High-Efficiency Set-Top Boxes

Summary

High-Efficiency Set-Top Boxes

Set-top Boxes: High-Efficiency vs. Standard

High-Efficiency electronic devices that convert incoming data signals to a format usable by a TV or computer monitor with low standby power and other efficiency strategies.

Synopsis:

Set-top boxes (STBs) have been available for roughly 60 years and now include cable boxes, satellite receivers, digital TV adapters,DVRs & IPTV receivers, Apple TV, and gaming consoles such as PlayStationand Xbox. Energy use of some of these products is more than ten times that of other products. Energy use in standby mode is relatively highdue to the products’ need to continue to communicate with the Internet. Becausethese devices constantly draw power even during sleep or standbymodes, and because of the increasing variety and proliferation of STBs in American homes, it is important to increase the energy efficiency of these units. This can be achieved by reducing the power draw during operation and during sleep/standby modes and by reducing the time elapsed until standby/sleep mode is automatically engaged. The STB industry recently developed a voluntary standard to improve the efficiency of their products but additional improvements could be made. While STBs alone could account for 4% of total residential energy use and have proliferated greatly in recent years, as more TVs become all digital, the need for STBs could diminish.

Energy Savings: 55%

Energy Savings Rating: Extensive Assessment What's this?

Level	Status	Description
1	Concept not validated	Claims of energy savings may not be credible due to lack of documentation or validation by unbiased experts.
2	Concept validated:	An unbiased expert has validated efficiency concepts through technical review and calculations based on engineering principles.
3	Limited assessment	An unbiased expert has measured technology characteristics and factors of energy use through one or more tests in typical applications with a clear baseline.
4	Extensive assessment	Additional testing in relevant applications and environments has increased knowledge of performance across a broad range of products, applications, and system conditions.
5	Comprehensive analysis	Results of lab and field tests have been used to develop methods for reliable prediction of performance across the range of intended applications.
6	Approved measure	Protocols for technology application are established and approved.

TAG Technical Score: 2.74

Details

High-Efficiency Set-Top Boxes

Set-top Boxes: High-Efficiency vs. Standard

High-Efficiency electronic devices that convert incoming data signals to a format usable by a TV or computer monitor with low standby power and other efficiency strategies.

Item ID: 84

Sector: Residential

Energy System: Electronics--Other Devices

Technical Advisory Group: 2014 Residential Building TAG (#10)
Average TAG Rating: 3.57 out of 5
TAG Ranking Date: 04/10/2014
TAG Rating Commentary:

This is a technology that can be effected in a large scale by influencing someone other than the end user. Small savings but might be attained with a small investment. Much attention is given to it in other areas (CEE and others). There might be a lot to leverage.
This is being led from a policy perspective already but there is opportunity to speed up the process with new implementation ideas.
Scored a 1 because the opportunity here is not core to BPA's EE business. BPA does not have a program with TV providers and retail market for set top boxes is not amenable to unit incentives (wide variation in "bundled" features among competing products).
This is already being built in to products, and the measure is not likely to be cost effective.
Set top boxes and game consoles can really suck up the juice but clearly don't have to. The challenge is that the field is constantly changing and the functionality of the devices is so diverse that setting an across the board standard may be quite difficult.

Synopsis:

Baseline Example:

Baseline Description: Non ENERGY STAR set-top box
Baseline Energy Use: 160.5 kWh per year per unit

Comments:

The estimated average energy use per installed unit in the US in 2011 according to a Navigant report is 127 kWh/year (Navigant, 2013 Pg 71). Ecotope conducted a whole house energy use study for the Northwest and determined a mean set top box annual energy consumption of 160.5 kWh/year ( Ecotope, 04/28/2014 Pg Table ES4).

Manufacturer's Energy Savings Claims: Currently no data available.

Best Estimate of Energy Savings:

"Typical" Savings: 55%
Low and High Energy Savings: 30% to 55%
Energy Savings Reliability: 4 - Extensive Assessment

Comments:

This is based on the ENERGY STAR calculator estimating a savings of 70 kWh per year, and a Navigant report that estimates that a typical set-top box in 2011 uses approximately 127 kWh, for a 55% savings (Navigant, 2013 Pg 71).

Energy Use of Emerging Technology:

72.2 kWh per unit per year What's this?

Energy Use of an Emerging Technology is based upon the following algorithm.

Baseline Energy Use - (Baseline Energy Use * Best Estimate of Energy Savings (either Typical savings OR the high range of savings.))

Technical Potential:
Units: unit
Potential number of units replaced by this technology: 9,320,000
Comments:

According to a Navigant report for the EIA, the estimated installed base of set-top boxes in 2015 in the US is projected to be 233,000,000. Take 4% of that, since the Northwest has a population of 4% of the US, to get 9,320,000 set-top boxes in the region. (Navigant, 2013 Pg 71)

Regional Technical Potential:
0.82 TWh per year
94 aMW
What's this?

Regional Technical Potential of an Emerging Technology is calculated as follows:

Baseline Energy Use * Estimate of Energy Savings (either Typical savings OR the high range of savings) * Technical Potential (potential number of units replaced by the Emerging Technology)

First Cost:

Installed first cost per: unit

Comments:

Highly variable, dependent on type of product. Efficient technology is not inherently more expensive than baseline equipment.

Cost Effectiveness:

Simple payback, new construction (years): N/A

Simple payback, retrofit (years): N/A

What's this?

Cost Effectiveness is calculated using baseline energy use, best estimate of typical energy savings, and first cost. It does not account for factors such as impacts on O&M costs (which could be significant if product life is greatly extended) or savings of non-electric fuels such as natural gas. Actual overall cost effectiveness could be significantly different based on these other factors.

Reference and Citations:

NRDC, 06/29/2007. Tuning in to Energy Efficiency: Prospects for energy savings in TV set-top boxes
Natural Resoures Defense Council

EERE, 01/24/2014. Appliance and Equipment Standards Result in Large Energy, Economic, and Environmental Benefits
Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

Energy Star, 04/23/2008. Set-top Box Specification
Energy Star

Navigant, 12/01/2013. Analysis and Representation of Miscellaneous Electric Loads in NEMS
U.S. Energy Information Administration

NCTA, 06/04/2014. Set-Top Box Energy Efficiency
National Cable & Telecommunications Association

LBL, 06/04/2014. Standby Power: Data
Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories

Ecotope, 04/28/2014. Residential Building Stock Assessment: Metering Study
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance

Rank & Scores

High-Efficiency Set-Top Boxes

2014 Residential Building TAG (#10)

Technical Advisory Group: 2014 Residential Building TAG (#10)
TAG Ranking:
Average TAG Rating: 3.57 out of 5
TAG Ranking Date: 04/10/2014
TAG Rating Commentary:

This is a technology that can be effected in a large scale by influencing someone other than the end user. Small savings but might be attained with a small investment. Much attention is given to it in other areas (CEE and others). There might be a lot to leverage.
This is being led from a policy perspective already but there is opportunity to speed up the process with new implementation ideas.
Scored a 1 because the opportunity here is not core to BPA's EE business. BPA does not have a program with TV providers and retail market for set top boxes is not amenable to unit incentives (wide variation in "bundled" features among competing products).
This is already being built in to products, and the measure is not likely to be cost effective.
Set top boxes and game consoles can really suck up the juice but clearly don't have to. The challenge is that the field is constantly changing and the functionality of the devices is so diverse that setting an across the board standard may be quite difficult.

Technical Score Details

TAG Technical Score: 2.7 out of 5

How significant and reliable are the energy savings?
Energy Savings Score: 3.2 Comments:

Savings estimates per unit for technologyreasons are probably very good, but users don't have choice of equipment, andit's hard to estimate how many users can be influenced to choose efficientservices
There is very little leverage for achieving thesavings potential in these devices, even if they currently utilized the kind ofAggios technology used in mobile devices. Service providers control whatequipment end-users have and they have shown little interest in movingaggressively to adopt such technologies. Almost all of the energy savings willbe found through whole system improvements and in an end-users choice ofservice provider and method for receiving electronic content.
It looks like there is an effort to reduce theenergy impact of the information systems by a factor of 5 while increasing thethrough-put by a factor of 10. Most of this energy seems to be associated withthe infrastructure itself (cell towers, internet backbones, etc.). The bulk of this savings seems to be fromtechnical advances in all aspects of this system (including the home). It is difficult to see how these componentsmight go together and how the course of technology development (Moore's Law)might deliver this result without much intervention from the utility sector.
Savings are assuming that the measure is definedand/or delivered as ongoing regional participation in anindustry/national/international agreement and standard development toaccelerate adoption of more energy efficient technologies, rather than earlyequipment retirement or other strictly regional intervention.
Per unit the savings are pretty low from aconsumer standpoint ($6 a year was the number in the presentation). As atechnology the savings look good.

How great are the non-energy advantages for adopting this technology?
Non-Energy Benefits Score: 2.4
Comments:

They could cause inconveniences
The products in this category are qualitativelydifferent from one another and the energy efficient product may or may notprovide the specific services, functionality, games, etc. that the customer islooking for. We're not talking justapples to oranges, we're talking about an Apple to Microsoft comparison.
Increasing the capability of these systems willhave a great benefit to everyone. (justask Bill Gates)
Could result in industry standards that improveinter-connectivity of devices/services to reduce the number/complexity ofdevices needed to provide desired services to end users.
Some advantages to the DVR on the server,instead of local DVR.

How ready are product and provider to scale up for widespread use in the Pacific Northwest?
Technology Readiness Score: 3.0
Comments:

The technology appears to already be there inmany cases. The question is on whetherthe laggards can be brought around or whether a new technology will come alongand make the whole question moot.
We have a ways to go before we can completelymap out a path to significant system-level energy savings.
Sounds like the market is making these productsavailable, but the barrier remains regarding all the units that are in use thatdo not have a cost effective early retirement option.
As Gregg mentioned, there are some barriers forservice providers

How easy is it to change to the proposed technology?
Ease of Adoption Score: 2.3
Comments:

End user has no choice or information, asindicated in the presentation. It wassupposed that homeowners would choose different cable providers based on theSTB efficiency, but there is no way that will work. Ever. People get the service that is available in their area, which is often onlyone or two providers.
Devices may not be owned by customer and thenext technology may be cloud instead of in-home.
This is a national issue. Time and energy would be better spent onestablishing national electronics EE standards rather than focusing on set-toplegacy products.
Very good for new subscribers that receive anENERGY STAR 4.1 or Voluntary Agreement product, but poor for end users thatalready subscribe to a provider with a business plan that involves a certainexpected product life.
There is some disadvantage to early replacement- may involve technical support on site

Considering all costs and all benefits, how good a purchase is this technology for the owner?
Value Score: 2.8
Comments:

If this were actually available to homeownersthrough any provider, it would be a good value. There is no program opportunity here, but hopefully there is progressmade at the standards level.
Uncertain because it is generally not the ownermaking the purchasing decision. This maychange if labels included all the related costs.
Assuming it's a like-for-like replacement, thenewer product will save energy and will probably have additional featureslikely to appeal to customers.
Once this is in the market I am sure that itwill be adopted.
The overall energy savings for the owner forefficient set top boxes isn't huge, this is more of a regional benefit product.It would be interesting to further explore system-wide network strategies andtechnologies.
Will likely not increase the total cost ofservice significantly, relative to bandwidth and other charges.

Completed:

Last Edited:
10/6/2014 9:41:25 AM