked PC power management applications (Phase II), . Determine the overall implementation and incremental measure costs (Phase II), . Estimate the potential annual energy savings and peak demand reduction in California (Phase II), . Review the existing and perceived market barriers (Phase II), and . Compare this assessment’s findings to what other studies have found and concluded about this measure (Phase II). From the computer user perspective, this assessment addresses productivity impacts and general acceptance through anecdotal participant feedback and surveys during Phase II. Also during Phase II, the assessment reviews current PC power management research and advances within the computer industry and their potential impact.

Southern California Edison Page 10 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

PRODUCT EVALUATED

Following the widespread adoption of computers and monitors compliant with the voluntary Energy Star guidelines, a number of software products emerged to help implement PC power management across networks. These network-centric solutions vary from logon scripts to sophisticated software applications, from “freeware” available either on the Energy Star website (http://www.energystar.gov), or free add-ons for commercial network asset management software, to specific solutions for commercial license. The capabilities of this diverse group of applications vary from only enforcing group policies on Windows-based computers to complete PC power management solutions. This assessment project tested a commercial product called Surveyor Network Energy Manager from Verdiem Corporation (http://www.verdiem.com). The tests were conducted on SCE’s computer network. Surveyor is a client-server software application designed as a complete PC power management network solution for Windows-based computers. The Surveyor software allows you to monitor, measure, manage, and report on the electrical energy consumption and power demand of computers across the network. The Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) recognized the software’s potential and supported its development. The NEEA and Verdiem formed a public/private partnership in 2001 to help commercialize the product.25 During the course of the overall assessment project, two versions of the software were tested:  In Phase I: Version 1.4 released in November 2002. This version of Surveyor relied on the Microsoft Access database program as the central data repository for information collected from network client PCs, and for creating reports; and  In Phase II: Versions 2.1 and 2.2 released in late 2003. The software continued to rely on Microsoft Access for reports. However, the central data repository now relied on SQL server support, an essential requirement for the data needs of large enterprises. Also, Version 2.1 introduced average hourly power demand reports. Also, the Phase II report reviews the improvements in the current release of the Surveyor software, version 5.2, within the context of the overall assessment results. The software features described in this section are limited to the versions tested during the Phase I and II evaluations.

SURVEYOR NETWORK ENERGY MANAGER The Surveyor Network Energy Manager is a client-server application that monitors and records computer usage over a network. The system records the date and time of power state changes for each individual computer tracked in its central database, and uses this information to estimate electricity usage. Surveyor can set and manage the power options of networked Windows-based PCs on a schedule that an organization customizes to its needs. The values set in each computer’s Power Options Properties tell the operating system the amount of time a computer can be idle before changing power states. Figure 8 shows an example of the Power Options Properties dialog box for Windows XP. The Surveyor software manages the Windows Power Options Properties from a central server application, and uses a small client application on each computer to collect and communicate with the server, and enforce the power option settings. The Surveyor client software runs as a service and adds a tab to the Power Options Properties dialog box. Figure 9 shows the additions to the dialog box. The Surveyor tab summarizes the detailed schedule and power settings assigned to the particular computer in the server application.

Southern California Edison Page 11 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Windows Power Options The Power Options Properties dialog box can be accessed from the Control Panel by clicking on the Windows Start button.  Select on the “Appearance and Themes” category, and click on the Display icon.  When the Display Properties dialog box appears, select the Screen Saver tab.  The Power button is located near the bottom right hand side of the dialog box. Click it.  The Power Options Properties dialog box appears.  Depending on the available hardware device drivers and services on specific PCs, extra tabs may or may not appear such as UPS, Alarms, Power Meter, etc. The power option settings are saved in the operating system’s registry database.

FIGURE 8 WINDOWS XP POWER OPTIONS PROPERTIES DIALOG BOX

Notice the “Custom Scheme” column in the Schedule area and the disabled “Use Custom Scheme” check-box and drop-down list in Figure 9. When the Surveyor application’s administrator enables the Custom Schemes option in the server, individual computers are allowed to override their Surveyor group assigned Power Options Properties. The override is not automatic. The user has to place a check mark in the “Use Custom Scheme” check- box and select a new Power Setting from the drop-down list. The drop-down listing matches the list in the Power Schemes tab. Once selected, the user can customize the detailed settings in the Power Schemes tab.

Surveyor’s Flexible Options IT support often has to deal with many different operating systems in one network, forcing them to make allowances for machines that have varying degrees of power management. With Surveyor, groups can be built of PCs that have similar operating systems, to better synchronize their power options with the operating system’s capabilities. Windows 2000 and XP machines can be grouped to utilize their more stable low power states, while NT machines can be grouped to use a consistent standard shutdown schedule. PCs that don’t come out of hibernation well can be isolated in groups that neither hibernate nor suspend, but instead use a standard "shutdown schedule." Different user types can easily be sorted into different user groups.

FIGURE 9 SURVEYOR MODIFIED POWER OPTIONS PROPERTIES DIALOG BOX

Southern California Edison Page 12 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Surveyor is more than a PC “scheduled-shutdown” utility, although an organization can choose to use it as such. The Surveyor software neither chooses the power policies to enforce nor does it make decisions based on a complex set of business rules. These are set manually by an administrator using the Surveyor Administration Tool application (Admin Tool). The administrator is an individual, likely an IT staff employee, who has the authority and responsibility to configure and maintain the Surveyor application for the organization. This same individual may also act as the Energy Manager responsible for overseeing that the organization’s energy savings goals are met. This dual role can, at times, be at odds since the IT staff may be overburdened and have no direct responsibility to minimize operating energy usage and costs. This conflict is considered further in the Phase II assessment report. The Surveyor Admin Tool is a Microsoft Management Console (MMC) application. All of Surveyor’s administration features are accessed through the Admin Tool. Any network workstation with user policy rights to the MMC can host both the server and the Admin Tool applications. The Admin Tool uses a “tree” paradigm to allow the administrator to create “Group” nodes to organize the client computers. Groups are intended to simplify the overall administration by allowing one set of power management options to apply to a designated set of client computers. Figure 10 shows the Surveyor Admin Tool with some sample groups. Using the Admin Tool, client computers can be grouped by common factors either as:  Computers in a specific building,  Computers in a specific department,  Computers for specific user groups, e.g., administrators, students, etc.  Computers with common operating systems, e.g., Windows 2000/XP, etc.  Computer users with specific work schedules, or  Any other unique criteria.

FIGURE 10 SURVEYOR ADMIN TOOL EXAMPLES

Each group’s settings are easily set and modified through the Admin Tool. Figure 11 shows the dialog boxes used in the Admin Tool to set the Group Profiles, Schedules and Power Schemes for each unique group node.

Southern California Edison Page 13 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

FIGURE 11 GROUP PROFILE AND PROFILE SCHEME DIALOG BOXES

Client computers can be easily moved between groups using “drag and drop.” A client computer can only belong to one group node at a time. When a group is selected in the Admin Tool tree, the group’s clients are displayed in the list pane along with selected client computer attributes. A more detailed and in-depth description of the software’s capabilities and security attributes can be found in the Surveyor Administrator’s Guide.26 The Surveyor software includes a Report Tool that is a Microsoft Access application. This application can run from any workstation that can access the Surveyor central data repository. With the Report Tool, energy consumption reports can incorporate either all computers on the server, a selected group, or an individual computer. Figure 12 shows the Surveyor Report Tool.

Surveyor Consumption Reports The reporting tool is a Microsoft Access application. Starting with version 2, the application runs on any workstation with authorized access to the central SQL database server. The application only provides the energy consumption for the selected workstations in the report and does not provide a direct estimate of the annual energy savings.

The annual energy savings estimates are derived manually using the estimates denoted as “Actual kWh.” The energy consumption for a Baseline period, where workstations are allowed to kept their existing power option settings, and a Managed period, where Power Schemes are enforced, are needed to estimate savings. Both of these periods should be of sufficient length to capture long-term usage patterns, and may need to be normalized if the periods are not of the same duration. The reporting tool’s “Monthly” and “Yearly” forecasts do not account for scheduled breaks such as vacations, etc.

FIGURE 12 SURVEYOR REPORTING TOOL

Southern California Edison Page 14 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

The Report Tool uses a single set of power state values combined with the computer usage information stored in the central database to estimate the energy consumption and savings projections. The wattage information used is either the default values shipped with the Surveyor product, or user-supplied averages that the administrator collected separately to represent the computers and monitors managed in the database. Clicking on the Default Parameters button in the Surveyor Report – Launch Pad dialog box, shown in Figure 12, displays the dialog box where these values are entered. Figure 13 shows the Surveyor Report Default Assumptions dialog box.

FIGURE 13 SURVEYOR REPORT DEFAULT ASSUMPTIONS DIALOG BOX

The individual Surveyor Consumption Reports may be hourly, daily, weekly, or monthly energy use summaries and are customized using the Consumption Report Parameters dialog box shown in Figure 14. Also, this dialog box allows you to select the client computers included in the report. If the computer and monitors average wattages included in the report differ from the global default values set in the Surveyor Report – Default Assumptions dialog box, shown in Figure 13, custom values for the report can be entered in the Energy Consumption Parameters section of the dialog box.

FIGURE 14 CONSUMPTION REPORT PARAMETERS

Southern California Edison Page 15 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Figures 15 through 18 show a sample Daily Consumption Report generated using the Surveyor Report Tool.

FIGURE 15 EXAMPLE SURVEYOR CONSUMPTION REPORT, PAGE 1

The Consumption Report includes a chart comparing actual usage to best-case and worst- case scenarios. Lastly, the report provides tables summarizing the annualized results and values used in the chart.

FIGURE 16 EXAMPLE SURVEYOR REPORT, PAGE 2

Southern California Edison Page 16 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

FIGURE 17 EXAMPLE SURVEYOR REPORT, PAGE 3

FIGURE 18 EXAMPLE SURVEYOR REPORT, PAGE 4

The software features described in this section are limited to the tested versions of Surveyor in Phases I and II of this assessment project. Currently, Surveyor 5.2 is the latest release. A description of the latest software enhancements and improvements will be presented in the Phase II final report, discussed within the context of the assessment project’s overall findings and recommendations.

Southern California Edison Page 17 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

EVALUATIONS AND RESULTS

The Verdiem Surveyor Evaluation Program Handbook details a set of steps an organization may use to evaluate the PC power management software and decide whether to purchase the product. Flowchart (A) in Figure 19 illustrates Verdiem’s straightforward evaluation process.27 Implicit in flowchart (A) evaluation process is the determination of the customer’s potential savings with assistance from Verdiem’s technical staff. Although the Verdiem evaluation process is clearly aimed to support product sales, it is a useful roadmap nonetheless.

Scope and Controlled Lab Tests: Establish a - IT Hardware & Software Compatibility Partnership - Power Demand Metering with IT.

Compatibilty Resolve Issues YES Issues?

NO

Install Proceed to Deploy to Test YES Power Deployment? Participants Dataloggers NO

Surveyor and Troubleshoot and NO Dataloggers Resolve Working?

YES

Determine Baseline Consumption

Establish Enforcement Power Schemes

Determine Remove Enforcement Power Consumption Dataloggers

Compare Surveyor Estimated Consumption and Savings to Power Datalogger Measurements

Assessment Document Results Completed (B)

FIGURE 19 SURVEYOR EVALUATION PROCESS

This assessment project followed a similar set of steps as illustrated by flowchart (B) in Figure 19. As flowchart (B) shows, steps were added to verify the accuracy of the software’s energy consumption estimates and the annual energy savings calculated from them. The assessment project required close collaboration with the IT Department for infrastructure support, software compatibility and hardware testing, deployment, troubleshooting, etc. Also, the assessment team worked closely with Verdiem’s technical staff to troubleshoot and resolve issues during the project.

Southern California Edison Page 18 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

LABORATORY POWER MEASUREMENTS The initial equipment power measurements took place in an IT test facility at SCE’s corporate headquarters in Rosemead, California. The facility was equipped with its own network and servers. The computers and monitors in the laboratory represented well the typical hardware found across the SCE corporate network at that time. Table 1 lists the computer and monitor combinations used in the power measurements.

TABLE 1 COMPUTERS AND MONITORS USED IN THE LABORATORY POWER DEMAND MEASUREMENTS

COMPUTER TYPE MONITOR TYPE OPERATING SYSTEM Dell Optiplex GX240 Desktop NEC Multisync FE700+, 17” CRT Windows XP Pro Dell Optiplex GX1 Desktop Mitsubishi Diamond Plus 70, 17” CRT Windows 98SE Dell Optiplex GX200 Desktop Mitsubishi Diamond Plus 70, 17” CRT Windows 2000 Pro Dell C610 Laptop in Docking Station Mitsubishi Diamond Plus 71, 17” CRT Windows XP Pro

Figure 20 shows the measurement equipment, a Fluke 43B Power Quality Analyzer and 10X Current Transformer (CT) multipliers/splitters, used to measure and record the computer equipment instantaneous power demand.

FIGURE 20 POWER MEASUREMENT SETUP

Southern California Edison Page 19 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

One point of the laboratory equipment power measurements was to obtain a representative set of power state demand values for use with the Surveyor software (see Figure 13). As described in the previous section, the Surveyor software uses a set of average values to represent each power state: On, Sleep, and Off for displays; and On, Suspend, Hibernate, and Off for computers (CPU). Another point of the laboratory measurements was to assess whether instantaneous power measurements were sufficient to estimate, within acceptable accuracy, both the annual energy consumption and peak demand given AC to DC power supplies common in computer equipment and usage variances, i.e., differences in computer idle and active patterns due to users. Figure 21 shows the trend measurements obtained for the docked laptop computer and its monitor while idling and when running a full virus scan. Since a multiplier was used for the measurements, the values shown must be divided by 10 to obtain the correct value. Thus, the docked laptop average power demand while idling was 95 watts, and 106 watts during a full virus scan.

FIGURE 21 DOCKED LAPTOP AND MONITOR POWER MEASUREMENTS

From the measurement trends shown in Figure 21, the docked laptop and monitor power demand varied from a minimum of 77 watts at idle to a maximum of 130 watts during a full virus scan. The desktop computers running Windows 2000 Pro and Windows XP Pro also exhibited similar power draw variances as seen in Figure 22 and Figure 23.

FIGURE 22 GX240 DESKTOP AND MONITOR POWER MEASUREMENTS

Southern California Edison Page 20 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

FIGURE 23 GX200 DESKTOP AND MONITOR POWER MEASUREMENTS

Power draw varied between 100 watts at idle to 140 watts during the virus scan trend for the GX200 and GX240 desktop computers. Yet, the GX1 desktop computer with Windows 98SE exhibited little power variance, as shown in Figure 24, ranging between 118 Watts to 121 watts.

FIGURE 24 GX1 DESKTOP AND MONITOR POWER MEASUREMENTS

The power variations due to the equipment’s power supplies and the overall meter accuracy introduce uncertainty to any average power draw estimates. As an illustrative example, the docked laptop’s overall average power draw over its total usage time period, assuming a perfect 50% split between idle and active usage times, could be:

PAvg  IdleTime% PIdle  ActiveTime%  PActive  95%50 Watts  106%50 Watts  101 Watts [Equation 1] where, PAvg is the overall average power draw over the usage time period, IdleTime% is the percentage of the usage time the computer is idle, ActiveTime% is the percentage of the usage time the computer is active, PIdle is the average power draw while idle, and PActive is the average power draw while active.

Southern California Edison Page 21 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

However, uncertainties due to power fluctuation (variance) and the overall meter accuracy (measurement error) affect the resulting weighted average power estimate in Equation 1. The effects of variances and measurement errors can be determined through statistical error propagation using the general formula:28

2 2 2 2  Q  2  Q  2  Q  2  mQ     ma     mb     mc  ... [Equation 2]  a   b   c 

Applying this formula to Equation 1 yields:

2 2  P   P   2   Avg   2   Avg   2 PAvg   PIdle   PActive  PIdle   PActive  2 2  P   P  [Equation 3]  Avg  2  Avg  2     IdleTime%     ActiveTime%  IdleTime%   ActiveTime%  Since this illustrative example assumes a perfect 50% split between the idle and active usage times, the standard deviations for the usage times are zero simplifying Equation 3 to:

2 2  P   P   2   Avg   2   Avg   2 PAvg   PIdle   PActive [Equation 4]  PIdle   PActive 

The partial derivatives of PAvg with respect to PIdle and PActive are: P P Avg  IdleTime% ; Avg  ActiveTime% [Equation 5] PIdle PActive

The standard deviations for the observed power variances at idle and active were close to 17.9% and 22.6% respectively. The Fluke 43B Users Manual29 specifies a ± (2% + 6 counts of resolution) meter accuracy when “total %r” is used, and ±(5% of reading + 0.3 A) for the current probe 80i-500S accuracy. There was no published accuracy specification for the 10X CT multiplier, so it is not included in the example. For simplicity, let the total measurement accuracy equal ±7%. Substituting values into Equation 4 yields:  2  IdleTime% 2 2  ActiveTime% 2 2 PAvg PIdle   PActive [Equation 6]  2 2  2 2  %74.3%7%6.22%50%7%9.17%)50(

  %3.19%74.3 PAvg

Hence, the estimated weighted average power draw for the docked laptop would have a substantial amount of uncertainty: ±19.3%. Using the same assumptions and approach, the uncertainties for the desktop computers weighted average power draws would be: ±11.5% for the GX240, ±9.5% for the GX200, and ±6.8% for the GX1. With significant potential for power draw and usage variances along with normal measurement errors, it was decided that the assessment could not rely solely on instantaneous power measurements. Simple measurement instruments that rely on assumed average waveforms and simply multiply their readings internally by a constant to indicate Root Mean Square (RMS) values

Southern California Edison Page 22 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03 will yield erroneous results when harmonic distortion is present. Instruments with true RMS capability sample the waveform at multiple points and use those values to arrive at the correct RMS values. Given that significant harmonic distortion is present due to the AC to DC computer power supplies; true RMS measurements were considered essential to ensure overall measurement accuracy. Power Quality Loggers, Model PQL 120 (1Meg) from AEMC® Instruments, shown in Figure 25, were selected for the assessment’s equipment power monitoring and recording. The PQL 120 is a single-phase datalogger designed with true RMS measurement capability to record a suite of electrical power quantity and quality variables such as: Frequency, Harmonics, Voltage, Current, Power Factor (PF), Displacement PF, Real Power (watts), Apparent Power (VA), and Reactive Power (Vars). The PQL 120 nominal power measurement accuracy is given as ± (2.0% of reading + 4 watts) with a resolution of 0.1 watts.30

FIGURE 25 POWER QUALITY LOGGER MODEL PQL 120

Since computers and monitors in low power modes may draw only a few watts, the accuracy of the PQL 120 Power Quality Logger for low power measurements was a concern. Taken at face-value, the published accuracy specification appears to indicate that a power measurement of 3.0 watts would have a potential measurement error of ±4.06 watts, an unacceptable level of uncertainty. When queried, AEMC Instruments technical support sole reply was “… we specify 4 watts minimum.”31 Therefore, a series of low power draw measurements were undertaken to compare the PQL 120 Power Quality Logger to a Fluke 43B digital multimeter (DMM). Table 2 summarizes the loads and the measurements from each instrument.

Southern California Edison Page 23 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

TABLE 2 POWER MEASUREMENTS COMPARISON BETWEEN A FLUKE 43B DMM AND A PQL 120 POWER QUALITY LOGGER

NAMEPLATE FLUKE 43B DMM PQL 120 LOGGER RUN LOAD DESCRIPTION (WATTS) (WATTS) (WATTS) A Incandescent Lamp 40.0 35.8 38.2 B Incandescent Lamp 25.0 25.2 28.0 C Mini Spiral Type CFL, 900 Lumens, 2700K 14.0 13.4 14.7

External Hard Drive With an External Power Adapter, USB P 24.0 10.8 10.4 Connected (Virus Scan) External Hard Drive With an External Power Adapter, USB D 24.0 9.7 9.9 Disconnected (Idle) E DSL Modem With External Power Adapter, On, Standalone 30.0 7.4 7.3 F LED Screw-in Lamp 5.0 4.0 4.9 G Incandescent Book Light With External Power Adapter 5.0 3.8 4.1 H DSL Modem With External Power Adapter, Off, Standalone 30.0 3.0 2.4 Handheld Computer (Idle) With External Battery Charger N 13.0 2.7 2.4 (Battery Charged), Backlight On, On Handheld Computer (Idle) With External Battery Charger I 13.0 2.6 3.6 (Battery Charged), Backlight On, On

8-port Ethernet Switch, 10/100 Mbps, With External Power J 16.0 2.5 2.4 Adapter, Standalone Handheld Computer (Idle) With External Battery Charger O 13.0 1.7 1.1 (Battery Charged), Backlight Off, On K Battery Charger/External Power Adapter, Standalone 6.0 1.1 1.0 Handheld Computer With External Battery Charger (Battery M 13.0 0.7 0.0 Charged), Off

The Table 2 measurement data is plotted in the two charts of Figure 26. The logger measurements were consistently close to the DMM values, and the relationship between the two instruments is clearly linear as the right-hand chart in Figure 26 demonstrates. Also, in the left-hand chart the standard error bars for the DMM data points encompass the logger measurements. Based on these measurements, the logger was considered sufficient for low power measurements, and the lower limit closer to one and not four watts.

Power Measurement Comparison Tests Fluke 43B and PQL 120 Measurements Comparison

40 45

Fluke 43B 35 40 PQL 120

30 35

25 30

20 25

15 20 Power (Watts) 10 15 y = 1.0717x R2 = 0.9962 5 10 PQL 120 Measurements (Watts) Measurements 120 PQL

0 5

-5 0 ABCPDEFGHN I JOKM 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Fluke 43B Measurements (Watts) Run FIGURE 26 COMPARISONS OF FLUKE 43B DMM AND PQL 120 POWER QUALITY LOGGER POWER MEASUREMENTS

Therefore, this assessment considers the PQL 120 Power Quality Logger accuracy to be closer to ± (2.0% of reading + 7 counts of resolution).

Southern California Edison Page 24 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

DATA ACCURACY FOR A SINGLE WORKSTATION In a test of the accuracy of the Surveyor software’s hourly demand and daily energy use estimates, a desktop computer and a 17” CRT display were monitored over a 24-hour period with a PQL 120 logger at one-minute intervals. Surveyor Version 2.1 was installed, and hourly average demand estimates were obtained from the reporting tool application (see Figure 14). Table 3 summarizes the wattage assumptions, derived from the logger recorded data, entered into the Surveyor reporting tool for the comparison.

TABLE 3 AVERAGE POWER VALUES USED IN THE SURVEYOR REPORT FOR THE SINGLE WORKSTATION ACCURACY TEST

EQUIPMENT ON SUSPEND/SLEEP HIBERNATE OFF Desktop Computer 52.2 3.6 2.0 1.3 17” CRT Monitor 70.7 2.6 n/a 0.0

Figure 27 plots the data from the logger, averaged into hourly values, and the values from the Surveyor hourly report. Table 4 summarizes the measurement data along with the percent differences between the logger data and the Surveyor estimates, as well as the estimated logger measurement error.

Average Hourly Demand Comparison

160 Datalogger 140 Surveyor

120

100

80

60

40 Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average

20

0 1:00 AM 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 10:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 PM 12:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 12:00 AM 12:00 Time of Day

FIGURE 27 COMPARISON OF SURVEYOR AND LOGGER AVERAGE HOURLY DEMAND FOR ONE WORKSTATION

The logger measurement error was estimated using the revised accuracy specification determined in the previous section: ± (2% of reading + 7 counts of resolution). As Figure 27 illustrates, the software tracked the power mode changes well. The Surveyor energy consumption estimate was within -4.6% of the logger value, slightly outside the logger measurement error of ±3.9%. Since Surveyor uses an average value for each CPU and display power state, it cannot match closely the recorded demand for every period. For example, during the noon time period in Figure 27, the Surveyor software estimated the average hourly demand using the values from Table 3 as follows:

 36 minutes   24 minutes  Watts  6.22.52 Watts    2.52 Watts  7.70 Watts    0.82 Watts  60 minutes   60 minutes     

Southern California Edison Page 25 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

TABLE 4 SINGLE WORKSTATION AVERAGE HOURLY DEMAND ACCURACY TEST

DATALOGGER SURVEYOR PERCENT DATALOGGER MEASUREMENT ERROR TIME (WATTS) (WATTS) DIFFERENCE (WATTS) PERCENT 12:00 a.m. 4.9 6.2 26.5% ± 0.8 ± 16.2% 1:00 a.m. 4.9 6.2 26.5% ± 0.8 ± 16.3% 2:00 a.m. 4.9 6.2 26.5% ± 0.8 ± 16.3% 3:00 a.m. 4.9 6.2 26.5% ± 0.8 ± 16.3% 4:00 a.m. 4.9 6.2 26.5% ± 0.8 ± 16.4% 5:00 a.m. 4.8 6.2 29.2% ± 0.8 ± 16.4% 6:00 a.m. 4.9 6.2 26.5% ± 0.8 ± 16.3% 7:00 a.m. 4.9 6.2 26.5% ± 0.8 ± 16.3% 8:00 a.m. 68.4 66.5 -2.8% ± 2.1 ± 3.0% 9:00 a.m. 135.3 122.9 -9.2% ± 3.4 ± 2.5% 10:00 a.m. 106.8 101.3 -5.1% ± 2.8 ± 2.7% 11:00 a.m. 131.8 122.9 -6.8% ± 3.3 ± 2.5% 12:00 p.m. 117.7 82.0 -30.3% ± 3.1 ± 2.6% 1:00 p.m. 53.9 54.8 1.7% ± 1.8 ± 3.3% 2:00 p.m. 50.8 54.8 7.9% ± 1.7 ± 3.4% 3:00 p.m. 50.7 54.8 8.1% ± 1.7 ± 3.4% 4:00 p.m. 68.7 54.8 -20.2% ± 2.1 ± 3.0% 5:00 p.m. 49.9 54.8 9.8% ± 1.7 ± 3.4% 6:00 p.m. 6.6 6.2 -6.1% ± 0.8 ± 12.6% 7:00 p.m. 3.6 6.2 72.2% ± 0.8 ± 21.5% 8:00 p.m. 3.6 6.2 72.2% ± 0.8 ± 21.5% 9:00 p.m. 3.6 6.2 72.2% ± 0.8 ± 21.6% 10:00 p.m. 3.6 6.2 72.2% ± 0.8 ± 21.7% 11:00 p.m. 3.5 6.2 77.1% ± 0.8 ± 21.8% Totals:* 897.6 Wh 856.4 Wh -4.6% ± 34.8 ± 3.9%

The one-minute logger data for the noon hour is shown in Figure 28. At first glance, it appears as if the display is “On” since the demand is much higher than the CPU On average of 52.2 watts. However, normal CPU power variations can account for the higher demand as the logger data in Figure 29 illustrates for this workstation. While the display remained “asleep,” the computer demand increased to over 90 watts for about 30 minutes.

One-Minute Average Demand Data

180

160

140

120 117.7 Watts Average

100 Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 80

60 M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M P P P P PM P P P P P P P 0 PM 4 6 PM 0 6 0 2 6 8 PM 2 6 8 2 4 PM 8 0 P 4 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 : : : : :12 PM : : : : : :34 PM : : : : : :56 PM 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 12:02 PM12 1 12:08 P12 1 12:14 P1 12:18 PM12:2 1 12:24 PM12 1 12:30 P1 1 12:3 1 12:40 PM12:4 1 12:46 PM12 M1 12:52 P1 1 12:58 P Time of Day

FIGURE 28 ONE-MINUTE AVERAGE DEMAND LOGGER DATA: NOON HOUR

Southern California Edison Page 26 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Networked Desktop Computer and Display 100

Monitor 90 Computer

80

70

60

50

40

Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 30

20

10

0 04/22 12:00 PM04/22 01:00 PM04/22 02:00 PM04/22 03:00 PM04/22 04:00 PM04/22 05:00 PM04/22 06:00 PM04/22 07:00 PM04/22 08:00 PM04/22 09:00 PM04/22 10:00 PM04/22 11:00 PM04/22 12:00 PM04/23 01:00 PM04/23 02:00 PM04/23 03:00 PM04/23 04:00 PM04/23 05:00 PM04/23 06:00 PM04/23 07:00 PM04/23 08:00 PM04/23 09:00 PM04/23 10:00 PM04/23 11:00 PM04/23 04/22 12:00 AM 12:00 04/22 AM 01:00 04/22 AM 02:00 04/22 AM 03:00 04/22 AM 04:00 04/22 AM 05:00 04/22 AM 06:00 04/22 AM 07:00 04/22 AM 08:00 04/22 AM 09:00 04/22 AM 10:00 04/22 AM 11:00 04/22 AM 12:00 04/23 AM 01:00 04/23 AM 02:00 04/23 AM 03:00 04/23 AM 04:00 04/23 AM 05:00 04/23 AM 06:00 04/23 AM 07:00 04/23 AM 08:00 04/23 AM 09:00 04/23 AM 10:00 04/23 AM 11:00 04/23 AM 12:00 04/24 Date & Time

FIGURE 29 NETWORKED COMPUTER AND DISPLAY AVERAGE 15-MINUTE DEMAND

Using a single hour is not a recommended peak demand estimation approach when random demand variances are present. For example, SCE’s TOU-8 rate tariff defines the on-peak period from noon to 6:00 p.m., summer weekdays, and selects the highest 15-minute demand during the monthly billing period as the peak demand. This corresponds to the noon hour in Table 4 and a large percent difference. A better approach, for energy efficiency purposes, is to use the peak demand definition mandated by Interim Order 1 in the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Decision 06-06-063, i.e., the DEER definition, and given as:32 “…the average grid level impact for a measure between 2 p.m. and 5 p.m. during the three consecutive weekday period containing the weekday temperature with the hottest temperature of the year.” Averaging the three hours starting at 2:00 p.m. in Table 4 yields the values summarized in Table 5. The resulting Surveyor software and datalogger average peak demand estimates are in close agreement, and almost within the logger measurement error range.

TABLE 5 AVERAGE PEAK DEMAND FOR THE SINGLE WORKSTATION ACCURACY TEST

DATALOGGER SURVEYOR PERCENT DATALOGGER MEASUREMENT ERROR (WATTS) (WATTS) DIFFERENCE* (WATTS)* PERCENT* 56.7 54.8 -3.4% ± 1.8 ± 3.2% *Values rounded to a single decimal. Thus, for a single workstation, good estimates of the total energy use and average peak demand are possible. However, using a single set of power state assumptions when multiple workstations are grouped together introduces additional uncertainties. The Small Group Evaluation looked into this issue in detail.

Southern California Edison Page 27 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

PHASE I EVALUATION: SMALL GROUP TESTS The Phase I small group evaluation tests encompassed ten networked workstations in SCE’s Design & Engineering Services group in Irwindale, California. Version 1.4 of the Surveyor server application, database, admin and reporting tools were installed on a test server in the IT computer infrastructure test laboratory in Rosemead, California. An IT staff member was the assigned Surveyor administrator and oversaw all aspects of the Surveyor server application. The assessment project manager installed the Surveyor client software, version 1.4, and PQL 120 loggers on the ten workstations. Table 6 summarizes the basic workstation characteristics. All workstations were running the Windows XP Pro SP1 operating system.

TABLE 6 PHASE I EVALUATION WORKSTATIONS

SURVEYOR DEVICE ID COMPUTER MONITOR CLIENT ID Desktop, Dell Optiplex GX260, two 80 GB drives, D104259 11 17” Mitsubishi Diamond Plus 71 (CRT) DVD and CD-RW drives, 1.0 GB RAM. Desktop, Dell Optiplex GX260, two 80 GB drives, D107086 17 21” Sony Multiscan G520 (CRT) DVD and CD-RW drives, 1.0 GB RAM. Laptop, Dell Latitude 610C series, 0.5 GB RAM, D098646 4 21” Sony Multiscan G520 (CRT) and docking station. Desktop, Dell Optiplex GX260, two 80 GB drives, D091505 6 17” Dell Trinitron (CRT) DVD and CD-RW drives, 1.0 GB RAM. Desktop, Dell Optiplex GX260, two 80 GB drives, D107084 9 17” Mitsubishi Diamond Plus 71 (CRT) DVD and CD-RW drives, 1.0 GB RAM. Desktop, Dell Optiplex GX260, two 80GB drives, D107076 14 21” Sony Multiscan G520 (CRT) DVD-R and CD-RW drives, 1.0 GB RAM. Laptop, Dell Latitude 610C series, 0.5 GB RAM, D096671 12 17” NEC Multisync FE770 (CRT) and docking station. Desktop, Dell Optiplex GX260, two 80 GB drives, D096285 13 17” Dell Trinitron (CRT) DVD and CD-RW drives, 1.0 GB RAM. Desktop, Dell Optiplex GX260, two 80 GB drives, D104239 16 17” Sony Multiscan (CRT) DVD and CD-RW drives, 1.0 GB RAM. Desktop, Dell Optiplex GX260, two 80 GB drives, D099628 10 17” Dell Trinitron (CRT) DVD and CD-RW drives, 1.0 GB RAM.

FOUR-DAY ENERGY USE COMPARISONS The first 15 days of baseline usage information stored in Surveyor’s Access database table “SystemStateRollup” was reviewed for comparison to the logger data. The information in the “SystemStateRollup” table indicated that nine workstations had either 14 or 15 days of valid data. However, the table also indicated that one workstation, Client ID 16, had 43 days of valid data. Close review of the data found that 29 days were repeated with different values. According to the Surveyor manual,33 among the reporting tool issues is the possibility of a client computer to double-report. The Surveyor manual indicates that this may occur when: “…the system time has changed on the client. For example, if the system time is changed back at least a day and the client has already sent data to the server for that day, then when that day passes again for the client, it will send data for that day again to the server. The solution is to either exclude that client from your report or open the Surveyor.mdb file in a licensed copy of Access and change the “Valid” flag on one of the day’s records in the SystemStateRollup table. Surveyor only includes records marked “Valid” in the reports.”

Southern California Edison Page 28 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

The user of this particular workstation indicated that he would, on occasion, set the computer system clock back to accomplish some particular tasks. For the purpose of evaluating the software system accuracy for a group of workstations, a set of four contiguous days with no duplicate data for all workstations was identified within the SystemStateRollup table and compared to the logger data for the same time period. Table 7 summarizes both the Surveyor and the recorded logger data for the 4-day period.

TABLE 7 PHASE I EVALUATION: DETAILED SURVEYOR AND LOGGER DATA COMPARISON Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Averages Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT CPU On (Watts): 22.7 53.0 53.0 53.0 53.0 22.7 53.0 53.0 53.0 53.0 46.9 CPU Suspend (Watts): 2.3 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.3 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.7 CPU Hibernate (Watts): 1.0 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 1.0 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.3 2.0 CPU Off (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 Display On (Watts): 86.5 100.5 89.6 65.7 71.6 63.9 81.5 113.6 105.6 98.1 87.7 Display Sleep (Watts): 7.7 1.6 1.1 1.6 1.6 9.3 5.7 4.5 6.4 3.7 4.3 Display Off (Watts): ------CPU On (Hours): 8.85 96.00 28.32 95.97 96.00 16.80 18.73 95.97 17.92 18.72 493.27 CPU Suspend (Hours): ------CPU Hibernate (Hours): ------CPU Off (Hours): 87.15 - 67.68 0.03 - 79.20 77.27 0.02 78.08 69.18 458.62 Display On (Hours): 8.85 96.00 28.32 95.97 96.00 12.45 18.73 95.97 17.92 18.72 488.92 Display Sleep (Hours): 87.15 - 67.68 0.03 - 83.55 77.27 0.02 78.08 69.18 462.97 Display Off (Hours): ------CPU On (kWh): 0.20 5.09 1.50 5.09 5.09 0.38 0.99 5.09 0.95 0.99 23.15 CPU Suspend (kWh): ------CPU Hibernate (kWh): ------CPU Off (kWh): 0.09 - 0.09 0.00 - 0.08 0.11 0.00 0.11 0.10 0.61 Display On (kWh): 0.77 9.65 2.54 6.31 6.87 0.80 1.53 10.90 1.89 1.84 42.86 Display Sleep (kWh): 0.67 - 0.07 0.00 - 0.78 0.44 0.00 0.50 0.26 2.00 Display Off (kWh): ------Surveyor 4-day Total (kWh): 1.72 14.74 4.21 11.39 11.96 2.03 3.07 15.99 3.45 3.18 68.62 Loggers 4-day Total (kWh): 1.74 14.45 4.16 11.39 11.96 2.19 3.10 7.43 3.54 3.33 63.30 Percent Difference: -0.8% 1.9% 1.2% 0.0% 0.0% -7.9% -1.1% 53.5% -2.7% -4.8% 7.8% Table 7 represents an Excel workbook that contains the Surveyor SystemStateRollup table data and calculates the Surveyor estimated energy consumption for each workstation and the combined group along the “Surveyor 4-day Total (kWh)” row. The loggers recorded energy consumption is summarized along the “Loggers 4-day Total (kWh)” row. The power state values listed in the table for each workstation were obtained from both prior power draw measurements and from the recorded 15-minute logger data. An example is shown in Figure 30 for Surveyor Client ID 14. Additional charts may be found in Appendix A. The “Averages” column in Table 7 represents the combined group of workstations. For example, the power state values in the Averages column are the averages of the ten workstations for each power state. The first grouping of middle rows summarizes the amount of time each workstation spent in each power state and came directly from the Surveyor SystemStateRollup table. Those hours multiplied by the power state values yield the energy consumption values for each workstation and are summarized in the second grouping of middle rows. The last row lists the percent difference between the Surveyor estimates and the logger data. As the results indicate, with the exception of Client ID 14, the Surveyor energy usage estimates for each workstation were very close to the logger data, and the combined group was within 7.8% of the total logger recorded energy usage. Figure 31 shows two output pages from the Surveyor reporting tool for the same time

Southern California Edison Page 29 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03 period. Notice the close match between the values in the data cell under the “Actual kWh” column and along the “All Clients” row in the Surveyor consumption report in Figure 31 (68.60), with the estimate presented in Table 7 along the “Surveyor 4-day Total (kWh)” row and the “Averages” column (68.62).

Datalogger Average Demand Device ID D107076 Power State Estimates 200 The data chart shows the 165.9 W Average 167.4 W Average average 15-minute power 180 demand recorded for workstation idle and 160 active time periods. For example, on 6/19 from 140 12:00 A.M. to 8:00 A.M., the 15-minute demand 120 averaged 56.6 watts. CPU On Average = 53 Watts Display On Average = 166.3 - 53 = 113.6 Watts Likewise, on 6/20 from Display Sleep Average = 57.5 - 53 = 4.5 Watts 100 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M., the average 15-minute 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 15-Minute 80 demand was 167.4 watts. The chart textbox 60 shows the derivation of 56.6 W Average 57.5 W Average 57.7 W Average some of the power state 40 values used in Table 7 using the data recorded for this workstation. 06/19 12:00 PM 06/19 02:00 PM 06/19 04:00 PM 06/19 06:00 PM 06/19 08:00 PM 06/19 10:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/20 02:00 PM 06/20 04:00 PM 06/20 06:00 PM 06/20 08:00 PM 06/20 10:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/21 02:00 PM 06/21 04:00 PM 06/21 06:00 PM 06/21 08:00 PM 06/21 10:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/22 02:00 PM 06/22 04:00 PM 06/22 06:00 PM 06/22 08:00 PM 06/22 10:00 PM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 02:00 AM 06/19 04:00 AM 06/19 06:00 AM 06/19 08:00 AM 06/19 10:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 02:00 AM 06/20 04:00 AM 06/20 06:00 AM 06/20 08:00 AM 06/20 10:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 02:00 AM 06/21 04:00 AM 06/21 06:00 AM 06/21 08:00 AM 06/21 10:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 02:00 AM 06/22 04:00 AM 06/22 06:00 AM 06/22 08:00 AM 06/22 10:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM Date & Time

FIGURE 30 LOGGER DATA FOR SURVEYOR CLIENT 14

There are four highlighted data cells in Table 7 that point to another problem that was encountered with the Surveyor client data. The problem becomes apparent when the logger data for Surveyor Client 14 in Figure 30 is compared to the CPU and Display “On” time periods summarized in the table. The recorded logger data indicates that the CPU was on continuously, yet the Surveyor SystemStateRollup data indicates that the CPU was off for a very small amount of time, about 1.2 minutes. Also, the logger data indicates that the Display spent a significant amount of time either turned off or in sleep mode, about 78.5 hours out of a total of 96 hours. Similarly, the logger data for Surveyor Client 10 indicates that both the CPU and the Display were turned on at all times. If these discrepancies were corrected, the difference between the logger data and Surveyor for the combined group would be reduced to -2.0%. The Surveyor manual identifies one limitation to the software’s power monitoring capability that is a reasonable explanation for the Surveyor Client 14 Display “On” discrepancy:34 “Measuring Energy Consumption in PC Monitors: Surveyor estimates when the display is on and when it is sleeping. Surveyor does not know when the display is off entirely. The estimate is based on how long the PC is idle (i.e. no user input) and what display timeout setting is currently in effect. Generally, this estimate is accurate. Occasionally, such as when the user pushes the power button on the monitor, the estimate is incorrect.” Thus, it is possible that the Display power option settings for Surveyor Client 14 were set to keep the monitor turned on at all times, and that the user would manually turn off the monitor at the end of each work day. The pattern is consistent with the logger data.

Southern California Edison Page 30 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

FIGURE 31 SURVEYOR REPORT FOR 4-DAY COMPARISON USING GROUP AVERAGE POWER STATE VALUES

Southern California Edison Page 31 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

The Surveyor reporting tool comes with a set of default values35 for the power states, summarized here in Table 8. What if the default values were used to estimate the combined group energy consumption in lieu of the group specific averages? Without correcting the Surveyor Client 10 and 14 discrepancies discussed above, a deceptive difference of -2.5% with respect to the logger data would result. But this result is an example of error cancellation that masks the real problem of not reflecting, as closely as possible, the group averages. Fixing the Client 10 and 14 discrepancies, the Surveyor default power state values yield a difference of -11.7% with respect to the logger data.

TABLE 8 SURVEYOR DEFAULT ASSUMPTIONS

SURVEYOR DEFAULT VALUES POWER STATE (WATTS) CPU On 56 CPU Suspend 26 CPU Hibernate 2 CPU Off 1 Display On 67 Display Sleep 2 Display Off 1

An approximate measurement error for the Surveyor estimated energy consumptions in Table 7 was derived using the following procedure: . Determine the individual and combined workstations logger measurement errors using the adjusted accuracy specification of ± (2% of reading + 0.7 watts), . For each individual workstation, determine the absolute kWh difference between the logger and Surveyor measurements, compare the value to the logger error, and select the largest one, and . Sum the estimated individual workstation measurement errors for Surveyor to arrive at the combined group error value. This procedure effectively bounds the Surveyor results to the logger measurement accuracy and sets the minimum accuracy equal to the logger accuracy specification. Table 9 summarizes the measurement accuracy for the results presented in Table 7 based on the above procedure. As can be expected, the Client 14 Display “On” discrepancy contributes the majority of the Surveyor combined group ±14.4% measurement error.

TABLE 9 PHASE I LOGGER AND SURVEYOR MEASUREMENT ERROR ESTIMATES Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Averages Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT Surveyor 4-day Total (kWh): 1.72 14.74 4.21 11.39 11.96 2.03 3.07 15.99 3.45 3.18 68.62 Loggers 4-day Total (kWh): 1.74 14.45 4.16 11.39 11.96 2.19 3.10 7.43 3.54 3.33 63.30 Percent Difference: -0.8% 1.9% 1.2% 0.0% 0.0% -7.9% -1.1% 53.5% -2.7% -4.8% 7.8% Logger Error (kWh): ± 0.04 ± 0.29 ± 0.08 ± 0.23 ± 0.24 ± 0.04 ± 0.06 ± 0.15 ± 0.07 ± 0.07 ± 1.27 Logger Error (%): ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% Surveyor Error (kWh): ± 0.04 ± 0.29 ± 0.08 ± 0.23 ± 0.24 ± 0.16 ± 0.06 ± 8.56 ± 0.09 ± 0.15 ± 9.90 Surveyor Error (%): ± 2.1% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 7.9% ± 2.0% ± 53.5% ± 2.7% ± 4.8% ± 14.4% A significant improvement is possible by fixing the Client 10 and 14 discrepancies. With the corrections, the Surveyor combined group measurement error is reduced to ±2.4% as summarized in Table 10.

Southern California Edison Page 32 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

TABLE 10 MEASUREMENT ERROR USING PHASE I CORRECTED SURVEYOR CLIENT DATA Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Averages Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT Surveyor 4-day Total (kWh): 1.72 14.74 4.21 11.40 11.96 2.03 3.07 7.43 3.45 3.18 62.08 Loggers 4-day Total (kWh): 1.74 14.45 4.16 11.39 11.96 2.19 3.10 7.43 3.54 3.33 63.30 Percent Difference: -0.8% 1.9% 1.2% 0.0% 0.0% -7.9% -1.1% 0.0% -2.7% -4.8% -2.0% Logger Error (kWh): ± 0.04 ± 0.29 ± 0.08 ± 0.23 ± 0.24 ± 0.04 ± 0.06 ± 0.15 ± 0.07 ± 0.07 ± 1.27 Logger Error (%): ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% Surveyor Error (kWh): ± 0.04 ± 0.29 ± 0.08 ± 0.23 ± 0.24 ± 0.16 ± 0.06 ± 0.15 ± 0.09 ± 0.15 ± 1.49 Surveyor Error (%): ± 2.1% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 7.9% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.7% ± 4.8% ± 2.4%

SMALL GROUP TESTS The Surveyor software, Version 1.4, encountered a Security ID (SID) related problem with the workstations’ operating system image that kept the software from working correctly during the Phase I evaluation tests. Verdiem resolved the problem in Version 2.1 for Phase II testing. The SID problem required the enforcement testing to use server scheduled “Profile Tasks” and contributed, in part, to a delay as shown in Figure 32.

Phase I Datalogger Measurements 1,500

1,250 atts) 1,000 and (Wand

750

500 15-Minute Average Dem

250

Baseline Monitors Only Evening Hibernate 0 Jul-01 Jul-03 Jul-05 Jul-07 Jul-09 Jul-11 Jul-13 Jul-15 Jul-17 Jul-19 Jul-21 Jul-23 Jul-25 Jul-27 Jul-29 Jul-31 Jun-09 Jun-11 Jun-13 Jun-15 Jun-17 Jun-19 Jun-21 Jun-23 Jun-25 Jun-27 Jun-29 Sep-01 Sep-03 Sep-05 Sep-07 Sep-09 Aug-02 Aug-04 Aug-06 Aug-08 Aug-10 Aug-12 Aug-14 Aug-16 Aug-18 Aug-20 Aug-22 Aug-24 Aug-26 Aug-28 Aug-30 Date

FIGURE 32 PHASE I LOGGER BASELINE AND MANAGED WORKSTATION DATA

A Surveyor “Profile Task” allows for a scheduled power management action through the server on clients separate from the Profile Schemes.36 The “Enforcement” tests entailed:  Scheme (A) Monitors Only. Enable displays to enter the sleep mode after 20 minutes of inactivity during the day, and no enforced daytime CPU stand-by and hibernate modes; and  Scheme (B) Evening Hibernate. Same as the daytime Scheme (A) with an added evening Surveyor server “Profile Task” triggered at 7:00 P.M. to hibernate all computers. The regular power daytime/nighttime scheme changeovers were impaired due to the SID issues. Users were allowed to skip the evening hibernation if so desired by clicking the “Skip” button on a dialog box that displayed on their monitors when the server task was triggered. Also, users were allowed to customize their power option settings during the testing period. The 15-minute logger data for both the “Baseline” and the “Enforcement” test periods are shown in Figure 32. The reduced usage for the group is evident in Figure 33, where the logger data is averaged into hourly values representing a 7-day week period.

Southern California Edison Page 33 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Phase I Small Group Evaluation Average Weekly Profiles

1,400 Baseline Monitors Only Monitors & Evening Hibernate

1,200

1,000

800

600

400 Average Hourly Demand (Watts) Demand Hourly Average

200

0 Fri, 12:00 PM Fri, 03:00 PM Fri, 06:00 PM Fri, 09:00 PM Fri, 12:00 AM Fri, 03:00 AM Fri, 06:00 AM Fri, 09:00 AM Sat, 12:00 PM 12:00 Sat, PM 03:00 Sat, PM 06:00 Sat, PM 09:00 Sat, Sat, 12:00 AM 12:00 Sat, AM 03:00 Sat, AM 06:00 Sat, AM 09:00 Sat, Thu, 12:00 PM 12:00 Thu, PM 03:00 Thu, PM 06:00 Thu, PM 09:00 Thu, Tue, 12:00 PM 12:00 Tue, PM 03:00 Tue, PM 06:00 Tue, PM 09:00 Tue, Thu, 12:00 AM 12:00 Thu, AM 03:00 Thu, AM 06:00 Thu, AM 09:00 Thu, Tue, 12:00 AM 12:00 Tue, AM 03:00 Tue, AM 06:00 Tue, AM 09:00 Tue, Sun, 12:00 PM 12:00 Sun, PM 03:00 Sun, PM 06:00 Sun, PM 09:00 Sun, Mon, 12:00 PM Mon, 03:00 PM Mon, 06:00 PM Mon, 09:00 PM Sun, 12:00 AM 12:00 Sun, AM 03:00 Sun, AM 06:00 Sun, AM 09:00 Sun, Mon, 12:00 AM Mon, 03:00 AM Mon, 06:00 AM Mon, 09:00 AM Wed, PM 12:00 Wed, PM 03:00 Wed, PM 06:00 Wed, PM 09:00 Wed, 12:00 AM 12:00 Wed, AM 03:00 Wed, AM 06:00 Wed, AM 09:00 Wed, Day of the Week & Time

FIGURE 33 SMALL GROUP AVERAGE WEEKLY DEMAND PROFILES BASED ON 15-MINUTE LOGGER DATA

Since the data in the Surveyor SystemStateRollup table typically represents whole days, the logger data for each test case analysis was limited to full days to properly align with the Surveyor data: 23 days for the “Baseline” case, 22 days for the “Monitors Only” case, and 20 days for the “Evening Hibernate” case. These reduced logger datasets are reflected in Figure 32. Based on the logger data shown in Figure 32, the average annual energy consumption per workstation for each test case, summarized in Table 11, were estimated using the following equation:

WS 10  Watts   AverageDemandn   15 minutes    Watts 15 minutes  000,1  4     kW 1 hour  365 days  kWh  WS1 n [Equation 7] EnergyUseWS      year  nworkstatio  .  . ofNoDaysCaseTestofNo Workstations 1 year

where,

EnergyUseWS is the average annual energy savings per workstation, AverageDemandn is the logger recorded average 15-minute demand per workstation, No. of Workstations is 10, and No. of Test Case Days is 23 for the “Baseline” case, 22 for the “Monitors Only” case, and 20 for the “Evening Hibernate” case.

Southern California Edison Page 34 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Profile Monday Wednesday Monday Monday Wednesday Monday Tuesday Monday Tuesday Monday Tuesday Monday DEER 3-day heat wave begin dates: Average 12-Aug 21-Aug 26-Aug 22-Jul 17-Jul 15-Jul 30-Jul 9-Sep 3-Sep 23-Sep 24-Sep 30-Sep Average Watts: 1,152.4 1,153.8 1,173.0 1,153.8 1,153.8 1,173.0 1,153.8 1,127.2 1,153.8 1,127.2 1,153.8 1,127.2 1,153.8 ± 2.0 ± 8.0 ± 8.1 ± 8.0 ± 8.0 ± 8.1 ± 8.0 ± 7.9 ± 8.0 ± 7.9 ± 8.0 ± 7.9 ± 8.0

Peak Demand Averaging

21-Aug 22-Aug 23-Aug

1,300

1,200

1,100

1,000

900

800

700 Average Hourly Demand (Watts)

600

500 1:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 9:00 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 1:00 AM 10:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 12:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 12:00 AM 12:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 Time

FIGURE 34 SMALL GROUP BASELINE PEAK DEMAND ESTIMATE

The average peak demand per workstation for each test case was estimated using the average 7-day profiles from Figure 33 and the DEER peak demand definition on page 27. Figure 34 shows the results for the “Baseline” test case along with a sample chart of one of the three-day heat wave periods. The peak demand estimation procedure is as follows:  The 7-day hourly profile is spread across a 365-day calendar year in an Excel workbook using 1991 as the base year;  The DEER assigns a start-day for the three-day heat wave to each of the 16 California Thermal Zones (CTZ).37 Only 12 of these dates are unique with four dates repeated twice. The start days are listed in the cells along the top of Figure 34. The Excel workbook averages the 2:00 P.M. to 5:00 P.M. hours, the chart area highlighted in yellow in Figure 34, for three consecutive days, to produce a nine-hour average for each of the unique time periods; and  The 12 three-day heat wave values were averaged, with double weighting for the four repeated start-days highlighted in green in Figure 34, to produce the final estimated peak demand for the test case. The average peak demand estimates are shown in the row along the top of Figure 34 for the “Baseline” test case with the overall average listed under the “Average” heading. The 7-day hourly profiles for both the “Monitors Only” and “Evening Hibernate” test cases were analyzed with the same calculation procedure to determine their overall average peak demands. The estimates are summarized in Table 11 along with the annual energy savings and peak demand reduction estimates for the Phase I Small Group Evaluation. Thus, based on the logger measurements only, enforcing the computer display sleep mode after 20 minutes of inactivity, the “Monitors Only” power scheme, saved close to 207 kWh per workstation, roughly a 32% reduction. Adding the “Evening Hibernate” enforcement increased the average annual energy savings close to 339 kWh per workstation, about a

Southern California Edison Page 35 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

52% reduction. The measurement error for the annual energy savings was derived from the Baseline and Enforcement cases annual energy usage using the error propagation formula in Equation 2 as follows:

2 2 2  E  2  E  2          [Equation 8] E   EB   EM  EB   EM  where, E is the annual energy savings,

EB is the Baseline annual energy use,

EM is the Measure annual energy use,  is the standard deviation of the Baseline annual energy use, EB  is the standard deviation of the Measure annual energy use, EM

 E is the standard deviation of the annual energy savings, and

 EEE MB [Equation 9] Combining Equations 8 and 9 and taking the partial derivatives yields:

2 2 2 2 2 2 2  1   1    [Equation 10] E E B E M E B E M The peak demand reduction measurement error follows an identical derivation and yields:

22 2     [Equation 11] D DB DM An unexpected result was the average peak demand reduction for each test case: 13 watts per workstation for the “Monitors Only” case and 22 watts per workstation for the “Evening Hibernate” case. For a group of only ten workstations within the same workgroup and small office, the effects of daytime workstation runtime reductions weren’t expected to be measureable. Careful consideration of the profiles in Figure 33 cautions against generalizing these numerical results. Specifically, the “Baseline” and “Monitors Only” profiles for Monday are very close in maximum demand. For Tuesday, the chart shows that the maximum demand for both the “Monitors Only” and “Evening Hibernate” cases exceed the “Baseline” case. Hence, despite the numerical results, the Small Group peak demand reductions should not be considered reliable. Also, note that the estimated measurement errors for the average peak demand reductions are significant: ±23% and ±14%, respectively.

TABLE 11 SMALL GROUP LOGGER RESULTS: AVERAGE IMPACTS PER WORKSTATION

ANNUAL ENERGY ANNUAL ENERGY PEAK DEMAND PEAK DEMAND REDUCED TEST CASE CONSUMPTION [kW/Workstation] SAVINGS [kW/Workstation] [kWh/(Year·Workstation)] [kWh/(Year·Workstation)] Baseline 648.1 ±13.2 0.115 ±0.002 - - Monitors Only 441.5 ±9.1 0.102 ±0.002 206.7 ±16.0 0.013 ±0.003* Evening Hibernate 309.4 ±6.4 0.093 ±0.002 338.7 ±14.7 0.022 ±0.003* * These demand reduction results are not reliable. Please reference the previous paragraph. The Surveyor usage estimates based on the “as-is” SystemStateRollup table data for the workstations and the combined group are summarized in Table 12 for the “Baseline,” Table 13 for the “Monitors Only,” and Table 14 for the “Evening Hibernate” cases.

Southern California Edison Page 36 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

TABLE 12 SMALL GROUP EVALUATION LOGGER AND SURVEYOR DATA COMPARISONS: BASELINE CASE Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10111213141617 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Averages Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT CPU On (Watts): 15.7 48.5 61.3 48.4 54.0 15.7 50.6 51.6 51.2 55.6 45.3 CPU Suspend (Watts): 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.8 CPU Hibernate (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 CPU Off (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 Display On (Watts): 93.9 99.2 82.6 72.2 71.5 64.5 82.0 105.9 93.6 95.1 86.1 Display Sleep (Watts): 8.1 10.0 1.4 2.7 3.0 9.4 5.4 6.6 6.0 3.9 5.6 Display Off (Watts): ------CPU On (Hours): 162.85 522.32 170.28 542.67 551.32 109.53 170.25 551.58 573.15 129.07 3,483.02 CPU Suspend (Hours): 0.10 - - - 0.30 34.42 - 0.02 253.37 0.12 288.32 CPU Hibernate (Hours): ------CPU Off (Hours): 388.90 29.68 381.72 9.33 0.38 408.05 381.75 0.38 260.50 390.68 2,251.38 Display On (Hours): 162.85 522.32 170.28 542.67 551.32 81.80 170.25 551.58 573.15 129.07 3,455.28 Display Sleep (Hours): 389.00 29.68 381.72 9.33 0.68 470.20 381.75 0.40 513.87 390.80 2,567.43 Display Off (Hours): ------CPU On (kWh): 2.56 25.32 10.43 26.27 29.77 1.72 8.62 28.46 29.33 7.18 157.65 CPU Suspend (kWh): 0.00 - - - 0.00 0.10 - 0.00 1.01 0.00 1.10 CPU Hibernate (kWh): ------CPU Off (kWh): 0.39 0.04 0.53 0.01 0.00 0.41 0.53 0.00 0.36 0.55 2.97 Display On (kWh): 15.30 51.83 14.06 39.20 39.44 5.27 13.97 58.40 53.66 12.28 297.38 Display Sleep (kWh): 3.16 0.30 0.52 0.03 0.00 4.43 2.05 0.00 3.06 1.53 14.48 Display Off (kWh): ------Surveyor Total (kWh): 21.40 77.49 25.55 65.51 69.22 11.94 25.17 86.87 87.43 21.54 473.58 Loggers Total (kWh): 20.80 75.49 25.15 64.03 69.23 12.70 25.67 47.28 44.26 23.80 408.41 Percent Difference: 2.8% 2.6% 1.6% 2.3% 0.0% -6.3% -2.0% 45.6% 49.4% -10.5% 13.8%

Logger Error (kWh): ± 0.42 ± 1.51 ± 0.50 ± 1.28 ± 1.39 ± 0.25 ± 0.51 ± 0.95 ± 0.89 ± 0.48 ± 8.17 Logger Error (%): ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% Surveyor Error (kWh): ± 0.60 ± 2.00 ± 0.50 ± 1.47 ± 1.39 ± 0.76 ± 0.51 ± 39.59 ± 43.17 ± 2.26 ± 92.24 Surveyor Error (%): ± 2.8% ± 2.6% ± 2.0% ± 2.3% ± 2.0% ± 6.3% ± 2.0% ± 45.6% ± 49.4% ± 10.5% ± 19.5%

CPU Totals (Hours): 551.85 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 551.98 1,087.02 519.87 Display Totals (Hours): 551.85 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 551.98 1,087.02 519.87

TABLE 13 SMALL GROUP EVALUATION LOGGER AND SURVEYOR DATA COMPARISONS: MONITORS ONLY CASE Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10111213141617 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Averages Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT CPU On (Watts): 15.7 48.5 61.3 48.4 54.0 15.7 50.6 51.6 51.2 55.6 45.3 CPU Suspend (Watts): 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.8 CPU Hibernate (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 CPU Off (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 Display On (Watts): 93.9 99.2 82.6 72.2 71.5 64.5 82.0 105.9 93.6 95.1 86.1 Display Sleep (Watts): 8.1 10.0 1.4 2.7 3.0 9.4 5.4 6.6 6.0 3.9 5.6 Display Off (Watts): ------CPU On (Hours): 114.95 528.00 116.25 526.43 511.78 94.92 122.95 263.45 222.20 126.80 2,627.73 CPU Suspend (Hours): - - - - - 36.68 - 234.12 2.02 - 272.82 CPU Hibernate (Hours): ------CPU Off (Hours): 413.05 - 411.75 1.57 16.22 396.30 405.05 30.43 307.48 401.17 2,383.02 Display On (Hours): 55.37 126.72 94.92 67.98 91.37 73.68 92.28 122.22 110.65 112.27 947.45 Display Sleep (Hours): 472.63 401.28 433.08 460.02 436.63 454.22 435.72 405.78 421.05 415.70 4,336.12 Display Off (Hours): ------CPU On (kWh): 1.80 25.60 7.12 25.48 27.64 1.49 6.22 13.59 11.37 7.06 118.94 CPU Suspend (kWh): - - - - - 0.11 - 0.94 0.01 - 1.04 CPU Hibernate (kWh): ------CPU Off (kWh): 0.41 - 0.58 0.00 0.02 0.40 0.57 0.04 0.43 0.56 3.15 Display On (kWh): 5.20 12.57 7.84 4.91 6.54 4.75 7.57 12.94 10.36 10.68 81.54 Display Sleep (kWh): 3.84 4.03 0.59 1.24 1.29 4.28 2.34 2.66 2.51 1.63 24.46 Display Off (kWh): ------Surveyor Total (kWh): 11.25 42.20 16.13 31.64 35.49 11.03 16.70 30.17 24.68 19.93 229.12 Loggers Total (kWh): 17.11 54.67 17.15 32.57 37.24 12.78 17.55 29.96 25.97 21.09 266.10 Percent Difference: -52.0% -29.6% -6.4% -2.9% -4.9% -15.9% -5.1% 0.7% -5.2% -5.9% -16.1%

Logger Error (kWh): ± 0.34 ± 1.09 ± 0.34 ± 0.65 ± 0.75 ± 0.26 ± 0.35 ± 0.60 ± 0.52 ± 0.42 ± 5.32 Logger Error (%): ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% Surveyor Error (kWh): ± 5.86 ± 12.47 ± 1.03 ± 0.93 ± 1.75 ± 1.75 ± 0.85 ± 0.60 ± 1.30 ± 1.17 ± 27.69 Surveyor Error (%): ± 52.0% ± 29.6% ± 6.4% ± 2.9% ± 4.9% ± 15.9% ± 5.1% ± 2.0% ± 5.2% ± 5.9% ± 12.1%

CPU Totals (Hours): 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 527.90 528.00 528.00 531.70 527.97 Display Totals (Hours): 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 527.90 528.00 528.00 531.70 527.97

Southern California Edison Page 37 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

TABLE 14 SMALL GROUP EVALUATION LOGGER AND SURVEYOR DATA COMPARISONS: EVENING HIBERNATE CASE Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10111213141617 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Averages Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT CPU On (Watts): 15.7 48.5 61.3 48.4 54.0 15.7 50.6 51.6 51.2 55.6 45.3 CPU Suspend (Watts): 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.8 CPU Hibernate (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 CPU Off (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 Display On (Watts): 93.9 99.2 82.6 72.2 71.5 64.5 82.0 105.9 93.6 95.1 86.1 Display Sleep (Watts): 8.1 10.0 1.4 2.7 3.0 9.4 5.4 6.6 6.0 3.9 5.6 Display Off (Watts): ------CPU On (Hours): 96.58 156.17 130.88 134.05 109.85 114.87 102.37 144.90 522.45 88.25 1,600.37 CPU Suspend (Hours): 13.12 323.82 14.35 345.92 363.77 115.62 - 174.27 290.78 0.83 1,642.47 CPU Hibernate (Hours): ------CPU Off (Hours): 370.30 0.02 334.77 - 6.38 249.25 377.63 160.83 237.25 390.92 2,127.35 Display On (Hours): 55.55 85.92 105.30 54.83 74.20 79.63 78.45 79.18 439.03 88.17 1,140.27 Display Sleep (Hours): 424.45 394.08 374.70 425.13 405.80 400.10 401.55 400.82 611.45 391.83 4,229.92 Display Off (Hours): ------CPU On (kWh): 1.52 7.57 8.02 6.49 5.93 1.81 5.18 7.48 26.73 4.91 72.44 CPU Suspend (kWh): 0.04 1.30 0.06 1.38 1.46 0.35 - 0.70 1.16 0.00 6.24 CPU Hibernate (kWh): ------CPU Off (kWh): 0.37 0.00 0.47 - 0.01 0.25 0.53 0.23 0.33 0.55 2.81 Display On (kWh): 5.22 8.53 8.69 3.96 5.31 5.13 6.44 8.38 41.10 8.39 98.14 Display Sleep (kWh): 3.44 3.96 0.51 1.15 1.20 3.77 2.15 2.63 3.65 1.54 23.86 Display Off (kWh): ------Surveyor Total (kWh): 10.59 21.35 17.75 12.98 13.90 11.31 14.30 19.41 72.98 15.38 203.48 Loggers Total (kWh): 14.63 24.75 19.11 12.83 14.39 11.54 15.21 22.08 18.93 16.08 169.54 Percent Difference: -38.1% -15.9% -7.6% 1.2% -3.5% -2.0% -6.4% -13.8% 74.1% -4.5% 16.7%

Logger Error (kWh): ± 0.29 ± 0.50 ± 0.38 ± 0.26 ± 0.29 ± 0.23 ± 0.30 ± 0.44 ± 0.38 ± 0.32 ± 3.39 Logger Error (%): ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% Surveyor Error (kWh): ± 4.04 ± 3.40 ± 1.36 ± 0.26 ± 0.48 ± 0.23 ± 0.91 ± 2.67 ± 54.05 ± 0.70 ± 68.09 Surveyor Error (%): ± 38.1% ± 15.9% ± 7.6% ± 2.0% ± 3.5% ± 2.0% ± 6.4% ± 13.8% ± 74.1% ± 4.5% ± 33.5%

CPU Totals (Hours): 480.00 480.00 480.00 479.97 480.00 479.73 480.00 480.00 1,050.48 480.00 Display Totals (Hours): 480.00 480.00 480.00 479.97 480.00 479.73 480.00 480.00 1,050.48 480.00 The workstation power state values were derived from the 65 days of 15-minute logger data using scatter plots and data filtering. For example, Figure 35 shows all the Baseline logger data for Client 14 in the left-hand plot, and just the data below 61 watts, i.e., active CPU and display in a low-power state, in the right-hand plot using a smaller vertical axis scale.

Baseline Average Demand Baseline Average Demand Device ID D107076 Device ID D107076 250 61.0

230 60.5

210 60.0

190 59.5

170 59.0

150 58.5

130 58.0

110 57.5 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute

90 57.0

70 56.5

50 56.0 06/10 12:00 AM 06/10 12:00 PM 06/11 12:00 AM 06/11 12:00 PM 06/12 12:00 AM 06/12 12:00 PM 06/13 12:00 AM 06/13 12:00 PM 06/14 12:00 AM 06/14 12:00 PM 06/15 12:00 AM 06/15 12:00 PM 06/16 12:00 AM 06/16 12:00 PM 06/17 12:00 AM 06/17 12:00 PM 06/18 12:00 AM 06/18 12:00 PM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 12:00 PM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/23 12:00 AM 06/23 12:00 PM 06/24 12:00 AM 06/24 12:00 PM 06/25 12:00 AM 06/25 12:00 PM 06/26 12:00 AM 06/26 12:00 PM 06/27 12:00 AM 06/27 12:00 PM 06/28 12:00 AM 06/28 12:00 PM 06/29 12:00 AM 06/29 12:00 PM 06/30 12:00 AM 06/30 12:00 PM 07/01 12:00 AM 07/01 12:00 PM 07/02 12:00 AM 07/02 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM 06/10 12:00 AM 06/10 12:00 PM 06/11 12:00 AM 06/11 12:00 PM 06/12 12:00 AM 06/12 12:00 PM 06/13 12:00 AM 06/13 12:00 PM 06/14 12:00 AM 06/14 12:00 PM 06/15 12:00 AM 06/15 12:00 PM 06/16 12:00 AM 06/16 12:00 PM 06/17 12:00 AM 06/17 12:00 PM 06/18 12:00 AM 06/18 12:00 PM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 12:00 PM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/23 12:00 AM 06/23 12:00 PM 06/24 12:00 AM 06/24 12:00 PM 06/25 12:00 AM 06/25 12:00 PM 06/26 12:00 AM 06/26 12:00 PM 06/27 12:00 AM 06/27 12:00 PM 06/28 12:00 AM 06/28 12:00 PM 06/29 12:00 AM 06/29 12:00 PM 06/30 12:00 AM 06/30 12:00 PM 07/01 12:00 AM 07/01 12:00 PM 07/02 12:00 AM 07/02 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM Date & Time Date & Time FIGURE 35 SURVEYOR CLIENT 14 BASELINE LOGGER DATA

The data in the right-hand plot averages to 57.7 watts. After an estimate of the display’s “sleep” power state value is derived from other test periods and subtracted from this period’s average, the CPU active power state value for the Baseline period is obtained. Notice that this approach cannot effectively distinguish between the CPU Suspend, Hibernate, and Off power states, so the average values for these power states are obtained

Southern California Edison Page 38 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03 from measurements of representative desktop and laptop computers. Also, since each data point represents 15-minutes, the total number of data points tells us that the display is in a low-power state for about 408 hours, and not 0.4 hours as the Surveyor data in Table 12 indicates. These detailed analyses were repeated with all the logger test data and are summarized in Appendix B. There are significant differences between the logger data and the Surveyor estimates for several individual workstations in each test case. These differences produce significant measurement errors for the Surveyor group estimates in each table and unacceptable uncertainty levels for the annual energy savings estimates. Table 15 summarizes the annual energy usage and the annual energy savings estimates based on the Surveyor data in Tables 12 through 14. Since Surveyor Version 1.4 did not have hourly reporting capability, there are no peak demand reduction estimates.

TABLE 15 SMALL GROUP EVALUATION: SURVEYOR ESTIMATED ENERGY USAGE AND SAVINGS

ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION ANNUAL ENERGY SAVINGS TEST CASE [kWh/(Year·Workstation)] [kWh/(Year·Workstation)] Baseline 751.5 ±146.4 - Monitors Only 380.1 ±45.9 371.4 ±153.4 Evening Hibernate 371.4 ±124.3 380.2 ±192.0

CORRECTING THE SURVEYOR STATE DATA The “as-is” Surveyor results were inaccurate for the Small Group Evaluation tests when compared with the logger results. There were a number of unusual problems that contributed to the large measurement errors in Table 15. As with the 4-day energy use comparisons, the data for Client 14 had errors due, perhaps, to limitations when the display was manually turned off. Client 16 data had repeated days likely due to the user resetting the system date. Client 16 alone added over 535 hours to the Surveyor baseline estimates. Other clients were missing small amounts of time. For example, Client 17 had over a day missing in the Baseline period. Based on the estimated hours from the logger analyses in Appendix B, the Surveyor software overestimated the Baseline CPU “On” time by about 265 hours. The Display “On” time was overestimated by 694 hours, and the Display “Sleep” state was underestimated by 191 hours. The Display “Sleep” state hours were overestimated by close to 261 hours in the Monitors Only case and by close to 338 hours in the Evening Hibernate case, adding to the annual energy savings overestimate. The problem of overestimated Display “Sleep” state hours during the enforcement tests persists even after excluding Client 14 and 16 data from the analyses. Table 16 summarizes the differences between the logger estimated hours and the “as-is” Surveyor state data. The Surveyor database “Exception” table listed 610 records for the Monitors Only test case period and 822 exceptions during the Evening Hibernate test case. The Baseline test case period had only 10 exception records. Most of the records during the two “managed settings” tests, over 97%, either were a Type 7, “PWRSETTINGSCHANGE,” or a Type 8, “SETSCHEMEFAIL,” exception. The Type 7 exception may be related to the use of the server “Profile Task” to accomplish the PC power management testing, and not that the users were changing the power options settings manually as the “ExceptionTableLookup” description indicates. The Type 8 exception, “setting power scheme failed,” may be related to the SID problem that Phase I testing encountered with Surveyor Version 1.4. Over the course of all test cases, there were 19 records of Type 10, “OUTOFSEQRECORDS,” i.e., “out of sequence system state records.” All but two of the exceptions were triggered by Client 16 and appear correlated to the repeated day records in the SystemStateRollup table for

Southern California Edison Page 39 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

this client. If the Surveyor reporting tool had used this information, perhaps the differences relative to the logger data would be smaller.

TABLE 16 DIFFERENCES IN POWER STATE HOURS BETWEEN SURVEYOR AND LOGGER DATA Baseline Operating Hours Differences Hours Diff = Surveyor Estimate - Logger Estimate Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Group Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT CPU On (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.42 279.40 -13.43 265.55 CPU Suspend (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 253.37 0.00 253.38 CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CPU Off (Hours): -0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 2.25 -18.70 -16.22 Display On (Hours): 0.00 12.82 0.00 23.42 0.00 -15.95 0.00 407.58 279.40 -13.43 693.83 Display Sleep (Hours): -0.15 -12.82 0.00 -23.42 0.00 15.95 0.00 -407.60 255.62 -18.70 -191.12 Display Off (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CPU Totals (Hours): -0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 535.02 -32.13 502.72 Display Totals (Hours): -0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.02 535.02 -32.13 502.72

Monitors Only Operating Hours Differences Hours Diff = Surveyor Estimate - Logger Estimate Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Group Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT CPU On (Hours): -3.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.10 0.00 0.00 -1.30 -3.95 -8.40 CPU Suspend (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.02 0.00 2.02 CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CPU Off (Hours): 3.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.98 3.92 9.95 Display On (Hours): -62.63 -138.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 -29.32 0.00 0.00 -14.10 -13.48 -257.82 Display Sleep (Hours): 62.63 138.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.22 0.00 0.00 17.80 13.45 261.38 Display Off (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CPU Totals (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.10 0.00 0.00 3.70 -0.03 3.57 Display Totals (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.10 0.00 0.00 3.70 -0.03 3.57

Evening Hibernate Operating Hours Differences Hours Diff = Surveyor Estimate - Logger Estimate Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Group Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT CPU On (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.27 0.00 0.00 376.20 0.00 375.93 CPU Suspend (Hours): 0.00 323.82 0.00 -0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 174.27 290.78 0.00 788.84 CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CPU Off (Hours): 0.00 -323.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -174.27 -96.50 0.00 -594.58 Display On (Hours): -41.03 -37.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.27 0.00 -37.07 347.53 0.00 231.83 Display Sleep (Hours): 41.03 37.33 0.00 -0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 37.07 222.70 0.00 338.10 Display Off (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CPU Totals (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 0.00 -0.27 0.00 0.00 570.48 0.00 570.18 Display Totals (Hours): 0.00 0.00 0.00 -0.03 0.00 -0.27 0.00 0.00 570.23 0.00 569.93 What if the Surveyor cumulative power-state hours were closer to the estimates derived from the logger data? Given that the power state hours derived from the logger data are only approximations, any corrections only approximate the potential group accuracy of the Surveyor reports and the annual energy savings derived from them. Tables 17 through 19 summarize the results of using the logger state estimates to correct the Surveyor energy consumption estimates. The estimated state data improved the Surveyor energy consumption estimates relative to the logger results, and the measurement error approaches that of the 4-day comparison. Table 20 lists the corrected Surveyor results. Based on these results, the Surveyor reporting tool’s approach works well if the average power state values used in the reporting tool closely reflect the actual workstations power draw in each state. Hence, the Surveyor default values should not be used to determine the annual energy savings, and should only be used for the initial installation and commissioning of the software on a network. One potential improvement remains to be examined: using the average power-state demand values and power-state hours for each workstation in lieu of a single set of power-state demand averages and aggregated power-state hours for all workstations.

Southern California Edison Page 40 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

TABLE 17 SMALL GROUP EVALUATION SURVEYOR CORRECTED DATA COMPARISONS: BASELINE CASE Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10111213141617 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Averages Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT CPU On (Watts): 15.7 48.5 61.3 48.4 54.0 15.7 50.6 51.6 51.2 55.6 45.3 CPU Suspend (Watts): 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.8 CPU Hibernate (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 CPU Off (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 Display On (Watts): 93.9 99.2 82.6 72.2 71.5 64.5 82.0 105.9 93.6 95.1 86.1 Display Sleep (Watts): 8.1 10.0 1.4 2.7 3.0 9.4 5.4 6.6 6.0 3.9 5.6 Display Off (Watts): ------CPU On (Hours): 162.85 522.32 170.28 542.67 551.32 109.53 170.25 552.00 293.75 142.50 3,217.47 CPU Suspend (Hours): 0.10 - - - 0.30 34.42 - - - 0.12 34.93 CPU Hibernate (Hours): ------CPU Off (Hours): 389.05 29.68 381.72 9.33 0.38 408.05 381.75 - 258.25 409.38 2,267.60 Display On (Hours): 162.85 509.50 170.28 519.25 551.32 97.75 170.25 144.00 293.75 142.50 2,761.45 Display Sleep (Hours): 389.15 42.50 381.72 32.75 0.68 454.25 381.75 408.00 258.25 409.50 2,758.55 Display Off (Hours): ------CPU On (kWh): 2.56 25.32 10.43 26.27 29.77 1.72 8.62 28.48 15.03 7.93 145.63 CPU Suspend (kWh): 0.00 - - - 0.00 0.10 - - - 0.00 0.13 CPU Hibernate (kWh): ------CPU Off (kWh): 0.39 0.04 0.53 0.01 0.00 0.41 0.53 - 0.36 0.57 2.99 Display On (kWh): 15.30 50.56 14.06 37.51 39.44 6.30 13.97 15.25 27.50 13.55 237.67 Display Sleep (kWh): 3.16 0.43 0.52 0.09 0.00 4.28 2.05 2.67 1.54 1.61 15.56 Display Off (kWh): ------Surveyor Total (kWh): 21.40 76.35 25.55 63.88 69.22 12.82 25.17 46.40 44.43 23.66 401.98 Loggers Total (kWh): 20.80 75.49 25.15 64.03 69.23 12.70 25.67 47.28 44.26 23.80 408.41 Percent Difference: 2.8% 1.1% 1.6% -0.2% 0.0% 1.0% -2.0% -1.9% 0.4% -0.6% -1.6%

Logger Error (kWh): ± 0.42 ± 1.51 ± 0.50 ± 1.28 ± 1.39 ± 0.25 ± 0.51 ± 0.95 ± 0.89 ± 0.48 ± 8.17 Logger Error (%): ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% Surveyor Error (kWh): ± 0.60 ± 1.51 ± 0.50 ± 1.28 ± 1.39 ± 0.25 ± 0.51 ± 0.95 ± 0.89 ± 0.48 ± 8.36 Surveyor Error (%): ± 2.8% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.1%

CPU Totals (Hours): 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 Display Totals (Hours): 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00 552.00

TABLE 18 SMALL GROUP EVALUATION SURVEYOR CORRECTED DATA: MONITORS ONLY CASE Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10111213141617 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Averages Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT CPU On (Watts): 15.7 48.5 61.3 48.4 54.0 15.7 50.6 51.6 51.2 55.6 45.3 CPU Suspend (Watts): 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.8 CPU Hibernate (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 CPU Off (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 Display On (Watts): 93.9 99.2 82.6 72.2 71.5 64.5 82.0 105.9 93.6 95.1 86.1 Display Sleep (Watts): 8.1 10.0 1.4 2.7 3.0 9.4 5.4 6.6 6.0 3.9 5.6 Display Off (Watts): ------CPU On (Hours): 118.00 528.00 116.25 526.43 511.78 95.02 122.95 263.45 223.50 130.75 2,636.13 CPU Suspend (Hours): - - - - - 36.68 - 234.12 - - 270.80 CPU Hibernate (Hours): ------CPU Off (Hours): 410.00 - 411.75 1.57 16.22 396.30 405.05 30.43 304.50 397.25 2,373.07 Display On (Hours): 118.00 265.00 94.92 67.98 91.37 103.00 92.28 122.22 124.75 125.75 1,205.27 Display Sleep (Hours): 410.00 263.00 433.08 460.02 436.63 425.00 435.72 405.78 403.25 402.25 4,074.73 Display Off (Hours): ------CPU On (kWh): 1.85 25.60 7.12 25.48 27.64 1.50 6.22 13.59 11.44 7.27 119.32 CPU Suspend (kWh): - - - - - 0.11 - 0.94 - - 1.03 CPU Hibernate (kWh): ------CPU Off (kWh): 0.41 - 0.58 0.00 0.02 0.40 0.57 0.04 0.43 0.56 3.13 Display On (kWh): 11.08 26.30 7.84 4.91 6.54 6.64 7.57 12.94 11.68 11.96 103.73 Display Sleep (kWh): 3.33 2.64 0.59 1.24 1.29 4.01 2.34 2.66 2.40 1.58 22.99 Display Off (kWh): ------Surveyor Total (kWh): 16.68 54.54 16.13 31.64 35.49 12.65 16.70 30.17 25.95 21.37 250.19 Loggers Total (kWh): 17.11 54.67 17.15 32.57 37.24 12.78 17.55 29.96 25.97 21.09 266.10 Percent Difference: -2.6% -0.3% -6.4% -2.9% -4.9% -1.1% -5.1% 0.7% -0.1% 1.3% -6.4%

Logger Error (kWh): ± 0.34 ± 1.09 ± 0.34 ± 0.65 ± 0.75 ± 0.26 ± 0.35 ± 0.60 ± 0.52 ± 0.42 ± 5.32 Logger Error (%): ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% Surveyor Error (kWh): ± 0.44 ± 1.09 ± 1.03 ± 0.93 ± 1.75 ± 0.26 ± 0.85 ± 0.60 ± 0.52 ± 0.42 ± 7.88 Surveyor Error (%): ± 2.6% ± 2.0% ± 6.4% ± 2.9% ± 4.9% ± 2.0% ± 5.1% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 3.2%

CPU Totals (Hours): 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 Display Totals (Hours): 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00 528.00

Southern California Edison Page 41 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

TABLE 19 SMALL GROUP EVALUATION SURVEYOR CORRECTED DATA: EVENING HIBERNATE CASE Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10111213141617 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Averages Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT CPU On (Watts): 15.7 48.5 61.3 48.4 54.0 15.7 50.6 51.6 51.2 55.6 45.3 CPU Suspend (Watts): 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.8 CPU Hibernate (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 CPU Off (Watts): 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 Display On (Watts): 93.9 99.2 82.6 72.2 71.5 64.5 82.0 105.9 93.6 95.1 86.1 Display Sleep (Watts): 8.1 10.0 1.4 2.7 3.0 9.4 5.4 6.6 6.0 3.9 5.6 Display Off (Watts): ------CPU On (Hours): 96.58 156.17 130.88 134.05 109.85 115.14 102.37 144.90 146.25 88.25 1,224.44 CPU Suspend (Hours): 13.12 - 14.35 345.95 363.77 115.62 - - - 0.83 853.63 CPU Hibernate (Hours): ------CPU Off (Hours): 370.30 323.83 334.77 - 6.38 249.25 377.63 335.10 333.75 390.92 2,721.93 Display On (Hours): 96.58 123.25 105.30 54.83 74.20 79.90 78.45 116.25 91.50 88.17 908.44 Display Sleep (Hours): 383.42 356.75 374.70 425.16 405.80 400.10 401.55 363.75 388.50 391.83 3,891.56 Display Off (Hours): ------CPU On (kWh): 1.52 7.57 8.02 6.49 5.93 1.81 5.18 7.48 7.48 4.91 55.42 CPU Suspend (kWh): 0.04 - 0.06 1.38 1.46 0.35 - - - 0.00 3.24 CPU Hibernate (kWh): ------CPU Off (kWh): 0.37 0.45 0.47 - 0.01 0.25 0.53 0.47 0.47 0.55 3.59 Display On (kWh): 9.07 12.23 8.69 3.96 5.31 5.15 6.44 12.31 8.57 8.39 78.19 Display Sleep (kWh): 3.11 3.58 0.51 1.15 1.20 3.77 2.15 2.38 2.32 1.54 21.95 Display Off (kWh): ------Surveyor Total (kWh): 14.11 23.84 17.75 12.98 13.90 11.33 14.30 22.64 18.83 15.38 162.39 Loggers Total (kWh): 14.63 24.75 19.11 12.83 14.39 11.54 15.21 22.08 18.93 16.08 169.54 Percent Difference: -3.7% -3.8% -7.6% 1.2% -3.5% -1.8% -6.4% 2.5% -0.5% -4.5% -4.4%

Logger Error (kWh): ± 0.29 ± 0.50 ± 0.38 ± 0.26 ± 0.29 ± 0.23 ± 0.30 ± 0.44 ± 0.38 ± 0.32 ± 3.39 Logger Error (%): ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% ± 2.0% Surveyor Error (kWh): ± 0.52 ± 0.91 ± 1.36 ± 0.26 ± 0.48 ± 0.23 ± 0.91 ± 0.56 ± 0.38 ± 0.70 ± 6.30 Surveyor Error (%): ± 3.7% ± 3.8% ± 7.6% ± 2.0% ± 3.5% ± 2.0% ± 6.4% ± 2.5% ± 2.0% ± 4.5% ± 3.9%

CPU Totals (Hours): 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 Display Totals (Hours): 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00 480.00

TABLE 20 SMALL GROUP EVALUATION: SURVEYOR ESTIMATES CORRECTED WITH LOGGER DATA

ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION ANNUAL ENERGY SAVINGS TEST CASE [kWh/(Year·Workstation)] [kWh/(Year·Workstation)] Baseline 637.9 ±13.3 - Monitors Only 415.1 ±13.1 222.8 ±18.6 Evening Hibernate 296.4 ±11.5 341.6 ±17.6

USING WORKSTATION SPECIFIC DATA As the single workstation test concluded, using a single set of average power-state values to represent a group of workstations introduces additional estimation errors into the Surveyor calculation methodology. These estimation errors are due to the combined effect of individual workstation runtime diversity and their power demand variances. The data from Tables 17 through 19 were used to gauge the impact on the Surveyor reporting tool’s estimates. The Surveyor total energy usage estimates and logger data for each workstation listed in Table 17 for the Baseline case is summarized in Table 21. In Table 17, the value of 401.98 kWh in the cell along the “Surveyor Total (kWh)” row in the “Averages” column was calculated using the set of average power values and power state hours above it in the “Averages” column, replicating the Surveyor estimation methodology. In contrast, the value of 408.88 kWh in Table 21 along the “Surveyor Total (kWh)” row in the “Totals” column is the sum of the individual workstations along the row. This estimate is within 0.1% of the logger measurement of 408.41 kWh. The energy consumption estimates for the other test cases improve as well. In the Monitors Only case, the difference between the Surveyor estimate and the logger measurement is reduced from a value of -6.4% in

Southern California Edison Page 42 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Table 18 to -1.8% in Table 22. For the Evening Hibernate case, the difference is reduced from -4.4% in Table 19 to -2.7% in Table 23.

TABLE 21 IMPACTS OF SINGLE SET AVERAGES FOR THE BASELINE CASE Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Totals Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT Surveyor Total (kWh): 21.40 76.35 25.55 63.88 69.22 12.82 25.17 46.40 44.43 23.66 408.88 Loggers Total (kWh): 20.80 75.49 25.15 64.03 69.23 12.70 25.67 47.28 44.26 23.80 408.41 Differences (kWh): 0.60 0.86 0.40 (0.15) (0.01) 0.12 (0.50) (0.88) 0.17 (0.13) 0.47 Percent Difference: 2.8% 1.1% 1.6% -0.2% 0.0% 1.0% -2.0% -1.9% 0.4% -0.6% 0.1%

TABLE 22 IMPACTS OF SINGLE SET AVERAGES FOR THE MONITORS ONLY CASE Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10111213141617 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Totals Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT Surveyor Total (kWh): 16.68 54.54 16.13 31.64 35.49 12.65 16.70 30.17 25.95 21.37 261.30 Loggers Total (kWh): 17.11 54.67 17.15 32.57 37.24 12.78 17.55 29.96 25.97 21.09 266.10 Differences (kWh): (0.44) (0.14) (1.03) (0.93) (1.75) (0.13) (0.85) 0.21 (0.03) 0.28 (4.80) Percent Difference: -2.6% -0.3% -6.4% -2.9% -4.9% -1.1% -5.1% 0.7% -0.1% 1.3% -1.8%

TABLE 23 IMPACTS OF SINGLE SET AVERAGES FOR THE EVENING HIBERNATE CASE Surveyor Db Client No. 4 6 9 10111213141617 Device ID: D098646 D091505 D107084 D099628 D104259 D096671 D096285 D107076 D104239 D107086 Totals Workstation Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Laptop Desktop Desktop Desktop Desktop Configuration: 21" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT 17" CRT 21" CRT Surveyor Total (kWh): 14.11 23.84 17.75 12.98 13.90 11.33 14.30 22.64 18.83 15.38 165.07 Loggers Total (kWh): 14.63 24.75 19.11 12.83 14.39 11.54 15.21 22.08 18.93 16.08 169.54 Differences (kWh): (0.52) (0.91) (1.36) 0.16 (0.48) (0.21) (0.91) 0.56 (0.10) (0.70) (4.47) Percent Difference: -3.7% -3.8% -7.6% 1.2% -3.5% -1.8% -6.4% 2.5% -0.5% -4.5% -2.7% The revised annual energy consumption and annual energy savings, based on the Surveyor estimates in Tables 21 through 23, are listed in Table 24. Since the measurement error estimates in Table 20 are based on individual workstation data, the measurement error values do not change.

TABLE 24 SMALL GROUP EVALUATION: SURVEYOR RESULTS BASED ON INDIVIDUAL WORKSTATION DATA

ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION ANNUAL ENERGY SAVINGS TEST CASE [kWh/(Year·Workstation)] [kWh/(Year·Workstation)] Baseline 648.9 ±13.3 - Monitors Only 433.5 ±13.1 215.4 ±18.6 Evening Hibernate 301.3 ±11.5 347.6 ±17.6

Southern California Edison Page 43 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

IT PRELIMINARY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE The IT organization’s review of Surveyor Network Energy Manager, version 1.4, focused on the software’s resource requirements, compatibility with SCE’s corporate software applications and existing computer hardware, and whether it satisfied corporate requirements for client-server applications that may be deployed in the production environment. The IT reviews were performed in conjunction with the laboratory power measurements. During laboratory and Phase I testing, the client software was found to be stable and compatible with SCE’s main corporate applications and existing computer hardware. The client application’s resource requirements did not impose any undue burden on any of the tested platforms and did not significantly increase network traffic. The Surveyor Admin application posed no significant problems and was straightforward to configure and manage. However, the use of Microsoft Access in Surveyor version 1.4 as the central data store did not meet the requirements for client-server applications intended for a large production environment with thousands of workstations. Large corporate network databases are standardized on applications such as Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server. For SCE’s corporate IT organization to accept a client-server application such as Surveyor, the central data store had to be upgraded to a SQL database. This corporate IT requirement lead directly to the assessment project division into two parts: one testing Surveyor version 1.4 with its Microsoft Access database within a small group of users where the project manager can rapidly respond to any problems (Phase I), and a second evaluation using a larger group of workstations across a more diverse set of workgroups and physical locations, after SQL database support was added (Phase II). During the Phase I testing, the IT groups responsible for security and application updates did not encounter any problems with the workstations running the Surveyor client application. As Figure 29 clearly shows, the client software did not interfere with what appears to be a “Wake-on-LAN” signal, and a subsequent 30 minute update “push” a day later, that may in part explain the CPU “insomnia” while the monitor “sleeps.” The IT Surveyor administrator did notice some problems with client and server communications and client failures to change Power Schemes that lead to the discovery of the SID issues between Surveyor and the operating system image prevalent on SCE workstations. The SID problems were resolved with Surveyor version 2.1 for the Phase II evaluation testing.

Southern California Edison Page 44 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Phase I Small Group Evaluation reviewed and demonstrated the basic aspects of a networked PC power management application, specifically, Verdiem’s Surveyor Network Energy Manager, version 1.4. Table 25 summarizes the Surveyor-based annual energy savings estimates derived during the Phase I evaluation testing and compares them to the logger derived savings estimates. The original set of Surveyor-based estimates significantly overestimated the savings compared to the logger-based estimates, and the estimated Surveyor measurement errors were unacceptable. Yet, as the progression of corrected results demonstrate, the Surveyor estimates can be improved, and the measurement errors and differences with logger based estimates dramatically reduced.

TABLE 25 SUMMARY COMPARISON OF THE SMALL GROUP EVALUATION RESULTS

ANNUAL ENERGY SAVINGS PERCENT DIFFERENCE TO THE LOGGER [kWh/(Year·Workstation)] BASED SAVINGS ESTIMATES Logger Based Estimates Monitors Only Case 206.7 ±16.0 - Evening Hibernate Case 338.7 ±14.7 - Surveyor (Original, Uncorrected State Data) Monitors Only Case 371.4 ±153.4 44.4% Evening Hibernate Case 380.2 ±192.0 10.9% Surveyor (Corrected State Data) Monitors Only Case 222.8 ±18.6 7.3% Evening Hibernate Case 341.6 ±17.6 0.8% Surveyor (Corrected State Data & Revised Calculation Method) Monitors Only Case 215.4 ±18.6 4.0% Evening Hibernate Case 347.6 ±17.6 2.6%

However, the Phase I Small Group Evaluation numerical results cannot be considered representative of all commercial sector office environments for several reasons:  The results are based on a small sample of only ten workstations,  A single office workgroup cannot adequately represent the work habits and schedules of all potential workgroups,  There are three 21” CRT displays in the sample, three out of ten, and hence, not likely representative of the office workstation population at large,  At least one participant, and possibly two, may have altered their workstation power option settings at the start of the Baseline monitoring period, according to the logger scatter plots, leading to a higher Baseline energy consumption,  The SID problem did not allow the Surveyor software to use the less intrusive Profile Schemes approach with day and night schedules, i.e., the server Profile Task approach that Phase I was forced to use announces itself with a pop-up dialog box telling users that the software was about to shutdown their workstation within a few minutes; and  The differences between the Surveyor and the logger estimated cumulative power- state hours are significant, even after accounting for manual display turn-offs, repeated days due to workstation system date setbacks, and variations in CPU power

Southern California Edison Page 45 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

draw. The SID problem may have contributed to the power-state hours differences in ways not possible for this assessment to ascertain. The Phase I evaluation results support that the Surveyor version 1.4 software, even with the SID problem limitations, is capable of managing workstations across a wide area network (WAN). Also, the Surveyor energy consumption reports are reasonable for estimating annual energy savings if the following requirements are met:  The average power state values used in the reports are based on the actual average power draws of the workstations, i.e., the Surveyor default values are not used to estimate the annual energy savings;  Laptop computers are associated with networked docking stations with a monitor and spend most of their time docked,  The Baseline and Managed measurement periods are of sufficient length to capture user behavior and adjusted to reflect the annual work schedule, and  The problems with the cumulative power-state hours, observed during the Phase I evaluations, are resolved and minimized. The assessment project’s Phase II Large Group Evaluation continues the investigation into the cumulative power-state hours issue with the SID problem resolved. Hence, the final conclusion regarding the overall accuracy of the Surveyor energy consumption estimates, and the annual energy savings based on those estimates, is left to the Phase II evaluation. Several recommendations emerge from the Phase I Small Group Evaluation experience and results:  The Surveyor reporting tool default average demand values should not be used to estimate annual energy savings, and should only be used to commission the software on a network,  The Surveyor Administrator needs to develop and maintain an inventory database that tracks the configuration and average power state values for each workstation in the Surveyor database. The Surveyor database “Client” table and the Admin Tool application should be extended to provide this capability,  The Surveyor Reporting Tool should use information from the Surveyor database “Exception” table to diagnose and warn users of data problems that may invalidate the energy consumption estimates,  The Surveyor Reporting Tool should make the “Best Case,” “Worst Case,” and “Simulated” estimates optional in the reports,  The Surveyor Reporting Tool should be revised to use individual workstation average power-state demand and power-state hours, and  The Surveyor Reporting Tool should be extended to include the calculation of the actual annual energy savings and peak demand reduction by allowing the user to designate the “Baseline” and “Managed” periods in the report.

Southern California Edison Page 46 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A. ADDITIONAL PHASE I WORKSTATION LOGGER CHARTS. The following charts represent the balance of the 4-day workstation logger data used in the Phase I Small Group Evaluation results presented in Table 7.

Datalogger Average Demand Device ID D098646 140

109.2 W Average 120

100

80

CPU On Average = 22.7 Watts CPU Off Average = 1.0 Watts 60 Display On Average = 109.2 - 22.7 = 86.5 Watts Display Sleep Average = 8.7 - 1.0 = 7.7 Watts

15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 15-Minute 40

20

8.5 W Average 8.8 W Average

0 06/19 PM 12:00 06/19 PM 02:00 06/19 PM 04:00 06/19 PM 06:00 06/19 PM 08:00 06/19 PM 10:00 06/20 PM 12:00 06/20 PM 02:00 06/20 PM 04:00 06/20 PM 06:00 06/20 PM 08:00 06/20 PM 10:00 06/21 PM 12:00 06/21 PM 02:00 06/21 PM 04:00 06/21 PM 06:00 06/21 PM 08:00 06/21 PM 10:00 06/22 PM 12:00 06/22 PM 02:00 06/22 PM 04:00 06/22 PM 06:00 06/22 PM 08:00 06/22 PM 10:00 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 02:00 AM 06/19 04:00 AM 06/19 06:00 AM 06/19 08:00 AM 06/19 10:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 02:00 AM 06/20 04:00 AM 06/20 06:00 AM 06/20 08:00 AM 06/20 10:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 02:00 AM 06/21 04:00 AM 06/21 06:00 AM 06/21 08:00 AM 06/21 10:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 02:00 AM 06/22 04:00 AM 06/22 06:00 AM 06/22 08:00 AM 06/22 10:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 47 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Datalogger Average Demand Device ID D091505 170

154.4 W Average 160

153.6 W Average

150.9 W Average

150

CPU On Average = 53 Watts Display On Average = 153.5 - 53 = 100.5 Watts 15-Minute Average Demand(Watts) 15-Minute 140

139.5 W Average 140.1 W Average

130 06/19 12:00 AM 12:00 06/19 AM 02:00 06/19 AM 04:00 06/19 AM 06:00 06/19 AM 08:00 06/19 AM 10:00 06/19 PM 12:00 06/19 PM 02:00 06/19 PM 04:00 06/19 PM 06:00 06/19 PM 08:00 06/19 PM 10:00 06/19 AM 12:00 06/20 AM 02:00 06/20 AM 04:00 06/20 AM 06:00 06/20 AM 08:00 06/20 AM 10:00 06/20 PM 12:00 06/20 PM 02:00 06/20 PM 04:00 06/20 PM 06:00 06/20 PM 08:00 06/20 PM 10:00 06/20 AM 12:00 06/21 AM 02:00 06/21 AM 04:00 06/21 AM 06:00 06/21 AM 08:00 06/21 AM 10:00 06/21 PM 12:00 06/21 PM 02:00 06/21 PM 04:00 06/21 PM 06:00 06/21 PM 08:00 06/21 PM 10:00 06/21 AM 12:00 06/22 AM 02:00 06/22 AM 04:00 06/22 AM 06:00 06/22 AM 08:00 06/22 AM 10:00 06/22 PM 12:00 06/22 PM 02:00 06/22 PM 04:00 06/22 PM 06:00 06/22 PM 08:00 06/22 PM 10:00 06/22 AM 12:00 06/23 Date & Time

Datalogger Average Demand

Device ID D107084

180

146.7 W Average 138.7 W Average

160

140

120 127.4 W Average

100

CPU On Average = 53 Watts CPU Off Average = 1.4 Watts 80 Display On Average = 142.6 - 53 = 89.6 Watts Display Sleep Average = 2.5 - 1.4 = 1.1 Watts

60 15-Minute Average Demand(Watts) 15-Minute

40

20

2.5 W Average 2.5 W Average 0 06/19 12:00 PM 06/19 02:00 PM 06/19 04:00 PM 06/19 06:00 PM 06/19 08:00 PM 06/19 10:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/20 02:00 PM 06/20 04:00 PM 06/20 06:00 PM 06/20 08:00 PM 06/20 10:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/21 02:00 PM 06/21 04:00 PM 06/21 06:00 PM 06/21 08:00 PM 06/21 10:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/22 02:00 PM 06/22 04:00 PM 06/22 06:00 PM 06/22 08:00 PM 06/22 10:00 PM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 02:00 AM 06/19 04:00 AM 06/19 06:00 AM 06/19 08:00 AM 06/19 10:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 02:00 AM 06/20 04:00 AM 06/20 06:00 AM 06/20 08:00 AM 06/20 10:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 02:00 AM 06/21 04:00 AM 06/21 06:00 AM 06/21 08:00 AM 06/21 10:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 02:00 AM 06/22 04:00 AM 06/22 06:00 AM 06/22 08:00 AM 06/22 10:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 48 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Datalogger Average Demand Device ID D099628 160

155

127.3 W Average 150

145

140 CPU On Average = 53 Watts Display On Average = 118.7 - 53 = 65.7 Watts 135

130

125 15-Minute Average Demand(Watts) 15-Minute

120

117.6 W Average 118.0 W Average 115

110 06/19 12:00 PM 06/19 02:00 PM 06/19 04:00 PM 06/19 06:00 PM 06/19 08:00 PM 06/19 10:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/20 02:00 PM 06/20 04:00 PM 06/20 06:00 PM 06/20 08:00 PM 06/20 10:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/21 02:00 PM 06/21 04:00 PM 06/21 06:00 PM 06/21 08:00 PM 06/21 10:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/22 02:00 PM 06/22 04:00 PM 06/22 06:00 PM 06/22 08:00 PM 06/22 10:00 PM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 02:00 AM 06/19 04:00 AM 06/19 06:00 AM 06/19 08:00 AM 06/19 10:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 02:00 AM 06/20 04:00 AM 06/20 06:00 AM 06/20 08:00 AM 06/20 10:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 02:00 AM 06/21 04:00 AM 06/21 06:00 AM 06/21 08:00 AM 06/21 10:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 02:00 AM 06/22 04:00 AM 06/22 06:00 AM 06/22 08:00 AM 06/22 10:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM Date & Time

Datalogger Average Demand

Device ID D104259 160

155

150

133.5 W Average

145

CPU On Average = 53 Watts 131.3 W Average Display On Average = 124.6 - 53 = 71.6 Watts 140

135 15-Minute DemandAverage (Watts) 15-Minute 130

122.9 W Avg 122.9 W Average 122.9 W Average 125

120 06/19 12:00 PM 06/19 02:00 PM 06/19 04:00 PM 06/19 06:00 PM 06/19 08:00 PM 06/19 10:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/20 02:00 PM 06/20 04:00 PM 06/20 06:00 PM 06/20 08:00 PM 06/20 10:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/21 02:00 PM 06/21 04:00 PM 06/21 06:00 PM 06/21 08:00 PM 06/21 10:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/22 02:00 PM 06/22 04:00 PM 06/22 06:00 PM 06/22 08:00 PM 06/22 10:00 PM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 02:00 AM 06/19 04:00 AM 06/19 06:00 AM 06/19 08:00 AM 06/19 10:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 02:00 AM 06/20 04:00 AM 06/20 06:00 AM 06/20 08:00 AM 06/20 10:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 02:00 AM 06/21 04:00 AM 06/21 06:00 AM 06/21 08:00 AM 06/21 10:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 02:00 AM 06/22 04:00 AM 06/22 06:00 AM 06/22 08:00 AM 06/22 10:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 49 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Datalogger Average Demand Device ID D096671 100 79.5 W Average 78.0 W Average

90

80

70

60

50

CPU On Average = 22.7 Watts CPU Off Average = 1.0 Watts 40 Display On Average = 86.6 - 22.7 = 63.9 Watts Display Sleep Average = 10.3 - 1.0 = 9.3 Watts

30 15-Minute DemandAverage (Watts) 15-Minute

20

10 11.0 W Average 10.2 W Average 10.2 W Average

0 06/19 12:00 PM 06/19 02:00 PM 06/19 04:00 PM 06/19 06:00 PM 06/19 08:00 PM 06/19 10:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/20 02:00 PM 06/20 04:00 PM 06/20 06:00 PM 06/20 08:00 PM 06/20 10:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/21 02:00 PM 06/21 04:00 PM 06/21 06:00 PM 06/21 08:00 PM 06/21 10:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/22 02:00 PM 06/22 04:00 PM 06/22 06:00 PM 06/22 08:00 PM 06/22 10:00 PM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 02:00 AM 06/19 04:00 AM 06/19 06:00 AM 06/19 08:00 AM 06/19 10:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 02:00 AM 06/20 04:00 AM 06/20 06:00 AM 06/20 08:00 AM 06/20 10:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 02:00 AM 06/21 04:00 AM 06/21 06:00 AM 06/21 08:00 AM 06/21 10:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 02:00 AM 06/22 04:00 AM 06/22 06:00 AM 06/22 08:00 AM 06/22 10:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM Date & Time

Datalogger Average Demand Device ID D096285 160 135.1 W Average 133.3 W Average

140

120

100

CPU On Average = 53 Watts CPU Off Average = 1.4 Watts 80 Display On Average = 134.5 - 53 = 81.5 Watts Display Sleep Average = 7.1 - 1.4 = 5.7 Watts

60 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 15-Minute 40

20

6.0 W Avg 7.0 W Average 7.2 W Average

0 06/19 12:00 PM 06/19 02:00 PM 06/19 04:00 PM 06/19 06:00 PM 06/19 08:00 PM 06/19 10:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/20 02:00 PM 06/20 04:00 PM 06/20 06:00 PM 06/20 08:00 PM 06/20 10:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/21 02:00 PM 06/21 04:00 PM 06/21 06:00 PM 06/21 08:00 PM 06/21 10:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/22 02:00 PM 06/22 04:00 PM 06/22 06:00 PM 06/22 08:00 PM 06/22 10:00 PM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 02:00 AM 06/19 04:00 AM 06/19 06:00 AM 06/19 08:00 AM 06/19 10:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 02:00 AM 06/20 04:00 AM 06/20 06:00 AM 06/20 08:00 AM 06/20 10:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 02:00 AM 06/21 04:00 AM 06/21 06:00 AM 06/21 08:00 AM 06/21 10:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 02:00 AM 06/22 04:00 AM 06/22 06:00 AM 06/22 08:00 AM 06/22 10:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 50 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Datalogger Average Demand Device ID D104239 200

180 156.8 W Average 161.8 W Average

160

140

120

100

CPU On Average = 53 Watts CPU Off Average = 1.4 Watts 80 Display On Average = 158.6 - 53 = 105.6 Watts Display Sleep Average = 7.8 - 1.4 = 6.4 Watts

60 15-Minute DemandAverage (Watts) 15-Minute

40

20 7.6 W Average 7.6 W Average 7.9 W Average

0 06/19 12:00 PM 06/19 02:00 PM 06/19 04:00 PM 06/19 06:00 PM 06/19 08:00 PM 06/19 10:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/20 02:00 PM 06/20 04:00 PM 06/20 06:00 PM 06/20 08:00 PM 06/20 10:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/21 02:00 PM 06/21 04:00 PM 06/21 06:00 PM 06/21 08:00 PM 06/21 10:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/22 02:00 PM 06/22 04:00 PM 06/22 06:00 PM 06/22 08:00 PM 06/22 10:00 PM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 02:00 AM 06/19 04:00 AM 06/19 06:00 AM 06/19 08:00 AM 06/19 10:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 02:00 AM 06/20 04:00 AM 06/20 06:00 AM 06/20 08:00 AM 06/20 10:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 02:00 AM 06/21 04:00 AM 06/21 06:00 AM 06/21 08:00 AM 06/21 10:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 02:00 AM 06/22 04:00 AM 06/22 06:00 AM 06/22 08:00 AM 06/22 10:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM Date & Time

Datalogger Average Demand Device ID D107086

152.2 W Average 180 151.4 W Average 138.8 W Average

160

140

120

100

CPU On Average = 53 Watts CPU Off Average = 1.4 Watts 80 Display On Average = 151.1 - 53 = 98.1 Watts Display Sleep Average = 5.1 - 1.4 = 3.7 Watts

60 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 15-Minute

40

20

4.8 W Avg 4.9 W Average 5.0 W Average 6.0 W Avg

0 06/19 12:00 PM 06/19 02:00 PM 06/19 04:00 PM 06/19 06:00 PM 06/19 08:00 PM 06/19 10:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/20 02:00 PM 06/20 04:00 PM 06/20 06:00 PM 06/20 08:00 PM 06/20 10:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/21 02:00 PM 06/21 04:00 PM 06/21 06:00 PM 06/21 08:00 PM 06/21 10:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/22 02:00 PM 06/22 04:00 PM 06/22 06:00 PM 06/22 08:00 PM 06/22 10:00 PM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/19 02:00 AM 06/19 04:00 AM 06/19 06:00 AM 06/19 08:00 AM 06/19 10:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/20 02:00 AM 06/20 04:00 AM 06/20 06:00 AM 06/20 08:00 AM 06/20 10:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/21 02:00 AM 06/21 04:00 AM 06/21 06:00 AM 06/21 08:00 AM 06/21 10:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/22 02:00 AM 06/22 04:00 AM 06/22 06:00 AM 06/22 08:00 AM 06/22 10:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 51 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

APPENDIX B. PHASE I LOGGER DETAILED DATA ANALYSIS. The following represent the detailed workstation logger data analyses used in the Phase I Small Group Evaluation. The logger data was used to determine the average power state values, and to judge if the Surveyor estimated cumulative times in each power mode state were correct. Device ID: D107076 Baseline - 23 days (6/10 12:00 AM - 7/2 11:45 PM)Avg. Power Draws kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 552 100.0% 51.15 Watts 28.23 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.40 Watts - CPU Total: 552

Approximate Display On (Hours): 143.75 26.0% 113.88 Watts 16.37 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 408.25 74.0% 6.55 Watts 2.67 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 552 Total: 47.28 0.0% difference

Monitors Only - 22 days (7/3 12:00 AM - 7/24 11:45 PM) % Change kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 267 50.6% -49.4% 51.12 Watts 13.65 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 261 49.4% 49.4% 1.40 Watts 0.37 CPU Total: 528

Approximate Display On (Hours): 127.75 24.2% -1.8% 103.77 Watts 13.26 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 400.25 75.8% 1.8% 6.76 Watts 2.70 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 528 Total: 29.98 0.0% difference

Evening Hibernate - 20 days (8/20 12:00 AM - 9/8 11:45 PM) kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 148.75 31.0% -69.0% 52.53 Watts 7.81 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 331.25 69.0% 69.0% 1.40 Watts 0.46 CPU Total: 480

Approximate Display On (Hours): 116.25 24.2% -1.8% 99.99 Watts 11.62 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 363.75 75.8% 1.8% 6.34 Watts 2.31 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 480 Total: 22.21 0.6% difference

Overall Test Cases Power Draw Averages Approximate CPU On: 51.60 Watts 49.94 kWh Approximate CPU Suspend: 4.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Hibernate: 1.40 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Off: 1.40 Watts 0.83 kWh Approximate Display On: 105.88 Watts 41.06 kWh Approximate Display Sleep: 6.55 Watts 7.68 kWh Approximate Display Off: - Watts - kWh Total: 99.50 kWh 0.2% difference

Southern California Edison Page 52 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Average Demand Device ID D107076 250

200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute

50

0 06/10 12:00 PM 12:00 06/10 PM 12:00 06/11 PM 12:00 06/12 PM 12:00 06/13 PM 12:00 06/14 PM 12:00 06/15 PM 12:00 06/16 PM 12:00 06/17 PM 12:00 06/18 PM 12:00 06/19 PM 12:00 06/20 PM 12:00 06/21 PM 12:00 06/22 PM 12:00 06/23 PM 12:00 06/24 PM 12:00 06/25 PM 12:00 06/26 PM 12:00 06/27 PM 12:00 06/28 PM 12:00 06/29 PM 12:00 06/30 PM 12:00 07/01 PM 12:00 07/02 06/10 12:00 AM 12:00 06/10 AM 12:00 06/11 AM 12:00 06/12 AM 12:00 06/13 AM 12:00 06/14 AM 12:00 06/15 AM 12:00 06/16 AM 12:00 06/17 AM 12:00 06/18 AM 12:00 06/19 AM 12:00 06/20 AM 12:00 06/21 AM 12:00 06/22 AM 12:00 06/23 AM 12:00 06/24 AM 12:00 06/25 AM 12:00 06/26 AM 12:00 06/27 AM 12:00 06/28 AM 12:00 06/29 AM 12:00 06/30 AM 12:00 07/01 AM 12:00 07/02 AM 12:00 07/03 Date & Time

Monitors Only Average Demand Device ID D107076 250

200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute

50

0 07/03 12:00 PM 07/04 12:00 PM 07/05 12:00 PM 07/06 12:00 PM 07/07 12:00 PM 07/08 12:00 PM 07/09 12:00 PM 07/10 12:00 PM 07/11 12:00 PM 07/12 12:00 PM 07/13 12:00 PM 07/14 12:00 PM 07/15 12:00 PM 07/16 12:00 PM 07/17 12:00 PM 07/18 12:00 PM 07/19 12:00 PM 07/20 12:00 PM 07/21 12:00 PM 07/22 12:00 PM 07/23 12:00 PM 07/24 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM 12:00 07/03 AM 12:00 07/04 AM 12:00 07/05 AM 12:00 07/06 AM 12:00 07/07 AM 12:00 07/08 AM 12:00 07/09 AM 12:00 07/10 AM 12:00 07/11 AM 12:00 07/12 AM 12:00 07/13 AM 12:00 07/14 AM 12:00 07/15 AM 12:00 07/16 AM 12:00 07/17 AM 12:00 07/18 AM 12:00 07/19 AM 12:00 07/20 AM 12:00 07/21 AM 12:00 07/22 AM 12:00 07/23 AM 12:00 07/24 AM 12:00 07/25 Date & Time

Evening Hibernate Average Demand Device ID D107076 250

200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute

50

0 08/20 12:00 PM 08/21 12:00 PM 08/22 12:00 PM 08/23 12:00 PM 08/24 12:00 PM 08/25 12:00 PM 08/26 12:00 PM 08/27 12:00 PM 08/28 12:00 PM 08/29 12:00 PM 08/30 12:00 PM 08/31 12:00 PM 09/01 12:00 PM 09/02 12:00 PM 09/03 12:00 PM 09/04 12:00 PM 09/05 12:00 PM 09/06 12:00 PM 09/07 12:00 PM 09/08 12:00 PM 08/20 12:00 AM 12:00 08/20 AM 12:00 08/21 AM 12:00 08/22 AM 12:00 08/23 AM 12:00 08/24 AM 12:00 08/25 AM 12:00 08/26 AM 12:00 08/27 AM 12:00 08/28 AM 12:00 08/29 AM 12:00 08/30 AM 12:00 08/31 AM 12:00 09/01 AM 12:00 09/02 AM 12:00 09/03 AM 12:00 09/04 AM 12:00 09/05 AM 12:00 09/06 AM 12:00 09/07 AM 12:00 09/08 AM 12:00 09/09 Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 53 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Device ID: D091505 Baseline - 23 days (6/10 12:00 AM - 7/2 11:45 PM)Avg. Power Draws kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 522.25 94.6% 45.69 Watts 23.86 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 29.75 5.4% 1.40 Watts 0.04 CPU Total: 552

Approximate Display On (Hours): 509.5 92.3% 100.37 Watts 51.14 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 42.5 7.7% 10.71 Watts 0.46 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 552 Total: 75.49 0.0% difference

Monitors Only - 22 days (7/3 12:00 AM - 7/24 11:45 PM) % Change kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 528 100.0% 5.4% 51.62 Watts 27.26 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 0 0.0% -5.4% 1.40 Watts - CPU Total: 528

Approximate Display On (Hours): 265 50.2% -42.1% 95.51 Watts 25.31 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 263 49.8% 42.1% 8.00 Watts 2.10 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 528 Total: 54.67 0.0% difference

Evening Hibernate - 20 days (8/20 12:00 AM - 9/8 11:45 PM) kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 161.5 33.6% -61.0% 48.13 Watts 7.77 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 318.5 66.4% 61.0% 1.40 Watts 0.45 CPU Total: 480

Approximate Display On (Hours): 123.25 25.7% -66.6% 101.82 Watts 12.55 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 356.75 74.3% 66.6% 11.42 Watts 4.07 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 480 Total: 24.84 0.4% difference

Overall Test Cases Power Draw Averages Approximate CPU On: 48.48 Watts 58.75 kWh Approximate CPU Suspend: 4.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Hibernate: 1.40 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Off: 1.40 Watts 0.49 kWh Approximate Display On: 99.23 Watts 89.09 kWh Approximate Display Sleep: 10.04 Watts 6.65 kWh Approximate Display Off: - Watts - kWh Total: 154.97 kWh 0.0% difference

Southern California Edison Page 54 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Average Demand Device ID D091505 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute 50

0 06/10 12:00 PM 06/11 12:00 PM 06/12 12:00 PM 06/13 12:00 PM 06/14 12:00 PM 06/15 12:00 PM 06/16 12:00 PM 06/17 12:00 PM 06/18 12:00 PM 06/19 12:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/23 12:00 PM 06/24 12:00 PM 06/25 12:00 PM 06/26 12:00 PM 06/27 12:00 PM 06/28 12:00 PM 06/29 12:00 PM 06/30 12:00 PM 07/01 12:00 PM 07/02 12:00 PM 06/10 12:00 AM 06/11 12:00 AM 06/12 12:00 AM 06/13 12:00 AM 06/14 12:00 AM 06/15 12:00 AM 06/16 12:00 AM 06/17 12:00 AM 06/18 12:00 AM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM 06/24 12:00 AM 06/25 12:00 AM 06/26 12:00 AM 06/27 12:00 AM 06/28 12:00 AM 06/29 12:00 AM 06/30 12:00 AM 07/01 12:00 AM 07/02 12:00 AM 07/03 12:00 AM Date & Time

Monitors Only Average Demand Device ID D091505 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 50

0 07/03 12:00 PM 07/04 12:00 PM 07/05 12:00 PM 07/06 12:00 PM 07/07 12:00 PM 07/08 12:00 PM 07/09 12:00 PM 07/10 12:00 PM 07/11 12:00 PM 07/12 12:00 PM 07/13 12:00 PM 07/14 12:00 PM 07/15 12:00 PM 07/16 12:00 PM 07/17 12:00 PM 07/18 12:00 PM 07/19 12:00 PM 07/20 12:00 PM 07/21 12:00 PM 07/22 12:00 PM 07/23 12:00 PM 07/24 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM07/03 12:00 AM07/04 12:00 AM07/05 12:00 AM07/06 12:00 AM07/07 12:00 AM07/08 12:00 AM07/09 12:00 AM07/10 12:00 AM07/11 12:00 AM07/12 12:00 AM07/13 12:00 AM07/14 12:00 AM07/15 12:00 AM07/16 12:00 AM07/17 12:00 AM07/18 12:00 AM07/19 12:00 AM07/20 12:00 AM07/21 12:00 AM07/22 12:00 AM07/23 12:00 AM07/24 12:00 AM07/25 12:00 Date & Time

Evening Hibernate Average Demand Device ID D091505 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 50

0 08/20 12:00 PM 08/21 12:00 PM 08/22 12:00 PM 08/23 12:00 PM 08/24 12:00 PM 08/25 12:00 PM 08/26 12:00 PM 08/27 12:00 PM 08/28 12:00 PM 08/29 12:00 PM 08/30 12:00 PM 08/31 12:00 PM 09/01 12:00 PM 09/02 12:00 PM 09/03 12:00 PM 09/04 12:00 PM 09/05 12:00 PM 09/06 12:00 PM 09/07 12:00 PM 09/08 12:00 PM 08/20 12:00 AM 08/21 12:00 AM 08/22 12:00 AM 08/23 12:00 AM 08/24 12:00 AM 08/25 12:00 AM 08/26 12:00 AM 08/27 12:00 AM 08/28 12:00 AM 08/29 12:00 AM 08/30 12:00 AM 08/31 12:00 AM 09/01 12:00 AM 09/02 12:00 AM 09/03 12:00 AM 09/04 12:00 AM 09/05 12:00 AM 09/06 12:00 AM 09/07 12:00 AM 09/08 12:00 AM 09/09 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 55 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Device ID: D096285 Baseline - 23 days (6/10 12:00 AM - 7/2 11:45 PM)Avg. Power Draws kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 175.5 31.8% 53.00 Watts 9.30 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 376.5 68.2% 1.40 Watts 0.53 CPU Total: 552

Approximate Display On (Hours): 175.5 31.8% 78.25 Watts 13.73 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 376.5 68.2% 5.60 Watts 2.11 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 552 Total: 25.67 0.0% difference

Monitors Only - 22 days (7/3 12:00 AM - 7/24 11:45 PM) % Change kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 126.5 24.0% -7.8% 49.45 Watts 6.25 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 401.5 76.0% 7.8% 1.40 Watts 0.56 CPU Total: 528

Approximate Display On (Hours): 103 19.5% -12.3% 82.95 Watts 8.54 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 425 80.5% 12.3% 5.14 Watts 2.18 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 528 Total: 17.54 0.0% difference

Evening Hibernate - 20 days (8/20 12:00 AM - 9/8 11:45 PM) kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 105.5 22.0% -9.8% 49.41 Watts 5.21 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 374.5 78.0% 9.8% 1.40 Watts 0.52 CPU Total: 480

Approximate Display On (Hours): 86.75 18.1% -13.7% 84.95 Watts 7.37 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 393.25 81.9% 13.7% 5.34 Watts 2.10 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 480 Total: 15.21 0.0% difference

Overall Test Cases Power Draw Averages Approximate CPU On: 50.62 Watts 20.63 kWh Approximate CPU Suspend: 4.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Hibernate: 1.40 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Off: 1.40 Watts 1.61 kWh Approximate Display On: 82.05 Watts 29.97 kWh Approximate Display Sleep: 5.36 Watts 6.40 kWh Approximate Display Off: - Watts - kWh Total: 58.61 kWh 0.3% difference

Southern California Edison Page 56 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Average Demand Device ID D096285 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute 50

0 06/10 12:00 PM 06/11 12:00 PM 06/12 12:00 PM 06/13 12:00 PM 06/14 12:00 PM 06/15 12:00 PM 06/16 12:00 PM 06/17 12:00 PM 06/18 12:00 PM 06/19 12:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/23 12:00 PM 06/24 12:00 PM 06/25 12:00 PM 06/26 12:00 PM 06/27 12:00 PM 06/28 12:00 PM 06/29 12:00 PM 06/30 12:00 PM 07/01 12:00 PM 07/02 12:00 PM 06/10 12:00 AM 06/11 12:00 AM 06/12 12:00 AM 06/13 12:00 AM 06/14 12:00 AM 06/15 12:00 AM 06/16 12:00 AM 06/17 12:00 AM 06/18 12:00 AM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM 06/24 12:00 AM 06/25 12:00 AM 06/26 12:00 AM 06/27 12:00 AM 06/28 12:00 AM 06/29 12:00 AM 06/30 12:00 AM 07/01 12:00 AM 07/02 12:00 AM 07/03 12:00 AM Date & Time

Monitors Only Average Demand Device ID D096285 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 50

0 07/03 12:00 PM 07/04 12:00 PM 07/05 12:00 PM 07/06 12:00 PM 07/07 12:00 PM 07/08 12:00 PM 07/09 12:00 PM 07/10 12:00 PM 07/11 12:00 PM 07/12 12:00 PM 07/13 12:00 PM 07/14 12:00 PM 07/15 12:00 PM 07/16 12:00 PM 07/17 12:00 PM 07/18 12:00 PM 07/19 12:00 PM 07/20 12:00 PM 07/21 12:00 PM 07/22 12:00 PM 07/23 12:00 PM 07/24 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM 07/04 12:00 AM 07/05 12:00 AM 07/06 12:00 AM 07/07 12:00 AM 07/08 12:00 AM 07/09 12:00 AM 07/10 12:00 AM 07/11 12:00 AM 07/12 12:00 AM 07/13 12:00 AM 07/14 12:00 AM 07/15 12:00 AM 07/16 12:00 AM 07/17 12:00 AM 07/18 12:00 AM 07/19 12:00 AM 07/20 12:00 AM 07/21 12:00 AM 07/22 12:00 AM 07/23 12:00 AM 07/24 12:00 AM 07/25 12:00 AM Date & Time

Evening Hibernate Average Demand Device ID D096285 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 50

0 08/20 12:00 PM 08/21 12:00 PM 08/22 12:00 PM 08/23 12:00 PM 08/24 12:00 PM 08/25 12:00 PM 08/26 12:00 PM 08/27 12:00 PM 08/28 12:00 PM 08/29 12:00 PM 08/30 12:00 PM 08/31 12:00 PM 09/01 12:00 PM 09/02 12:00 PM 09/03 12:00 PM 09/04 12:00 PM 09/05 12:00 PM 09/06 12:00 PM 09/07 12:00 PM 09/08 12:00 PM 08/20 12:00 AM 08/21 12:00 AM 08/22 12:00 AM 08/23 12:00 AM 08/24 12:00 AM 08/25 12:00 AM 08/26 12:00 AM 08/27 12:00 AM 08/28 12:00 AM 08/29 12:00 AM 08/30 12:00 AM 08/31 12:00 AM 09/01 12:00 AM 09/02 12:00 AM 09/03 12:00 AM 09/04 12:00 AM 09/05 12:00 AM 09/06 12:00 AM 09/07 12:00 AM 09/08 12:00 AM 09/09 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 57 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Device ID: D096671 Baseline - 23 days (6/10 12:00 AM - 7/2 11:45 PM)Avg. Power Draws kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 111 20.1% 16.00 Watts 1.78 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 3.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 441 79.9% 1.00 Watts 0.44 CPU Total: 552

Approximate Display On (Hours): 97.75 17.7% 65.70 Watts 6.42 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 454.25 82.3% 8.92 Watts 4.05 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 552 Total: 12.69 0.0% difference

Monitors Only - 22 days (7/3 12:00 AM - 7/24 11:45 PM) % Change kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 105 19.9% -0.2% 15.36 Watts 1.61 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 3.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 423 80.1% 0.2% 1.00 Watts 0.42 CPU Total: 528

Approximate Display On (Hours): 103 19.5% 1.8% 67.20 Watts 6.92 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 425 80.5% -1.8% 9.97 Watts 4.24 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 528 Total: 13.19 3.1% difference

Evening Hibernate - 20 days (8/20 12:00 AM - 9/8 11:45 PM) kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 107 22.3% 2.2% 15.85 Watts 1.70 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 3.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 373 77.7% -2.2% 1.00 Watts 0.37 CPU Total: 480

Approximate Display On (Hours): 97 20.2% 2.5% 60.51 Watts 5.87 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 383 79.8% -2.5% 9.40 Watts 3.60 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 480 Total: 11.54 0.0% difference

Overall Test Cases Power Draw Averages Approximate CPU On: 15.74 Watts 5.08 kWh Approximate CPU Suspend: 3.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Hibernate: 1.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Off: 1.00 Watts 1.24 kWh Approximate Display On: 64.47 Watts 19.20 kWh Approximate Display Sleep: 9.43 Watts 11.90 kWh Approximate Display Off: - Watts - kWh Total: 37.42 kWh 1.1% difference

Southern California Edison Page 58 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Average Demand Device ID D096671 150

100

50 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute

0 06/10 12:00 PM 12:00 06/10 PM 12:00 06/11 PM 12:00 06/12 PM 12:00 06/13 PM 12:00 06/14 PM 12:00 06/15 PM 12:00 06/16 PM 12:00 06/17 PM 12:00 06/18 PM 12:00 06/19 PM 12:00 06/20 PM 12:00 06/21 PM 12:00 06/22 PM 12:00 06/23 PM 12:00 06/24 PM 12:00 06/25 PM 12:00 06/26 PM 12:00 06/27 PM 12:00 06/28 PM 12:00 06/29 PM 12:00 06/30 PM 12:00 07/01 PM 12:00 07/02 06/10 12:00 AM 12:00 06/10 AM 12:00 06/11 AM 12:00 06/12 AM 12:00 06/13 AM 12:00 06/14 AM 12:00 06/15 AM 12:00 06/16 AM 12:00 06/17 AM 12:00 06/18 AM 12:00 06/19 AM 12:00 06/20 AM 12:00 06/21 AM 12:00 06/22 AM 12:00 06/23 AM 12:00 06/24 AM 12:00 06/25 AM 12:00 06/26 AM 12:00 06/27 AM 12:00 06/28 AM 12:00 06/29 AM 12:00 06/30 AM 12:00 07/01 AM 12:00 07/02 AM 12:00 07/03 Date & Time

Monitors Only Average Demand Device ID D096671 150

100

50 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute

0 07/03 12:00 PM 07/04 12:00 PM 07/05 12:00 PM 07/06 12:00 PM 07/07 12:00 PM 07/08 12:00 PM 07/09 12:00 PM 07/10 12:00 PM 07/11 12:00 PM 07/12 12:00 PM 07/13 12:00 PM 07/14 12:00 PM 07/15 12:00 PM 07/16 12:00 PM 07/17 12:00 PM 07/18 12:00 PM 07/19 12:00 PM 07/20 12:00 PM 07/21 12:00 PM 07/22 12:00 PM 07/23 12:00 PM 07/24 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM 07/04 12:00 AM 07/05 12:00 AM 07/06 12:00 AM 07/07 12:00 AM 07/08 12:00 AM 07/09 12:00 AM 07/10 12:00 AM 07/11 12:00 AM 07/12 12:00 AM 07/13 12:00 AM 07/14 12:00 AM 07/15 12:00 AM 07/16 12:00 AM 07/17 12:00 AM 07/18 12:00 AM 07/19 12:00 AM 07/20 12:00 AM 07/21 12:00 AM 07/22 12:00 AM 07/23 12:00 AM 07/24 12:00 AM 07/25 12:00 AM Date & Time

Evening Hibernate Average Demand Device ID D096671 150

100

50 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute

0 08/20 12:00 PM 08/21 12:00 PM 08/22 12:00 PM 08/23 12:00 PM 08/24 12:00 PM 08/25 12:00 PM 08/26 12:00 PM 08/27 12:00 PM 08/28 12:00 PM 08/29 12:00 PM 08/30 12:00 PM 08/31 12:00 PM 09/01 12:00 PM 09/02 12:00 PM 09/03 12:00 PM 09/04 12:00 PM 09/05 12:00 PM 09/06 12:00 PM 09/07 12:00 PM 09/08 12:00 PM 08/20 12:00 AM 08/21 12:00 AM 08/22 12:00 AM 08/23 12:00 AM 08/24 12:00 AM 08/25 12:00 AM 08/26 12:00 AM 08/27 12:00 AM 08/28 12:00 AM 08/29 12:00 AM 08/30 12:00 AM 08/31 12:00 AM 09/01 12:00 AM 09/02 12:00 AM 09/03 12:00 AM 09/04 12:00 AM 09/05 12:00 AM 09/06 12:00 AM 09/07 12:00 AM 09/08 12:00 AM 09/09 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 59 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Device ID: D098646 Baseline - 23 days (6/10 12:00 AM - 7/2 11:45 PM)Avg. Power Draws kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 164.5 29.8% 15.70 Watts 2.58 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 3.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 387.5 70.2% 1.00 Watts 0.39 CPU Total: 552

Approximate Display On (Hours): 164.5 29.8% 88.72 Watts 14.60 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 387.5 70.2% 7.99 Watts 3.10 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 552 Total: 20.66 -0.7% difference

Monitors Only - 22 days (7/3 12:00 AM - 7/24 11:45 PM) % Change kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 118 22.3% -7.5% 15.70 Watts 1.85 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 3.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 410 77.7% 7.5% 1.00 Watts 0.41 CPU Total: 528

Approximate Display On (Hours): 118 22.3% -7.5% 97.93 Watts 11.56 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 410 77.7% 7.5% 8.04 Watts 3.30 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 528 Total: 17.12 0.0% difference

Evening Hibernate - 20 days (8/20 12:00 AM - 9/8 11:45 PM) kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 100 20.8% -9.0% 15.70 Watts 1.57 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 3.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 380 79.2% 9.0% 1.00 Watts 0.38 CPU Total: 480

Approximate Display On (Hours): 100 20.8% -9.0% 95.17 Watts 9.52 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 380 79.2% 9.0% 8.32 Watts 3.16 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 480 Total: 14.63 0.0% difference

Overall Test Cases Power Draw Averages Approximate CPU On: 15.70 Watts 6.01 kWh Approximate CPU Suspend: 3.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Hibernate: 1.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Off: 1.00 Watts 1.18 kWh Approximate Display On: 93.94 Watts 35.93 kWh Approximate Display Sleep: 8.12 Watts 9.56 kWh Approximate Display Off: - Watts - kWh Total: 52.67 kWh 0.2% difference

Southern California Edison Page 60 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Average Demand Device ID D098646 150

100

50 15-Minute Average (Watts) Demand 15-Minute

0 06/10 12:00 PM 06/11 12:00 PM 06/12 12:00 PM 06/13 12:00 PM 06/14 12:00 PM 06/15 12:00 PM 06/16 12:00 PM 06/17 12:00 PM 06/18 12:00 PM 06/19 12:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/23 12:00 PM 06/24 12:00 PM 06/25 12:00 PM 06/26 12:00 PM 06/27 12:00 PM 06/28 12:00 PM 06/29 12:00 PM 06/30 12:00 PM 07/01 12:00 PM 07/02 12:00 PM 06/10 12:00 AM 06/11 12:00 AM 06/12 12:00 AM 06/13 12:00 AM 06/14 12:00 AM 06/15 12:00 AM 06/16 12:00 AM 06/17 12:00 AM 06/18 12:00 AM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM 06/24 12:00 AM 06/25 12:00 AM 06/26 12:00 AM 06/27 12:00 AM 06/28 12:00 AM 06/29 12:00 AM 06/30 12:00 AM 07/01 12:00 AM 07/02 12:00 AM 07/03 12:00 AM Date & Time

Monitors Only Average Demand Device ID D098646 150

100

50 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts)

0 07/03 12:00 PM 07/04 12:00 PM 07/05 12:00 PM 07/06 12:00 PM 07/07 12:00 PM 07/08 12:00 PM 07/09 12:00 PM 07/10 12:00 PM 07/11 12:00 PM 07/12 12:00 PM 07/13 12:00 PM 07/14 12:00 PM 07/15 12:00 PM 07/16 12:00 PM 07/17 12:00 PM 07/18 12:00 PM 07/19 12:00 PM 07/20 12:00 PM 07/21 12:00 PM 07/22 12:00 PM 07/23 12:00 PM 07/24 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM 07/04 12:00 AM 07/05 12:00 AM 07/06 12:00 AM 07/07 12:00 AM 07/08 12:00 AM 07/09 12:00 AM 07/10 12:00 AM 07/11 12:00 AM 07/12 12:00 AM 07/13 12:00 AM 07/14 12:00 AM 07/15 12:00 AM 07/16 12:00 AM 07/17 12:00 AM 07/18 12:00 AM 07/19 12:00 AM 07/20 12:00 AM 07/21 12:00 AM 07/22 12:00 AM 07/23 12:00 AM 07/24 12:00 AM 07/25 12:00 AM Date & Time

Evening Hibernate Average Demand Device ID D098646 150

100

50 15-Minute Average Demand(Watts)

0 08/20 12:00 PM 08/21 12:00 PM 08/22 12:00 PM 08/23 12:00 PM 08/24 12:00 PM 08/25 12:00 PM 08/26 12:00 PM 08/27 12:00 PM 08/28 12:00 PM 08/29 12:00 PM 08/30 12:00 PM 08/31 12:00 PM 09/01 12:00 PM 09/02 12:00 PM 09/03 12:00 PM 09/04 12:00 PM 09/05 12:00 PM 09/06 12:00 PM 09/07 12:00 PM 09/08 12:00 PM 08/20 12:00 AM 08/21 12:00 AM 08/22 12:00 AM 08/23 12:00 AM 08/24 12:00 AM 08/25 12:00 AM 08/26 12:00 AM 08/27 12:00 AM 08/28 12:00 AM 08/29 12:00 AM 08/30 12:00 AM 08/31 12:00 AM 09/01 12:00 AM 09/02 12:00 AM 09/03 12:00 AM 09/04 12:00 AM 09/05 12:00 AM 09/06 12:00 AM 09/07 12:00 AM 09/08 12:00 AM 09/09 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 61 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Device ID: D099628 Baseline - 23 days (6/10 12:00 AM - 7/2 11:45 PM)Avg. Power Draws kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 542.5 98.3% 47.63 Watts 25.84 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 9.5 1.7% 1.40 Watts 0.01 CPU Total: 552

Approximate Display On (Hours): 519.25 94.1% 72.24 Watts 37.51 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 32.75 5.9% 3.16 Watts 0.10 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 552 Total: 63.46 -0.9% difference

Monitors Only - 22 days (7/3 12:00 AM - 7/24 11:45 PM) % Change kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 527.75 100.0% 1.7% 48.07 Watts 25.37 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 0.25 0.0% -1.7% 1.40 Watts 0.00 CPU Total: 528

Approximate Display On (Hours): 82.5 15.6% -78.4% 72.68 Watts 6.00 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 445.5 84.4% 78.4% 2.70 Watts 1.20 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 528 Total: 32.57 0.0% difference

Evening Hibernate - 20 days (8/20 12:00 AM - 9/8 11:45 PM) kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 140 29.2% -69.1% 49.52 Watts 6.93 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 340 70.8% 69.1% 1.40 Watts 0.48 CPU Total: 480

Approximate Display On (Hours): 62.5 13.0% -81.0% 71.80 Watts 4.49 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 417.5 87.0% 81.0% 2.24 Watts 0.93 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 480 Total: 12.83 0.0% difference

Overall Test Cases Power Draw Averages Approximate CPU On: 48.41 Watts 58.58 kWh Approximate CPU Suspend: 4.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Hibernate: 1.40 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Off: 1.40 Watts 0.49 kWh Approximate Display On: 72.24 Watts 47.98 kWh Approximate Display Sleep: 2.70 Watts 2.42 kWh Approximate Display Off: - Watts - kWh Total: 109.48 kWh 0.0% difference

Southern California Edison Page 62 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Average Demand Device ID D099628 200

150

100 15-Minute Average (Watts) Demand 15-Minute 50

0 06/10 12:00 PM 06/11 12:00 PM 06/12 12:00 PM 06/13 12:00 PM 06/14 12:00 PM 06/15 12:00 PM 06/16 12:00 PM 06/17 12:00 PM 06/18 12:00 PM 06/19 12:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/23 12:00 PM 06/24 12:00 PM 06/25 12:00 PM 06/26 12:00 PM 06/27 12:00 PM 06/28 12:00 PM 06/29 12:00 PM 06/30 12:00 PM 07/01 12:00 PM 07/02 12:00 PM 06/10 12:00 AM06/10 12:00 AM06/11 12:00 AM06/12 12:00 AM06/13 12:00 AM06/14 12:00 AM06/15 12:00 AM06/16 12:00 AM06/17 12:00 AM06/18 12:00 AM06/19 12:00 AM06/20 12:00 AM06/21 12:00 AM06/22 12:00 AM06/23 12:00 AM06/24 12:00 AM06/25 12:00 AM06/26 12:00 AM06/27 12:00 AM06/28 12:00 AM06/29 12:00 AM06/30 12:00 AM07/01 12:00 AM07/02 12:00 AM07/03 12:00 Date & Time

Monitors Only Average Demand Device ID D099628 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute 50

0 07/03 12:00 PM 07/04 12:00 PM 07/05 12:00 PM 07/06 12:00 PM 07/07 12:00 PM 07/08 12:00 PM 07/09 12:00 PM 07/10 12:00 PM 07/11 12:00 PM 07/12 12:00 PM 07/13 12:00 PM 07/14 12:00 PM 07/15 12:00 PM 07/16 12:00 PM 07/17 12:00 PM 07/18 12:00 PM 07/19 12:00 PM 07/20 12:00 PM 07/21 12:00 PM 07/22 12:00 PM 07/23 12:00 PM 07/24 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM 07/04 12:00 AM 07/05 12:00 AM 07/06 12:00 AM 07/07 12:00 AM 07/08 12:00 AM 07/09 12:00 AM 07/10 12:00 AM 07/11 12:00 AM 07/12 12:00 AM 07/13 12:00 AM 07/14 12:00 AM 07/15 12:00 AM 07/16 12:00 AM 07/17 12:00 AM 07/18 12:00 AM 07/19 12:00 AM 07/20 12:00 AM 07/21 12:00 AM 07/22 12:00 AM 07/23 12:00 AM 07/24 12:00 AM 07/25 12:00 AM Date & Time

Evening Hibernate Average Demand Device ID D099628 150

100

50 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts)

0 08/20 12:00 PM 08/21 12:00 PM 08/22 12:00 PM 08/23 12:00 PM 08/24 12:00 PM 08/25 12:00 PM 08/26 12:00 PM 08/27 12:00 PM 08/28 12:00 PM 08/29 12:00 PM 08/30 12:00 PM 08/31 12:00 PM 09/01 12:00 PM 09/02 12:00 PM 09/03 12:00 PM 09/04 12:00 PM 09/05 12:00 PM 09/06 12:00 PM 09/07 12:00 PM 09/08 12:00 PM 08/20 12:00 AM 08/21 12:00 AM 08/22 12:00 AM 08/23 12:00 AM 08/24 12:00 AM 08/25 12:00 AM 08/26 12:00 AM 08/27 12:00 AM 08/28 12:00 AM 08/29 12:00 AM 08/30 12:00 AM 08/31 12:00 AM 09/01 12:00 AM 09/02 12:00 AM 09/03 12:00 AM 09/04 12:00 AM 09/05 12:00 AM 09/06 12:00 AM 09/07 12:00 AM 09/08 12:00 AM 09/09 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 63 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Device ID: D104239 Baseline - 23 days (6/10 12:00 AM - 7/2 11:45 PM)Avg. Power Draws kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 295.5 53.5% 51.17 Watts 15.12 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 256.5 46.5% 1.40 Watts 0.36 CPU Total: 552

Approximate Display On (Hours): 295.5 53.5% 92.08 Watts 27.21 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 256.5 46.5% 6.12 Watts 1.57 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 552 Total: 44.26 0.0% difference

Monitors Only - 22 days (7/3 12:00 AM - 7/24 11:45 PM) % Change kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 223.5 42.3% -11.2% 51.30 Watts 11.47 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 304.5 57.7% 11.2% 1.40 Watts 0.43 CPU Total: 528

Approximate Display On (Hours): 124.75 23.6% -29.9% 94.00 Watts 11.73 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 403.25 76.4% 29.9% 5.81 Watts 2.34 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 528 Total: 25.96 0.0% difference

Evening Hibernate - 20 days (8/20 12:00 AM - 9/8 11:45 PM) kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 146.25 30.5% -23.1% 51.03 Watts 7.46 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 333.75 69.5% 23.1% 1.40 Watts 0.47 CPU Total: 480

Approximate Display On (Hours): 91.5 19.1% -34.5% 94.78 Watts 8.67 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 388.5 80.9% 34.5% 5.97 Watts 2.32 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 480 Total: 18.92 0.0% difference

Overall Test Cases Power Draw Averages Approximate CPU On: 51.17 Watts 34.04 kWh Approximate CPU Suspend: 4.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Hibernate: 1.40 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Off: 1.40 Watts 1.25 kWh Approximate Display On: 93.62 Watts 47.91 kWh Approximate Display Sleep: 5.96 Watts 6.25 kWh Approximate Display Off: - Watts - kWh Total: 89.45 kWh 0.3% difference

Southern California Edison Page 64 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Average Demand Device ID D104239 250

200

150

100 15-Minute Average (Watts) Demand 15-Minute

50

0 06/10 12:00 PM 06/11 12:00 PM 06/12 12:00 PM 06/13 12:00 PM 06/14 12:00 PM 06/15 12:00 PM 06/16 12:00 PM 06/17 12:00 PM 06/18 12:00 PM 06/19 12:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/23 12:00 PM 06/24 12:00 PM 06/25 12:00 PM 06/26 12:00 PM 06/27 12:00 PM 06/28 12:00 PM 06/29 12:00 PM 06/30 12:00 PM 07/01 12:00 PM 07/02 12:00 PM 06/10 12:00 AM 06/11 12:00 AM 06/12 12:00 AM 06/13 12:00 AM 06/14 12:00 AM 06/15 12:00 AM 06/16 12:00 AM 06/17 12:00 AM 06/18 12:00 AM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM 06/24 12:00 AM 06/25 12:00 AM 06/26 12:00 AM 06/27 12:00 AM 06/28 12:00 AM 06/29 12:00 AM 06/30 12:00 AM 07/01 12:00 AM 07/02 12:00 AM 07/03 12:00 AM Date & Time

Monitors Only Average Demand Device ID D104239 250

200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts)

50

0 07/03 12:00 PM 07/04 12:00 PM 07/05 12:00 PM 07/06 12:00 PM 07/07 12:00 PM 07/08 12:00 PM 07/09 12:00 PM 07/10 12:00 PM 07/11 12:00 PM 07/12 12:00 PM 07/13 12:00 PM 07/14 12:00 PM 07/15 12:00 PM 07/16 12:00 PM 07/17 12:00 PM 07/18 12:00 PM 07/19 12:00 PM 07/20 12:00 PM 07/21 12:00 PM 07/22 12:00 PM 07/23 12:00 PM 07/24 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM 07/04 12:00 AM 07/05 12:00 AM 07/06 12:00 AM 07/07 12:00 AM 07/08 12:00 AM 07/09 12:00 AM 07/10 12:00 AM 07/11 12:00 AM 07/12 12:00 AM 07/13 12:00 AM 07/14 12:00 AM 07/15 12:00 AM 07/16 12:00 AM 07/17 12:00 AM 07/18 12:00 AM 07/19 12:00 AM 07/20 12:00 AM 07/21 12:00 AM 07/22 12:00 AM 07/23 12:00 AM 07/24 12:00 AM 07/25 12:00 AM Date & Time

Evening Hibernate Average Demand Device ID D104239 250

200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts)

50

0 08/20 12:00 PM 08/21 12:00 PM 08/22 12:00 PM 08/23 12:00 PM 08/24 12:00 PM 08/25 12:00 PM 08/26 12:00 PM 08/27 12:00 PM 08/28 12:00 PM 08/29 12:00 PM 08/30 12:00 PM 08/31 12:00 PM 09/01 12:00 PM 09/02 12:00 PM 09/03 12:00 PM 09/04 12:00 PM 09/05 12:00 PM 09/06 12:00 PM 09/07 12:00 PM 09/08 12:00 PM 08/20 12:00 AM 08/21 12:00 AM 08/22 12:00 AM 08/23 12:00 AM 08/24 12:00 AM 08/25 12:00 AM 08/26 12:00 AM 08/27 12:00 AM 08/28 12:00 AM 08/29 12:00 AM 08/30 12:00 AM 08/31 12:00 AM 09/01 12:00 AM 09/02 12:00 AM 09/03 12:00 AM 09/04 12:00 AM 09/05 12:00 AM 09/06 12:00 AM 09/07 12:00 AM 09/08 12:00 AM 09/09 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 65 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Device ID: D104259 Baseline - 23 days (6/10 12:00 AM - 7/2 11:45 PM)Avg. Power Draws kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 551.5 99.9% 53.00 Watts 29.23 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 0.5 0.1% 1.40 Watts 0.00 CPU Total: 552

Approximate Display On (Hours): 551.5 99.9% 72.51 Watts 39.99 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 0.5 0.1% 2.96 Watts 0.00 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 552 Total: 69.22 0.0% difference

Monitors Only - 22 days (7/3 12:00 AM - 7/24 11:45 PM) % Change kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 512.25 97.0% -2.9% 54.27 Watts 27.80 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 15.75 3.0% 2.9% 1.40 Watts 0.02 CPU Total: 528

Approximate Display On (Hours): 117 22.2% -77.8% 69.66 Watts 8.15 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 411 77.8% 77.8% 3.07 Watts 1.26 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 528 Total: 37.24 0.0% difference

Evening Hibernate - 20 days (8/20 12:00 AM - 9/8 11:45 PM) kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 116 24.2% -75.7% 54.72 Watts 6.35 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 364 75.8% 75.7% 1.40 Watts 0.51 CPU Total: 480

Approximate Display On (Hours): 88.5 18.4% -81.5% 72.45 Watts 6.41 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 391.5 81.6% 81.5% 2.84 Watts 1.11 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 480 Total: 14.38 0.0% difference

Overall Test Cases Power Draw Averages Approximate CPU On: 54.00 Watts 63.70 kWh Approximate CPU Suspend: 4.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Hibernate: 1.40 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Off: 1.40 Watts 0.53 kWh Approximate Display On: 71.54 Watts 54.16 kWh Approximate Display Sleep: 2.96 Watts 2.38 kWh Approximate Display Off: - Watts - kWh Total: 120.77 kWh -0.1% difference

Southern California Edison Page 66 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Average Demand

Device ID D104259 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Average Demand 15-Minute 50

0 06/10 12:00 PM 06/11 12:00 PM 06/12 12:00 PM 06/13 12:00 PM 06/14 12:00 PM 06/15 12:00 PM 06/16 12:00 PM 06/17 12:00 PM 06/18 12:00 PM 06/19 12:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/23 12:00 PM 06/24 12:00 PM 06/25 12:00 PM 06/26 12:00 PM 06/27 12:00 PM 06/28 12:00 PM 06/29 12:00 PM 06/30 12:00 PM 07/01 12:00 PM 07/02 12:00 PM 06/10 12:00 AM 06/11 12:00 AM 06/12 12:00 AM 06/13 12:00 AM 06/14 12:00 AM 06/15 12:00 AM 06/16 12:00 AM 06/17 12:00 AM 06/18 12:00 AM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM 06/24 12:00 AM 06/25 12:00 AM 06/26 12:00 AM 06/27 12:00 AM 06/28 12:00 AM 06/29 12:00 AM 06/30 12:00 AM 07/01 12:00 AM 07/02 12:00 AM 07/03 12:00 AM Date & Time

Monitors Only Average Demand

Device ID D104259 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 15-Minute 50

0 07/03 12:00 PM 07/04 12:00 PM 07/05 12:00 PM 07/06 12:00 PM 07/07 12:00 PM 07/08 12:00 PM 07/09 12:00 PM 07/10 12:00 PM 07/11 12:00 PM 07/12 12:00 PM 07/13 12:00 PM 07/14 12:00 PM 07/15 12:00 PM 07/16 12:00 PM 07/17 12:00 PM 07/18 12:00 PM 07/19 12:00 PM 07/20 12:00 PM 07/21 12:00 PM 07/22 12:00 PM 07/23 12:00 PM 07/24 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM 07/04 12:00 AM 07/05 12:00 AM 07/06 12:00 AM 07/07 12:00 AM 07/08 12:00 AM 07/09 12:00 AM 07/10 12:00 AM 07/11 12:00 AM 07/12 12:00 AM 07/13 12:00 AM 07/14 12:00 AM 07/15 12:00 AM 07/16 12:00 AM 07/17 12:00 AM 07/18 12:00 AM 07/19 12:00 AM 07/20 12:00 AM 07/21 12:00 AM 07/22 12:00 AM 07/23 12:00 AM 07/24 12:00 AM 07/25 12:00 AM Date & Time

Evening Hibernate Average Demand

Device ID D104259 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 15-Minute 50

0 08/20 12:00 PM 08/21 12:00 PM 08/22 12:00 PM 08/23 12:00 PM 08/24 12:00 PM 08/25 12:00 PM 08/26 12:00 PM 08/27 12:00 PM 08/28 12:00 PM 08/29 12:00 PM 08/30 12:00 PM 08/31 12:00 PM 09/01 12:00 PM 09/02 12:00 PM 09/03 12:00 PM 09/04 12:00 PM 09/05 12:00 PM 09/06 12:00 PM 09/07 12:00 PM 09/08 12:00 PM 08/20 12:00 AM 08/21 12:00 AM 08/22 12:00 AM 08/23 12:00 AM 08/24 12:00 AM 08/25 12:00 AM 08/26 12:00 AM 08/27 12:00 AM 08/28 12:00 AM 08/29 12:00 AM 08/30 12:00 AM 08/31 12:00 AM 09/01 12:00 AM 09/02 12:00 AM 09/03 12:00 AM 09/04 12:00 AM 09/05 12:00 AM 09/06 12:00 AM 09/07 12:00 AM 09/08 12:00 AM 09/09 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 67 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Device ID: D107084 Baseline - 23 days (6/10 12:00 AM - 7/2 11:45 PM)Avg. Power Draws kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 173.5 31.4% 61.27 Watts 10.63 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 378.5 68.6% 1.40 Watts 0.53 CPU Total: 552

Approximate Display On (Hours): 173.5 31.4% 77.59 Watts 13.46 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 378.5 68.6% 1.38 Watts 0.52 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 552 Total: 25.15 0.0% difference

Monitors Only - 22 days (7/3 12:00 AM - 7/24 11:45 PM) % Change kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 118.75 29.0% -2.4% 60.86 Watts 7.23 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 409.25 100.0% 31.4% 1.40 Watts 0.57 CPU Total: 528

Approximate Display On (Hours): 103.75 19.6% -11.8% 84.99 Watts 8.82 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 424.25 80.4% 11.8% 1.32 Watts 0.56 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 528 Total: 17.18 0.2% difference

Evening Hibernate - 20 days (8/20 12:00 AM - 9/8 11:45 PM) kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 134.25 38.8% 7.4% 61.67 Watts 8.28 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 345.75 72.0% 3.5% 1.40 Watts 0.48 CPU Total: 480

Approximate Display On (Hours): 123.25 25.7% -5.8% 85.09 Watts 10.49 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 356.75 74.3% 5.8% 1.39 Watts 0.50 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 480 Total: 19.75 3.2% difference

Overall Test Cases Power Draw Averages Approximate CPU On: 61.27 Watts 26.13 kWh Approximate CPU Suspend: 4.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Hibernate: 1.40 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Off: 1.40 Watts 1.59 kWh Approximate Display On: 82.56 Watts 33.06 kWh Approximate Display Sleep: 1.36 Watts 1.58 kWh Approximate Display Off: - Watts - kWh Total: 62.36 kWh 1.5% difference

Southern California Edison Page 68 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Average Demand Device ID D107084 200

150

100 15-Minute Average (Watts) Demand 15-Minute 50

0 06/10 12:00 PM 06/11 12:00 PM 06/12 12:00 PM 06/13 12:00 PM 06/14 12:00 PM 06/15 12:00 PM 06/16 12:00 PM 06/17 12:00 PM 06/18 12:00 PM 06/19 12:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/23 12:00 PM 06/24 12:00 PM 06/25 12:00 PM 06/26 12:00 PM 06/27 12:00 PM 06/28 12:00 PM 06/29 12:00 PM 06/30 12:00 PM 07/01 12:00 PM 07/02 12:00 PM 06/10 12:00 AM 06/11 12:00 AM 06/12 12:00 AM 06/13 12:00 AM 06/14 12:00 AM 06/15 12:00 AM 06/16 12:00 AM 06/17 12:00 AM 06/18 12:00 AM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM 06/24 12:00 AM 06/25 12:00 AM 06/26 12:00 AM 06/27 12:00 AM 06/28 12:00 AM 06/29 12:00 AM 06/30 12:00 AM 07/01 12:00 AM 07/02 12:00 AM 07/03 12:00 AM Date & Time

Monitors Only Average Demand

Device ID D107084 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) 50

0 07/03 12:00 PM 07/04 12:00 PM 07/05 12:00 PM 07/06 12:00 PM 07/07 12:00 PM 07/08 12:00 PM 07/09 12:00 PM 07/10 12:00 PM 07/11 12:00 PM 07/12 12:00 PM 07/13 12:00 PM 07/14 12:00 PM 07/15 12:00 PM 07/16 12:00 PM 07/17 12:00 PM 07/18 12:00 PM 07/19 12:00 PM 07/20 12:00 PM 07/21 12:00 PM 07/22 12:00 PM 07/23 12:00 PM 07/24 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM 07/04 12:00 AM 07/05 12:00 AM 07/06 12:00 AM 07/07 12:00 AM 07/08 12:00 AM 07/09 12:00 AM 07/10 12:00 AM 07/11 12:00 AM 07/12 12:00 AM 07/13 12:00 AM 07/14 12:00 AM 07/15 12:00 AM 07/16 12:00 AM 07/17 12:00 AM 07/18 12:00 AM 07/19 12:00 AM 07/20 12:00 AM 07/21 12:00 AM 07/22 12:00 AM 07/23 12:00 AM 07/24 12:00 AM 07/25 12:00 AM Date & Time

Evening Hibernate Average Demand

Device ID D107084 250

200

150

100 15-Minute Average (Watts) Demand 15-Minute

50

0 08/20 12:00 PM 08/21 12:00 PM 08/22 12:00 PM 08/23 12:00 PM 08/24 12:00 PM 08/25 12:00 PM 08/26 12:00 PM 08/27 12:00 PM 08/28 12:00 PM 08/29 12:00 PM 08/30 12:00 PM 08/31 12:00 PM 09/01 12:00 PM 09/02 12:00 PM 09/03 12:00 PM 09/04 12:00 PM 09/05 12:00 PM 09/06 12:00 PM 09/07 12:00 PM 09/08 12:00 PM 08/20 12:00 AM 08/21 12:00 AM 08/22 12:00 AM 08/23 12:00 AM 08/24 12:00 AM 08/25 12:00 AM 08/26 12:00 AM 08/27 12:00 AM 08/28 12:00 AM 08/29 12:00 AM 08/30 12:00 AM 08/31 12:00 AM 09/01 12:00 AM 09/02 12:00 AM 09/03 12:00 AM 09/04 12:00 AM 09/05 12:00 AM 09/06 12:00 AM 09/07 12:00 AM 09/08 12:00 AM 09/09 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 69 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Device ID: D107086 Baseline - 23 days (6/10 12:00 AM - 7/2 11:45 PM)Avg. Power Draws kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 143 25.9% 53.00 Watts 7.58 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 409 74.1% 1.40 Watts 0.57 CPU Total: 552

Approximate Display On (Hours): 143 25.9% 99.24 Watts 14.19 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 409 74.1% 3.55 Watts 1.45 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 552 Total: 23.80 0.0% difference

Monitors Only - 22 days (7/3 12:00 AM - 7/24 11:45 PM) % Change kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 130.75 24.8% -1.1% 60.92 Watts 7.97 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 397.25 75.2% 1.1% 1.40 Watts 0.56 CPU Total: 528

Approximate Display On (Hours): 125.75 23.8% -2.1% 86.96 Watts 10.94 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 402.25 76.2% 2.1% 3.87 Watts 1.56 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 528 Total: 21.01 -0.4% difference

Evening Hibernate - 20 days (8/20 12:00 AM - 9/8 11:45 PM) kWh Approximate CPU On (Hours): 91 19.0% -6.9% 53.00 Watts 4.82 Approximate CPU Suspend (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 4.00 Watts - Approximate CPU Hibernate (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% 1.40 Watts - Approximate CPU Off (Hours): 389 81.0% 6.9% 1.40 Watts 0.54 CPU Total: 480

Approximate Display On (Hours): 91 19.0% -6.9% 99.17 Watts 9.02 Approximate Display Sleep (Hours): 389 81.0% 6.9% 4.35 Watts 1.69 Approximate Display Off (Hours): 0 0.0% 0.0% - Watts - Display Total: 480 Total: 16.08 0.0% difference

Overall Test Cases Power Draw Averages Approximate CPU On: 55.64 Watts 20.29 kWh Approximate CPU Suspend: 4.00 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Hibernate: 1.40 Watts - kWh Approximate CPU Off: 1.40 Watts 1.67 kWh Approximate Display On: 95.12 Watts 34.22 kWh Approximate Display Sleep: 3.92 Watts 4.71 kWh Approximate Display Off: - Watts - kWh Total: 60.90 kWh -0.1% difference

Southern California Edison Page 70 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

Baseline Average Demand Device ID D107086 200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts) Demand Average 15-Minute 50

0 06/10 12:00 PM 06/11 12:00 PM 06/12 12:00 PM 06/13 12:00 PM 06/14 12:00 PM 06/15 12:00 PM 06/16 12:00 PM 06/17 12:00 PM 06/18 12:00 PM 06/19 12:00 PM 06/20 12:00 PM 06/21 12:00 PM 06/22 12:00 PM 06/23 12:00 PM 06/24 12:00 PM 06/25 12:00 PM 06/26 12:00 PM 06/27 12:00 PM 06/28 12:00 PM 06/29 12:00 PM 06/30 12:00 PM 07/01 12:00 PM 07/02 12:00 PM 06/10 12:00 AM 06/11 12:00 AM 06/12 12:00 AM 06/13 12:00 AM 06/14 12:00 AM 06/15 12:00 AM 06/16 12:00 AM 06/17 12:00 AM 06/18 12:00 AM 06/19 12:00 AM 06/20 12:00 AM 06/21 12:00 AM 06/22 12:00 AM 06/23 12:00 AM 06/24 12:00 AM 06/25 12:00 AM 06/26 12:00 AM 06/27 12:00 AM 06/28 12:00 AM 06/29 12:00 AM 06/30 12:00 AM 07/01 12:00 AM 07/02 12:00 AM 07/03 12:00 AM Date & Time

Monitors Only Average Demand Device ID D107086 250

200

150

100 15-Minute Average (Watts) Demand 15-Minute

50

0 07/03 12:00 PM 07/04 12:00 PM 07/05 12:00 PM 07/06 12:00 PM 07/07 12:00 PM 07/08 12:00 PM 07/09 12:00 PM 07/10 12:00 PM 07/11 12:00 PM 07/12 12:00 PM 07/13 12:00 PM 07/14 12:00 PM 07/15 12:00 PM 07/16 12:00 PM 07/17 12:00 PM 07/18 12:00 PM 07/19 12:00 PM 07/20 12:00 PM 07/21 12:00 PM 07/22 12:00 PM 07/23 12:00 PM 07/24 12:00 PM 07/03 12:00 AM 07/04 12:00 AM 07/05 12:00 AM 07/06 12:00 AM 07/07 12:00 AM 07/08 12:00 AM 07/09 12:00 AM 07/10 12:00 AM 07/11 12:00 AM 07/12 12:00 AM 07/13 12:00 AM 07/14 12:00 AM 07/15 12:00 AM 07/16 12:00 AM 07/17 12:00 AM 07/18 12:00 AM 07/19 12:00 AM 07/20 12:00 AM 07/21 12:00 AM 07/22 12:00 AM 07/23 12:00 AM 07/24 12:00 AM 07/25 12:00 AM Date & Time

Evening Hibernate Average Demand Device ID D107086 250

200

150

100 15-Minute Average Demand (Watts)

50

0 08/20 12:00 PM 08/21 12:00 PM 08/22 12:00 PM 08/23 12:00 PM 08/24 12:00 PM 08/25 12:00 PM 08/26 12:00 PM 08/27 12:00 PM 08/28 12:00 PM 08/29 12:00 PM 08/30 12:00 PM 08/31 12:00 PM 09/01 12:00 PM 09/02 12:00 PM 09/03 12:00 PM 09/04 12:00 PM 09/05 12:00 PM 09/06 12:00 PM 09/07 12:00 PM 09/08 12:00 PM 08/20 12:00 AM 08/21 12:00 AM 08/22 12:00 AM 08/23 12:00 AM 08/24 12:00 AM 08/25 12:00 AM 08/26 12:00 AM 08/27 12:00 AM 08/28 12:00 AM 08/29 12:00 AM 08/30 12:00 AM 08/31 12:00 AM 09/01 12:00 AM 09/02 12:00 AM 09/03 12:00 AM 09/04 12:00 AM 09/05 12:00 AM 09/06 12:00 AM 09/07 12:00 AM 09/08 12:00 AM 09/09 12:00 AM Date & Time

Southern California Edison Page 71 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

REFERENCES

1 Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), “After-hours Power Status of Office Equipment and Inventory of Miscellaneous Plug-Load Equipment,” LBNL-53729, Judy A. Roberson, Carrie A Webber, Marla C. McWhinney, Richard E. Brown, Margaret J. Pinckard, and John F. Busch, January 2004, Table 1, page 4. (Available at: http://enduse.lbl.gov/info/LBNL-53729_REV.pdf) 2 Morton H. Blatt, Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), “Overview,” Proceedings: Energy- Efficient Office Technologies, The Outlook and Market, TR-101945, Research Project 2890-18, proceedings prepared by Policy Research Associates, December 1992, page 1-3. 3 Ibid, page 1-3. 4 Bristol L. Stickney and Amory B. Lovins, E Source, “New Power Management Strategies for Personal Computers and Other Office Equipment,” TU-92-2, September 1992. 5 Ibid, page 7-2. 6 Arthur D. Little, Inc., “Energy Consumption by Office and Telecommunications Equipment in Commercial Buildings,” prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy, National Technical Information Service, Report No. PB2002-1-1438, January 2002. 7 Energy Information Administration, Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, U.S. Department of Energy, “Annual Energy Outlook 2008 With Projections to 2030,” June 2008, page 125. (Available at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/) 8 Ibid, page 215. 9 LBNL-53729, page 1. 10 Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, “Space Heaters, Computers, Cell Phone Chargers: How Plugged In Are Commercial Buildings?,” LBNL-62397, LBNL: Marla Sanchez, Carrie Webber, Richard Brown, John Busch, Margaret Pinckard, and PG&E: Judy Roberson, February 2007, page 2. 11 Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, “Savings Estimates for the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s ENERGY STAR Voluntary Product Labeling Program,” LBNL- 329E, Marla Sanchez, Richard Brown, Greg Horman, and Carrie Webber, June 2008, page 20. 12 Dale K. Tiller and Guy R. Newsham, “Power Management for Desktop Personal Computers,” Proceedings: Energy-Efficient Office Technologies, The Outlook and Market, EPRI TR-10945, Project 2890-18, prepared by Policy Research Associates, Inc., December 1992, pages 18-2 through 18-3. 13 Stickney et al., page 1. 14 Tiller et al., page 18-3. 15 2004-2005 Database for Energy Efficiency Resources (DEER) Update Study, Final Report, prepared for Southern California Edison by Itron, Inc., December 2005, page 3-12 through 3-13. 16 DEER Plug Load Sensor Measure

DEER05 Plug Load Sensor Measure

17 Stickney et al., page 8. 18 Ibid, page 10.

Southern California Edison Page 72 Design & Engineering Services June 2009 Network Control of Computer Power Options, Phase I ET 03.03

19 Jerzy Koliski, Ram Chary, Andrew Henroid, and Barry Press, Building the Power-Efficient PC A Developer’s Guide to ACPI Power Management, Intel Press, Chapter 2, “Power Management History and Motivation,” page 8. 20 Ibid, page 11. 21 Ibid, page 13. 22 Ibid, page 14. 23 Ibid, pages 15 through 16. 24 Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Intel Corporation, Microsoft Corporation, Phoenix Technologies Ltd., and Toshiba Corporation, Advanced Configuration and Power Interface Specification, Revision 3.0b, October 10, 2006, page v. 25 Quantec LLC, Surveyor Network Energy Manager Market Progress Evaluation Report No. 2, prepared for the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, Report #E05-136, January 19, 2005, page ES-1. 26 Verdiem, Inc., Surveyor TM Network Energy Manager Administrator’s Guide, Version 2.1.0.0, January 2004, pages 18 – 41. 27 EZ Conserve, Incorporated (now Verdiem Corporation), Surveyor Network Energy Manager Evaluation Program Handbook, Version 2.27, March 2003, page 3. 28 Hugh D. Young, Statistical Treatment of Experimental Data, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., ISBN 07-072646-9, 1962, Equation 13.8, page 98. 29 Fluke Corporation, Fluke 43B Power Quality Analyzer Users Manual, April 2001, pages 37 and 43. 30 AEMC Instruments, Power Quality Logger, Models PQL 100 (128k) / PQL 120 (128k) and PQL 100 (1Meg) / PQL 120 (1Meg), User Manual, version 2, Sept. 2002, page 38. 31 Ray Brady, AEMC Instruments Technical Support, [email protected], e-Mail Communication, January 27, 2009. 32 California Public Utilities Commission, “Interim Opinion: 2006 Update of Avoided Costs and Related Issues Pertaining to Energy Efficiency Resources,” Decision 06-06-063, June 29, 2006, page 94. 33 EZ Conserve Incorporated, Surveyor Network Energy Manager, v 1.4.0.1, November 4, 2002, page 56. 34 Ibid, page 48. 35 Ibid, page 41. 36 Ibid, page 32. 37 James J. Hirsch & Associates, Definition of Demand (kW) Impacts Used in the 2005 DEER Update, March 21, 2006, with corrections on March 24, 2006, page 3.

Southern California Edison Page 73 Design & Engineering Services June 2009