Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012 Alaska Energy Authority End Use Study 2012-AAlaska Energy Authority End Use Study: 2012 April 30, 2012 Produced by: with Brian Saylor and Associates, CTG Energetics, and Craciun Research Group i Table of Contents Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................... i Acronyms .................................................................................................................................................................... viii Alaska Energy Authority End-Use Study Executive Summary ........................................................................................ 1 Overview .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Railbelt and Southeast Residential Energy Use ......................................................................................................... 1 Railbelt and Southeast Non-residential Energy Use .................................................................................................. 2 Energy use in rural Alaska .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Rural Non-Residential community buildings ............................................................................................................. 3 Water and sewer ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 Street lighting ............................................................................................................................................................ 3 Energy Use Trends by Sector ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Methods .................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Alaska’s 15% Energy Efficiency Goal .......................................................................................................................... 6 AEA/EUS Report Organization ................................................................................................................................... 7 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................................... 8 Southeast and Railbelt Alaska Residential Energy Use .................................................................................................. 9 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 9 Total Energy Use by Climate Zone & Fuel Type ....................................................................................................... 10 Energy Uses by Climate Zone, Region and Residence Type ..................................................................................... 13 Energy End Uses ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Space Heating and Domestic Hot Water Use .......................................................................................................... 19 Appliance Use - Appliances, Equipment & Lighting ................................................................................................. 21 Major Appliances ..................................................................................................................................................... 27 Primary Cooking................................................................................................................................................... 27 Entertainment.......................................................................................................................................................... 28 Information Technology ...................................................................................................................................... 30 Miscellaneous Appliances .................................................................................................................................... 30 Interior Lighting ....................................................................................................................................................... 31 Exterior Lighting & Seasonal Decorative Lighting .................................................................................................... 32 Other Kitchen Equipment ........................................................................................................................................ 33 Southeast and Railbelt Alaska Non-Residential Energy Use ........................................................................................ 35 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 35 ii Energy Use by Climate Zone .................................................................................................................................... 36 Energy Use by Fuel Type .......................................................................................................................................... 38 Energy Use by Building Type .................................................................................................................................... 39 Energy Use by End Use ............................................................................................................................................ 40 Energy Consumption Details by Climate Zone and Building Type ........................................................................... 47 Energy End-use Details ............................................................................................................................................ 48 Policy Implications of Statistically Significant Differences in Energy Use ................................................................ 49 Characteristics of Energy Use in the Non-Residential Sample ................................................................................. 51 Non-Residential Energy use by Climate Zone ...................................................................................................... 51 Climate Zone 6 non-residential energy use ......................................................................................................... 54 Overall Energy Use in All Buildings ...................................................................................................................... 54 Distribution of Total Energy Use .......................................................................................................................... 55 Climate ZoneClimate Zone 7 Non-residential energy use ................................................................................... 58 Distribution of Total Energy Use .......................................................................................................................... 60 Energy Use by Building Type ................................................................................................................................ 61 Distribution of Total Energy Use .......................................................................................................................... 64 Energy Use by Building Type ................................................................................................................................ 65 Rural North & Northwest............................................................................................................................................. 68 Bethel residential energy use & comparison with ARIS .......................................................................................... 68 Characteristics of the Bethel residential survey sample .......................................................................................... 70 Bethel residential energy use .................................................................................................................................. 71 Lighting, appliance and other energy use ................................................................................................................ 74 Bethel non-residential energy use ........................................................................................................................... 75 Overall energy use by building type ........................................................................................................................ 76 Distribution of energy use ....................................................................................................................................... 77 Distribution of energy use by building type......................................................................................................... 78 Water and Wastewater Energy Requirements .................................................................................................... 81 Summary of Bethel energy use ............................................................................................................................ 81 Rural Village Communities ....................................................................................................................................... 82 Small Community Residential Energy Use ........................................................................................................... 83 Overall Energy Use ............................................................................................................................................... 83 Community Differences in Energy Use ................................................................................................................ 85 Non-residential energy use...................................................................................................................................... 86 Overall energy use ............................................................................................................................................... 87 Distribution of non-residential energy use .......................................................................................................... 88 iii Distribution of energy uses .................................................................................................................................. 89 Summary of Average Energy Use in Three Small Communities .............................................................................. 91 Water and Sewer- Study .............................................................................................................................................. 94 Data Collection ........................................................................................................................................................ 94 Data Review and Evaluation .................................................................................................................................... 98 Energy Use Models for Rural Communities ............................................................................................................. 99 Model Results ........................................................................................................................................................ 104 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................ 111 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................. 112 Street Lighting- Independent Study ........................................................................................................................... 113 Method .................................................................................................................................................................. 113 Sample Selection ............................................................................................................................................... 113 Data Management ................................................................................................................................................. 114 Street Lighting Definitions: .................................................................................................................................... 115 Description of the Street Lighting Sample ............................................................................................................. 116 Summary of Results ............................................................................................................................................... 117 Lighting Effectiveness ............................................................................................................................................ 118 Total energy use by community size ..................................................................................................................... 118 Average street light energy use and illumination by community size ................................................................... 119 Traffic light instruments ........................................................................................................................................ 120 Non-Residential Rural Building-Independent Study .................................................................................................. 121 Sampling Method .................................................................................................................................................. 121 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................ 122 Building Types .................................................................................................................................................... 122 Building Construction ............................................................................................................................................ 124 Building Size ........................................................................................................................................................... 125 Fuel Usage ............................................................................................................................................................. 126 Annual Electricity Usage ........................................................................................................................................ 127 Statewide Energy Use by Sector ................................................................................................................................ 128 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................... 128 Method .................................................................................................................................................................. 128 Overall Energy Use by Sector ................................................................................................................................. 129 Energy Consumption by Sector ............................................................................................................................. 129 Preliminary Energy Use Forecasts ......................................................................................................................... 130 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................ 131 iv AEA End-use Study Conclusions................................................................................................................................. 135 Railbelt and Southeast Residential Energy Use ..................................................................................................... 135 Railbelt and Southeast Non-residential Energy Use .............................................................................................. 136 Energy use in rural Alaska ...................................................................................................................................... 137 Rural Non-Residential community buildings ......................................................................................................... 138 Water and sewer facilities ..................................................................................................................................... 139 Street lighting ........................................................................................................................................................ 139 Energy Use Trends by Sector ................................................................................................................................. 140 Methods ................................................................................................................................................................ 140 Figure 1: Total energy use/yr per home by climate zone for Railbelt & SEAK (pop weighted, MMBTU) .................... 11 Figure 2: Total annual energy use by fuel type for the Railbelt & Southeast (pop wt, % MMBTU) ............................ 12 Figure 3: Total annual energy use per home by fuel type and CZ for the Railbelt & Southeast (pop wt, MMBTU) .... 12 Figure 4: Total energy by major energy use per home by Climate Zone (pop wt, MMBTU) ....................................... 13 Figure 5: Total energy use per home for major energy uses by region (pop wt, MMBTU) ......................................... 15 Figure 6: Total energy use per home for major energy uses by residence type (pop wt, MMBTU) ........................... 15 Figure 7: Total energy use per home for major energy uses by residence type for CZ6, CZ7, and CZ8 respectively (pop wt, MMBTU) ...................................................................................................................................... 16 Figure 8: Total energy use intensity for major energy uses by residence type (ARIS, pop wt, kBTU/ft 2) .................... 17 Figure 9: Space heating energy use intensity for the Railbelt and Southeast by fuel type and region (ARIS, un- weighted, kBTU/ft2/yr) .............................................................................................................................. 20 Figure 10: Domestic hot water energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by fuel type and region (ARIS, un- weighted, kBTU/ft2/yr) .............................................................................................................................. 20 Figure 11: Space heating energy use intensity for the Railbelt and Sou theast by fuel type and residence type (ARIS, un-weighted, kBTU/ft2/yr) ......................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 12: Appliance electrical energy use by major uses (pop wt, % MMBTU) ......................................................... 22 Figure 13: Total electricity use for the Railbelt and Southeast by end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) ................................ 22 Figure 14: Total appliance energy use by fuel type (pop wt, % MMBTU) ................................................................... 23 Figure 15: Total appliance energy by end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) ........................................................................... 23 Figure 16: Total appliance electricity by end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) ....................................................................... 24 Figure 17: Total appliance energy by end use by residence type (pop wt, MMBTU) .................................................. 24 Figure 18: Major appliances energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) .......... 27 Figure 19: Primary cooking energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) ............ 28 Figure 20: Entertainment energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) .............. 29 Figure 21: Entertainment energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by sub end use and residence type (pop wt, % MMBTU) .................................................................................................................................................... 29 Figure 22: Information technology energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) 30 Figure 23: Miscellaneous appliances energy use by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) .............................................. 31 Figure 24: Interior lighting energy use by bulb type (pop wt, % MMBTU) .................................................................. 31 Figure 25: Interior lighting energy use by bulb type and Climate Zone (pop wt, % MMBTU) ..................................... 32 Figure 26: Exterior & seasonal lighting energy use by bulb type (pop wt, % MMBTU) ............................................... 33 Figure 27: Other kitchen equipment energy use by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) .............................................. 34 Figure 28: Total non-residential energy use in the Railbelt and Southeast by Climate Zone ...................................... 37 Figure 29: Average non-residential building energy intensity by Climate Zone .......................................................... 38 Figure 30: Total non-residential building energy use (MMBTU) by fuel type. ............................................................ 38 Figure 31: Fuel type by Climate Zone .......................................................................................................................... 39 Figure 32: Total building energy use and area by building type .................................................................................. 39 v Figure 33: Average building energy intensity by building type for all Climate Zones .................................................. 40 Figure 34: Total non-residential energy end-use consumption in MMBTU/yr, Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8. ................. 41 Figure 35: Total non-residential energy end-use consumption by building type in MMBTU/yr, Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8. ......................................................................................................................................................... 42 Figure 36: Total building energy use and area by building type for Climate Zone 6 ................................................... 43 Figure 37: Total building energy use and area by building type for Climate Zone 7 ................................................... 44 Figure 38: Total building energy use and area by building type for Climate Zone 8 ................................................... 44 Figure 39: Total non-residential energy end use consumption by building type in MMBTU/yr, Climate Zone 6 ....... 45 Figure 40: Total non-residential energy end use consumption by building type in MMBTU/yr, Climate Zone 7 ....... 46 Figure 41: Total non-residential energy end use consumption by building type in MMBTU/yr, Climate Zone 8 ....... 46 Figure 42: Total non-residential lighting electricity use (kWh/year) by lamp type, Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 ............ 48 Figure 43: Total non-residential computer and IT electricity use (kWh/year), Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 ................... 49 Figure 44: Total Non-Residential Energy Use by Climate Zone in MMBTUs/yr ........................................................... 51 Figure 45: Total Non-Residential Energy Intensity by Climate Zone in kBTUs /ft2/yr .................................................. 52 Figure 46: Energy distribution in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8.................................................................... 52 Figure 47: Energy intensity (kBTUs /ft2/yr) by use category and Climate Zone........................................................... 53 Figure 48: Total Energy Use in MMBTUs.yr, Climate Zone 6 ....................................................................................... 54 Figure 49: Total Energy Intensity in kBTUs/ft2/yr, Climate Zone 6 .............................................................................. 55 Figure 50: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 6. .............................................................. 56 Figure 51: Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr Climate Zone 6. ............................................. 56 Figure 52: Energy distribution in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 6. .................................................................................. 57 Figure 53: Energy intensity (kBTUs /ft2/yr) by use category, Climate Zone 6. ............................................................. 57 Figure 54: Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 7 ...................................................................................... 59 Figure 55: Energy Intensity, Climate Zone 7, kBTUs /ft 2/yr ......................................................................................... 59 Figure 56: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 7. .............................................................. 60 Figure 57: Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr, Climate Zone 7 ............................................. 61 Figure 58: Energy distribution in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 7. .................................................................................. 61 Figure 59: Energy intensity (kBTUs /ft2/yr) by use category, Climate Zone 7. ............................................................. 62 Figure 60: Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 8 ...................................................................................... 63 Figure 61: Energy Intensity, Climate Zone 8, kBTUs /ft 2/yr ......................................................................................... 64 Figure 62: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs, Climate Zon e 8. .................................................................. 64 Figure 63: Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr Climate Zone 8 .............................................. 65 Figure 64: Total Energy distribution in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 8. ......................................................................... 66 Figure 65: Energy intensity (kBTUs /ft2/yr) by use category, Climate Zone 8. ............................................................. 66 Figure 66: Number of Bedrooms, ARIS and Bethel Residential Sample ...................................................................... 69 Figure 67: Decade of Home Construction, ARIS and Bethel Residential Sample ......................................................... 69 Figure 68: Decade Built of Bethel Residential Sample* ............................................................................................... 70 Figure 69: Primary Heating Fuel, Bethel Residential Sample* ..................................................................................... 71 Figure 70: Summary of Residential Energy Use in Bethel in MMBTUs/yr ................................................................... 72 Figure 71: Residential Energy Use, Bethel, in MMBTUs/yr .......................................................................................... 73 Figure 72: Residential Energy Use, Bethel, in Percent MMBTU/yr .............................................................................. 73 Figure 73: Bethel Residential Appliance Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr ........................................................................... 75 Figure 74: Total energy use in MMBTU/yrs, Bethel ..................................................................................................... 76 Figure 75: Energy Intensity in kBTUs /ft2/yr, Bethel. ................................................................................................... 76 Figure 76: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs/yr, Bethel ............................................................................ 77 Figure 77: Overall Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr, Bethel ............................................... 78 Figure 78: Distribution of energy use by building type, MMBTUs/yr, Bethel. ............................................................. 79 Figure 79: Distribution of energy uses by building type,in kBTUs/ft 2/yr, Bethel ........................................................ 79 Figure 80: Bethel Energy Use ....................................................................................................................................... 82 Figure 81: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs, Rural Communities ............................................................. 84 Figure 82: Overall Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr, Three Small Communities ................ 84 Figure 83: Distribution of energy use by building type, MMBTUs/yr, Three Small Communities ............................... 85 vi Figure 84: Distribution of energy uses by building type,in kBTUs/ft 2/yr, Three Small Communities ......................... 86 Figure 85: Total energy use in MMBTUs/yr, Three Small Communities ...................................................................... 87 Figure 86: Energy Intensity in kBTUs /ft2/yr, Three Small Communities ..................................................................... 88 Figure 87: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs/yr, Three Small Communities.............................................. 88 Figure 88: Overall Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr, Three Small Communities ................ 89 Figure 89: Distribution of energy use by building type, MMBTUs/yr, Three Small Communities ............................... 90 Figure 90: Distribution of energy uses by building type,in kBTUs/ft 2/yr, Three Small Communities ......................... 90 Figure 91: Summary of Energy Use in Three Communities ......................................................................................... 93 Figure 92: Bethel Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer .......................................................................................... 105 Figure 93: Bethel Energy Use Model of Water & Sewer ............................................................................................ 105 Figure 94: New Stuyahok Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer ............................................................................. 106 Figure 95: New Stuyahok Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer ............................................................................. 106 Figure 96: Selawik Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer......................................................................................... 107 Figure 97: Selawik Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer......................................................................................... 107 Figure 98: Savoonga Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer ..................................................................................... 108 Figure 99: Savoonga Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer ..................................................................................... 108 Figure 100: Street Lighting Lumens per Kilowatt....................................................................................................... 118 Figure 101: Non-residential community response .................................................................................................... 121 Figure 102: Distribution of Building Types ................................................................................................................. 123 Figure 103: Distribution of Institutional Building Sub-Types ..................................................................................... 124 Figure 104: Building Construction by Decade ............................................................................................................ 125 Figure 105: Building Size (square feet) ...................................................................................................................... 125 Figure 106: Fuel Types ............................................................................................................................................... 126 Figure 107: Annual Fuel Oil Usage ............................................................................................................................. 127 Figure 108: Annual Electricity Usage ......................................................................................................................... 127 Figure 109: Alaska Energy Consumption Estimates and Trends ................................................................................ 129 Figure 110: Percent Energy Consumption by Sector ................................................................................................. 130 Figure 111: Alternative Industrial Energy Use Projections ........................................................................................ 131 Table 1: Population totals per climate zone ................................................................................................................ 10 Table 2: Total annual energy use per home for major energy uses by Climate Zone and residence type for the Railbelt & Southeast, (pop wt, MMBTU) ................................................................................................... 14 Table 3: Energy end use categories organization for the Railbelt and Southeast residential study ........................... 18 Table 4: Annual space heating and hot water energy use intensities for Railbelt, SEAK & Rural residential according (ARIS, kBTU/ft2) .......................................................................................................................................... 19 Table 5: Railbelt and Southeast appliance energy use by end use for each Climate Zone and residence type (pop wt, MMBTU) .................................................................................................................................................... 26 Table 6: Railbelt and Southeast non-residential building summary data .................................................................... 36 Table 7: Total building energy use and area by building type ..................................................................................... 40 Table 8: Average energy end-use Intensity (kBTU/SF/year) for nonresidential buildings for climate zones 6, 7, and 8 ................................................................................................................................................................... 42 Table 9: Detailed energy intensity data (kBTU/SF/year) for the primary end uses for each building type and climate zone ........................................................................................................................................................... 47 Table 10: Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr.............................................. 50 Table 11: Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in kBTUs per Square Foot/yr ........................ 50 Table 12: Total energy use by Climate Zone, all building types, in MMBTUs/yr. ........................................................ 53 Table 13: Total energy intensity by Climate Zone, all building types, in kBTUs/ft 2/yr ................................................ 54 Table 14: Total energy use by Climate Zone by building types, in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 6. ............................... 58 Table 15: Total energy intensity by Climate Zone by building types, in kBTUs /ft2/yr, Climate Zone 6. ..................... 58 Table 16: Total energy use by Climate Zone by building types, in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 7. ............................... 62 Table 17: Total energy intensity by Climate Zone by building types, in kBTUs /ft2/yr Climate Zone 7. ...................... 63 vii Table 18: Total energy use by Climate Zone by building types, in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 8. ............................... 67 Table 19: Total energy intensity by Climate Zone by building types, in kBTUs /ft2/yr, Climate Zone 8. ..................... 67 Table 20: ARIS and survey end-use energy records ..................................................................................................... 68 Table 21: Residential Projected and Actual Samples ................................................................................................... 70 Table 22: Summary of Bethel residential energy use in MMBTUs/yr .......................................................................... 72 Table 23: Bethel residential appliance energy use, in MMBTUs ................................................................................. 74 Table 24: Distribution of Non-Residential Building Types, Bethel Sample .................................................................. 75 Table 25: Bethel Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr........................................................................... 80 Table 26: Bethel Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in kMBTUs /ft2/yr ...................................................................... 80 Table 27: Summary of Bethel Energy Use.................................................................................................................... 81 Table 28: Number of observations from participating rural communities .................................................................. 83 Table 29: Estimated Residence Size in Square Feet ..................................................................................................... 83 Table 30: Energy use characteristics of three rural Alaskan communities in MMBTUs/yr ......................................... 86 Table 31: Non-Residential buildings sample, three smaller rural communities .......................................................... 87 Table 32: Three Small Communities’ Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr ........................................... 91 Table 33: Bethel Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in kMBTUs /ft2/yr ...................................................................... 91 Table 34: Summary of Energy Use in Three Communities .......................................................................................... 92 Table 35: Data Furnished by Alaska Rural Utility Cooperative, an organization sponsored by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium ........................................................................................................................ 96 Table 36: Water and Sewerage Utilities Systems Data Summary ............................................................................. 100 Table 37: Model of Water System Energy Use Calculations ...................................................................................... 101 Table 38: Model Results at AAAT and 45 Deg F Operating Temperature .................................................................. 109 Table 39: Model Results at EWAT and 45 Deg F Operating Temperature ................................................................. 109 Table 40: Model Results at Avg Annual Temp and 45 Deg F Operating Temperature .............................................. 110 Table 41: Model Results at Avg Annual Temp and 50 Deg F Operating Temperature .............................................. 110 Table 42: Model Results at Avg Annual Temp and 55 Deg F Operating Temperature .............................................. 110 Table 43: Size Distribution of Alaskan Communities and Survey Response Rate ...................................................... 114 Table 44: Communities with streetlights by size ....................................................................................................... 116 Table 45: Participating Communities by AEA Region ................................................................................................ 117 Table 46: Street light energy use (Kw hrs) and Illumination (lumens)....................................................................... 117 Table 47: Street lighting instrument energy use and brightness by community ....................................................... 119 Table 48: Average street light energy use and illumination by community size ....................................................... 120 Table 49: Non-Residential Building Types Represented ............................................................................................ 122 Table 50: Energy use forecasts by industrial sector, 2010 through 2020 .................................................................. 131 Table 51: Total Alaska Energy Use by Sector-1960-2009 .......................................................................................... 133 Appendix A: Methodology Appendix B: AEA End-use Study Implementation Plan Appendix C: Residential Questionnaire Appendix D: Non-residential Questionnaire Appendix E: Generalizability Appendix F: INGENS Appendix G: Parcel Data Appendix H: Residential and Non-residential Data Sets Appendix I: Final Rural Energy Wise Data Sets Appendix J: School Data Appendix K: Street Lighting Appendix L: Utility Data Appendix M: Water and Sewer Appendix N: Non-residential Rural Building Survey Tools viii Acronyms AAAT Annual Average Ambient Temperature AEA Alaska Energy Authority ANCSA Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act ANTHC Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium ARIS Alaska Retrofit Information System ARUC Alaska Rural Utilities Consortium AVEC Alaska Village Electric Cooperative BEES Building Energy Efficiency Standards BTUs British Thermal Units CCHRC Cold Climate Research Housing Center CFL Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs CZ Climate Zone DHW Domestic Hot Water EUS End Use Study EWAT Extreme Winter Ambient Temperature HID High Intensity Discharge HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Condition ISER Institute of Social and Economic Research KBTU British Thermal Units X1000 LED Light-Emitting Diode LPS Low Pressure Sodium MH Metal Halide MMBTU British Thermal Units x 1 million RDI Resource Data Inc. SEAK Southeast Alaska UAA University of Alaska Anchorage VSW Village Safe Water 1 Alaska Energy Authority End-Use Study Executive Summary Overview The primary purpose of this End-use Study (EUS) is to provide energy end use details for residential and non-residential buildings in Southeast Alaska (Climate Zone 6), Southc entral Alaska (Climate Zone 7), Fairbanks/Interior (Climate Zone 8), and the rural North/Northwest Alaska. Building upon this geographic stratification, it is important to place building energy use in context of statewide energy consumption at the regional level. The AEA/EUS also provided basic end-use energy and building benchmark information on several non-building categories, including street lighting and water/waste water treatment infrastructure. In conjunction with AEA, the data was amalgamated to document overall statewide energy use for residential and non-residential buildings in Climate Zones 6-8, water/wastewater infrastructure energy use, and non-Residential rural community buildings. Specifically, the purposes of the AEA End-Use Study are to:  Provide baseline data on energy use in residential and nonresidential buildings through - lighting, etc.), stratified by building type, location, and other parameter s.  Establish a framework for future end-use studies. This end-use data may be used to:  Identify opportunities for energy efficiency measures.  Track changes over time in building and community energy use intensities and greenhouse gas emissions. The report presents information on residential, nonresidential energy end-use data for communities in the Railbelt and Southeast Alaska Regions further disaggregated by Climate Zone. The conclusions noted below are shown in greater detail in the conclusions section of the report. The conclusions are derived from data shown in the baseline study narrative tables and graphs and are presented in the order that they are presented in the report. Railbelt and Southeast Residential Energy Use  The average residence in Railbelt and Southeast Alaska regions uses 269 MMBTUs in energy each year, and total energy use of 59 million MMBTUs. 2  Residents of Railbelt and Southeast Alaska use about 80% of their total energy (in MMBTUs) to heat their homes.  Single family detached residences use more energy than other types of residences. Multifamily residences use the least.  Natural gas is the primary fuel for home heating in 64% of households in Railbelt and Southeast Alaska, and oil is the primary fuel in Southeast Alaska.  Domestic hot water uses between 9% and 11% of energy in Railbelt and Southeast Alaskan homes.  Electrical appliances use between 8% and 10% of all MMBTUs among respondent households in Railbelt and Southeast Alaska, but consume 65% of all electrical energy.  The operation of major appliances such as refrigerators, freezers, washers and dryers is the largest single residential use of electrical energy in all the Climate Zones within Railbelt and Southeast Alaska (24% of electrical energy.  Mobile homes have the highest energy intensity (KBTU/ft2) in space heating, domestic hot water production and operating appliances. Railbelt and Southeast Non-residential Energy Use  Based on average energy use by various non-residential building types, Railbelt and Southeast Alaska regions use over 29,974.000 MMBTUs of energy each year.  It is important to estimate both the total energy use in MMBTUs and the energy intensity in kBTUs per square foot.  Food service facilities have more energy intensity than any other type of building in Climate Zones 6, 7, and 8.  Healthcare facilities have the second highest energy intensity, about one half that of food service buildings.  Heating accounts for just over 50% of total building energy used.  Primary cooking is the second highest energy use for all fuel types, at 26%.  Lighting uses the largest proportion of energy (28%) in non-residential buildings in all three Climate Zones.  Lighting has the highest energy intensity of non-residential end use, at 36% of all kBTUs.  Laundry services in healthcare facilities are a major use of energy.  Lighting is the highest use of energy in retail buildings, using over half of all of the energy consumed in MMBTUs.  While total non-residential energy use is higher in more northerly Climate Zones, it appears to be lower when energy intensity is measured. Energy use in rural Alaska  Bethel is estimated to use almost 1.3 million MMBTUs of energy per year. 3  Oil is the primary heating fuel for Bethel residential use.  On average, Bethel residents use almost 250MMBTUs of energy each year in home heating, domestic hot water, and the operation of electrical appliances.  Space heating uses 72% of all energy among Bethel residences.  Operating major appliances, including refrigerators, freezers, washers and dryers, uses 35% of all electrical energy in Bethel households.  Office buildings in Bethel use more energy and MMBTUs than any other type of facility.  Food service facilities have the highest energy intensity, at 335 kBTUs per square foot of any building type.  Almost three quarters (72%) of all energy used by non-residential buildings in Bethel is used for heating, ventilation and air-conditioning.  Space heating is the dominant use of energy in all building types except food service buildings.  Together, the three rural communities included in the rural study use about 107 MMBTUs of energy per year.  Almost 90% of all energy used in the three communities is for space heating.  There are differences in the distribution of residential energy use between communities.  Non-residential heating requires more energy in MMBTUs (72%) than any other application. Rural Non-Residential community buildings  Most (92%) of the almost 2000 rural non-residential buildings examined in this study are heated with fuel oil  The building surge in rural Alaska during the 1980s suggests that many of the facilities may have inadequate insulation and weatherization. Water and sewer  There does not appear to be adequate data to measure the amount of energy used to operate rural water and sewer utilities.  Energy data is not readily available with the engineering and other operational staff.  Operating water and sewer utilities at higher temperatures than necessary or having inadequate utilidor insulation results in significantly higher utility systems costs. Street lighting  Communities who participated in the study used over 3.5 million kWh of energy to generate over 500,000 lumens of street lighting. 4  High pressure sodium fixtures are clearly the most commonly used street lighting technology.  Smaller communities are using more incandescent street lighting instruments than larger communities.  There appears to be more interest among communities in switching to LED street lighting technology. Energy Use Trends by Sector  Industrial energy use comprises about half of all energy used in Alaska.  Statewide Energy use in Alaska appears to be declining.  The interpretation of changes in energy use may benefit from the use of denominators.  AEA should be cautious in selecting the time period that it will use in developing forecasts. Methods  ARIS (from AkWarm© energy raters) was supplemented with survey data to provide a comprehensive picture of residential energy use.  Survey research, combined with an on-site/walkthrough methodology, appears to be an effective way of collecting end-use energy data.  Energy Wise energy use data appears to be a promising source of energy end-use characteristics in rural Alaskan communities.  The State should carefully examine this baseline data to determine which variables are likely candidates to be included in a performance measurement system of overall statewide energy use. 5 Introduction The intent of the Alaska Energy Authority End-use Study (AEA/EUS) is to:  Establish baseline energy consumption data related to power and heat usage;  Develop a repeatable methodology that will allow AEA, project partners, or others to measure changes in baseline energy use and evaluate energy efficiency measures over time;  Guide energy efficiency policy and programs for residential and non-residential sectors of Southeast Alaska, the Railbelt, and Rural Alaska; and  Inform policy makers, AEA stakeholders, and other project partners on energy consumption patterns in Alaska. The energy end-use data collected is intended to provide a snapshot of energy use over a specific time period to support planning for energy efficiency programs. This report includes information and field data collection protocols used to collect energy end-use data for residential and non-residential buildings in Alaska. Due to the unique energy challenges in different regions of Alaska, multiple data collection methodologies were utilized. The methodology is further described in Appendix A. The EUS focuses on energy consumption in the residential and non -residential building sectors1 which are among the largest energy end users in Alaska. The EUS also explores several non- building end uses, such as street lighting and water/waste water treatment infrastructure. Energy end-use data combined to describe the overall energy use for:  Residential and non-residential buildings in Climate Zones 6-82;  Residential and non-residential buildings in selected rural communities;  Rural non-residential community buildings; and  Water/wastewater infrastructure and street lighting. Specifically, the purposes of the AEA End-use Study are to:  Provide baseline energy use data for residential and non-residential buildings through end use ting, cooling, lighting, etc.); stratified by building type, location, and other parameters; and  Establish a framework for future end-use studies. 1 The sector analysis shows that the non-residential sector is the third largest energy user. 2 Climate Zones are defined in the Building Energy Efficiency Standards (BEES). 6 This end-use data is intended to:  Identify opportunities for energy efficiency measures;  Track changes over time in building and community energy use intensi ties and greenhouse gas emissions by establishing a baseline that can be replicated in future years; and  Support the Alaska Legislature in achieving Alask In 2010 the Alaska Legislature and Governor passed HB306 that stated: achieve a 15 percent increase in energy efficiency on For the purposes of this study, the researchers have interpreted the 15% goal in the following manner: Alaska shall achieve a 15 percent reduction in the amount of heating fuel and electricity used on a per capita basis in the residential and commercial building sectors, as well as public facilities such as street lighting and water/sewer facilities, between the base year of 2010 and the year 2020. For the purposes of this goal, some small manufacturing and light industrial users are included as part of the goal, but large industrial users are not. For the purposes of this goal, industrial users are defined as those that:  Have commercial accounts with their electric utility (excluding industrial, interruptible or other very large customer accounts); or  Would qualify for the Alaska Commercial Energy Audit Program.  Federal buildings that were included in the End-use buildings are included in the goal.  Military bases and military operations, aviation fuel operations, and transportation fuel operations, are excluded. The State recognizes the value of efficiency improvements in all these excluded sectors and would like to set goals in future years with and for these sectors. AEA intends to measure progress toward the goal based on:  Top down per capita: Total energy distributed in applicable residential and non- residential sectors, divided by total population (i.e. total electrical sales divided by population); 7  Top down per square foot: Total energy distributed in applicable sectors, divided by square footage of built environment. This measure allows for changes in the number of buildings, and the number of occupants per building, over time;  Bottom up per capita: Sample building energy end uses by sector and by region, extrapolate across entire state, and divide by total population;  Bottom up per square foot: Sample building energy end uses by sector and region, extrapolate across entire state, and divide by total square footage of built environment;  Average energy intensity measurement: Measure longitudinal changes in energy intensity (BTU/sf/year), normalized by heating degree days, in selected buildings, by sector; and  Sum of known savings: Sum all verified savings due to energy efficiency programs. Since this measure cannot capture energy savings from non-programmatic energy efficiency measures, it provides an incomplete picture of total energy savings. However, the measure is very accurate for the verified sample. The 2011 End-use Study captures measures at the regional level, including:  Southeast Alaska (Climate Zone 6);  Southcentral Railbelt Alaska (Climate Zone 7);  Interior Railbelt Alaska (Climate Zone 8); and  Rural North and West Alaska. In future years, the regions may be further sub-divided into the 11 energy regions monitored by AEA. AEA/EUS Report Organization This report is organized around major regions, building types, and independent studies. For those interested in the methodological approach, refer to the highly detailed, independent implementation plan entitled AEA End-Use Study Methodology3. The EUS is organized in the following sections:  Residential Energy End-use Results. This section describes the energy end-use results for BEES Climate Zones 6 (Southeast AK), 7 (Southcentral), and 8 (Interior) for various types of residences;  Non-Residential Energy End-use Results. This section describes the energy end-use results for Climate Zones 6, 7, and 8 for various Alaska non-residential buildings;  Rural North and West Results. This section describes the energy end-use results as found in the rural north and north northwest; 3 Copies of the AEA End-Use Study Methodology can be found in Appendix A or requested from AEA. 8  Independent Studies. This section describes AEA requested independent studies to assess water/wastewater, and street lighting, and rural non-residential building energy uses;  Conclusions. This sections highlights conclusions derived from the research team based upon the available data; and  Appendices. This section includes methodology summary, data sets, supplemental analyses, and other information to support EUS conclusions. Acknowledgements AEA relied on many partners in the development of this study, including the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC), the University of Alaska (Anchorage) Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER), Chugach Electric Association, Cold Climate Research Housing Center (CCRHC), Resource Data Inc. (RDI), RurAL CAP, Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC), Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC), State of Alaska school districts, and staff from many Alaska city and tribal governments. The US Department of Energy and Chugach Electric Association provided funding for this report. AEA contracted WHPacific to design and implement the study and teamed with Brian Saylor and Associates, CTG Energetics, and Craciun Research Group. 9 Southeast and Railbelt Alaska Residential Energy Use Introduction This section summarizes residential energy use for Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 for the Railbelt and Southeast Alaska by end use, climate zone, region and residence type. Alaska Retrofit Information System (ARIS) data sets were used to calculate residential end-use study for heating and domestic hot water use. This is a very rich source of HVAC and DHW data which provides significant data on building envelope, heating equipment, and other housing characteristics which can be used by future researchers to further explore the end-use data. Furthermore, the ARIS data contains both pre and post retrofit data4, which provides a source of actual energy savings and associated measures that can be further analyzed. ARIS data currently does not contain detailed information on lighting, appliances, and other Therefore, a supplemental survey was performed to provide additional data on these end uses. Throughout the rest of this report, these end uses are collectively referred to as end uses.5 The survey used a stratified random sampling approach for each residence type within each of the three climate zones in the study area. This defines the smallest unique strata for which the study provides statistically valid data. The aggregate results reported here have been population weighted (pop wt) so that they are representative of the entire study -area population. For easy comparison, energy use for all fuel types was converted into British Thermal Units (BTUs)6. energy includes upstream energy conversion losses in the power plant; transmission and distribution losses; and extraction, processing and transportation of fuels. This is particularly significant for electricity, which has significant losses in the power plant and in the transmission and distribution system. Alaskan transmission and distribution losses are approximately 12.9%. 4 For this end use study, the “pre-retrofit” data is assumed to be representative of the majority of Alaskan housing stock, which has not participated in the incentive program. 5 Appliances include all lighting, electrical and non-electrical appliances and equipment not related to space heating or hot water heating 6 The British thermal unit is a traditional unit of energy based on the amount of energy needed to keep 1 pound of water from 39°F to 40°F. It is often used to measure the heat value of fuels and the power of heating and cooling systems. A MMBTU is 1 million BTUs. 10 For every kWh of delivered (site) electricity, 3.65 kWh of source energy is consumed upstream 7. In other words, the electricity supply system is only 27% efficient; 73% of the energy going into power plants is not delivered to end users. Average energy use values calculated in this study were used to estimate total energy use for all residences in the Southeast and Railbelt regions. Table 1 shows the population totals per climate zone and residence type that were used for the population weighting. Table 1: Population totals per climate zone Strata Population Climate Zone 6 Total 27,777 Single Family Detached 13,611 Single Family Attached 1,389 Multi Family 9,999 Mobile Home 2,778 Climate Zone 7 Total 159,451 Single Family Detached 82,829 Single Family Attached 12,745 Multi Family 54,160 Mobile Home 9,717 Climate Zone 8 Total 33,595 Single Family Detached 17,452 Single Family Attached 2,685 Multi Family 11,411 Mobile Home 2,047 Study-Area Total 220,823 Single Family Detached 113,892 Single Family Attached 16,819 Multi Family 75,570 Mobile Home 14,542 Total Energy Use by Climate Zone & Fuel Type Figure 1 shows the total energy used by residences in each of the climate zones for the Railbelt and Southeast Alaska (SEAK). On average, homes in the more temperate Climate Zone 6 use less energy than those in the colder climate zones. The use of energy in Southcentral Alaska (Railbelt, Climate Zone 7) is slightly higher than energy use in Climate Zone 8. On average homes were 6% larger in Climate Zone 7 than in Climate Zone 8. 7 Deru, M., and Torcellini, P. “Source Energy and Emission Factors for Energy Use in Buildings.” National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Technical Report NREL/TP-550-38617. June 2007. 11 This section focuses on total energy use, which is shown in MMBTUs. Data collected for the sample of residential facilities in the region is generalized to the total number of residences. This (pop wt). This allows for generalization to the total number of residences in Climate Zone 6 (SEAK) and Climate Zones 7 and 8 (Railbelt Alaska). There is insufficient data on total residential square feet within these regions to present total energy use on a per square foot basis. Figure 1: Total energy use/yr per home by climate zone for Railbelt & SEAK (pop weighted, MMBTU) Figure 2 compares total energy use for all fuel types (includes birch, spruce, coal, fuel oil number 1 and fuel oil number 2 , natural gas, propane, electricity, and appliance fuels8). 8 All non-electricity based fuel sources that power appliances have been broken out as ‘Appliance Fuels’. Electricity includes electricity used for space heating, domestic hot water and appliance energy use. 202.2 281.5 264.2 268.9 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 CZ6 CZ7 CZ8 All Climate Zones annual energy use per home, (MMBTU/yr) 12 Figure 2: Total annual energy use by fuel type for the Railbelt & Southeast (pop wt, % MMBTU) Figure 3 compares state-wide total energy use by all fuel types for each climate zone within the Railbelt and Southeast study areas. Climate Zone 7 has by far the largest total energy use due to a substantially larger population than other climate zones. Total Railbelt and Southeast residential energy use within this study is 59.38 million MMBTUs. Figure 3: Total annual energy use per home by fuel type and CZ for the Railbelt & Southeast (pop wt, MMBTU) 4% 0% 10% 59% 21% 4% 0% 2% Birch Coal Electricity Gas Oil Propane Spruce Appliance Fuels 5,617,000 44,885,000 8,875,000 0 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 35,000,000 40,000,000 45,000,000 50,000,000 CZ6 CZ7 CZ8 total annual energy use, (MMBTU/yr) Railbelt & SEAK Total Energy Use by Fuel Type and Climate Zone Appliance Fuels Spruce Propane Oil Gas Electricity Coal Birch 13 Energy Uses by Climate Zone, Region and Residence Type Figure 4 shows the breakdown of major energy uses (space heating, domestic hot water, and appliance energy use) in MMBTUs for all climate zones for the Railbelt and Southeast regions. For this study, appliance energy includes all electrical and non-electrical appliances and equipment and lighting not directly related to space heating or the heating of domestic hot water. Appliance energy use across climate zones is very similar. Climate Zone 6 has significantly less space heating and domestic hot water energy use then Climate Zones 7 and 8. Figure 4: Total energy by major energy use per home by Climate Zone (pop wt, MMBTU) Table 2 shows population weighted space heating, hot water, appliance and total energy use per home for each of the residence types and for each of the three Climate Zones. 157.8 223.2 215.0 213.7 22.9 35.7 26.7 32.7 21.5 22.9 22.5 22.7 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 CZ 6 CZ 7 CZ 8 All annual energy use per home, (MMBTU/yr) Space Heating Domestic Hot Water Appliance 14 Table 2: Total annual energy use per home for major energy uses by Climate Zone and residence type for the Railbelt & Southeast, (pop wt, MMBTU) Climate Zone Total Space Heating Domestic Hot Water Appliance Climate Zone 6 202.23 157.80 22.88 21.54 Mobile Home 193.61 146.83 25.31 21.47 Multi Family 141.39 106.01 18.67 16.71 Single Family Attached 163.12 121.86 21.46 19.79 Single Family Detached 252.68 201.76 25.63 25.29 Climate Zone 7 281.73 223.19 35.65 22.90 Mobile Home 251.74 193.46 36.28 22.00 Multi Family 177.20 134.08 26.39 16.74 Single Family Attached 278.48 214.96 42.30 21.22 Single Family Detached 354.10 286.20 40.61 27.29 Climate Zone 8 264.21 215.01 26.72 22.48 Mobile Home 308.49 266.09 21.40 21.00 Multi Family 198.74 154.33 24.20 20.22 Single Family Attached 246.14 191.81 30.07 24.26 Single Family Detached 304.61 252.27 28.48 23.86 All Climate Zones 269.07 213.72 32.69 22.66 Mobile Home 248.63 194.78 32.09 21.76 Multi Family 175.72 133.42 25.03 17.26 Single Family Attached 263.79 203.57 38.63 21.59 Single Family Detached 334.40 270.91 36.96 26.52 Figure 5 shows space heating, domestic hot water, and appliance energy uses for each region in MMBTUs. Homes in the Southeast region use less space heating and domestic hot water energy than those in the Railbelt while appliance energy has smaller differences. 15 Figure 5: Total energy use per home for major energy uses by region (pop wt, MMBTU) Figure 6 shows space heating, domestic hot water and appliance energy uses for each residence type for all Climate Zones in the Southeast and Railbelt. The figure shows highest energy use by families living in single family detached residences and the lowest energy use in multifamily residences. Single family detached homes use the largest absolute and relative amount of total energy to heat the home and multifamily the least. The relative amount of energy used to operate appliances, including primary cooking and lighting, is approximately the same (between 8-10%) in all types of residences. Figure 6: Total energy use per home for major energy uses by residence type (pop wt, MMBTU) 218.8 159.3 31.1 22.9 22.7 21.7 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Railbelt Southeast annual energy use per home, (MMBTU/yr) Space Heating Domestic Hot Water Appliances 194.8 133.4 203.6 270.9 32.1 25.0 38.6 37.0 21.8 17.3 21.6 26.5 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Mobile Home Multi Family Single Family Attached Single Family Detached annual energy use per home, (MMBTU/yr) Space Heating Domestic Hot Water Appliance 16 Figure 7 shows similar data for Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 individually. There are statistically significant differences in energy use between residence types. A similar pattern is shown in all three Climate Zones; home heating is the largest energy use (between 76-83%), single family detached residences use the most energy, and multifamily residences the least. In Climate Zone 6 and 8, mobile homes use more overall energy then single family attached homes, where in Climate Zone 7, single family attached homes use more than mobile homes. Figure 7: Total energy use per home for major energy uses by residence type for CZ6, CZ7, and CZ8 respectively (pop wt, MMBTU) 146.8 106.0 121.9 201.8 25.3 18.7 21.5 25.6 21.5 16.7 19.8 25.3 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Mobile Home Multi Family Single Family Attached Single Family Detached CZ6, annual energy use (MMBTU/yr) Space Heating Domestic Hot Water Appliance 193.5 134.1 215.0 286.2 36.3 26.4 42.3 40.6 22.0 16.7 21.2 27.3 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Mobile Home Multi Family Single Family Attached Single Family Detached CZ7, annual energy use (MMBTU/yr) 17 Figure 8 compares the average energy intensity per home area in kBTU/ft 2 for each residence type. Mobile homes have the largest average energy use intensity of the four residence types while the other three residence types are very similar. Space heating energy use intensity in particular is significantly larger for mobile homes then for other residence types. The space heating and domestic hot water energy use intensities for multifamily and single fa mily attached homes both relied on the same housing type definition from the ARIS data (the ARIS database does not distinguish between these residence types). Differences in intensities between the two are due to population difference in residence types across Climate Zones. Figure 8: Total energy use intensity for major energy uses by residence type (ARIS, pop wt, kBTU/ft2) Energy End Uses Space heating, domestic hot water and appliance energy use were further broken down into end- use categories and sub end-use categories within those end uses. The space heating and domestic 266.1 154.3 191.8 252.3 21.4 24.2 30.1 28.5 21.0 20.2 24.3 23.9 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Mobile Home Multi Family Single Family Attached Single Family Detached CZ8, annual energy use (MMBTU/yr) 155.4 109.1 110.8 117.5 25.6 20.6 21.0 16.0 20.8 14.1 16.4 12.6 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 Mobile Home Multi Family Single Family Attached Single Family Detached annual energy use Intensity, (kBTU/ft2/yr) Space Heating Domestic Hot Water Appliance 18 hot water energy consumption relied on ARIS data, while the data collection for the appliance end uses was done through a stratified random survey. Table 3 expands the information on the organization of appliance end-use categories used for the Railbelt and Southeast residential study by adding space heating and domestic hot water. Some appliance sub end uses were combined after analysis, when and where appropriate. Table 3: Energy end use categories organization for the Railbelt and Southeast residential study Major Use End Use Sub End Use Space Heating Space Heating Birch Space Heating, Coal Space Heating, Electric Space Heating, Gas Space Heating, Oil1 Space Heating Oil2 Space Heating, Oil Space Heating, Propane Space Heating, Spruce Space Heating Domestic Hot Water Domestic Hot Water Birch DHW, Coal DHW, Electric DHW, Gas DHW,Oil1 DHWOil2 DHW, Oil DHW, Propane DHW, Spruce DHW Heating Appliance (electrical and non-electrical appliances, equipment and lighting) Interior Lighting Fluorescent, Incandescent.CFL, Small Halogen, Large Halogen LED, Other Bulb Exterior Lighting Fluorescent _ext, Incandescent_ext, CFL_ext, Small Halogen_ext, Large Halogen_ext, LED_ext Other Bulb_ext Major Appliances Refrigerator, Freezer, Dishwasher , Washer/ Dryer Primary Cooking Oven, Stove, Microwave Other Kitchen Equipment Coffee Maker, Electric Deep Fryer, Electric Fry Pan Electric Kettle, Slow Cooker, Toaster/Toaster Oven Entertainment Television, Gaming Console , DVD Player VCR, Digital Video Recorder (DVR), Standalone Cable Box Cable box with DVR , Music playing system, Satellite Dish Information Technology Computer/ Office Equipment, Small Low Tech Electronics (e.g. radios, clocks, phones), Small High Tech Electronics (e.g. cell chargers, tablets) Seasonal Decorative Lighting Seasonal Decorative Lighting Miscellaneous Appliances Garage door opener , Electric waterbed Hot Tub, Waterwell pumps , Sewage lift pump Sump pump , RV trickle charger, Engine Block Heater Heat Trace/ Heat Tape, Electric Vehicle Charging 19 Space Heating and Domestic Hot Water Use Space heating and domestic hot water energy use was calculated using existing residential ARIS data from 2008-2011. Average energy use intensities were calculated for all regions, Climate Zones, and residence types. Space heating and hot water energy usage was available by individual fuel type consumption and included birch, spruce, coal, oil number 1, oil number 2, natural gas, propane and electricity. The ARIS database does not distinguish between a multifamily residence type and a single family attached residence type, so the same space heating and hot water energy use intensities were applied to both residence types from the survey. Differences in total space heating and hot water energy use for these two residence types depend on home size as collected from the survey. Energy intensity calculations are shown in Table 4. Table 4: Annual space heating and hot water energy use intensities for Railbelt, SEAK & Rural residential according (ARIS, kBTU/ft2) Region Climate Zone Residence Type Space Heating EUI Domestic Hot Water EUI kBTU/ft2/yr kBTU/ft2/yr Railbelt 7 Mobile Home 155.4 29.13 Single Family 119.7 16.99 Multi Family 115.4 22.71 8 Mobile Home 213.8 17.20 Single Family 117.6 13.28 Multi Family 105.2 16.49 Southeast 6 Mobile Home 112.3 19.36 Single Family 103.4 13.13 Multi Family 79.2 13.95 Rural 8 Single Family 79.7 21.68 Multi Family 71.8 23.27 Figure 9 shows space heating energy intensity per home area by fuel type for the Railbelt, Southeast, and the combined Railbelt and Southeast (ARIS data, not population weighted). Natural gas is the most prevalent fuel type by intensity in the Railbelt followed by oil (oil number 1 and oil 2 are combined), while oil heating is most common in the Southeast, followed by spruce. Overall, the Railbelt uses more energy per square foot to heat the home than the Southeast. 20 Figure 9: Space heating energy use intensity for the Railbelt and Southeast by fuel type and region (ARIS, un-weighted, kBTU/ft2/yr) Figure 10 shows the breakdown of domestic hot water heating by fuel type for the Railbelt, Southeast, and the Railbelt and Southeast combined (ARIS data, not population weighted). Overall, the Railbelt uses more energy per square foot to heat hot water. As with space heating, natural gas is the dominant fuel type in the Railbelt, while oil dominates the Southeast. Electricity is a more common fuel type for hot water then for space heating, particularly in the Southeast. Figure 10: Domestic hot water energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by fuel type and region (ARIS, un-weighted, kBTU/ft2/yr) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Railbelt Southeast SEAK & Railbelt annual energy use intensity, (kBTU/ft2/yr) Spruce Propane Oil Gas Electric Coal Birch 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Railbelt Southeast SEAK & Railbelt annual energy use intensity, (kBTU/ft2/yr) Spruce Propane Oil Gas Electric Coal Birch 21 Figure 11 shows the breakdown of space heating by fuel type and residence type for all Climate Zones in the Railbelt and Southeast regions. Multifamily and single family residence types most heavily used natural gas as a space heating fuel while mobile homes more he avily used oil. For multifamily homes on a MMBTU basis, 70% of space heating was attributed to natural gas use. Figure 11: Space heating energy use intensity for the Railbelt and Southeast by fuel type and residence type (ARIS, un-weighted, kBTU/ft2/yr) Appliance Use - Appliances, Equipment & Lighting Appliance energy use accounts for 8% of total energy use for all fuel types ; but, as shown in Figure 12, appliances consume 65% of total electricity use. 9 9 Appliances include all lighting, electrical and non-electrical appliances and equipment not related to space heating or hot water heating 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Single Family Multi Family Mobile Home annual energy use intensity, (kBTU/ft2/yr) Spruce Propane Oil Gas Electric Coal Birch 22 Figure 12: Appliance electrical energy use by major uses (pop wt, % MMBTU) Figure 13 shows a further breakdown of total electricity use per home by all t he end uses as listed in Table 3. The single largest use is for operating major appliances, such as refrigerators, freezers, washers and dryers (24%). Space heating is the second largest application of electrical power at 21%, and domestic hot water production is third at 14%. Figure 13: Total electricity use for the Railbelt and Southeast by end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) Focusing now only on appliances, Figure 14 shows total appliance energy by fuel type per home. The majority of appliance energy is supplied by electricity. Certain end uses can be powered by electricity or others fuels (in most cases natural gas). These include primary cooking (ovens and stoves), major appliances (washers and dryers), and miscellaneous appliances (hot tubs). 14% 21% 65% Domestic Hot Water Space Heating Appliances DHW 14% Space Heating 21% Interior Lighting 5% Exterior Lighting 1% Major Appliances 24% Primary Cooking 10% Other Kitchen 2% Entertainment 10% Information Tech 7% Seasonal Lighting 1% Misc Appliances 5% 23 Figure 14: Total appliance energy use by fuel type (pop wt, % MMBTU) Figure 15 shows total appliance energy use (all fuel types) per home for each appliance end use defined in Table 2. Aggregating by fuel type shows major changes in the distribution of end uses. While operating major appliances is still the largest end use (31%), primary cooking uses increased from 10% to 26% of all energy used. Figure 15: Total appliance energy by end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) Figure 16 shows total appliance electricity use (this excludes all fuel-powered ovens, stoves, washer/dryers, and hot tubs) per home for each appliance end use as defined in Table 2. Primary cooking (specifically ovens and stoves) relies equally on electricity and other fuel sources and therefore makes up 26% of total appliance energy use but only 16% total appliance electricity use. 77% 23% Electricity Other Fuels 6% 2% 31% 26% 2% 11% 9% 1% 12% Interior Lighting Exterior Lighting Major Appliances Primary Cooking Other Kitchen Entertainment Information Tech Seasonal Lighting Misc Appliances 24 Figure 16: Total appliance electricity by end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) Major appliances are the largest energy consuming appliance end use for all Climate Zones. This is followed by primary cooking. Figure 17 shows total appliance energy use (all fuel types) per home by appliance end use for by residence type. Mobile homes have the la rgest primary cooking and entertainment energy use. Single family detached homes have the largest major appliances, interior lighting and miscellaneous appliance energy use. Other end uses are very similar across residence types. The breakdown of appliance energy by appliance end uses across Climate Zones showed little variation. Figure 17: Total appliance energy by end use by residence type (pop wt, MMBTU) 7% 2% 36% 16% 3% 15% 11% 2% 8% Interior Lighting Exterior Lighting Major Appliances Primary Cooking Other Kitchen Entertainment Information Tech Seasonal Lighting Misc Appliances 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Mobile Home Multi Family Single Family Attached Single Family Detached annual energy use per home, (MMBTU/yr) Misc Appliances Seasonal Lighting Information Tech Entertainment Other Kitchen Primary Cooking Major Appliances Exterior Lighting Interior Lighting 25 Each end use is discussed in detail in the following sections. The energy use for each end-use category is comprised of a number of sub end uses as shown in Table 2. Survey data collection has provided extensive information on appliance saturations, use patterns and energy consumptions of the specific appliances. The energy use is shown in detail in Table 5. 26 Table 5: Railbelt and Southeast appliance energy use by end use for each Climate Zone and residence type (pop wt, MMBTU) Interior Lighting Exterior Lighting Major Appliances Primary Cooking Other Kitchen Equipment Entertainment Information Technology Seasonal Lighting Miscellaneous Appliances Total Climate Zone 6 1.30 0.31 6.43 6.09 0.54 3.12 2.40 0.01 1.33 21.54 Mobile Home 0.96 0.39 7.16 6.56 0.45 3.13 1.85 0.01 0.96 21.47 Multi Family 1.59 0.49 4.45 4.32 0.57 2.47 1.67 0.00 1.15 16.71 Single Family Attached 0.99 0.70 6.20 6.35 0.50 2.13 1.68 0.03 1.21 19.79 Single Family Detached 1.18 0.13 7.77 7.27 0.54 3.69 3.12 0.02 1.55 25.29 Climate Zone 7 1.29 0.36 7.24 5.96 0.47 2.47 1.86 0.37 2.88 22.90 Mobile Home 0.74 0.43 5.95 7.99 0.48 3.39 1.84 0.01 1.18 22.00 Multi Family 0.79 0.09 6.04 5.09 0.28 1.70 1.52 0.00 1.23 16.74 Single Family Attached 1.27 0.49 7.59 6.56 0.39 2.90 1.72 0.00 0.30 21.22 Single Family Detached 1.68 0.51 8.12 6.21 0.61 2.80 2.11 0.71 4.55 27.29 Climate Zone 8 1.17 0.68 6.70 5.86 0.48 2.50 2.14 0.04 2.91 22.48 Mobile Home 0.76 0.40 5.65 5.82 0.44 3.30 1.90 0.20 2.54 21.00 Multi Family 0.88 0.55 5.53 6.42 0.46 2.58 2.01 0.01 1.78 20.22 Single Family Attached 1.13 0.45 6.85 6.02 0.51 3.88 2.00 0.05 3.38 24.26 Single Family Detached 1.42 0.84 7.56 5.48 0.49 2.14 2.27 0.05 3.61 23.86 All Climate Zones 1.27 0.40 7.05 5.96 0.48 2.56 1.97 0.27 2.69 22.66 Mobile Home 0.78 0.41 6.14 7.41 0.47 3.33 1.85 0.04 1.33 21.76 Multi Family 0.91 0.21 5.75 5.19 0.35 1.93 1.61 0.00 1.31 17.26 Single Family Attached 1.22 0.50 7.36 6.46 0.42 2.99 1.76 0.01 0.87 21.59 Single Family Detached 1.58 0.51 7.99 6.22 0.58 2.81 2.25 0.52 4.05 26.52 27 Major Appliances The major appliances category was the largest energy-consuming end use for all Climate Zones in the Railbelt and Southeast, contributing to 31% of total appliance energy use and 37% of total appliance electricity use. Figure 18 shows the relative contribution of the four sub end uses (refrigerators, freezers, washer/dryers, and dishwashers). Major appliance use across individual Climate Zones and residence types followed a similar breakdown. Refrigerator use was the largest appliance use in this category , with 52% of all energy used. Washer/Dryers accounted for 21% of total major appliance energy use, using either electricity or natural gas as a fuel source. Survey respondents were asked what fuel type was used for both their washer and dryer. If unknown, the primary heating fuel for the home was used as the default. On average, 70% of washer/dryer energy was derived from electricity. Figure 18: Major appliances energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) Other available characteristics on major appliances in the home include: number of refrigerators/freezers, age of refrigerators/freezers, size of refrigerators/freezers, ag e of dishwasher, dishwasher loads per week, energy star rating for all major appliances, and laundry loads per week. Primary Cooking Primary cooking was the second largest energy end use for all Climate Zones in the Railbelt and Southeast, contributing to 27% of overall appliance energy use and 16% of total appliance electricity use. Figure 19 shows the relative contribution of the three sub end uses (ovens, stoves and microwaves). Stove use was the largest appliance use in this category. Approximately 40% of stove energy use was electricity based. 52% 13% 14% 21% Refrigerator Freezer Dishwasher Washer/ Dryer 28 Figure 19: Primary cooking energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) Other available characteristics on primary cooking in the home include: fuel type used for oven/stove, hours of oven/stove/microwaves use per week, number of ovens/stoves/mi crowaves. The average daily stove use as collected by the survey was 1.75 hours per day for the Railbelt and Southeast. The average weekly oven use was 5.4 hours. The unit energy consumption value used was 1.0 kWh/hr for electric ovens and 0.09 therms/hr for gas stoves10. Entertainment The entertainment category was the third largest energy end use in all Climate Zones for the Railbelt and Southeast, contributing to 11% of overall appliance energy use and 15% of total appliance electricity use. Figure 20 shows the relative contribution of the various sub end uses within this category. Television energy use was the largest component of this category. 10 http://evanmills.lbl.gov/pubs/pdf/home-energy-saver.pdf 35% 57% 8% Oven Stove Microwave 29 Figure 20: Entertainment energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) Figure 21 shows the entertainment energy use by sub end use for each of the residence types. Mobile homes had the largest energy use in the entertainment end-use category. Figure 21: Entertainment energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by sub end use and residence type (pop wt, % MMBTU) Other available characteristics on entertainment in the home include: number of televisions, type of television, and hours of television use per week. There was not significant variation in this end use between Climate Zones. Television 44% Gaming Console 1% DVD/VCR 2% VCR 2% DVR 7% Cable Box 13% Cable/DVR 22% Stereo 5% Satellite 4% 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Mobile Home Multi Family Single Family Attached Single Family Detached annual energy use per home, (MMBTU/yr) Satellite Stereo Cable/DVR Cable Box DVR VCR DVD/VCR Gaming Console Television 30 Information Technology The information technology category accounted for about 9% overall appliance energy use and 11% of total appliance electricity for the three Climate Zones in the Railbelt and Southeast. Figure 22 shows the relative contribution of the various sub end uses within this category. Computers and other office equipment were the largest energy sub end use of this category. There was no significant variation in this end use between Climate Zones or residence types. Figure 22: Information technology energy use for the Railbelt and Southeast by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) The information technology category covers a wide range of electronics and other equipment. Available data for computer/office equipment includes: the number of desktop computers, monitors, laptops, printers, multi-functioning devices, modems, copy machines, fax machines. Available data for small low tech electronics includes number of: alarm clocks, wall clocks, radios, and cordless telephones. Small high tech electronics include items such as IPods, mobile phone chargers, tablets, etc. Miscellaneous Appliances Miscellaneous appliances accounted for about 12% overall appliance energy use and 8% of total appliance electricity use for the three Climate Zones in the Railbelt and Southeast. Figure 23 shows the relative contribution of the various subcategory end uses within this category. Hot tubs were the largest consumer of energy in this category, and included both electric and fuel powered hot tubs. Approximately 55% of hot tubs were electric powered. Other Equipment accounted for 1% of total miscellaneous energy use and included trickle chargers, garage door openers and sump pumps. There was no significant variation in this end us e between Climate Zones or residence types. 82% 13% 5% Computer/ Office Equipment Small Low Tech Electronics Small High Tech Electronics 31 Figure 23: Miscellaneous appliances energy use by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) Interior Lighting Interior lighting accounted for 6% of overall appliance energy use and 7% of total appliance electricity use for the three Climate Zones in the Railbelt and Southeast. Figure 24 shows the relative contribution of the various bulb types that were used in the homes surveyed. Incandescent bulbs were the most prevalent lighting type, accounting for 48% of total lighting by energy (MMBTU), followed by compact fluorescent bulbs (CFLs) at 11%. Survey respondents were asked to categorically estimate the wattage of their incandescent bulbs . The CFL bulb wattage was assumed to be 13 watts. Figure 24: Interior lighting energy use by bulb type (pop wt, % MMBTU) 2% 70% 5% 1% 1% 20% 1% Electric waterbed Hot Tub Waterwell pump Sewage lift pump Heat Trace/Tape Electric Vehicle Other Equipment 10% 48% 11% 9% 12% 0% 10% Fluorescent Incandescent CFL Small Halogen Large Halogen LED Other Bulb 32 Figure 25 shows the interior lighting energy use by bulb type for each of the residence types. Mobile homes had the least interior lighting energy use and single family detached the largest. Proportionally, mobile homes had the greatest amount of CFL bulb energy usage. Figure 25: Interior lighting energy use by bulb type and Climate Zone (pop wt, % MMBTU) Other available characteristics on interior lighting include: number of bulbs of each type, hours on/off per bulb type, and type of incandescent bulb. There was no significant variation in this end use between Climate Zones. Exterior Lighting & Seasonal Decorative Lighting Exterior lighting accounted for 2% of overall appliance energy use and seasonal decorative lighting accounted for 1% for the three Climate Zones in the Railbelt and Southeast. Figure 26 shows the relative contribution of the various bulb types that were used for exterior lighting combined with the total for seasonal decorative lighting. Large halogen bulbs consumed the largest amount of energy. 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 Mobile Home Multi Family Single Family Attached Single Family Detached annual energy use per home, (MMBTU/yr) Other Bulb LED Large Halogen Small Halogen CFL Incandescent Fluorescent 33 Figure 26: Exterior & seasonal lighting energy use by bulb type (pop wt, % MMBTU) Other available characteristics on exterior lighting include: number of bulbs of each type, hours on/off per bulb type, and type of incandescent bulb. Other available characteristics on seaso nal decorative lighting include: number of light strands of each type (large incandescent, small incandescent, LED), type of light strand, hours on/off, months on/off. Other Kitchen Equipment Figure 27 Other kitchen equipment (including coffee makers, deep fryers, electric frying pans, electric kettles, slow cookers, toasters and toaster ovens) accounted for 2% of total appliance energy use and 3% of total appliance electrical use. However, each appliance contributes to this total load. Coffee makers are the largest sub category at 38%, followed by toasters at 29%. 1% 19% 3% 3% 56% 0% 1% 17% Fluorescent Incandescent CFL Small Halogen Large Halogen LED Other Bulb Seasonal Decorative Lighting 34 Figure 27: Other kitchen equipment energy use by sub end use (pop wt, % MMBTU) Other available characteristics on other kitchen equipment include: number of coffeemakers/ toasters/toaster ovens, type of coffeemaker. 38% 3% 6% 7% 10% 29% 7% Coffee Maker Electric Deep Fryer Electric Fry Pan Electric Kettle Slow Cooker Toaster Toaster Oven 35 Southeast and Railbelt Alaska Non-Residential Energy Use Introduction This section summarizes non-residential energy use for Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 for the Railbelt and Southeast Alaska by end use, climate zone, and building use. A detailed description of the energy end-use methodology is provided in the Methods section located in the appendices. This includes detailed discussion of the available non-residential building data in the study region, the sampling and survey approach used for this study, and detailed energy end-use calculation methodologies. All of the available parcel data and assessor records were obtained and reviewed. Parcel data was not obtainable for all areas within the study. Furthermore, there is a lack of consistent descriptive data for non-residential buildings in the Railbelt and Southeast (e.g., building counts, building types, square footage, etc.). A stratified random sample of the Railbelt and Southeast Alaska was conducted. The study region was divided by Climate Zone and building type (9 primary building type categories as shown in Table 6 selected to be surveyed, to provide statistics on building characteristics and energy end use that can be extrapolated to the entire population. Table 6 summarizes key statistics on the survey sample, and the population of buildings represented in each strata. 36 Table 6: Railbelt and Southeast non-residential building summary data Building Type Climate Zone Survey Data Population Data Average SF/Bldg Survey Total SF Surveyed Buildings Total Bldgs in Population Estimated Population SF Food service 6 5,866 76,259 13 111 651,135 Healthcare 6 34,694 416,332 12 38 1,318,385 Institutional 6 9,292 139,387 15 124 1,152,266 Lodging 6 9,076 117,985 13 77 698,834 Office 6 10,036 210,758 21 349 3,502,597 Other 6 8,238 65,900 8 364 2,998,450 Retail 6 22,394 425,477 19 349 7,815,341 Service 6 7,929 142,715 18 134 1,062,434 Warehouse 6 13,240 251,551 19 874 11,571,346 Food service 7 7,750 131,747 17 579 4,487,148 Healthcare 7 26,635 399,522 15 229 6,099,369 Institutional 7 21,962 307,465 14 935 20,534,270 Lodging 7 17,370 330,022 19 437 7,590,506 Office 7 24,927 598,237 24 1,562 38,935,258 Other 7 16,843 286,323 17 1,634 27,520,693 Retail 7 18,562 464,038 25 1,782 33,076,629 Service 7 10,646 180,980 17 977 10,401,027 Warehouse 7 19,658 353,843 18 4,496 88,382,118 Food service 8 5,147 87,504 17 136 700,032 Healthcare 8 42,981 644,710 15 40 1,719,227 Institutional 8 13,463 484,655 36 162 2,180,948 Lodging 8 9,973 179,521 18 81 807,845 Office 8 7,137 228,391 32 406 2,897,711 Other 8 5,443 136,066 25 415 2,258,696 Retail 8 11,323 283,087 25 398 4,506,745 Service 8 8,422 218,981 26 152 1,280,197 Warehouse 8 15,796 426,483 27 997 15,748,280 Totals 525 17,838 299,897,483 Energy Use by Climate Zone Figure 28 shows the total non-residential building energy use for each of the Climate Zones in the study area. Some light industrial facilities are included in the non-residential sample. Facilities supporting large industrial enterprises are not included. The total number of buildings and the non-residential square footage by Climate Zone is shown in Appendix A. Total energy 37 use calculations use standard calculation protocols described in the methodology section, also included in Appendix A. Climate Zone 6 generally corresponds to the Southeast, Climate Zone 7 to the Anchorage Area, and Climate Zone 8 to the Fairbanks area. Climate Zone 7 contains the largest population of non-residential buildings and accounts for the largest percentage of non-residential building energy use. Figure 28: Total non-residential energy use in the Railbelt and Southeast by Climate Zone Figure 29 shows similar data, but represents the average non-residential building energy intensity (kBTU/ft2/year) for each Climate Zone and the entire study area. Climate Zone 8 is the most extreme and buildings use the most energy per square foot. 2,872,828 22,910,769 4,190,155 29,973,753 - 5,000,000 10,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 35,000,000 6 7 8 All Total Energy Use (MMBTU/yr) Climate Zone 38 Figure 29: Average non-residential building energy intensity by Climate Zone Energy Use by Fuel Type Figure 30 shows non-residential building energy use by fuel type. Electricity accounts for 44% of building energy use. Natural gas is the next largest fuel source, accounting for 39% of building energy Figure 30: Total non-residential building energy use (MMBTU) by fuel type. Figure 31 shows similar data of fuel type by Climate Zone. Climate Zone 7 (Anchorage area) has a large penetration of natural gas, while the other Climate Zones do not and rely on other fuel types. 93 97 131 100 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 6 7 8 All Average Energy Intensity (kBTU/SF/yr) Climate Zone Electricity, 13,162,415 , 44% Natural Gas, 11,908,734 , 39% Propane, 30,168 , 0% Fuel Oil #1, 1,315,716 , 4% Fuel Oil #2, 2,447,641 , 8% Wood, 195,633 , 1% Other, 1,117,175 , 4% 39 Figure 31: Fuel type by Climate Zone Energy Use by Building Type Figure 32 and Table 7 show the total Railbelt and Southeast non-residential building energy use broken down by building type (blue bars, read from left axis). Warehouse type buildings use the largest amount of energy. Also plotted is the total building area by building type (red bars read on right). The total building energy use correlates to total building area for each building type. Figure 32: Total building energy use and area by building type 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 6 7 8 All Climate Zone Other Wood Fuel Oil #2 Fuel Oil #1 Propane Natural Gas Electricity 0 20,000,000 40,000,000 60,000,000 80,000,000 100,000,000 120,000,000 140,000,000 - 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000 8,000,000 10,000,000 12,000,000 Total Building Area (SF) Total Building Energy Use (MMBTU/year) 40 Table 7: Total building energy use and area by building type Building Type Total Energy Use, MMBTU/year Estimated Building Area (SF) Foodservice 1,922,406 5,838,314 Healthcare 1,329,890 9,136,981 Institutional 2,402,436 23,867,483 Lodging 1,034,281 9,097,185 Office 3,714,242 45,335,566 Other 3,170,122 32,777,839 Retail 4,660,790 45,398,714 Service 1,358,434 12,743,658 Warehouse 10,381,152 115,701,744 Total 29,973,753 299,897,483 Figure 33 shows average energy intensity (kBTU/SF) for all Climate Zones by building type. Food service is the most energy intensive building type due to cooking energy. Healthcare facilities are the second most energy intensive building type. Figure 33: Average building energy intensity by building type for all Climate Zones Energy Use by End Use Figure 34 shows total building energy use by primary end-use categories for all non-residential buildings in the Railbelt and Southeast Alaska. Total annual energy consumption (MMBTU) and percent of the total non-residential energy use is shown. Heating accounts for just over 50% of 90 103 82 97 101 329 107 146 114 100 - 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Total Building Energy Use (kbtU/sqft/year) 41 the total building energy use, followed by interior lighting (23%), domestic hot water heating (DHW), and office equipment. Figure 34: Total non-residential energy end-use consumption in MMBTU/yr, Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8. Figure 35 shows similar total energy end-use data for each of the building types, aggregated for Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8. This shows how total energy end-use consumption varies by building type. In general, heating accounts for around 50% of total energy use in all building types except for healthcare and food service facilities, where laundry and cooking, respectiv ely, represent significant portions of total energy use. Refrigeration, 699,269 , 2% Cooking, 1,319,299 , 5% Office Equipment & IT, 2,097,719 , 7% Laundry, 543,763 , 2% Interior Lighting, 6,764,289 , 23% Decorative Lighting, 5,442 , 0% Exterior Lighting , 876,054 , 3% Air- Conditioning, 73,671 , 0% DHW, 2,121,350 , 7% Space Heating, 15,143,667 , 51% 42 Figure 35: Total non-residential energy end-use consumption by building type in MMBTU/yr, Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8. Table 8 shows average end-use energy intensities (kBTU/SF/year) for each of the primary non - residential building types. Table 8: Average energy end-use Intensity (kBTU/SF/year) for nonresidential buildings for climate zones 6, 7, and 8 Building Type Refrigeration Cooking Office Equipment & IT Laundry Interior Lighting Decorative Lighting Exterior Lighting Air-Conditioning DHW Space Heating Total Food service 20.1 182.7 5.5 0.6 37.8 0.1 3.1 0.1 6.8 72.4 329.3 Healthcare 1.6 4.7 9.4 49.0 25.3 0.0 1.4 0.2 8.8 42.6 145.6 Institutional 0.7 1.9 7.1 0.2 15.7 0.2 1.6 0.8 24.3 47.8 100.7 Lodging 1.9 6.8 13.4 4.7 18.9 0.0 1.7 0.6 13.7 49.7 113.7 Office 0.2 0.5 5.2 0.4 19.6 0.0 1.3 0.1 9.8 44.4 81.9 Other 3.0 0.3 7.2 0.2 24.7 0.0 1.5 0.0 3.4 54.6 96.7 Retail 4.1 1.3 5.9 0.1 32.9 0.0 3.1 0.2 6.9 48.1 102.7 Service 6.9 0.3 5.9 0.4 31.4 0.0 4.0 0.3 4.4 52.6 106.6 Warehouse 1.3 0.1 7.5 0.1 18.8 0.0 4.2 0.2 3.2 52.5 89.7 Total 2.3 4.4 7.0 1.8 22.6 0.0 2.9 0.2 7.1 50.5 99.9 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Space Heating DHW Air-Conditioning Exterior Lighting Decorative Lighting Interior Lighting Laundry Office Equipment & IT Cooking Refrigeration 43 Figure 36 shows Climate Zone 6 Railbelt and Southeast non-residential building energy use and total building area (SF) broken down by building type (blue bars are MMBTUs, red bars are SF). Retail type buildings use the largest amount of energy. The total building energy use correlates to total building area for each building type. Figure 36: Total building energy use and area by building type for Climate Zone 6 Figure 37 shows Climate Zone 7 Railbelt and Southeast non-residential building energy use and total building area (SF) broken down by building type (blue bars are MMBTUs, red bars a re SF). Warehouse type buildings use the largest amount of energy. The total building energy use correlates to total building area for each building type. - 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000 8,000,000 10,000,000 12,000,000 14,000,000 16,000,000 18,000,000 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 800,000 900,000 Total Building Area ( SF) Total Building Energy Use (MMBTU/year) 44 Figure 37: Total building energy use and area by building type for Climate Zone 7 Figure 38 shows Climate Zone 7 Railbelt and Southeast non-residential building energy use and total building area (SF) broken down by building type (blue bars are MMBTUs, red bars are SF). Warehouse type buildings use the largest amount of energy. The total building energy use correlates to total building area for each building type. Figure 38: Total building energy use and area by building type for Climate Zone 8 0 10,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000 40,000,000 50,000,000 60,000,000 70,000,000 80,000,000 90,000,000 100,000,000 0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 8,000,000 9,000,000 Total Building Area ( SF) Total Building Energy Use (MMBTU/year) 0 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000 8,000,000 10,000,000 12,000,000 14,000,000 16,000,000 18,000,000 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000 1,600,000 1,800,000 2,000,000 Total Building Area ( SF) Total Building Energy Use (MMBTU/year) 45 Figure 39 shows total energy end use data for each of the building types for Climate Zone 6.This shows how total energy end use consumption varies by building type. In general, heating accounts for around 49% of total energy use in all building types except for healthcare and food service facilities, where laundry and cooking, respectively, represent significant portions of total energy use. Interior Lighting makes up a significant portion of total energy use in both Retail and Office buildings for Climate Zone 6. Figure 39: Total non-residential energy end use consumption by building type in MMBTU/yr, Climate Zone 6 Figure 40 shows total energy end use data for each of the building types for Climate Zone 7.This shows how total energy end use consumption varies by building type. In general, heating accounts for around 51% of total energy use in all building types except for healthcare and food service facilities, where laundry and cooking, respectively, represent significant portions of total energy use. 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 800,000 900,000 Total Building Energy Use (MMBTU/year) Space Heating DHW Air-Conditioning Exterior Lighting Decorative Lighting Interior Lighting Laundry Office Eqpmnt & IT Cooking Refrigeration 46 Figure 40: Total non-residential energy end use consumption by building type in MMBTU/yr, Climate Zone 7 Figure 41 shows total energy end use data for each of the building types for Climate Zone 8.This shows how total energy end use consumption varies by building type. In general, heating accounts for around 56% of total energy use in all building types except for healthcare and food service facilities, where laundry and cooking, respectively, represent significant portions of total energy use. Figure 41: Total non-residential energy end use consumption by building type in MMBTU/yr, Climate Zone 8 0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 8,000,000 9,000,000 Total Building Energy Use (MMBTU/year) Space Heating DHW Air-Conditioning Exterior Lighting Decorative Lighting Interior Lighting Laundry Office Eqpmnt & IT Cooking Refrigeration 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000 1,600,000 1,800,000 2,000,000 Total Building Energy Use (MMBTU/year) Space Heating DHW Air-Conditioning Exterior Lighting Decorative Lighting Interior Lighting Laundry Office Eqpmnt & IT Cooking Refrigeration 47 Energy Consumption Details by Climate Zone and Building Type Table 9 summarizes key energy intensity data (kBTU/SF/year) for each building type in each of the three climate zones covered. Note that more detailed data on specific energy end uses is available in the detailed energy end-use spreadsheets provided as an electronic appendix to this document. Table 9: Detailed energy intensity data (kBTU/SF/year) for the primary end uses for each building type and climate zone Climate Zone Building Type Refrigerators- Residential Freezers - Residential Commercial Refrigeration Cases Walk in Coolers Cooking Office & IT Equipment Laundry Residential Equip. Laundry Commercial Total Laundry Lighting Interior Lighting Decorative Lighting Exterior Lighting Total Cooling 6 Food service 0.5 0.3 3.5 9.1 - 0.5 42.0 0.0 1.5 43.5 0.1 5.2 43.2 283.6 Healthcare 0.2 0.0 0.6 2.0 73.0 73.1 18.8 0.0 1.2 20.0 0.2 8.0 36.2 163.1 Institutional 0.4 0.1 - - - 0.1 50.2 3.9 0.6 54.7 0.1 6.4 38.7 108.4 Lodging 0.5 0.1 0.6 5.0 2.0 2.5 8.3 0.0 1.7 10.0 - 9.1 60.3 106.4 Office 0.3 0.1 - - - 0.1 40.6 0.0 1.5 42.1 - 3.2 44.3 103.0 Other 0.4 0.3 0.0 - - 0.2 30.8 0.0 0.2 31.0 - 2.0 41.5 81.4 Retail 0.1 0.0 2.0 3.3 - 0.0 47.4 0.0 0.6 48.0 0.4 1.8 43.5 102.9 Service 0.2 0.1 - - 2.0 2.2 16.1 0.0 3.3 19.4 - 4.2 47.7 88.9 Warehouse 0.1 0.0 0.1 2.1 - 0.1 13.3 - 1.1 14.3 - 1.0 38.8 66.6 7 Food service 0.4 0.3 0.8 17.9 0.6 0.7 36.8 0.1 2.1 39.0 0.1 6.4 68.6 321.2 Healthcare 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.6 44.0 44.2 25.8 0.0 1.4 27.3 0.2 9.1 47.7 144.9 Institutional 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 - 0.1 14.2 0.0 1.7 15.9 0.9 26.3 45.7 98.9 Lodging 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.6 5.0 5.3 19.2 0.0 1.8 21.0 0.7 14.8 47.0 111.9 Office 0.1 0.0 - - 0.5 0.5 18.2 0.0 1.3 19.5 0.1 10.8 40.7 76.4 Other 0.2 0.1 0.1 3.0 - 0.1 23.7 0.0 1.6 25.3 0.0 3.2 52.7 94.2 Retail 0.1 0.0 1.2 2.4 - 0.1 29.2 0.0 3.7 32.9 0.1 8.8 46.8 100.8 Service 0.2 0.0 0.4 1.4 - 0.2 29.4 0.0 4.2 33.6 0.4 4.3 51.3 97.5 Warehouse 0.1 0.0 - 0.9 - 0.1 15.8 0.0 5.0 20.8 0.3 3.8 52.4 88.2 9 Food service 0.4 0.3 2.3 27.3 - 0.2 40.4 0.1 11.1 51.6 0.3 10.3 123.8 423.7 Healthcare 0.1 0.0 0.2 2.0 47.8 47.9 28.3 0.0 1.3 29.6 0.0 8.4 29.4 134.2 Institutional 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.6 12.1 0.0 1.0 13.1 0.1 14.5 72.8 113.5 Lodging 0.4 0.1 - 1.6 0.8 1.2 24.6 0.0 0.9 25.5 0.0 6.9 65.8 136.6 Office 0.3 0.0 - - 0.1 0.2 12.3 0.0 1.7 14.0 0.3 4.2 94.7 131.2 Other 0.5 0.2 0.1 - 0.6 0.8 28.4 0.0 2.3 30.7 - 7.3 95.2 147.8 Retail 0.1 0.0 1.5 3.3 - 0.0 34.6 0.0 3.6 38.2 0.1 1.6 65.9 116.2 Service 0.4 0.1 0.3 50.3 0.8 1.0 60.1 0.0 3.2 63.4 0.0 4.8 67.6 195.3 Warehouse 0.1 0.0 0.2 2.0 0.2 0.2 39.7 0.0 2.0 41.7 0.1 1.7 63.5 115.4 48 Energy End-use Details The energy end-use study has provided detailed information on a wide range of specific building energy end uses and building characteristics. This provides a rich data set that can be mined and explored to understand Alaskan non-residential building energy use, appliance and equipment saturations, building characteristics, etc. This data can be used to inform policy, serve as the baseline to measure policy effectiveness (e.g., the penetration on energy efficient lighting products), etc. This section provides a brief summary of some of the key end -use data available in the complete results. Figure 42 provides a breakdown of total nonresidential lighting energy by lighting technology/lamp type. Fluorescent lighting (including T12, T8 and T5 lamps) accounts for nearly 60% of the total lighting. Inefficient lamp types for which there are good energy efficiency upgrades available constitute approximately 51% of the total lighting energy, and presents a good opportunity for the state to focus on lighting efficiency policy in the nonresidential sector. Figure 42: Total non-residential lighting electricity use (kWh/year) by lamp type, Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 Figure 43 shows total computer and IT related energy consumption for nonresidential buildings. Grow Lights, 57,204 , 0% Incandescent, 376,672,014 , 19% Halogen, 161,452,455 , 8% CFL, 220,144,963 , 11% T12, 467,030,348 , 24% T8, 471,052,450 , 24% T5, 220,342,681 , 11% HID, 43,764,825 , 2% LED, 17,705,220 , 1% ExitSigns, 4,334,657 , 0% 49 Figure 43: Total non-residential computer and IT electricity use (kWh/year), Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 Policy Implications of Statistically Significant Differences in Energy Use Statewide energy policy is more easily drafted and applied to types of facilities that have similar energy use patterns. Interventions may be far more difficult to promote and implement fo r facilities that have different energy use characteristics. A statistical analysis of total energy use (not adjusted for the total population of buildings in the three Southeast and Railbelt Climate Zones) was performed at both the building level (i.e., total building energy use) as well as on an energy intensity basis (e.g., kBTU/SF). These are shown as Table 10 and Table 11. When looking at total building energy use, there are statistically significant differences between climate zones and energy used to produce hot water, provide laundry services and total energy use. However, when looking at building energy intensity data, many of the statistical differences disappear. The amount of energy required for laundr y services, measured in KBTU/ft2, is the only energy use category that maintains statistically significant differences between climate zones. This analysis suggests that a policy focused on managing end -use energy on a per-square- foot basis may be appropriate for statewide implementation. Laundry services could receive special consideration in certain climate zones. Desktop Computers, 67,712,983 , 49% Laptops, 19,801,139 , 14% Servers, 28,431,910 , 20% Monitors, 897,470 , 1% Multi-Function Devices (MFDs), 8,168,950 , 6% Scanners, 884,421 , 1% Printers, 12,454,687 , 9% Fax, 550,809 , 0% 50 Table 10: Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr Building Type Heating ventilation and air conditioning MMBTU Hot water MMBTU* Food service, cooking and refrigeration MMBTU Office equipment and information technology MMBTU Laundry MMBTU *** Lighting MMBTU All end uses MMBTU * Food service 508.67 47.46 1326.56 355.74 3.08 312.59 2554.11 Healthcare 1394.21 330.95 267.74 2000.69 9590.82 2493.70 16078.12 Institutional 761.36 266.26 35.86 169.42 1.59 592.17 1826.66 Lodging 717.38 157.89 128.09 185.18 54.76 785.54 2028.83 Office 689.42 126.28 11.05 140.39 5.90 400.12 1373.16 Other 689.07 39.44 30.84 97.83 1.61 464.90 1323.69 Retail 902.88 88.54 289.50 92.72 1.08 1896.03 3270.75 Service 523.34 44.78 227.91 76.54 7.20 532.70 1412.47 Warehouse 894.35 39.03 31.38 103.42 1.18 798.39 1867.75 Total 776.36 118.80 247.02 303.05 811.00 896.02 3152.25 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 Table 11: Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in kBTUs per Square Foot/yr Building Type HVAC kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft * Lighting kBTUsqft All End Uses kBTUsqft Food service 93.14 9.59 211.60 139.83 0.73 64.82 519.71 Healthcare 75.42 17.18 9.09 69.64 27.95 75.14 274.41 Institutional 63.99 15.97 2.88 23.21 0.18 57.06 163.29 Lodging 81.36 11.60 11.26 32.69 5.41 176.41 318.73 Office 83.77 7.05 1.61 31.01 1.17 45.68 170.29 Other 84.39 6.80 2.85 29.32 0.55 54.13 178.04 Retail 70.77 4.78 244.22 17.56 0.17 302.14 639.64 Service 69.88 10.06 4.47 14.88 0.77 69.08 169.13 Warehouse 68.24 3.87 1.60 8.22 0.22 52.96 135.11 Total 76.44 9.13 57.01 37.87 3.33 102.67 286.46 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 51 Characteristics of Energy Use in the Non-Residential Sample The underlying energy end-use study data contains many more details that are available to be analyzed and processed to inform Alaskan energy policy. The following sections present data on energy use within each climate zone. Unlike the previous section, this information emphasizes the average end-use energy values for each type of building in the non-residential sample. This data is not generalized to the total population, but allows policy makers and program planne rs to use baseline building specific data to plan program interventions and measure the effectiveness of initiatives within each climate zone. Non-Residential Energy use by Climate Zone Figure 44 shows that buildings in Climate Zone 8 use substantially more energy than buildings in Climate Zones 6 or 7 when measured on a MMBTU basis. Figure 44: Total Non-Residential Energy Use by Climate Zone in MMBTUs/yr However, when energy intensity is measured by dividing the total energy use by the square footage of the building, the pattern is reversed. Buildings in Climate Zone 6 use more energy than those in either Climate Zone 7 or 8 (Figure 45). The differences appear to be attributable to heating energy use. 2545.59 2473.60 4571.60 0.00 500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00 2500.00 3000.00 3500.00 4000.00 4500.00 5000.00 6 7 8 Total Energy Use in MMBTU/yrs Climate Zone 52 Figure 45: Total Non-Residential Energy Intensity by Climate Zone in kBTUs /ft2/yr Each Climate Zone has a different distribution of total energy use. Figure 46 shows that the amount of energy used for heating, ventilation and air-conditioning is highest in Climate Zone 7. Laundry is highest in Climate Zone 8. Hot water production, while a small overall portion of total energy use, is the only single use that shows statistically significant differences between Climate Zones. Figure 46: Energy distribution in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8 328.42 301.57 224.95 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00 6 7 8 Energy Intensity in kBTUs /ft2/yr Climate Zone 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 6 7 8 Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr Climate Zone Lighting MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs HVAC MMBTUs 53 An analysis of energy intensity, measuring annual energy use by building square foot, shows a far different picture of the distribution of energy use (Figure 47). As would be expected, the per- square-foot energy requirements for heating are highest in Climate Zone 8. The per-square-foot energy requirements for lighting are highest in buildings in Climate Zone 7. Figure 47: Energy intensity (kBTUs /ft2/yr) by use category and Climate Zone. Detailed energy use data by Climate Zone is shown in Table 12 and Table 13. Table 12: Total energy use by Climate Zone, all building types, in MMBTUs/yr. Climate Zone HVAC MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Lighting MMBTUs All End Uses MMBTUs 6 620.20 57.00 238.12 382.61 216.81 1030.85 2545.59 7 855.17 194.48 230.60 140.30 123.38 929.67 2473.60 8 849.63 96.54 275.30 406.98 2227.57 715.58 4571.60 Total 776.36 118.80 247.02 303.05 811.00 896.02 3152.25 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 6 7 8 Energy Use in kBTUs /ft2/yr Climate Zone Lighting kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft 54 Table 13: Total energy intensity by Climate Zone, all building types, in kBTUs/ft2/yr Climate Zone HVAC kBTUs/ft2/yr Hot Water kBTUs/ft2/yr Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUs/ft2/yr Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUs/ft2/yr Laundry kBTUs/ft2/yr Lighting kBTUs/ft2/yr All End Uses kBTUs/ft2/yr 6 57.56 6.38 113.68 64.97 3.39 82.44 328.42 7 83.92 11.99 26.52 18.00 2.12 159.02 301.57 8 87.66 8.72 32.59 32.29 4.67 59.02 224.95 Total 76.44 9.13 57.01 37.87 3.33 102.67 286.46 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 Climate Zone 6 non-residential energy use Climate Zone 6 is most of Southeast Alaska, but includes non-residential buildings in Haines and Kodiak. The decision to include these two areas in Climate Zone 6 was made to account for the similarity in the air maritime climate. Overall Energy Use in All Buildings In Climate Zone 6, healthcare facilities are by far the largest energy user when meas ured by their total MMBTU use. Figure 48 which include parking facilities, sports facilities, multipurpose centers and other types of facilities. Figure 48: Total Energy Use in MMBTUs.yr, Climate Zone 6 2742.70 10860.18 1304.79 1453.25 1609.56 823.39 3030.52 920.26 1564.12 0.00 2000.00 4000.00 6000.00 8000.00 10000.00 12000.00 Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr 55 When divided by the square footage of each building, energy use patterns shift. Figure 49 shows that retail and food service buildings become the most energy intensive buildings, and healthcare facilities drop down considerably. Figure 49: Total Energy Intensity in kBTUs/ft2/yr, Climate Zone 6 Distribution of Total Energy Use Lighting uses a higher proportion of the energy (41%) in buildings sampled in Climate Zone 6 than any other single use. Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning use 24% of all of the energy, and office equipment and information technology use an additiona l 15%. These are shown in Figure 50. The energy intensity calculations, however, show a different perspective. When the total square footage of each building is taken into account, the proportion of energy required for lighting drops from 41% to 24%. Energy required to operate office and information technology equipment increases from 15% to 20%. Heating, ventilation and air -conditioning are a smaller portion of energy use when examined on a per square foot basis, decreasing from 24% of total energy use to 17% of energy use on a per square foot basis per yea r (see Figure 51). 746.57 180.70 199.86 297.00 144.09 195.31 833.21 197.81 160.67 0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 600.00 700.00 800.00 900.00 Total Energy Intensity in kBTUs/ft2/yr 56 Figure 50: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 6. Figure 51: Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr Climate Zone 6. There is substantial variation in the overall distribution of energy use in non-residential buildings in Climate Zone 6. Figure 52 shows that heating, ventilation and air-conditioning require the largest amount of energy in office buildings. Food service buildings, on the other hand, devote a smaller portion of their MMBTUs to this energy use. As would be expected, food service, cooking and refrigeration require far more energy in food service facilities than in other types of buildings. 24% 2% 9% 15% 9% 41% HVAC MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Lighting MMBTUs 17% 2% 35% 20% 1% 25% HVAC kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Lighting kBTUsqft 57 Figure 52: Energy distribution in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 6. When examined on a per-square-foot basis, the energy used for lighting retail spaces decreases, and the amount of energy for food service, cooking and refrigeration increases dramatically. The amount of energy required for heating office space, however, remains largely unchanged (Figure 53). Figure 53: Energy intensity (kBTUs /ft2/yr) by use category, Climate Zone 6. Detailed information on energy use in Climate Zone 6 is shown in Table 14 and Table 15. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Distrubution in Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr Lighting MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs HVAC MMBTUs 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Energy Intensity in kBTUs/ft2/yr Lighting kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft HVAC kBTUsqft 58 Table 14: Total energy use by Climate Zone by building types, in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 6. Building Type HVAC MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs * Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs *** Lighting MMBTUs All End Uses MMBTUs * Food service 253.68 30.72 1073.49 1119.81 2.67 262.33 2742.70 Healthcare 1182.12 258.66 245.46 2362.99 2340.85 4470.09 10860.18 Institutional 360.93 59.48 21.78 190.10 0.61 671.90 1304.79 Lodging 547.37 82.68 123.23 29.41 22.46 648.10 1453.25 Office 838.37 31.60 12.80 114.22 12.96 599.60 1609.56 Other 371.90 15.82 9.54 58.60 2.07 365.46 823.39 Retail 940.19 39.09 711.08 60.70 1.02 1278.45 3030.52 Service 373.07 33.37 3.92 85.49 16.15 408.26 920.26 Warehouse 510.59 12.57 38.78 48.75 1.32 952.12 1564.12 Total 620.20 57.00 238.12 382.61 216.81 1030.85 2545.59 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 Table 15: Total energy intensity by Climate Zone by building types, in kBTUs /ft2/yr, Climate Zone 6. Climate Zone HVAC kBTUs/ft2/yr Hot Water kBTUs/ft2/yr Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUs/ft2/yr Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUs/ft2/yr Laundry kBTUs/ft2/yr ** Lighting kBTUs/ft2/yr All End Uses kBTUs/ft2/yr Food service 55.40 7.17 165.94 460.95 0.63 56.48 746.57 Healthcare 51.29 5.39 8.30 31.48 30.86 53.38 180.70 Institutional 52.47 7.02 2.41 52.95 0.16 84.84 199.86 Lodging 62.52 11.94 16.25 6.26 2.69 197.34 297.00 Office 73.58 3.92 1.45 22.31 0.68 42.15 144.09 Other 64.86 5.47 2.45 59.69 0.93 61.92 195.31 Retail 50.66 2.98 691.70 31.56 0.17 56.13 833.21 Service 55.03 13.50 1.35 16.23 0.70 110.98 197.81 Warehouse 51.23 2.32 2.80 7.70 0.18 96.44 160.67 Total 57.56 6.38 113.68 64.97 3.39 82.44 328.42 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 Climate Zone 7 Non-residential energy use Climate Zone 7 is the region that incorporates much of Southcentral Alaska. Its climate is slightly cooler than that in Climate Zone 6. Buildings in Climate Zone 7 showed the same basic pattern of energy use as those in Climate Zone 6. Healthcare facilities and retail buildings appeared to have the highest overall energy use, measured in MMBTUs (Figure 54). 59 Figure 54: Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 7 Figure 55 shows that retail buildings have the highest energy consumption per square foot of any building type in Climate Zone 7. This is similar to what was seen in Southeast Alaska (Climate Zone 6). Healthcare facilities, on the other hand, have a substantially lower energy use per square foot. Figure 55: Energy Intensity, Climate Zone 7, kBTUs /ft2/yr 2488.99 4411.26 2171.12 2089.79 1487.49 1896.20 4411.26 1080.55 1935.75 0.00 500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00 2500.00 3000.00 3500.00 4000.00 4500.00 5000.00 Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr 364.53 249.15 126.78 324.57 216.59 164.36 762.46 151.08 130.15 0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 600.00 700.00 800.00 900.00 Energy Intensity in kBTUs/ft2/yr 60 Distribution of Total Energy Use Figure 56 shows the total distribution of energy use within all Climate Zone 7 buildings. Energy used for lighting and for heating ventilation and air conditioning are similar (38% and 34% respectively.) All other energy uses are approximately the same at less than 10%. Figure 56: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 7. Figure 57 presents the distribution of energy on a per-square-foot basis. This figure shows the energy intensity of all facilities in Climate Zone 7. When viewed in this way, lighting becomes a more intensive use of energy, rising from 38% to 53% of all energy used by all types of buildings. The amount of energy used by heating, ventilation and air-conditioning, on the other hand, consumes a smaller portion of energy, decreasing from 34% to 28%. All oth er energy use categories each comprise less than 10% of total energy use per square foot. 34% 8% 9% 6% 5% 38% HVAC MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Lighting MMBTUs 61 Figure 57: Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr, Climate Zone 7 . Energy Use by Building Type As with Climate Zone 6, there is substantial variation in the use of energy in various building types. In this Climate Zone, warehouses and buildings used in the service industry (cinemas and theaters, automotive oriented buildings, spas and salons, etc.) are examples of this vari ation. Retail buildings used most of their energy in lighting. As expected, food service buildings have their highest use in food service, cooking and refrigeration (Figure 58). Figure 58: Energy distribution in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 7. 28% 4% 9% 6% 0% 53% HVAC kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Lighting kBTUsqft 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr Lighting MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs HVAC MMBTUs 62 The energy intensity of Climate Zone 7 buildings is different than their total energy use. When divided by the building square footage, the proportion of energy used for lighting increases even more within retail facilities. Energy used for food service, cooking and refrigeration appears to decrease slightly within food service facilities when examined on a per-square-foot basis. One of the greatest changes appears to be the sharp reduction in laundry energy requirements for healthcare facilities (Figure 59). Figure 59: Energy intensity (kBTUs /ft2/yr) by use category, Climate Zone 7. Detailed information on energy use is shown in Table 16 and Table 17. Table 16: Total energy use by Climate Zone by building types, in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 7. Building Type HVAC MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs *** Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Lighting MMBTUs All End Uses MMBTUs Food service 532.84 49.86 1564.86 34.12 5.05 302.26 2488.99 Healthcare 1354.96 257.78 163.74 271.06 1259.32 1104.39 4411.26 Institutional 1023.82 577.97 57.58 161.01 2.49 348.25 2171.12 Lodging 827.76 256.99 141.72 238.22 91.22 533.88 2089.79 Office 658.78 292.11 12.02 118.38 0.51 405.69 1487.49 Other 906.19 56.22 65.76 115.25 1.84 750.93 1896.20 Retail 901.06 169.70 95.61 132.20 1.38 3111.31 4411.26 Service 566.95 46.58 27.76 57.57 1.88 379.82 1080.55 Warehouse 1070.28 79.26 12.70 153.53 1.75 618.23 1935.75 Total 855.17 194.48 230.60 140.30 123.38 929.67 2473.60 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Energy Intensity in kBTUs/ft2/yr Lighting kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft HVAC kBTUsqft 63 Table 17: Total energy intensity by Climate Zone by building types, in kBTUs /ft2/yr Climate Zone 7. Climate Zone HVAC kBTUs/ft2/yr Hot Water kBTUs/ft2/yr *** Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUs/ft2/yr *** Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUs/ft2/yr** Laundry kBTUs/ft2/yr* Lighting kBTUs/ft2/yr All End Uses kBTUs/ft2/yr Food service 85.94 11.14 206.46 7.01 1.20 52.78 364.53 Healthcare 88.79 13.21 5.19 12.91 5.46 123.59 249.15 Institutional 61.53 35.46 3.69 5.78 0.24 20.08 126.78 Lodging 84.33 12.49 8.35 42.89 10.04 166.47 324.57 Office 94.58 12.18 1.95 37.59 0.25 70.05 216.59 Other 86.69 7.22 2.04 11.59 0.66 56.17 164.36 Retail 79.23 6.90 12.64 12.50 0.22 650.97 762.46 Service 84.84 7.56 2.13 16.23 1.11 39.21 151.08 Warehouse 85.25 7.52 0.67 5.55 0.46 30.70 130.15 Total 83.92 11.99 26.52 18.00 2.12 159.02 301.57 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 Climate Zone 8 Non-residential energy use Climate Zone 8 includes the Denali and Fairbanks North Star Boroughs, and is the most northerly portion of the Railbelt region. It is generally cooler than Climate Zones 6 and 7. Healthcare buildings use more energy than any other building category and Climate Zone 8 (Figure 60). Figure 60: Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 8 2464.47 39195.04 2014.50 2515.32 876.14 1032.59 1658.76 2328.87 2091.23 0.00 5000.00 10000.00 15000.00 20000.00 25000.00 30000.00 35000.00 40000.00 45000.00 Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr 64 However, the picture changes when energy intensity is measured by dividing total energy use by building square feet. Food service facilities, which use less energy than many of the other facilities in Climate Zone 8, are seen to be the largest energy users per Square foot. Healthcare facilities, which were the largest energy users in terms of the amount of energy used, dropped to second place in energy intensity. These changes are shown in Figure 61. Figure 61: Energy Intensity, Climate Zone 8, kBTUs /ft2/yr Distribution of Total Energy Use Almost half of the energy used in Climate Zone 8 buildings is used for laundry. Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning are the second largest energy use, followed by lighting. These proportions are shown in Figure 62. Figure 62: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs, Climate Zone 8. 498.98 431.60 160.95 331.93 144.30 182.00 152.54 153.14 115.70 0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 600.00 Energy Intensity in kBTUs/ft2/yr 18% 2% 6% 9% 49% 16% HVAC MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Lighting MMBTUs 65 When energy intensity is measured by dividing total energy use by the total building square footage, the proportion of energy used for various purposes changes (Figure 63). For example, laundry services which consume 49% of all energy show that they consume only 2% of the energy on a square foot basis. Heating ventilation and air conditioning consume twice as much energy on a square footage basis, using 18% of all MMBTUs, but using 39% on a square footage basis. Food service, cooking and refrigeration more than double the energy used when measured on a square footage basis than when measured on a overall energy consumption level (15% vs 9%). Figure 63: Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr Climate Zone 8 Energy Use by Building Type Similar to Climate Zones 6, and 7, facilities in Climate Zone 8 show a substantial variation in their proportional use of energy. Figure 64 shows that food service, cooking and refrigeration are a major energy use for service facilities. Healthcare institutions in Climate Zone 8 have the expected high energy requirements for laundry services. Facilities which support lodging have a large proportion of total energy use dedicated to interior and exterior lighting of the buildings. 39% 4% 15% 14% 2% 26% HVAC kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Lighting kBTUsqft 66 Figure 64: Total Energy distribution in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 8. The same basic pattern shown in Climate Zones 6 and 7 appears when energy intensity is measured for facilities in Climate Zone 8. The proportion of energy on a square footage basis for food service, cooking and refrigeration in food service facilities beg ins to decrease, and the energy requirements for laundry within healthcare facilities declines (Figure 65). Figure 65: Energy intensity (kBTUs /ft2/yr) by use category, Climate Zone 8. Table 18 and Table 19 show the detailed information on energy use within Climate Zone 8 on an MMBTU and a kBTUs per-square-foot basis. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr Lighting MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs HVAC MMBTUs 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Energy Intensity in kBTUs/ft2/yr Lighting kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft HVAC kBTUsqft 67 Table 18: Total energy use by Climate Zone by building types, in MMBTUs/yr, Climate Zone 8. Building Type HVAC MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs ** Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs ** Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs *** Laundry MMBTUs Lighting MMBTUs All End Uses MMBTUs Food service 702.27 59.26 1275.81 58.06 1.21 367.86 2464.47 Healthcare 1724.89 527.36 442.32 3951.16 30679.87 1869.44 39195.04 Institutional 907.11 187.38 30.06 157.40 1.71 730.85 2014.50 Lodging 726.06 88.25 113.03 263.42 33.79 1290.78 2515.32 Office 517.42 34.37 7.21 208.26 3.16 105.72 876.14 Other 650.37 35.95 7.90 102.47 1.11 234.80 1032.59 Retail 852.69 20.07 19.60 70.78 0.67 694.96 1658.76 Service 658.17 56.52 694.04 84.89 1.91 833.34 2328.87 Warehouse 1107.28 32.01 39.08 114.40 0.61 797.85 2091.23 Total 849.63 96.54 275.30 406.98 2227.57 715.58 4571.60 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 Table 19: Total energy intensity by Climate Zone by building types, in kBTUs /ft2/yr, Climate Zone 8. Building Type HVAC kBTUs/ft2/yr * Hot Water kBTUs/ft2/yr * Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUs/ft2/yr *** Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUs/ft2/yr * Laundry kBTUs/ft2/yr Lighting kBTUs/ft2/yr ** All End Uses kBTUs/ft2/yr *** Food service 134.01 9.94 257.01 12.04 0.27 85.70 498.98 Healthcare 88.08 38.07 15.56 198.66 55.63 35.60 431.60 Institutional 76.93 7.29 2.62 10.59 0.16 63.36 160.95 Lodging 95.86 9.95 10.53 44.23 1.36 169.99 331.93 Office 83.56 4.51 1.37 34.46 3.13 17.27 144.30 Other 93.09 7.13 3.89 29.96 0.22 47.71 182.00 Retail 84.99 3.72 1.97 6.22 0.08 55.57 152.54 Service 72.54 8.47 10.53 11.91 0.50 49.19 153.14 Warehouse 70.55 2.46 1.23 10.75 0.07 30.65 115.70 Total 87.66 8.72 32.59 32.29 4.67 59.02 224.95 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 68 Rural North & Northwest This section presents data on energy use for a hub community and three smaller communities. The selection of the communities was intended to provide a representative snapshot of rural Alaska energy use. In collaboration with the UAA/ISER, this data will b e used as the benchmark in estimating energy use of similar community configurations. The section first presents energy use data regarding the hub community of Bethel. Both residential and non-residential energy use data are summarized. In addition, data on energy requirements for water and wastewater utilities is also included. Next, information on residential and non-residential energy use in the three village communities is presented. As with the hub community, information on water and wastewater utility energy use is also included in the analysis. Bethel residential energy use & comparison with ARIS Bethel residential end-use energy calculations were compiled using existing ARIS data, supplemented by information on residential electric use obtained through a survey. Table 20 shows the number of observations in each residential housing type. The table suggests that data on mobile home energy use may not be as reliable as the survey data used to collect additional information on the residential electrical energy use. Table 20: ARIS and survey end-use energy records Housing Type ARIS Survey # % # % Mobile Home 1 0.8 16 12.9 Single Family Detached 116 89.9 78 62.9 Multi Family 12 9.3 16 12.9 Single Family Attached 14 11.3 All Types 129 124 This section presents basic data on the characteristics of the residential ARIS database and the survey sample. Figure 66 compares the number of bedrooms of homes included in the ARIS database with those in the residential survey. The figure suggests that smaller homes are underrepresented and larger homes (four or more bedrooms) are overrepresented in the ARIS database. This is an expected difference; obtaining an AkWarm© energy rating, the data from which is included in the ARIS database, is voluntary. Homeowners with larger more energy consumptive homes may have a greater incentive to obtain an energy assessment than those with smaller less energy consumptive homes. The residential electrical survey, on the other hand, was 69 a random sample of all types of residences, and paid specific attention to ob taining reliable data on all four residences types. Figure 66: Number of Bedrooms, ARIS and Bethel Residential Sample There also appears to be a difference in the decade of home construction. Figure 67 compares the decade of construction of homes in the ARIS database with those in the residential survey sample. Error bars using a projected standard error are used to compare the two data sets. The error bars show that the two data sets do not appear to be significantly different with the exception of the number of homes in Bethel that were built during the 1980s. The ARIS data includes substantially more homes than the Bethel residential survey sample. Figure 67: Decade of Home Construction, ARIS and Bethel Residential Sample 3.5 20.3 50.4 25.6 13.7 25.8 45.2 15.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 2 3 4or more Percent of Homes Number of Bedrooms ARIS Residential Sample 0.9 1.8 1.8 23.0 54.9 9.7 8.0 0.0 1.6 3.3 26.8 34.1 16.3 17.9 -10.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 Percent of Homes ARIS Residential Sample 70 Characteristics of the Bethel residential survey sample This section briefly describes the Bethel residential survey sample, including square footage, decade built, and primary heating fuel and compares this to relevant examples. The estimated square feet of living space in Bethel is not significantly different than the square footage of homes in other regions (F= .616, p=.764). The number of bedrooms in Bethel is not significantly different than the square footage of homes in other regions (F= 389, p=.926). Table 21: Residential Projected and Actual Samples Housing Type Size Measure Square Feet Number of Bedrooms Single Family Detached 1592.1 2.76 Single Family Attached 1385.6 2.43 Multifamily 1328.1 1.88 Mobile Home 1462.0 2.88 Average 1519.6 2.62 Figure 68 shows that 95% of homes surveyed in Bethel were built since 1970, with the highest proportion being built in the decade of the 80s. By contrast, 85% of all residential homes in the survey were built since 1970. The more modern construction of homes in Bethel may be related to improved construction techniques yielding greater energy efficiency. Figure 68: Decade Built of Bethel Residential Sample* *(N=332, 6 missing, Significant Differences, Chi Sq=32.24, p=.001). 1.6 3.3 26.8 34.1 16.3 17.9 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 50's 60's 70's 80's 90's 2000 to 2011 Percent of Homes Decade Built 71 Oil is the most common source of heating fuel in Bethel homes. Figure 69 shows that over 87% of all homes are heated with oil. The use of electricity as a primary heating fuel in Bethel is also lower than the Railbelt (Climate Zones 7 and 8) or Southeast regions (Climate Zone 6) Figure 69: Primary Heating Fuel, Bethel Residential Sample* *(N=203, 1 missing, Significant Differences, Chi Sq=110.21, p=.000). Bethel residential energy use Table 22 and Figure 70 summarized Bethel residential energy use. As with other parts of this analysis, space heating and domestic hot water energy intensities derived from the ARIS database are applied to the residential survey (by survey home area) and combined with the appliances survey data to develop an estimate of total energy use (in MMBTUs /yr) by residence type.11 Overall, the average residents in Bethel uses 193 MMBTUs of energy each year home heating, providing domestic hot water and operating appliances. Families living in mobile home residences appeared to use the most energy, at 334 MMBTUs per year12. Families living in multi family residences use the least amount of energy. By far, more energ y is spent in home heating than for any other purpose. 11 Appliances include all lighting, electrical and non-electrical appliances and equipment not related to space heating or hot water heating 12 Mobile home space heating energy intensity was based on only a single record in the ARIS database. This single record (191 kBTU/ft2) however compared closely to 27 other records of mobile homes in the Railbelt, Climate Zone 8 (214 kBTU/ft2) 2.4 0.8 0.8 8.1 87.1 0 0.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Natural Gas Electricity Propane Wood Oil Coal Other Percent of Homes 72 Table 22: Summary of Bethel residential energy use in MMBTUs/yr Residence Type Space Heating Domestic Hot Water Appliances, Lighting, etc. Total Mobile Home 280.24 34.32 19.92 334.47 Multi Family 95.30 30.91 17.63 143.83 Single Family Attached 99.42 32.25 20.15 151.82 Single Family Detached 126.92 34.51 20.83 182.07 Total 139.22 33.79 20.24 193.12 Figure 70 shows the overall distribution of residential energy use. Almost ¾ (72%) of all energy is used in home heating. The remainder is distributed between domestic hot water (18%) and the operation of appliances, lighting and other plug loads13 (10%). Note that the electrical energy is reported as site energy, and does not include generation losses (i.e., site energy, not source energy is reported). Figure 70: Summary of Residential Energy Use in Bethel in MMBTUs/yr 13 Note that lighting, plug loads, and appliance use is lumped togethe r under the “appliances” heading for tables and figures in this report. 72% 18% 10% Space Heating Hot Water Appliances 73 A closer analysis shows some pronounced differences between residence types in the distribution and extent of energy use. Figure 71 present this data in MMBUTs/yr and as a percent of total energy use respectively. Figure 72 shows that mobile home dwellings use more energy than other residence types both in a relative (%) and absolute sense (MMBTUs), followed by single family detached homes. Single-family attached and multifamily residences use the least space heating and total energy in similar proportions. Figure 71: Residential Energy Use, Bethel, in MMBTUs/yr Figure 72: Residential Energy Use, Bethel, in Percent MMBTU/yr 280.2 95.3 99.4 126.9 139.2 34.3 30.9 32.2 34.5 33.8 19.9 17.6 20.2 20.8 20.2 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Mobile Home Multi Family Single Family Attached Single Family Detached All Types Percent MMBTUs Space Heating Hot Water Appliances 84% 66% 65% 70% 72% 10% 21% 21% 19% 17% 6% 12% 13% 11% 10% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Mobile Home Multi Family Single Family Attached Single Family Detached All Types Percent MMBTUs Space Heating Hot Water Appliances 74 Lighting, appliance and other energy use Appliance energy use data was collected through a survey of Bethel households. Table 23 presents the energy use for each type of residence in MMBTUs. The table shows that major appliances are the category of highest energy use, followed by primary cooking, entertaining and information technology. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test the differences between types of facility in appliance energy uses. There are no statistically significant differences in the distribution of appliance energy use by residence type with the exception of the use of information technology. In this case, it appears as if there are statistically significant differences in the use of appliance energy for information technology between residence types. Table 23: Bethel residential appliance energy use, in MMBTUs Residence Type >> Mobile Home Single Family Attached Multi Family Single Family Detached All Types End Use Interior Lighting 0.51 0.74 0.68 0.83 0.76 Exterior Lighting 0.15 0.05 0.15 0.35 0.26 Major Appliances 7.68 5.02 5.88 5.61 5.83 Primary Cooking 5.14 6.22 5.22 6.75 6.31 Other Kitchen Equipment 0.65 0.47 0.53 0.60 0.58 Entertainment 2.63 2.50 2.69 2.74 2.69 Information Technology* 1.44 1.56 2.34 2.09 1.97 Seasonal Decorative Lighting 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.03 Misc Appliances 1.59 0.90 2.38 1.65 1.63 Appliance Total 19.92 17.48 19.88 20.64 20.07 *ANOVA significant at .05 Figure 73 shows that primary cooking is the largest appliance end use at 32%. Major appliances are the next largest application of appliance energy (29%). Entertainment, including televisions, VCRs, gaming consoles and television reception, follow at 13%. 75 Figure 73: Bethel Residential Appliance Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr Bethel non-residential energy use An experienced energy rater was retained to collect data on energy use in non-residential facilities in Bethel. The analytic technique for estimating total energy use was the same as that used for the Railbelt and Southeast Alaska regions, Climate Zones 6,7,and 8. The distribution of building types in Bethel is shown in Table 24. Table 24: Distribution of Non-Residential Building Types, Bethel Sample Building Type Frequency Percent Food service 2 4.0 Healthcare 2 4.0 Institutional 10 20.0 Lodging 3 6.0 Office 7 14.0 Other 5 10.0 Retail 6 14.0 Service 10 20.0 Warehouse 4 8.0 Total 50 100.0 Interior Lighting 4% Exterior Lighting 1% Major Appliances 29% Primary Cooking 32% Other Kitchen Equipment 3% Entertainment 13% Information Technology 10% Seasonal Decorative Lighting 0% Misc Appliances 8% 76 Overall energy use by building type Figure 74 shows that office buildings in Bethel use more energy in MMBTUs than any other type and multiuse facilities, are the lowest users of energy. Figure 74: Total energy use in MMBTU/yrs, Bethel When the energy intensity of buildings in Bethel is analyzed by dividing total energy use by the square foot of each facility, food service buildings are the highest energy users. Other building types have similar per-square-foot energy usage, between 107 and 150 kBTUs per square foot (Figure 75.) Figure 75: Energy Intensity in kBTUs /ft2/yr, Bethel. 528.74 492.85 621.60 817.08 1368.97 267.91 838.78 550.52 586.65 0.00 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00 1000.00 1200.00 1400.00 1600.00 Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr 334.93 125.65 107.94 153.89 112.56 142.52 150.37 116.69 112.39 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00 400.00 Energy Intensity in kBTUs/ft2/yr 77 Distribution of energy use Figure 76 shows that over three quarters (76%) of all energy used by non-residential buildings in Bethel is used to heat the facility. This second highest use is in interior and ext erior lighting (9%). All other energy uses comprise about 15% of all MMBTUs. Figure 76: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs/yr, Bethel Surprisingly, this distribution does not change much when the energy intensity of each facility is calculated. After dividing total energy use by the building square feet, the proportion of energy used for heating remains approximately the same, decreasing only to 73% (Figure 77). The energy intensity of food service, cooking and refrigeration increases slightly, from 7% of total energy use to 11% of energy use on a square footage basis. All other values remain essentially unchanged. 76% 2% 7% 4% 2% 9% HVAC MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Lighting MMBTUs 78 Figure 77: Overall Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr, Bethel Distribution of energy use by building type Different building types have different patterns of energy use. Figure 78 shows that food service buildings develop a smaller proportion of their total energy use to heat than all other facility types. Office buildings have the largest proportion of their energy budgets devoted to heating the facility. As expected, food service, cooking and refrigeration use the highest proportion of energy within food service establishments. Interior and exterior lighting is fairly consistent across all building types. 73% 2% 11% 3% 2% 9% HVAC kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Lighting kBTUsqft 79 Figure 78: Distribution of energy use by building type, MMBTUs/yr, Bethel. As with the overall distribution of energy shown in Figure 79, calculating the energy intensity does little to alter the proportion of energy dedicated to different uses. Figure 79 looks much like the overall distribution of energy use in total MMBTUs by ene rgy use category shown in Figure 78. Figure 79: Distribution of energy uses by building type,in kBTUs/ft2/yr, Bethel 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr Lighting MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs HVAC MMBTUs 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Energy Intensity in Percent kBTUs/ft2/yr Lighting kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft HVAC kBTUsqft 80 Detailed energy statistics are shown in Table 25 and Table 26. Statistically significant differences are noted. Table 25: Bethel Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr Building Type Heating ventilation and air conditioning MMBTU Hot water MMBTU* Food service, cooking and refrigeration MMBTU *** Office equipment and information technology MMBTU Laundry MMBTU *** Lighting MMBTU All end uses MMBTU *** Food service 162.11 4.48 333.43 4.74 0.00 23.97 528.74 Healthcare 327.66 25.74 24.99 39.54 46.74 28.18 492.85 Institutional 468.98 15.99 15.59 40.97 16.61 63.47 621.60 Lodging 632.28 27.70 39.78 27.24 2.47 87.61 817.08 Office 1166.42 38.69 10.09 47.69 0.00 106.09 1368.97 Other 209.82 8.98 3.75 7.29 18.11 19.97 267.91 Retail 578.75 15.55 143.39 13.42 0.00 87.66 838.78 Service 427.53 14.02 12.91 22.59 18.99 54.48 550.52 Warehouse 469.92 2.04 31.82 3.87 22.15 56.86 586.65 Total 539.73 17.53 46.83 25.71 12.72 64.60 707.12 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 Table 26: Bethel Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in kMBTUs /ft2/yr Building Type HVAC kBTU/ft2/yr Hot Water kBTU/ft2/yr Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTU/ft2/yr *** Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTU/ft2/yr Laundry kBTU/ft2/yr * Lighting kBTU/ft2/yr All End Uses kBTU/ft2/yr Food service 103.63 2.85 210.15 3.17 0.00 15.12 334.93 Healthcare 84.77 6.41 6.40 9.59 11.26 7.22 125.65 Institutional 85.43 1.73 2.06 5.08 2.86 10.79 107.94 Lodging 118.82 3.84 7.49 7.10 0.26 16.38 153.89 Office 92.74 5.15 1.11 5.11 0.00 8.46 112.56 Other 117.97 6.44 1.87 2.92 4.76 8.56 142.52 Retail 101.70 2.13 23.40 3.38 0.00 19.75 150.37 Service 92.07 2.66 1.68 4.20 4.55 11.53 116.69 Warehouse 91.20 0.35 12.98 0.57 1.58 5.71 112.39 Total 96.48 3.17 14.52 4.32 2.55 11.60 132.64 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 81 Water and Wastewater Energy Requirements Units of local government often maintain water and wastewater utilities on behalf of its citizens - Bethel operates and maintains a water and sewer facility. The energy requirements to maintain these basic services were estimated by calculating the amount of energy required to heat water to a high enough temperature to prevent water and wastewater systems from freezing. While detailed calculations are provided in a different section of this report, the energy requirements to keep the water and wastewater system in Bethel at 50° operating temperature are presented in the Bethel end-use energy summary. Summary of Bethel energy use Table 27 summarizes energy use in Bethel. Residential energy use was calculated using the average energy used by all households14. Non-residential energy use was calculated using the mean energy use by a non-residential facility type multiplied by the estimated number of non- residential facilities in the community. Two additional healthcare facilities were added to the estimate by multiplying the square footage estimates of similar facilities by the kBTUs used. Street lighting information was estimated using the average number of kilowatt hours per year for a community of about 5000 people. This data is shown in a separate section of this report. Information on the use of energy to power water and wastewater systems assumed a 50° operating temperature. Detailed calculations of alternative energy use estimates are shown in a separate section of this report. Table 27: Summary of Bethel Energy Use Component Units Mean Use (MMBTU/yr) Total MMBTUs/yr Residential 2364 193.1 456,488.4 Non Residential 729,925.3 Food Service 8 528.74 4,229.9 Warehouse 14 586.65 8,213.2 Institutional 44 621.60 27,350.4 Health Care 4 492.85 1,971.4 Regional Administration15 (60,000 sqft) 1 1,251.65 kBTU/sqft16 75,099.0 Hospital (115,000 sqft) 1 4,411.26 kBTUs//ft2/yr17 507,294.9 14 There is insufficient data on the distribution of types of housing in Bethel, therefore a more precise estimate could not be developed. US census data for the City of Bethel was acce ssed at http://factfinder2.census.gov, February, 2012. 15 Building size estimates provided by Bethel energy auditor based on locally available information. 16 Non Residential data from Bethel, see Table 33 82 Component Units Mean Use (MMBTU/yr) Total MMBTUs/yr Lodging 5 817.08 4,085.4 Office 40 1368.97 54,758.9 Mercantile/ retail 15 838.78 12,581.7 Service 60 550.52 33031.2 Other 5 267.91 1339.6 Total 197 Street Lighting 2.6 Water and Waste Water (500) 13,463.0 Total 1,199,879.4 Figure 80: Bethel Energy Use Rural Village Communities Three rural communities were selected for a detailed energy end-use analysis. Descriptions of the communities of New Stuyahok, Savoonga and Selawik are presented in the methodology appendix of this report. Data on residential energy use was obtained through the Energy Wise Program operated by the Rural Alaska Community Action Program (RurAL CAP). Data on non- residential energy use were collected by a field technician and the end-use analysis conducted under a similar analytic framework as the Railbelt & SEAK. Data on water and wastewater was calculated using information from ANTHC and modeled. 17 Based in energy intensity of Climate Zone 7 healthcare buildings. 38% 61% 0% 1% Residential Non-Residential Street Lighting Water and Wastewater 83 Table 28 shows the number of households within each of the communities that provided information for the Energy Wise program. Table 28: Number of observations from participating rural communities Community Number Percent New Stuyahok 45 17.3 Savoonga 103 39.6 Selawik 112 43.1 Total 260 100.0 Small Community Residential Energy Use Energy use in the three rural communities was calculated using RurAL CAP Energy Wise data. There was insufficient data in the database to calculate the square footage of each type of residence required to calculate three rural communities was based on the data contained in the ARIS database communities of similar size. The estimate is shown in Table 29. Table 29: Estimated Residence Size in Square Feet Community Population18 Mean Residence Size (Square Feet)19 Climate Zone Square Foot Estimate20 Akiachak 655 855.0 8 Kaktovik 247 643.8 9 Napaskiak 428 988.0 8 Naknek 571 1983.17 7 Mekoryuk 215 1024.7 8 Hooper Bay 1137 927.4 7 New Stuyahok 501 7 988 Savoonga 704 8 655 Selawik 868 8-9 644 Overall Energy Use Almost 90% (89%) of total residential energy is used for home heating. Another 5% is used for major appliances, such as washing machines, dryers, refrigerators and freezers (Figure 81). 18 State of Alaska Community Profiles, most recent data, usually 2011. 19 ARIS data from AkWarm© energy Audits. 20 Based on community size and region. 84 Figure 81: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs, Rural Communities The energy intensity results are similar. Heating is still the largest energy use in the three communities. This may be attributable to the similar square footage of average houses in the three communities. Figure 82: Overall Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr, Three Small Communities 89% 3% 1% 5% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% Heating Domestic Hot Water Primary Cooking Major Appliances Other Kitchen Equipment Interior Lighting Exterior Lighting Entertainment Office Equipment Other Small Electronics 89% 3% 1% 5% 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% Heating Domestic Hot Water Primary Cooking Major Appliances Other Kitchen Equipment Interior Lighting Exterior Lighting Entertainment Office Equipment Other Small Electronics 85 Community Differences in Energy Use The three communities have some notable differences in their energy use pa tterns. Figure 83 and Figure 84 show these differences. Selawik uses a higher proportion of its total energy in space heating than the other communities. New Stuyahok uses far more energy than other communities in operating office and entertainment devices. Figure 83: Distribution of energy use by building type, MMBTUs/yr, Three Small Communities The energy intensity, or energy per square foot, mirrors the overall energy use largely due to the similar average sqare footage of homes as found in these communities. While all three communities dedicate a large portion of energy to home heating, Savoonga uses a significantly greater amount of energy per square foot than the other communities in heating, domestic hot water, primary cooking, major appliances and other kitchen equipment. New Stuyahok appears to be a greater user of energy for entertainment and office equipment. 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% New Stuyahok Selawik Savoonga Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr Misc Electric Appliances Other Small Electronics Office Equipment Entertainment Exterior Lighting Interior Lighting Other Kitchen Equipment Major Appliances Primary Cooking Domestic Hot Water 86 Figure 84: Distribution of energy uses by building type,in kBTUs/ft2/yr, Three Small Communities Detailed information on the mean MMBTU/yr energy use is shown in Table 30. Table 30: Energy use characteristics of three rural Alaskan communities in MMBTUs/yr Community New Stuyahok Selawik Savoonga All Three Use Mean MMBTUs Mean kBTUs Mean MMBTUs Mean kBTUs Mean MMBTUs Mean kBTUs Mean MMBTUs Mean kBTUs Heating**### 86.79 87.84 86.79 167.50 86.79 180.62 108.35 158.91 DHW### 2.65 2.68 2.95 4.58 2.96 4.52 2.90 4.23 Primary Cooking*## 0.85 0.86 1.35 2.10 1.88 2.87 1.48 2.19 Major Appliances***### 6.60 6.68 4.56 7.09 5.83 8.90 5.42 7.73 Other Kitchen Equipment# 1.28 1.30 1.32 2.05 2.07 3.16 1.61 2.36 Interior Lighting*## 0.16 0.16 .29 0.44 .40 0.62 .31 0.46 Exterior Lighting 0.14 0.15 .20 0.32 .28 0.43 .23 0.33 Entertainment*** 1.62 1.64 .73 1.14 .67 1.03 .86 1.18 Office Equipment***## 1.29 1.30 .19 0.30 .07 0.10 .33 0.39 Other Small Electronics 0.03 0.03 .05 0.08 .01 0.02 .03 0.05 Misc Electric Appliances 0.38 0.39 .29 0.44 .14 0.21 .24 0.34 Total* ### 101.78 103.02 119.80 186.03 132.62 202.47 121.76 178.18 *ANOVA MMBTUs significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001*ANOVA kBTUs per square foot significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 Non-residential energy use The three communities did not have all non-residential building type categories (Table 31) represented in the sample. Furthermore, the numbers appear to be too small to be stable. Therefore, non-residential energy use estimates used data from all three communities. 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% New Stuyahok Selawik Savoonga Energy Intensity by Use (kBTU/ft2/yr) Misc Electric Appliances Other Small Electronics Office Equipment Entertainment Exterior Lighting Interior Lighting Other Kitchen Equipment Major Appliances Primary Cooking Domestic Hot Water 87 Table 31: Non-Residential buildings sample, three smaller rural communities Building Type Frequency Percent Healthcare 3 9.1 Institutional 10 30.3 Lodging 2 6.1 Office 9 27.3 Other 4 12.1 Retail 4 12.1 Warehouse 1 3.0 Total 33 100 Overall energy use Figure 85 shows that buildings used for institutional purposes have by far the highest energy use. Facilities used for lodging had the lowest use. Figure 85: Total energy use in MMBTUs/yr, Three Small Communities However, when the energy intensity is measured by dividing the total energy use by the building square footage, a much different picture emerges. Figure 86 shows that the highest use as measured by kBTUs per square foot, is in warehouses. The second highest use is in other facilities, which include multipurpose facilities. These are common in many smaller communities. 547.26 2303.16 273.96 706.21 561.21 1048.17 865.58 0.00 500.00 1000.00 1500.00 2000.00 2500.00 Total Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr 88 Figure 86: Energy Intensity in kBTUs /ft2/yr, Three Small Communities Distribution of non-residential energy use As with residential uses, heating requires more energy in MMBTUs/yr (72%) than any other application. The production of hot water is second (12%), followed by the operation of the interior and exterior lighting (11%) as shown in Figure 87. Figure 87: Distribution of Total energy use in MMBTUs/yr, Three Small Communities The figures do not change substantially when the energy intensity is measured by dividing the total energy use by the square footage of the building as illustrated in Figure 88. Again, heating, 111.52 152.16 229.74 224.06 311.60 227.32 432.79 0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00 300.00 350.00 400.00 450.00 500.00 Energy Intensity in kBTUs/ft2/yr 72% 12% 3% 2% 0% 11% HVAC MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Lighting MMBTUs 89 at 79%, requires far more energy than any other use. Domestic hot water, on the other hand, is reduced from 12% to 4% when measured by the energy per square foot. Figure 88: Overall Distribution on Non-Residential Energy Use, kBTUs /ft2/yr, Three Small Communities Distribution of energy uses Warehouses use the largest proportion of their energy for heating in the targeted three communities. Healthcare facilities and retail establishments use a higher proportion of their energy for lighting (Figure 89). 79% 4% 3% 3% 0% 11% HVAC kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Lighting kBTUsqft 90 Figure 89: Distribution of energy use by building type, MMBTUs/yr, Three Small Communities Figure 90 shows that the picture does not change much when energy intensity is measured, by dividing the total energy use by the building square feet. Again, warehouses use a higher proportion of energy for heating then any other building type. Health care facilities and retail establishments use approximately the same proportions of energy. Figure 90: Distribution of energy uses by building type,in kBTUs/ft2/yr, Three Small Communities Detailed energy statistics for energy use within the three communities are shown in Table 32 and Table 33. Statistically significant differences are noted. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Use in MMBTUs/yr Lighting MMBTUs Laundry MMBTUs Office Equipment & Information Technology MMBTUs Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration MMBTUs Hot Water MMBTUs 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Energy Intensity in Percent kMBTUs/ft2/yr Lighting kBTUsqft Laundry kBTUsqft Office Equipment & Information Technology kBTUsqft Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kBTUsqft Hot Water kBTUsqft 91 Table 32: Three Small Communities’ Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in MMBTUs/yr Building Type Heating ventilation and air conditioning MMBTU Hot water MMBTU Food service, cooking and refrigeration MMBTU Office equipment and information technology MMBTU Laundry MMBTU Lighting MMBTU All end uses MMBTU Healthcare 360.76 22.35 42.45 15.98 2.58 103.15 547.26 Institutional 1613.29 387.16 62.87 27.46 7.82 204.56 2303.16 Lodging 237.55 8.29 8.47 9.44 3.94 6.28 273.96 Office 582.90 16.31 4.46 17.62 0.00 84.91 706.21 Other 373.37 93.60 0.84 13.38 0.00 80.02 561.21 Retail 673.85 14.74 111.74 11.90 0.00 235.95 1048.17 Warehouse 854.60 4.95 0.14 4.41 0.00 1.49 865.58 Total 847.87 137.59 38.29 18.35 2.84 133.25 1178.19 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 Table 33: Bethel Mean Non-Residential Energy Use in kMBTUs /ft2/yr Building Type HVAC kMBTUs /ft2/yr * Hot Water kMBTUs /ft2/yr Food Service, Cooking & Refrigeration kMBTUs /ft2/yr * Office Equipment & Information Technology kMBTUs /ft2/yr Laundry kMBTUs /ft2/yr ** Lighting kMBTUs /ft2/yr * All End Uses kMBTUs /ft2/yr ** Healthcare 73.90 4.72 7.89 3.08 0.42 21.50 111.52 Institutional 120.61 9.73 3.59 4.06 0.40 13.76 152.16 Lodging 198.22 5.06 7.59 11.58 3.68 3.60 229.74 Office 187.19 5.20 1.51 7.80 0.00 22.36 224.06 Other 238.51 24.07 0.39 15.89 0.00 32.74 311.60 Retail 147.77 3.11 26.13 2.66 0.00 47.64 227.32 Warehouse 427.30 2.47 0.07 2.20 0.00 0.75 432.79 Total 166.10 8.47 5.90 6.65 0.38 22.21 209.72 *ANOVA significant at .05, ** significant at .01, ***significant at .001 Summary of Average Energy Use in Three Small Communities Table 34: summarizes energy use in the three smaller communities. Residential energy use was calculated using the average energy used by all households 21. Non-residential energy use was calculated using the mean energy use by a non -MMBTU residential facility type multiplied by 21 There is insufficient data on the distribution of types of housing in rural communities. Therefore a more precise estimate could not be developed. The number of households was taken from Community Pr ofiles, accessed at http://commerce.alaska.gov/dca/commdb, February, 2012. 92 the estimated number of non-residential facilities in the community. Street lighting information was estimated using the average number of kilowatt hours per year for a community of about 100-199 people. This data is shown in a separate section of this report. Information on the use of energy to power water and wastewater systems assumed a 50° operating temperature. Detailed calculations of energy use estimates are shown in a separate section of this report. Table 34: Summary of Energy Use in Three Communities Component Units Mean MMBTU Use Total MMBTUs Residential 466 121.76 56,740 Non Residential22 38,880.9 Food Service 0 0 0 Warehouse 1 865.6 865.6 Institutional 10 2303.2 23032.0 Health Care 3 547.3 1641.9 Lodging 2 274.0 548.0 Office 9 706.2 6355.8 Mercantile/ retail 4 1048.2 4192.8 Service 0 0 0 Other 4 561.2 2244.8 Total 33 Street Lighting23 3 3.48 Water and Waste Water (500)24 11,213 Total 106,837.4 22 Average energy use for each type of facility in each community multiplies by the number of facilities in Energy Wise data. 23 Based on average use for a community less than 199 people. 24 See section on Water and Waste Water energy use. 93 Figure 91: Summary of Energy Use in Three Communities 53% 36% 0% 11% Residential Non-Residential Street Lighting Water and Wastewater 94 Water and Sewer- Study The objective of this task is to gain an understanding of the scope and magnitude of energy use associated with water supply and sewerage systems in rural Alaskan communities. The following communities were identified for inclusion in this energy use assessment:  Bethel;  New Stuyahok;  Selawik; and  Savoonga. Descriptions of these communities were provided in another section of this report. Data Collection The research team met with Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium (ANTHC), Village Safe Water (VSW) engineers, and other water and sewer stakeholders to discuss this assessment and to obtain available water and sewer data available from these agencies. ARUC is an organization sponsored by ANTHC to facilitate operation of water supply and sewerage facilities in rural Alaska communities. There are currently 23 member communities and that number is growing. The current ARUC community list can be seen in Table 35. ANTHC provided water and sewer data from October 2010 through September 2011 for energy use in the 23 ARUC communities. A summary of this data is presented in Table 35. ANTHC also provided very useful information on the water supply and sewerage system details for three of the four communities of interest for this report, including Selawik, Savoonga, and New Stuyahok. As part of the rural non-residential building data collection, the research team also targeted rural communities and its related infrastructure for additional building benchmark data, including water and sewer facilities. This resulted in very little useable data, largely due to lack of sub - metering fuel oil of water and sewer facilities throughout rural Alaska and due to poor accounting records. Although in its infancy, ARUC staff have collected over 12 months of fuel data in over 23 communities. This data set represents the only reliable source of rural water and sewer data currently available. ANTHC also provided energy audit reports for 12 rural Alaska communities. These communities are Akiak, Eek, Kongiganak, Lower Kalskag, Napaskiak, Nulato, Russian Mission, Savoonga, Selawik, Sleetmute, Teller, and Toksook. Among the communities audited are two of the four communities of interest for this report: Selawik and Savoonga. 95 The research team contacted VSW to obtain any rural utilities energy use information available from them. WHP was advised that VSW does not have reliable and current data concerning energy use by water and sewerage utilities in rural Alaska. 96 Table 35: Data Furnished by Alaska Rural Utility Cooperative, an organization sponsored by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium FY 2011 ARUC DATA Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Total Water Produced 8,733,300 8,416,962 9,937,548 9,712,363 9,407,541 10,072,738 8,610,740 8,173,998 7,397,884 7,463,763 7,158,810 7,852,171 102,937,818 Ambler 504,690 459,620 408,301 350,929 0 591,920 2,315,460.0 Chevak 740,474 805,558 790,007 848,680 759,592 698,015 889,476 1,118,167 683,524 707,789 753,632 753,684 8,002,566.0 Chignik Lagoon 239,797 259,748 175,448 125,702 358,734 286,090 355,618 372,509 198,011 2,371,656.6 Chignik Lake 234,714 ? ? 175,714 163,000 245,000 249,000 1,067,428.0 Golovin 101,168 123,690 88,459 101,657 98,717 127,522 103,859 145,850 163,600 116,435 1,069,789.0 Goodnews Bay 205,322 148,726 161,421 272,218 176,258 243,806 210,545 176,174 183,486 191,312 291,013 221,786 2,128,019.0 Holy Cross JOINED ARUC MAY 2011 289,900 306,700 347,500 333,700 402,600 1,680,400.0 Kiana 820,971 751,068 988,912 1,237,207 735,444 1,006,760 632,225 733,108 594,983 790,881 733,365 0 7,452,883.7 Kobuk 282,800 304,117 203,736 147,244 196,600 167,946 164,386 0 1,466,828.1 Kotlik 463,900 307,300 395,700 462,900 534,700 261,500 393,400 319,600 364,400 301,000 385,300 511,200 3,929,700.0 Lower Kalskag 169,692 205,810 263,968 238,708 95,453 161,904 113,019 174,025 147,833 166,765 185,913 197,114 1,744,702.0 New Stuyahok 2,597,851 2,416,523 2,534,130 2,514,031 2,623,205 2,864,333 1,676,055 525,000 525,000 525,000 525,000 0 14,311,754.0 Noorv ik JOINED ARUC JUNE 2011 0 0 0 722,557 722,557.0 Newhalen 361,031 112,030 93,200 83,000 60,600 58,900 62,300 79,600 72,570 983,231.0 Russian Mission 400,945 399,444 399,912 433,331 431,974 426,618 430,512 433,114 412,448 449,282 426,952 406,036 4,250,179.0 Savoonga 535,896 518,884 510,620 616,260 556,693 591,090 565,532 599,244 497,131 497,540 516,151 520,570 5,470,831.0 Selawik 825,095 666,930 844,762 631,283 720,730 782,698 703,626 666,492 817,927 819,335 459,003 974,450 7,420,306.0 Sleetmute 61,829 63,219 83,906 86,400 64,677 63,527 78,349 76,422 49,326 97,515 57,638 622,283 1,280,043.0 South Naknek ? ? ? 10,019 0 10,019.0 St. Michael 443,603 435,406 244,071 150,689 559,897 276,978 217,714 166,144 182,443 134,877 152,118 92,119 2,177,050.0 Toksook Bay 484,900 489,400 642,600 495,300 512,400 588,200 472,500 626,300 605,000 514,000 627,300 598,000 5,681,600.0 Tyonek 982,822 1,107,526 1,310,018 1,181,442 1,176,281 1,502,290 1,211,943 1,116,588 798,219 675,325 676,611 601,836 10,250,553.0 Fuel Inventory-gal 4829.70 6243.09 13664.42 10035.39 10859.41 12236.79 8564.10 5549.30 1957.10 1893.91 1820.12 2318.10 79,971.43 Ambler 0 0 0 0 0 0 253 500 0 0 0 250 1,003.00 Chevak 1,200 600 1,860 2,100 1,120 2,400 1,200 1,240 300 1,240 120 600 13,980.00 Chignik Lagoon 24 25 26 37 0 69 28 58 15 0 29 44 355.00 Chignik Lake 55 55 56 65 56 5 55 0 0 0 0 0 347.00 Golovin 250 28 291 450 1,019 574 590 481 23 29 336 32 4,102.53 Goodnews Bay 142 186 535 467 320 574 212 181 141 70 107 99 3,033.80 Holy Cross JOINED ARUC MAY 2011 - Kiana 0 0 0 0 0 739 365 375 0 0 332 0 1,811.00 Kobuk 0 0 448 400 0 0 450 200 0 0 150 0 1,648.00 Kotlik 343 457 465 440 313 153 202 80 16 0 0 312 2,781.00 Lower Kalskag 34 195 308 360 350 260 125 145 4 10 10 200 2,001.00 New Stuyahok 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Newhalen 0 0 0 0 10 81 100 30 76 54 0 0 351.00 Noorv ik JOINED ARUC JUNE 2011 - Russian Mission 53 272 362 242 217 281 232 145 80 62 73 55 2,074.00 Savoonga 385 678 1,274 0 1,113 1,030 890 763 144 0 100 0 6,377.70 Selawik 1,305 2,066 4,685 2,002 2,235 2,887 1,810 0 0 0 0 0 16,990.60 Sleetmute 150 260 350 380 400 400 225 100 25 0 0 25 2,315.00 South Naknek 30 35 45 0 0 15 30 0 0 15 20 0 190.00 St. Michael 623 1,337 2,522 2,468 2,845 2,230 1,149 528 450 0 130 309 14,591.00 Toksook Bay 236 49 437 624 429 326 548 656 646 392 413 355 5,111.00 Tyonek 0 0 0 0 433 213 100 67 37 22 0 37 908.80 Upper Kalskag 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 97 FY 2011 ARUC DATA Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Total Electricity (kWh) 156,533 185,941 228,863 283,382 225,835 230,173 221,330 194,191 163,779 132,478 148,351 144,993 2,315,849 Ambler 11,419 12,358 13,329 15,877 12,190 11,981 11,248 10,498 7,735 5,663 5,680 7,285 125,263.00 Chevak 17,305 21,324 21,958 24,366 21,872 24,192 22,290 22,153 18,150 16,906 18,042 19,818 248,376.00 Chignik Lagoon 931 885 796 769 1,021 1,279 1,059 888 1,033 1,191 1,226 628 11,706.00 Chignik Lake 2,333 2,186 2,078 2,353 2,045 2,026 2,057 1,879 1,805 1,843 1,629 1,258 23,492.00 Golovin 3,080 3,377 4,685 3,245 3,861 3,965 3,477 3,423 2,953 2,109 2,094 0 36,269.00 Goodnews Bay 1,588 1,821 2,684 2,656 2,857 2,513 2,332 1,883 1,782 1,536 1,739 1,416 24,807.00 Holy Cross JOINED ARUC MAY 2011 5,636 767 1,674 1,824 9,901.00 Kiana 8,690 9,700 12,549 13,185 11,797 12,612 12,223 11,729 9,016 8,731 9,323 10,333 129,888.00 Kobuk 4,914 8,649 8,752 8,744 8,322 8,540 8,999 7,399 2,782 2,751 2,704 1,985 74,541.00 Kotlik 12,822 16,224 16,946 19,240 18,160 18,907 17,668 16,876 16,357 15,229 18,674 14,595 201,698.00 Lower Kalskag 4,666 5,390 8,205 9,249 5,649 7,359 8,611 7,512 6,186 653 2,204 1,835 67,519.00 New Stuyahok 5,005 4,961 5,809 3,219 4,907 5,486 4,853 4,025 3,880 4,337 4,461 4,646 55,589.00 Newhalen 1,291 3,788 6,947 7,244 4,085 1,267 1,188 1,198 1,052 1,153 911 1,382 31,506.00 Noorv ik JOINED ARUC JUNE 2011 18,488 15,520 19,742 20,498 74,248.00 Russian Mission 2,457 3,639 4,155 4,398 3,821 4,055 4,209 3,206 1,258 1,386 1,173 1,248 35,005.00 Savoonga 6,500 6,550 11,142 55,959 17,840 17,840 17,840 17,840 7,176 8,754 10,000 10,000 187,441.00 Selawik 34,226 42,070 58,246 61,931 57,625 58,724 58,365 46,134 25,408 19,158 17,375 19,962 499,224.00 Sleetmute 2,332 2,782 2,574 2,902 2,467 2,506 2,517 2,311 2,236 2,225 2,283 0 27,135.00 South Naknek 534 997 1,355 2,097 2,512 2,058 1,152 768 617 570 650 577 13,887.00 St. Michael 17,761 23,297 26,724 27,063 23,126 26,868 24,968 19,090 14,824 14,939 16,412 17,972 253,044.00 Toksook Bay 10,832 10,984 12,505 11,224 15,994 10,225 9,912 9,096 9,688 3,282 8,817 3,947 116,506.00 Tyonek 3,760 3,840 4,120 4,520 3,720 4,760 3,960 3,160 2,520 2,320 0 2,960 39,640.00 Upper Kalskag 4,087 1,119 3,304 3,141 1,964 3,010 2,402 3,123 3,197 1,455 1,538 824 29,164.00 Alaska Rural Utilities Cooperative, an organization sponsored by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium DEHE-#128018-v1-ARUC_Monthly_Source_Data_FY11-bud edit 02Feb12.xls 98 Data Review and Evaluation The ANTHC engineers collected and evaluated 2010 and 2011 data from the 23 ARUC water and sewer operations during the summer and fall of 2011. The data was analyzed extensively for useful patterns or trends, such as energy use per capita, per connection, per unit of water produced, and Climate Zone. Unfortunately, the results of their evaluation did not reveal any useful patterns or trends in the data available. This data was independently evaluated by the research team, which confirmed the ANTHC findings that the data did not reveal any useful patterns or trends. It appears that there are two fundamental problems with the ARUC energy and operations data. First, the systems in the various villages are not directly comparable due to differences in the t ype of facilities (i.e. aboveground vs. buried water lines, or vacuum sewers vs. gravity sewers, or arctic pipe vs. utilidors). Second, and perhaps the main problem, the data may simply be incorrect or inaccurate. There are indications of this second problem in the calculated water use per person, which varies from 4 to 111 gallons per person per day. The ANTHC energy audits contain information about electrical consumption records and the reported annual cost of energy for the water and sewer systems. T he audits also report on the evaluation of boiler efficiencies, building insulation and thermal evaluation, electrical equipment loads, and operating temperatures. A main focus of the energy audit report is the identification and quantification of potential energy savings that could be achieved by facilities upgrades. This information was valuable both for inputs to the energy use model and for comparison with the results of the energy use model. While energy audits and energy use modeling are similar in nature, there is an important difference between them. An energy audit tends to focus on finding inefficiencies in system facilities and proposing facility modifications to improve efficiencies, to save energy, and to reduce cost. In contrast, system modeling is an attempt to model energy demands for a system which is assumed to be operating with reasonable efficiency. The concept is to better understand performance and opportunities for energy demand reduction. ANTHC provided very useful information and details about the three ARUC systems to be modeled and evaluated. This information concerned pipe sizes and lengths, type of piping systems (aboveground vs. buried water lines, or vacuum sewers vs. gravity sewers, or arctic pipe vs. utilidors), utilidor details, pump sizes and operating temperatures. Information concerning the Bethel water and sewerage systems was obtained from sources in the Bethel community and Bethel community websites. It should be noted that only approximately 99 30 percent of the Bethel population is served by piped water and sewer services, and the modeling effort is concerned only with the piped systems. Additional information about systems details in all four communities, such as pipe lengths and loop layouts, building sizes, service line lengths etc, was obtained from the latest Community Maps prepared by the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development, and from community aerial views obtained using Google Earth images. For all communities, the available data was incomplete to varying degrees. For example, there was very limited data about the raw water supply pipelines or raw water flow rates. For modeling purposes, it was necessary to make assumptions about pipeline diameters and degree of exposure (i.e. buried or above ground). Similarly, exposed surface areas were estimated from footprints. In some cases, there was conflicting information. In all such cases, reasonable assumptions were made based on normal practice. For below ground pipelines, the ground temperature has been assumed. Overall, the information finally used in the modeling is deemed to provide a reasonably accurate description of the systems in each of the communities. If the model results are considered to have a useful role to play in systems operation, it will be essential to verify the system information in the field and to eventually calibrate the model to reflect actual syste m performance under a range of operating conditions. Energy Use Models for Rural Communities Due to the lack of useful patterns and trends in the available data, it was decided to attempt to model the water supply and sewerage systems in use in the four t arget communities. A summary of the systems data which was collected and used in the preparation of energy models for each of the four communities is presented in Table 36. These four systems represent a variety of types of water and sewerage facilities. This variation has made the modeling effort and results variable as well. 100 Table 36: Water and Sewerage Utilities Systems Data Summary Community Bethel New Stuyahok Savoonga Selawik Population Served 1800* 510 700 830 Water Supply gallons per day (gal/capita day) 123,100 (68.4)** 17,500 (34.3) 15,200 (21.7) 20,330 (24.5) Fuel Cost $/gal $4.00 $5.92 $4.18 $3.70 Power Cost $/kWh $0.15 $0.15 $0.14 $0.17 Water Source Well Well Well River Raw Water Temperature 34 F 34 F 34 F 34 F Average Ambient Temperature 31 F 31 F 28 F 24 F Water Supply Type Arctic Pipe Loops and Services Above Ground Arctic Pipe Loops and Services Buried Utilidor Loops and Services Above Ground Arctic Pipe and Utilidor Loops and Services All Above Ground Number of Water Loops 5 2 3 2 Pipe Loops 1 Utilidor at Island Total Water Loop Length, ft 35,000 12,000 Util-15,400 Loop-30,800 Util-9,200 Island Loop 18,400 Loops-9,200 Number of Services 362 95 182 189 Total Length of Services, ft 16,220 4,750 9,100 15,120 Type of Sewerage Gravity with 7 Pump Stations Gravity with 2 Pump Stations Vacuum with 1 Vac Station Vacuum with 2 Vac Stations *Only 30 percent of Bethel population is connected to piped water and sewer services **Includes water used by Hospital and High School serving the entire community The basic model is a spreadsheet into which the system details are entered. An example of this complex spreadsheet model for Bethel is shown in Table 37. These details include pipe loop and services sizes and lengths, pipe locations above or below ground, utilidor details, insulation thicknesses, flow rates, raw water temperature, and ambient temperature to set the stage for water supply model. Also required are buildings sizes or exposed surface areas for all utilities buildings to be kept warm. Once this system is set up in the spreadsheet, various operating temperatures and ambient temperatures can be run to estimate energy requirements as a function of these two variables. Energy requirements are primarily for pumping, initial heating, and heat losses from pipelines and buildings. 101 Table 37: Model of Water System Energy Use Calculations Existing Water System Energy Use Calculations for BETHEL, ALASKA Service Area Population =1800 Raw water flow 129260 gal/day Raw Water Temperature:34 deg. F Heat/Power Production Efficiency =0.65 Average Service-AKIAK , ft =75 Raw water flow 89.8 gal/min Running Temperature:55 deg. F Average Service-BETHEL HTS , ft =20 System type:Water loops, Above ground arctic pipe w/ 4" insulation, pitorifices for H.C. loop Raw Water flow, gal/pers/day 71.8 Treated water flow 123104.76 gal/day Treated water flow, gal/pers/day 68.4 Treated water flow 85.5 gal/min Description Length I.D.O.D.Insulation Insulation R Insulation Insulation Water External Pipeline Heat Flow Temp Fuel Energy No. of Energy Percent ft inch inch T, inch ft2-hr-F per Effective Effective Temp Temp Area Loss Rate Drop Cost Cost Services Cost of Total BTU-inch R k (1/R)°F °F ft2 BTU/hr gpm °F $/gal $/d 382 $/mo-svc BTU per AMBIENT 4.00 ft2-hr-F -40 Efficiency Adusted Fuel Cost $/gal 6.15 DEG F Raw Water Pumping 3.98 kW 13,569 89.8 6.15 $14.84 382 $1.19 0.7% Raw Water Pipeline 3000 4 12 4.0 5 30 0.033 34.00 -40 9,425 23,248 89.8 0.52 6.15 $32.03 382 $2.56 1.4% Heating all raw water produced 943,463 89.8 6.15 $1,299.83 382 $103.78 57.8% Tank 1 Heat Losses 24' water depth 5.0 5 25 0.040 55.00 -40 7,351 27,935 6.15 $38.49 382 $3.07 1.7% Tank 2 Heat Losses 24' water depth 5.0 5 25 0.040 55.00 -40 7,351 27,935 6.15 $38.49 382 $3.07 1.7% WTP Building 1 10,000 sf surface area 5.0 4 20 0.050 70.00 -40 10,000 55,000 6.15 $75.77 382 $6.05 3.4% WTP Building 2 7,000 sf surface area 5.0 4 20 0.050 70.00 -40 7,000 38,500 6.15 $53.04 382 $4.24 2.4% Initial Pressurization 5.29 kW 18,046 85.5 6.15 $19.74 382 $1.58 0.9% AKIAK SERVICE AREA Loop A 6000 6 14 4.0 5 30 0.033 54.48 -40 21,991 69,260 188.1 0.74 6.15 $75.77 43 $53.74 3.4% Loop A Services (43)3225 4 12 4.0 5 30 0.033 54.12 -40 10,132 31,785 43 1.48 6.15 $34.77 43 $24.66 1.5% Loop A Pumping 2.97 kW 10,149 6.15 $11.10 43 $7.88 0.5% Loop B 9000 6 14 4.0 5 30 0.033 54.48 -40 32,987 103,890 188.1 1.10 6.15 $113.66 72 $48.15 5.1% Loop B Services (72)5400 4 12 4.0 5 30 0.033 53.93 -40 16,965 53,117 72 1.47 6.15 $58.11 72 $24.62 2.6% Central Loop Pumping 4.02 kW 13,705 6.15 $14.99 72 $6.35 0.7% Loop C 5000 6 14 4.0 5 30 0.033 54.48 -40 18,326 57,717 188.1 0.61 6.15 $63.14 41 $46.97 2.8% Loop C Services (41)3075 4 12 4.0 5 30 0.033 54.18 -40 9,660 30,326 41 1.48 6.15 $33.18 41 $24.68 1.5% Loop C Pumping 2.63 kW 8,964 6.15 $9.81 41 $7.30 0.4% BETHEL HEIGHTS SERVICE AREA Loop 1 8000 6 13 3.5 5 26.25 0.038 54.48 -40 27,227 98,000 188.1 1.04 6.15 $107.21 113 $28.94 4.8% Loop 1 Services (113)2260 4 11 3.5 5 26.25 0.038 53.96 -40 6,508 23,297 113 0.41 6.15 $25.49 113 $6.88 1.1% Loop 1 Pumping 3.67 kW 12,520 6.15 $13.70 113 $3.70 0.6% Loop 2 7000 6 13 3.5 5 26.25 0.038 54.48 -40 23,824 85,750 188.1 0.91 6.15 $93.81 113 $25.32 4.2% Loop 2 Services (113)2260 4 11 3.5 5 26.25 0.038 54.03 -40 6,508 23,313 113 0.41 6.15 $25.50 113 $6.88 1.1% Loop2 Pumping 3.32 kW 11,335 6.15 $12.40 113 $3.35 0.6% BETHEL 55 DEGREES - AMBIENT TEMP -40 F cost per service Note: 1 gpm heated 1 ºF =500.5 BTU/hour 1 kWh =3412.0 BTU Total Energy Use, BTU/h 1,780,825 Assumed Fuel is Fuel Oil No. 1 @ 135,000 BTU/gal =39.57 kWh/gal BTU/1000 gal 330,650 Total Cost, $/d $2,250.05 382 $5.9 Water use gal per capita day =71.811 kWh/1000 gal 97 Water use 1000 gal/cap-mo =2.15 kWh/cap-mo 209 Total Cost, $/mo $68,627 382 $179.7 Water use 1000 gallons per hour =5.39 kWh/svc.con-mo 984 Water use 1000 gal/svc conn-mo =10.15 Average kW 522 Total Cost, $/yr $823,519 382 $2,155.8 Peak Peak Peak Peak Average Total Peak Minimum Pump Pipe Pipe Pipe Avg Peak Peak Peak Peak H-W Flow Velocity Friction Friction Static Head Pumping Pumping Pump Pumping Station IDia Area Length Flow Factor Flow Flow Flow C Velocity Head Head Head Head Power Efficiency Motor Energy ID inches sq. ft.feet gpm gpm cfs cms value fps ft psi ft ft m kW kW kWh/d Initial Pressurization -----85.5 0.19 0.00540 -----60.00 3.1735 0.6 5.29 126.94 Raw Water Pumping-1 4 0.111 3000 89.76388889 1 89.8 0.20 0.00567 125 1.80 0.00 8.84 20.41 15 10.83 0.6014 0.6 1.00 24.06 Loop A Pumping 5.47 0.208 6000 17.0978836 11 188.1 0.42 0.01187 125 2.01 0.01 15.22 35.15 15 15.34 1.7847 0.6 2.97 6.49 Loop B Pumping 5.47 0.208 9000 17.0978836 11 188.1 0.42 0.01187 125 2.01 0.01 22.82 52.72 15 20.71 2.4101 0.6 4.02 8.76 Loop C Pumping 5.47 0.208 5000 17.0978836 11 188.1 0.42 0.01187 125 2.01 0.01 12.68 29.29 15 13.55 1.5763 0.6 2.63 5.73 Loop 1 Pumping 5.47 0.208 8000 17.0978836 11 188.1 0.42 0.01187 125 2.01 0.01 20.29 46.86 15 18.92 2.2016 0.6 3.67 8.01 Loop 2 Pumping 5.47 0.208 7000 17.0978836 11 188.1 0.42 0.01187 125 2.01 0.01 17.75 41.01 15 17.13 1.9932 0.6 3.32 7.25 Pumps and Pipeline Hydraulic and Energy Calculations 102 Existing Sewer System Energy Use Calculations for BETHEL, ALASKA Service Area Population =1800 Sewage as fraction of water flow 0.90 Raw Water Temperature:34 deg. F Heat/Power Production Efficiency =0.75 Average Service , ft =50 Sewage flow 110794.3 gal/day Running Temperature:50 deg. F Sewage flow, gal/pers/day 61.6 Avg. sewage flow 76.9 gal/min System type:Gravity buried service conn and buried gravity sewers. 2 catchments. Number of sewer connections 382.0 ASSUME EQUAL CATCHMENT FOR EACH PS services heat traced for emergency thawing Sewage flow, cal/conn/day 290.0 Sewage flow per catchment 11.0 gal/min 7 pump stations pumping in series in 2 lines: 4-3-2-1 7-6-5-1 PS 1 pumps to treatment/disposal Insulation Insulation R Insulation Insulation Inside External Surface Heat Heat Fuel Energy Energy Percent T, inch ft2-hr-F per Effective Effective Temp Temp Area Loss Loss Cost Cost Cost Water BTU-inch R k (1/R)°F °F ft2 BTU/hr BTU/d $/gal $/d $/mo-svc System BTU per Cost ft2-hr-F Heating Sewage Pump Stations 1000 ft2/PS 5.0 4 20 0.050 50.00 -40 7,000 31,500 756,000 6.15 $34.46 $2.75 1.5% Peak Peak Peak Peak Average Total Peak Minimum Pump Number Pipe Pipe Pipe Avg Peak Peak Peak Peak H-W Flow Velocity Friction Friction Static Head Pumping Pumping Pump Pumping Station of IDia Area Length Flow Factor Flow Flow Flow C Velocity Head Head Head Head Power Efficiency Motor Energy ID Catchments inches sq. ft.feet gpm gpm cfs cms value fps ft psi ft ft m kW kW kWh/d Pump Station No. 1 7 6 0.250 5000 76.9 4 307.762 0.68 0.0194 100 2.74 0.02 30.43 70.29 20 27.62 5.26 0.65 8.09 48.54 No. 2 3 4 0.111 500 33.0 4 131.898 0.29 0.0083 100 2.64 0.00 4.53 10.48 15 7.79 0.64 0.65 0.98 5.87 No. 3 2 4 0.111 1000 22.0 6 131.898 0.29 0.0083 100 2.64 0.00 9.07 20.95 15 11.00 0.90 0.6 1.50 5.98 No. 4 1 4 0.111 1000 11.0 8 87.932 0.20 0.0056 100 1.76 0.00 4.28 9.90 15 7.61 0.41 0.5 0.83 2.49 No. 5 3 4 0.111 1000 33.0 4 131.898 0.29 0.0083 100 2.64 0.00 9.07 20.95 15 11.00 0.90 0.6 1.50 8.97 No. 6 2 4 0.111 1500 22.0 6 131.898 0.29 0.0083 100 2.64 0.00 13.60 31.43 15 14.20 1.16 0.6 1.93 7.72 No. 7 1 4 0.111 1000 11.0 8 87.932 0.20 0.0056 100 1.76 0.00 4.28 9.90 15 7.61 0.41 0.5 0.83 2.49 Total Energy Use, BTU/h 11,666 Energy Cost, $/day $12.76 Total kWh/d 82.06 BTU/1000 gal 2,527 Total BTU/day 279,985 kWh/1000 gal 0.74 Energy Cost, $/day-conn $0.03 Average kW 3.42 kWh/cap-mo 1.39 kWh/svc.con-mo 6.55 Energy Cost, Percent of Water System cost 0.57 percent Total kWh/yr/person 16.64 Average kW 3.42 Note: Vacuum sewers reported to use 10-30 kWh/pers/yr for the vacuum pumps This calculation shows around 20 kWh/person/yr for the collection pumps - excluding pumping to treatment CONCLUSION: EXCLUDING HEATING, ENERGY COST FOR VACUUM SYSTEM AND FOR GRAVITY + PUMPING SYSTEM ARE SIMILAR Additional energy for Vacuum systems Assumptions Air to Liquid Ratio =3.00 (normal minimum)Air Flow =332,383 gpd =1,636 kg/d Heat needed =130,886 BTU/d Air Specific Gravity =0.0013 Air Temp=-40 deg C Air Specific Heat=1.00 kJ/kg-deg C Sewage Temp=40 deg C This adds 39 percent to the sewage collection energy Leaking Vacuum Valve Air to Liquid Ratio =10.00 (leaking)Air Flow =1,107,943 gpd =5,454 kg/d Heat needed =436,288 BTU/d Air Specific Gravity =0.0013 Air Temp=-40 deg C Air Specific Heat=1.00 kJ/kg-deg C Sewage Temp=40 deg C This adds 130 percent to the sewage collection energy Vacuum pumping energy would also triple Note: 1 BTU = 1 kJ (close enough; 1.005) Summary Water & Sewer - 35 degrees Efficiency factor 0.65 Percent of Ambient Temperature, deg F -40 Total Total Energy Requirement Raw Water Temperature, deg F 34 Heating & Pumping Raw Water Line 36,817 BTU/h 1.99 Heating Raw Water 943,463 BTU/h 51.07 Heating WTP Bldg & Water Tank 149,370 BTU/h 8.09 Initial Pressurization 18,046 BTU/h 0.98 Loop and Services Heat Loss 576,455 BTU/h 31.20 Loop Pumping 56,673 BTU/h 3.07 Sewage Pumping 11,666 BTU/h 0.63 Lift Station Heating (use WTP bldg value)55,000 BTU/h 2.98 Total Energy Estimate 1,847,491 BTU/h Pumps and Pipeline Hydraulic and Energy Calculations 103 For the community sewers, the principal energy use is for pumping the sewage for the gravity sewers, and for operating the vacuum pumps and disposal pumps for the vacuum systems. Additionally, the heating of all associated buildings is calculated. For gravity sewers, it is assumed that heating of the sewage is not required. For vacuum sewers, the heat required to warm the air sucked into the system to above freezing has been included. The energ y demand of sewerage facilities is calculated and reported separately from the water supply energy demand. For pumping facilities, the spreadsheet includes sections for calculating pipeline heat losses and pumping energy requirements. Energy calculations and results are based on net energy demand, without consideration of the efficiencies of energy delivery systems. This is done in order to avoid any confusion with respect to energy delivery efficiencies. It is also convenient for comparing the performan ce of the utilities systems without the complication of the effects of energy delivery methods. All energy demands are calculated in net BTUs/hr, regardless of the energy source. Similarly, all energy costs are calculated from the energy demands using the efficiency adjusted cost of heating fuel in each community. No differentiation is made between fuel energy and electrical energy. Energy results are expressed as both BTUs and kWh in the model. Summaries of the AAAT and EWAT model runs for each community are presented in Table 38 through Table 42 together with an example model run output at an operating temperature of 45°, 50° and 55°F for each climatic condition in each community. The results of the modeling are most easily seen using a chart presentation as shown in Figure 92 through Figure 99. For each community, a chart has been made showing the relative energy demand for five components of energy demand:  Raw Water Heating;  Loops and Service Lines;  Heating Buildings and Tanks;  Sewerage; and  Raw Water Pumping and Heat Loss. In general, this listing is presented in the order of energy demand, with the exception that for systems with above ground utilidors, the largest energy demand is for the loops and services, followed by raw water heating. In all cases, these two categories account for most of the energy demand of all four systems. For ease of comparison, the charting is presente d based on Energy Use per 1,000 gallons of water produced. 104 No use of heat trace has been included in the calculations. The assumption is that heat trace is not used for routine operations, and is only activated for thawing purposes, when something has gone wrong in the system. The model does allow for selection of overall energy delivery efficiency, and the selected efficiency factor is applied exclusively to the cost of fuel. The predicted energy costs of operation are therefore the only place where energy delivery efficiency is taken into account. For all of the results presented in this report, an energy efficiency factor of 0.65 has been used. Model Results The systems in all four communities have been modeled for two climatic conditions. One of t he conditions is for the Annual Average Ambient Temperature (AAAT), and the other is for an assumed Extreme Winter Ambient Temperature (EWAT). For all communities the EWAT has been taken as -40 F. Wind chill has not been included for above ground facilit ies. For each condition, AAAT and EWAT, the model has been run for operating temperatures of 35°, 40°, 45°, 50°, 55°, and 60° F. These operating temperatures are intended to cover the full range of anticipated operating values. Available data indicates that water systems are normally operated in a range between 40° and 55°. Raw water source temperatures have been set at 34° F without any variation, mostly due to the lack of any data in this regard. 105 Figure 92: Bethel Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer Figure 93: Bethel Energy Use Model of Water & Sewer 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 35 40 45 50 55 60 ENERGY USE (BTU/1,000 GALLONS) OPERATING TEMPERATURE (deg F) Sewage System Raw Water Energy Water Buildings & Tanks Loops & Services Bethel at Average Ambient Temp 31F 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 35 40 45 50 55 60 ENERGY USE (BTU/1,000 GALLONS) OPERATING TEMPERATURE (deg F) Sewage System Raw Water Energy Water Buildings & Tanks Loops & Services Raw Water Heating Bethel at Average Ambient Temperature -40 106 Figure 94: New Stuyahok Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer Figure 95: New Stuyahok Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 35 40 45 50 55 60 ENERGY USE (BTU/1,000 GALLONS) OPERATING TEMPERATURE (deg F) Sewage System Raw Water Energy Water Buildings & Tanks Loops & Services New Stuyahok at Average Ambient Temp 31 F 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000 35 40 45 50 55 60 ENERGY USE (BTU/1,000 GALLONS) OPERATING TEMPERATURE (deg F) Sewage System Raw Water Energy Water Buildings & Tanks Loops & Services Raw Water Heating New Stuyahok at Average Ambient Temp -40F 107 Figure 96: Selawik Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer Figure 97: Selawik Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 35 40 45 50 55 60 ENERGY USE (BTU/1,000 GALLONS) OPERATING TEMPERATURE (deg F) Sewage System Water Buildings & Tanks Loops & Services Raw Water Heating Selawik at Average Ambient Temp 24 F 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 35 40 45 50 55 60 ENERGY USE (BTU/1,000 GALLONS) OPERATING TEMPERATURE (deg F) Raw Water Energy Sewage System Water Buildings & Tanks Selawik at Average Ambient Temp -40 F 108 Figure 98: Savoonga Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer Figure 99: Savoonga Energy Use Model for Water & Sewer 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000 35 40 45 50 55 60 ENERGY USE (BTU/1,000 GALLONS) OPERATING TEMPERATURE (deg F) Sewage System Raw Water Energy Water Buildings & Tanks Loops & Services Raw Water Heating Savoonga at Average Ambient Temp 28 F 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,400,000 35 40 45 50 55 60 ENERGY USE (BTU/1,000 GALLONS) OPERATING TEMPERATURE (deg F) Sewage System Raw Water Energy Water Buildings & Tanks SAVOONGA at Average Ambient Temp - 109 Another way to present the model results is seen in Table 38 through Table 39. For the tabular presentation in this table, a set operating temperature of 45° F ha s been selected to limit the complexity of the table and also reflect a typical operating temperature. Table 38: Model Results at AAAT and 45 Deg F Operating Temperature2526 Community Bethel New Stuyahok Savoonga Selawik AAAT, deg f 31 31 28 24 Total energy 741,264 133,765 242,586 286,289 Total energy/ 1000 gal 137,526 183,240 385,057 336,811 Percent of energy requirement by component Raw water pmp & hl 2.0 5.6 2.8 1.2 Water heating 66.7 54.9 24.0 29.5 Bldgs & tanks 5.6 6.1 6.3 9.8 Loops & svcs heat 11.5 22.3 54.0 45.9 Loops pumping 10.1 8.5 8.5 10.1 Sewage total 4.2 2.7 3.6 3.5 Table 39: Model Results at EWAT and 45 Deg F Operating Temperature Community Bethel New Stuyahok Savoonga Selawik EWAT, deg f -40 -40 -40 -40 Total energy 1,331,330 183,598 797,799 727,554 Total energy/1000 gal 247,000 251,504 1,266,348 855,946 Percent of energy requirement by component Raw water pmp & hl 2.8 6.4 0.8 0.5 Water heating 37.1 36.4 7.3 10.7 Bldgs & tanks 10.8 16.6 5.9 10.4 Loops & svcs heat 38.7 32.5 82.1 73.1 Loops pumping 4.3 6.1 2.9 4.0 Sewage total 5.0 2.0 1.1 1.4 25 All Energy units are Net BTU/hr 26 Heat trace loads not included because heat trace should not be needed for normal operating conditions. Energy Demand is calculated in terms of net energy, without regard to Energy Production Efficiency. Energy Use is Energy Demand divided by Energy Production Efficiency. Typical Operating Temperatures are in the range 45 F to 55 F 110 Table 40: Model Results at Avg Annual Temp and 45 Deg F Operating Temperature Community Bethel New Stuyahok Savoonga Selawik Avg annual temp, deg f 31 31 28 24 Total energy demand, btu/h 741,000 134,000 241,000 277,000 Total energy demand, mmbtu/yr 6,491 1,174 2,111 2,427 Est. Energy production efficiency .65 .65 .65 .65 Total energy use, mmbtu/yr 9,989 1,803 3,269 3,860 Table 41: Model Results at Avg Annual Temp and 50 Deg F Operating Temperature Community Bethel New Stuyahok Savoonga Selawik Avg annual temp, deg f 31 31 28 24 Total energy demand, btu/h 999,000 179,000 308,000 345,000 Total energy demand, mmbtu/yr 8,751 1,568 2,698 3,022 Est. Energy production efficiency .65 .65 .65 .65 Total energy use, mmbtu/yr 13,463 2,412 4,151 4,650 Table 42: Model Results at Avg Annual Temp and 55 Deg F Operating Temperature Community Bethel New Stuyahok Savoonga Selawik Avg annual temp, deg f 31 31 28 24 Total energy demand, btu/h 1,257,000 223,000 375,000 413,000 Total energy demand, mmbtu/yr 11,011 1,953 3,285 3,618 Est. Energy production efficiency .65 .65 .65 .65 Total energy use, mmbtu/yr 16,940 3,005 5,054 5,566 When looking at the results in the graphs or in the table, it is useful to remember that for any given operating temperature, the energy to heat the raw water is the same for all systems. This means that if the percentage of energy use for heating the water is high, the overall system efficiency is high (smaller losses in the rest of the operations). If the percentage of energy use for heating the water is low, then the overall system efficiency is lower (larger losses in the rest of the operations). The model results have been compared to existing data on system performance where available. This is possible only for the communities of Savoonga and New Stuyahok. In Savoonga, the annual cost of operation for 2010 is reported in the Energy Audit Report to be $64,200, with a fuel cost of $3.10 per gallon and an operating temperature of around 45° F. Using this fuel price, the Savoonga model estimates operating energy costs to be $56,000/year at 40° F and $78,000/year at 45° F. This indicates that the model results are within a reasonable range. 111 In New Stuyahok, operating energy data is less precise, but estimated by ANTHC to average approximately 50 million BTUs per month. Assuming an operating temperature of 40° F, the Savoonga model estimates the average water utility energy demand to be 61 million BTUs per month. Data for the Selawik utilities operations is available but the information is not useful due to som e operating problems that have been discovered and documented in the ANTHC Energy Audit report. For Bethel, utilities electrical power usage data is available but not fuel usage data. Conclusions The main conclusion from these results is that the energy requirements of rural water and sewerage facilities that are operating well and operated properly are dominated by raw water heating and heat losses from the water loops and service connections. Heat losses from water/sewer utility buildings and water tanks come in a distant third in most cases. Raw water delivery and sewerage system energy requirements represent only a small percentage of the total in all cases. Higher operating temperature has predictably higher energy demand and cost. The model demonstrates this clearly and dramatically. Where it is possible to compare the model results with operating energy requirements in the communities modeled, there is a close fit between the model and the operating data. This is a very encouraging result. In looking at the results for both AAAT and EWAT conditions, it is apparent that the loop unit heat losses in Savoonga and Selawik are much higher than in New Stuyahok and Bethel. This is a result of the much poorer heat containment properties of utilidors, as in Savoonga and Selawik, compared to the heat containment provided by the buried arctic pipe in New Stuyahok and even the above ground arctic pipe in Bethel. Savoonga has greater water loop heat loss than Selawik because the Selawik system is a mix of ab ove ground arctic pipe and above ground utilidors, while Savoonga has all utilidors. Comparing Bethel, with above ground arctic pipe, to New Stuyahok, with below ground arctic performance. New Stuyahok should have less energy required per 1,000 gallons because their pipe is below ground. However, this is offset by New Stuyahok having twice the length of pipe per 1,0 00 gallons compared to Bethel. Another factor is that Bethel has 4 inches of insulation on their arctic pipe compared with 3 inches on the arctic pipe in New Stuyahok. This is according to the available information and is subject to field verification. Any model is only as good as the information input. In the case of these four communities, the data available was incomplete but adequate to prepare a reasonable model. However, to be 112 useful, any desktop model must be field verified and field calibrated in order to reliably project actual system performance under a variety of operating conditions. Recommendations First and foremost, it is recommended that the models be verified in the field and then calibrated based on actual system performance. Field verification would deal with pipe sizes and lengths, pump sizes, insulation thicknesses, building surface areas, tank sizes and insulation, and raw water temperature. Field verification will assure that the model components accurately represent the actual system to the maximum extent possible. In particular, the sewerage system currently in the model is based primarily on assumptions due to very little data being available. Field verification would also provide data to allow the differentiation of fuel energy and electric energy in the model. Model calibration would involve the establishment of a data collection and recording process to capture key systems operating parameters under different operating conditions. Once the data has been collected and recorded, the model would be adjusted (calibrated) to match the a ctual performance as best as possible. For example, the field verified model may estimate a temperature drop of 1°F in a given water loop for a certain operating temperature and a selected ambient temperature, but field observation for the same conditions may be different. The formulas in the model can be adjusted to better reflect the results observed in the field. A field verified and calibrated model could be a very useful tool for operations and for energy management. The model would allow the operators to adjust the system operating temperature in response to ambient temperature changes to maintain a desired safety factor against the potential of freeze-up. An accurate model would allow managers to select the desired safety factor based on system performance and the projected cost of a range of settings. Training should be provided to operators and managers regarding the use and limitations of the model. In this regard, the model should be expanded to include the impact and cost of activating emergency measures such as glycol or electric heat trace. Finally, and assuming the recommendations above are adopted, this energy management tool should be provided to all communities where it is seen to be applicable. By providing a better understanding of the performance of the water and sewer utilities in each community, it will be possible to manage the energy requirements of each system while at the same time minimizing the risk of freezing problems. 113 Street Lighting- Independent Study AEA requested energy use data on street lighting to evaluate energy efficiency upgrade opportunities, such as conversion to LED lamps, hi/low dimming coupled with occupancy sensors, etc.27 This section describes the results of this independent study. A summary of the patterns and results is included. In addition, the results of the survey are provided per community and organized according to AEA energy region. The results provide an overall snapshot of street light usage. The objectives of this street lighting independent study are to:  Identify street lighting energy efficiency opportunities; and  Establish statewide baseline energy use data on street lighting in Alaskan communities . Method Data was collected and analyzed for units of local and regional government throughout Alas ka. During the investigation, it was determined that the Boroughs were not responsible for street lighting. There are a variety of different owners of street lights in different across Alaska. In some areas it was discovered that the Boroughs, like the North Slope, did own and maintain the street lights. Ownership also included:  Individual City and community ownership;  State Department of Transportation (DOT); and  Utility Cooperative. In some communities, street lights were owned by multiple entities. The report collected information from numerous communities who were willing to participate. Sample Selection Data collection forms were sent to 150 Alaskan communities that have some form of government28 in November 2011. One hundred, twenty-one (121) forms were returned. A summary of the relationship between the size distribution of Alaskan communities, the forms sent out, and the response rate are shown in Table 43. The size characteristics of Alaskan communities who responded to the survey closely resemble all Alaskan communities. Therefore, it appears as if this survey can provide accurate information on the street lighting tech nologies 27 AEA End-use Study- Implementation Plan page 8. 28 Local Government in Alaska, Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development, February 2001, accessed at State of Alaska, 2008, 114 used by Alaskan communities. Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT) was targeted as a statewide owner and representative of street lighting infrastructure. Table 43: Size Distribution of Alaskan Communities and Survey Response Rate Community Size 200629 Census Forms Sent Sample (Forms Received) Response Rate Communities with Street Lights 100,000 or more 1 1 1 100% 1 10,000-99,999 2 4 3 75% 3 5,000-9,999 8 8 7 88% 6 1,000-4,999 16 20 15 75% 15 100-999 104 88 81 92% 75 Less than 100 19 13 10 77% 9 Total 150 134 117 87% 109 Table 43 also shows that eight communities who returned forms stated that they did not operate streetlights. In addition, four areas have their street lighting services provided in total or in part by the Alaska State Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. Anchorage, Fairbanks, the Mat Su area and the Kenai Peninsula receive DOTPF services. Data Management Data received was entered into an Excel spreadsheet. An additional variable on the number of hours each year that a streetlight could be expected to be operating was derived using the data on the annual amount of darkness in Alaskan communities. This allowed for the calculation of Kilowatt hours of street light operation. Information on the amount of light from each specific type of street lighting instrument was estimated. With this additional information, it was possible to estimate both the total power used in street lighting and the amount of light generated. Individual community response records are provided in the appendices. The community size was based on population of each community using community size categories used by the Alaska Division of Community and Regional Affairs. 29 Estimates of 2006 Alaska City Population, US Census Bureau, US Department of Commerce. 115 Street Lighting Definitions30: The data collection form asked local governments about their use of various street lighting technologies. Information was collected on the number of luminaires of each type and wattage. A definition of the light sources of the street lighting luminaires on which data were co llected is presented below. Incandescent: It is common type of lamp used in homes, indoors and outdoors. It is the most energy inefficient of the common lamp types. It produces light by electrical energy heating a filament of fine wire that glows white -hot when current flows through it. It produces a great deal of heat relative to the amount of light, only 10 percent of the energy goes to producing light. Mercury Vapor: lighting, as well as indoors for some applications. These lamps have a quartz tube filled with mercury gas under pressure. Light is produced when an electrical current passes through the mercury vapor. Like all such high intensity discharge (HID) lamps, s required to start and to operate the lamps at the correct voltage and current levels. This is typically a legacy system as few new mercury vapor luminaires are in production today. Fluorescent (CFL): Fluorescent lamps are gas-discharge lamps that use electricity to excite mercury vapor. The excited mercury atoms produce shortwave ultraviolet light which cause the phosphor coating on the inside of the tube to fluoresce producing visible light. These lamps are approximately four times more efficient than incandescent lamps. In northern climates they are used primarily for indoor applications as colder temperatures inhibit the ability of the phosphor to fluoresce, limiting their outdoor applications in extreme environments. Metal Halide (MH): These HID lamps are used for both outdoor and indoor applications. They are essentially mercury vapor lamps with additional rare earth metals in the arc tube to provide greater efficiencies, longer life and better color rendering. Low Pressure Sodium (LPS): These HID lamps have borosilicate glass gas discharge tubes containing solid sodium, small amounts of neon and argon gas in a chemical mixture designed to start the gas discharge. The discharge tube may be linear or U-shaped. These lamps provide a very narrow bandwidth yellow light with virtually no color distinction. This light source is energy efficient but is limited to applications where monochromatic light is acceptable. 30 Much of this information was taken from Efficient Outdoor Lighting Information Sheet #52, International Dark - Sky Association (IDA), accessed at http://www.darksky.org, January, 2012. 116 High Pressure Sodium (HPS): Like LPS, these HID lamps use sodium, neon and argon gas. HPS lamps are smaller and contain additional elements such as mercury, and produce a dark pink glow when first struck, and a pinkish orange light when warm. They are reasonably efficient, and have been widely used for outdoor and street lighting, parking lot lighting, and other such applications. It is more energy efficient and has a longer life than metal halide and is a good choice when true color is not critical. Light Emitting Diode (LED): A light-emitting diode (LED) is a semiconductor light source. When a light-emitting diode is forward-biased (switched on), electrons are able to recombine with electron holes within the device, releasing energy in the form of photons. This effect is called electroluminescence and the color of the light (corresponding to the energy of the photon) is determined by the energy gap of the semiconductor. LEDs are often small in area (less than 1 mm2), and integrated optical components may be used to shape its radiation pattern. LEDs present many advantages over incandescent and HID light sources including lower energy consumption, longer lifetime, improved robustness, smaller size, and faster switching. LEDs powerful enough for room lighting are relatively expensive and require more precise current and heat management than compact fluorescent lamp sources of comparable output. Description of the Street Lighting Sample Table 44 illustrates the distribution of communities by population. The largest proportion of communities is less than 1000 residents. Eight or about 10% of the smaller communities did not operate streetlights. This should be considered when preparing overall estimates of statewide street lighting energy use. Table 44: Communities with streetlights by size Community Size Communities with Street Lights Number Percent 100,000 or more 1 .92 10,000-99,999 3 2.75 5,000-9,999 6 5.50 1,000-4,999 15 13.76 100-999 75 68.81 Less than 100 9 8.25 Total 109 The regional distribution of participating communities is shown in Table 45. Most areas of the state appear to be represented in this data set. This suggests that t he information collected may be useful in establishing statewide baseline energy use for street lighting. 117 Table 45: Participating Communities by AEA Region AEA Region Number of Communities Percent of Communities Aleutians 9 7.5 Bering Straits 14 11.7 Bristol Bay* 4 3.3 Copper River/ Chugach 4 3.3 Kodiak 2 1.7 Lower Yukon- Kuskokwim 25 20.8 North Slope 1 0.8 Northwest Arctic 11 9.2 Railbelt 17 14.2 Southeast 20 16.6 Yukon-Koyukuk/ Upper Tanana 13 10.8 120 99.9 *The Bristol Bay Borough chose not to participate in the survey Summary of Results Table 46 shows the overall use of different lighting technologies. The sample of communi ties who provided data for this study used over 3.5 million kilowatt hours of energy to generate over 500,000 lumens of street lighting. HID-High Pressure Sodium fixtures are clearly the most commonly used street lighting technology, using 75% of all elect rical power (in Kilowatt hours) and generating 91% of light (in lumens). Table 46: Street light energy use (Kw hrs) and Illumination (lumens) Lighting Type Number Percent Incandescent Kw hrs 37,875 1.03 Lumens 755,870 .10 Fluorescent (CFL): Kw hrs 0 0 Lumens 0 0 High Pressure Sodium (HPS): Kw hrs 2,750,295 74.6 Lumens 450,828,585 91.0 Low Pressure Sodium (LPS): Kw hrs 35,260 1.0 Lumens 1,767,320 .3 Metal Halide (MH): Kw hrs 474,650 12.9 Lumens 41,786,700 8.4 Mercury Vapor (HID) Kw hrs 32,325 .9 Lumens 700 0 Light Emitting Diode (LED) Kw hrs 343,808 9.3 Lumens 81000 2.3 Other Kw hrs 14,435 .4 Lumens 59,450 0 Total Kw hrs 3,688,648 Lumens 507,012,675 118 Lighting Effectiveness High pressure sodium streetlights are the most effective way of lighting public spaces, as measured by the number of lumens generated per kilowatt of power. Metal halide street lighting is the second most efficient instrument. The comparative effectiveness of these instruments is shown below. Fewer communities are using newer and more efficient light emitting diode instruments for street lighting. Comments from survey respondents suggest that a majority of communities who use LED technology are satisfied with the results and ha ve seen energy savings because of them. Many of these communities were able to switch to LED technology because of grant and funding assistance. Financial incentive is the key decision factor on why a community converts to LED or not. Figure 100: Street Lighting Lumens per Kilowatt Total energy use by community size Table 47 presents data on the distribution of street lighting kilowatt hours and the amount of light each type of street lighting instrument can generate for communities of different sizes. Data is presented in thousands. The table shows that smaller communities are using more incandescent street lighting instruments than larger communities. 20 0 136.9 50.1 88 0 34.4 4.1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Incandescent Flourescent High Pressure Sodium Low Pressure Sodium Mental Halide Mercury Vapor Light Emitting Diode Other 119 Table 47: Street lighting instrument energy use and brightness by community Lighting Type In Thousands Community Size Less than 100 100-999 1,000- 4,999 5,000- 9,999 10,000- 99,999 100,000 or more Total Use or Brightness (1000) Incandescent Kw hrs .3 3.1 0 34.5 0 0 37.9 Lumens 20.8 215.0 0 520.1 0 0 755.9 Fluorescent (CFL): Kw hrs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lumens 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 High Pressure Sodium (HPS): Kw hrs 9.5 286.8 385.8 663.1 577.1 825.0 2750.3 Lumens 671.6 21804.3 40177.8 102052.9 82602.0 203.520 450828.6 Low Pressure Sodium (LPS): Kw hrs 0 0 35.3 0 0 0 35.3 Lumens 0 0 1767.3 0 0 0 1767.3 Metal Halide (MH): Kw hrs 0 14.3 16.7 18.8 0 425.0 474.7 Lumens 0 894.4 979.8 1312.5 0 38600.0 41786.7 Mercury Vapor (HID) Kw hrs 0 13.1 11.1 0 18.2 0 32.3 Lumens 0 .7 0 0 0 0 .7 Light Emitting Diode (LED) Kw hrs 0 22.7 139.3 38.4 143.4 0 343.8 Lumens 0 748.0 5318.2 1633.0 4114.9 0 11814.1 Other Kw hrs 0 1.0 .3 13.1 0 0 14.1 Lumens 0 59.5 0 0 0 0 59.5 Total Kw hrs 1 343.9 578.3 767.9 738.7 1250.0 3688.6 Lumens 692.4 23447.4 48243.1 104988.9 86716.9 242120.0 50619.4 Average street light energy use and illumination by community size It appears as if the data in this street lighting survey is representative of community street lighting practices across Alaska. While there appear to be variations in the choice of street lighting technologies, the survey can be useful in preparing a baseline and use energy estimates for communities of various sizes. Table 48 shows the average street lighting energy use in thousands of kilowatt hours and the amount of brightness generated by the street lighting technology chosen by communities of various sizes. 120 Table 48: Average street light energy use and illumination by community size Lighting Type In Thousands Community Size Less than 100 100-999 1,000- 4,999 5,000- 9,999 10,000- 99,999 100,000 or more Incandescent Kw hrs 33.3 41.33 0 5745.8 0 0 Lumens 2311.7 2866.47 0 86680.0 0 0 Fluorescent (CFL): Kw hrs 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lumens 0 0 0 0 0 0 High Pressure Sodium (HPS): Kw hrs 9500 3864.0 25718.0 110520.8 192366.7 825000 Lumens 671600 290.724.1 2678517.3 170008823 27533993 203520000 Low Pressure Sodium (LPS): Kw hrs 0 0 2350.7 0 0 0 Lumens 0 0 117821.3 0 0 0 Metal Halide (MH): Kw hrs 0 190.0 1110.0 3125.0 0 4250000 Lumens 0 11925.3 65320.0 218750.0 0 38600000 Mercury Vapor (HID) Kw hrs 0 9.33 70.0 0 6050 0 Lumens 0 302.0 0 0 0 0 Light Emitting Diode (LED) Kw hrs 0 302.0 9286.0 6405.8 0 0 Lumens 0 10108.1 354546.7 272158.3 0 0 Other Kw hrs 0 13.3 300 0 0 0 Lumens 0 792.7 0 0 0 0 Many of the communities utilizing LED technology have a population between 100 and 10,000, while larger municipalities and cities have not yet converted. Most cities that have not already converted remain unable to afford the technology; while ma ny of the utility cooperatives provide lighting for a flat rate and the energy savings from LED s would not bring financial benefits to the utility provider or the customer. Traffic light instruments There is insufficient survey data to develop baseline data on the choice of traffic light technology by Alaskan communities. 121 Non-Residential Rural Building-Independent Study The primary purpose of this study is to provide energy end-use benchmark details for non- residential buildings in rural Alaska. Other sections of this report present information on non- residential energy end-use data for communities in the Rural, Railbelt and Southeast Alaska energy regions. This following section will provide information on sampling methods, data collection strategies, conclusions, and a general assessment of the data collected. Figure 101 highlights the geographic dispersion of communities. Figure 101: Non-residential community response Sampling Method The list of communities that were initially considered for inclusion in the study included 390 communities, before being trimmed to 219. The criteria used for inclusion of communities in the study included the communities that are Rural; Communities that are not considered hub communities; and Communities with a population of less than 1,000 residents. In some cases, data was not collected for communities on the final list because they were found to be only seasonally occupied, or it was impossible to obtain current contact information. It was decided that the list of building types included in the study would be narrowed to the following types of facilities: city offices, tribal offices, village corporation offices, clinics, schools, 122 grocery stores, post offices, churches and water and sewer facilities. The research team also felt that the buildings included in this list are common to most rural, non-hub communities in Alaska. The list of communities was divided by ANCSA regions, and assigned to the research team. A list of questions was developed for each surveyor to use as a guide when conducting the telephone interviews31. Conclusions Building Types There were a total of 1,938 recorded attempts to gather commercial/public building information. Table 49 summarizes the building types and corresponding sub-types of the buildings included in this study. Table 49: Non-Residential Building Types Represented Building Type Sub Type Count Percent Food Services Restaurant 5 0% Food Stand 0 0% Fast Food 0 0% Bar/Lounge 4 0% Night Club 0 0% Warehouse and Storage Hangar 4 0% Refrigerated Warehouse 3 0% Warehouse - General 262 14% Institutional Education 360 19% Public Assembly 33 2% Public Order and Safety 85 4% Religious Worship 71 4% Library 11 1% Cemetery 0 0% Institutional - Other 31 2% Health Care Health Care - Inpatient 9 0% Health Care - Outpatient 65 3% Nursing Home 0 0% Lodging Hotel/Motel 14 1% Dormitories 10 1% Home for the Elderly 0 0% Lodging - Other 18 1% 31 Building owners/occupants were initially contacted by telephone. While the majority of data was collected through verbal contact, quite often respondents preferred to submit the information by facsimile or email. Attempts to collect information for each building or building owner (when multiple buildings were owned by the same entity) was limited to 3 attempts. 123 Building Type Sub Type Count Percent Office Office 180 9% Mercantile and Retail Strip Malls 0 0% Enclosed Malls 0 0% Food Retail 78 4% Retail - Other 25 1% Service Cinema/Theater 0 0% Automotive Oriented Services 56 3% Spa/Salon 0 0% Communication 3 0% Service - Other 261 13% Other Parking 17 1% Sports Facilities 3 0% Multipurpose 51 3% Miscellaneous 70 4% Not Recorded 209 11% Total 1938 100% Figure 102 depicts the percentages of the types of all buildings included in the study. Institutional buildings represent 30% of all buildings included in the study, while only 1% of the buildings are in the food services category. The building type and sub-types were not recorded for 11% of the buildings in the study. Figure 102: Distribution of Building Types Buildings in the institutional type category make up about 30% of all buildings in the study. Figure 103 shows the distribution of institutional building sub-types. The majority of these 1% 14% 30% 4% 2% 9% 5% 17% 7% 11% Food Services Warehouse and Storage Institutional Health Care Lodging Office Mercantile and Retail Service Other 124 buildings, or 61%, are schools or buildings affiliated with education. Also included in this building type were public order and safety (14%), religious worship (12%), public assembly (6%), institutional-other (5%), and the library (2%) sub-types. There were no buildings in the cemetery sub-type category. Figure 103: Distribution of Institutional Building Sub-Types Building Construction Figure 104 shows the percentages of buildings included in the study by the decade they were built. The year built was not reported for about a third (33%) of the buildings in the study. Seven percent of shows the number of buildings that were constructed in each energy region by deca de. Many of the survey respondents were unsure about the exact year of building construction, but in such cases approximate years or decades were provided. 61% 6% 14% 12% 2% 0% 5% Education Public Assembly Public Order and Safety Religious Worship Library Cemetery Institutional - Other 125 Figure 104: Building Construction by Decade Building Size Respondents were asked to provide the building size in square feet. When respondents did not know the exact measurements, they were asked for approximations. Figure 105 shows that 54% of all buildings included in the study are less than 5,000 square feet. Seven percent of the buildings in the study were between 5,000 and 10,000 square feet, and 7% of the buildings were greater than 10,000 square feet in size. A size approximation was not provided for 32% of the buildings included in the study. Figure 105: Building Size (square feet) 33% 7% 12% 19% 13% 15% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Not Reported Pre-1970 1970's 1980's 1990's 2000 to 2011 32% 54% 7% 7% Estimate Not Provided Less than 5,000 5,000-10,000 Greater than 10,000 126 Fuel Usage Respondents were asked what types of fuel were used to heat the buildings. They were then asked for approximations on the amount of fuel used on an annual basis. It is reported that 92% of the non-residential buildings included in the study are heated with fuel oil (see Figure 106.) Three percent of the buildings reportedly use burn wood for heat, followed by propane and waste heat used by 2% of the buildings in the study. Less than 1% of buildings included in the study use electricity or natural gas for heat, or are not heated at all. Figure 106: Fuel Types Figure 107 depicts the fuel oil annual usage rates. According to this figure, about 34% of all building occupants/owners in the study reported using between 0 and 999 gallons of fuel oil on an annual basis. Twenty-one percent of buildings use between 1,000 and 1,999. The percentage of buildings using increasing gallons of fuel oil on an annual basis steadily declines, until the 10,000 or more gallons level is reached. At this point about 13% of all buildings included in this study reportedly use 10,000 or more gallons of fuel oil on an annual basis. 0% 0% 0% 2% 2% 3% 93% No Heat Natural Gas Electric Waste Propane Wood Fuel Oil 127 Figure 107: Annual Fuel Oil Usage Annual Electricity Usage Figure 108 depicts the annual electricity usage rates. About 24% of all building occupants/owners in the study reported using between 0 and 5,000 kilowatt hours on an annual basis. Sixteen percent of buildings use between 5,000 and 9,999. The percentage of buildings using increasing amounts of electricity on an annual basis steadily declines, until the 100,000 or more kilowatt hour level is reached. At this point about 15% of all buildings included in this study reportedly use 100,000 or more kilowatt hours on an annual basis . Figure 108: Annual Electricity Usage 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Percent of Buildings Annual Fuel Oil Usage Levels 24% 16% 15% 9% 6% 4% 4% 3% 3% 1% 1% 15% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Percent of Buildings 128 Statewide Energy Use by Sector Introduction The AEA End-use Study Implementation Plan ll work with AEA to obtain 32 This section assumes that the purpose for this data is to help establish the baseline for setting the goal of increasing energy efficiency by 15% by the year 202033 as described in the section at the front of this report. Therefore, this section uses available energy consumption statistics to forecast energy use by the year 2020. In addition, the research team has developed a simple strategy to benchmark energy end-use dating back to 2010. The four basic sectors are industrial, residential, commercial and transportation. Method Data for this analysis was compiled by the US Energy Information Administration, and included in the State Energy Information System database.34 The database includes information from 1960 through 2009. The available US Energy Information Administration provides summary energy use information using trillions of BTUs to describe energy use by year for each of the four major sectors. Detailed data on the number of trillions of BTUs by energy use sector and the proportion of total energy use is shown in the appendices. The lack of comparable data on residential or non-residential data square footage prevents an analysis of energy use on a per - square-foot basis. Appropriate denominators for transportation and industrial sectors have yet to be identified. Therefore, this analysis is limited to annual basic energy use statistics. Forecasting is concerned with making educated guesses as to what will happen at some future time. The choice of the forecasting technique was limited by the specificity of the data. In this analysis, the independent variable is time (years from 1960 through 2009) and the dependent variable is trillions of BTUs. This limitation led to the selection of the use of a straight line (linear) least squares trend equation.35 Two alternative time frames were chosen following a review of the historical data. The first trend was developed using all annual data from 1960 through 2009. However, the total energy use appeared to begin a decline about the year 2000. For this reason, a second trend line was 32 AEA End use Study Implementation Plan Final, WHPacific, September 1, 2011, Section 3.2 .1, page 8 33 Ibid, p. 4. 34 US Energy Information Administration, State Energy Information System, Alaska, Tables CT4, CT5, CT6 and CT7, Accessed at EAI.DOE.gov, January 2012. 35 Hanke, JE, Reitsch, AG, Business Forecasting, Allyn and Bacon,1981, pp145-162. 129 developed using annual data from 2002 through 2009 to project future energy use. Forecasts were prepared using an Excel Forecasting function. Overall Energy Use by Sector Figure 109 shows total energy consumption by each sector (industrial, residential, commercial and transportation) from 1960 through 2009. An ordinary least squares trend line is presented to highlight the decrease in total energy consumption as well as the energy consumption in industrial and transportation sectors that appears to have started around 2002. The reason for this decrease in energy use is unclear. Figure 109: Alaska Energy Consumption Estimates and Trends Energy Consumption by Sector Figure 110 shows the proportion of energy use by each of the four sectors from 1960 through 2009. Clearly, the industrial sector uses the largest proportion of the energy used in Alaska. The second-largest user is the transportation sector. Commercial and residential sectors have been using about 10% of Alaska's energy over the last 15 years. This data is shown in detail in the appendices. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 Trillions of BUTs Year Industrial Residential Commercial Transportation Total 130 Figure 110: Percent Energy Consumption by Sector Preliminary Energy Use Forecasts A linear projection of energy use for each sector using the energy use data from 1960 through 2009 shows a continued increase in energy use. However, energy use in recent years (2000 -2009) appears to show a slight decline. These differences could influence the decision on the base time period that the AEA may choose in selecting its baseline measure. Figure 111 uses two different periods to project energy use for each of the four sectors from 2010 through 2020. Each forecast uses the least squares approach, but changes the number of years included in the calculation of the linear forecast. The resul ts show a dramatic difference. The use of all of available data shows a continued rise in energy use by all sectors through 2020. Using just the last nine years of data, data which highlights the recent decline in energy use, results in a projection of continued declines in energy use. The forecasts are shown graphically in Figure 111. 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% 1960 1963 1966 1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 Percent of Trillions of BTUs Transportation % Commercial % Residential % Industrial % 131 Table 50: Energy use forecasts by industrial sector, 2010 through 2020 Year Industrial Residential Commercial Transportation 1960- 2009 2000- 2009 1960- 2009 2000- 2009 1960- 2009 2000- 2009 1960- 2009 2000- 2009 2010 461 339.5 62.1 56.6 80.2 63 250.8 235.9 2011 470.6 334 63.1 57.2 81.5 63 255.5 236.9 2012 480.2 328.4 64 57.7 82.8 63 260.1 237.9 2013 489.9 323 64.9 58.3 84.1 63 264.8 238.9 2014 499.5 317.5 65.8 58.8 85.4 63.1 269.5 239.9 2015 509.1 312 66.7 59.4 86.7 63.1 274.2 240.9 2016 518.7 306.6 67.7 59.9 88 63.1 278.9 241.9 2017 528.3 301.1 68.6 60.5 89.3 63.1 283.6 243 2018 537.9 295.6 69.5 61.1 90.6 63.2 288.3 244 2019 545.5 290.1 70.4 61.6 91.8 63.2 293 245 2020 557.1 284.6 71.3 62.2 93.1 63.2 297.7 246 Figure 111: Alternative Industrial Energy Use Projections Conclusions Industrial energy use comprises about half of all energy used in Alaska. The transportation sector Alaska's energy. Energy use in Alaska appears to be marginally declining. However, declines in energy use in the industrial and transportation sectors are more pronounced than changes in the residential or commercial sectors. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 Trillions of BTUs Worst Case (1960- 2009 base) "Best Case (2000-2009 Base)" 132 The interpretation of changes in energy use may benefit from the use of deno minators. For example, using population as the denominator for residential energy use might give a more appropriate and defensible number for use in long-term energy use forecasts. Similarly, using total state economic output as a denominator for industrial energy use may help to better explain changes in long-term use and result in more reasonable forecasts. AEA should be cautious in selecting the time period that it will use in developing forecasts. Clearly, the use of all available data yields a far different forecast than one which relies on the last 10 years of available data. One possible approach for converting data collected in 2011 to estimated energy use in 2010 is to use the alternative energy forecasts shown in Table 50 to adjust more recent data. The table shows that residential energy use has increased between 1 and 1.4%, depending on the basic projection. The difference between 2010 and 2011, therefore, is a 1.6% increase (using 50 years of data for the projection) or 1.06% (using the past 10 years of data). The 2011 residential survey data could be adjusted using the annual proportional increase, the rate of increase being chosen by AEA. A similar metho d could be used to adjust the nonresidential end-use energy calculations by applying commercial sector forecasts. 133 Table 51: Total Alaska Energy Use by Sector-1960-2009 Year Trillions of BTUs Percent of All BTUs Industrial Residential Commercial Transportation Total Transportation % Industrial % Residential % Commercial % 1960 16.8 10.2 7.3 27.1 61.4 44.1% 27.4% 16.6% 11.9% 1961 21.7 10.8 7.7 31.9 72.1 44.2% 30.1% 15.0% 10.7% 1962 25.1 11.6 7.9 34.2 78.8 43.4% 31.9% 14.7% 10.0% 1963 25.9 12.3 10.1 32.4 80.7 40.1% 32.1% 15.2% 12.5% 1964 25.8 14.1 12.9 32.2 85 37.9% 30.4% 16.6% 15.2% 1965 23.1 15 15.3 34.4 87.8 39.2% 26.3% 17.1% 17.4% 1966 33.8 16.6 16 36.2 102.6 35.3% 32.9% 16.2% 15.6% 1967 35.5 17.6 18.2 43.9 115.2 38.1% 30.8% 15.3% 15.8% 1968 36.5 19.4 19.5 47.2 122.6 38.5% 29.8% 15.8% 15.9% 1969 51.4 21.7 27.1 56.5 156.7 36.1% 32.8% 13.8% 17.3% 1970 51 24.9 29.8 76.4 182.1 42.0% 28.0% 13.7% 16.4% 1971 53.5 29.6 32.9 85 201 42.3% 26.6% 14.7% 16.4% 1972 64.1 29.5 37.4 83.4 214.4 38.9% 29.9% 13.8% 17.4% 1973 63.1 28.5 34 71.4 197 36.2% 32.0% 14.5% 17.3% 1974 59.7 29.1 35.9 76.8 201.5 38.1% 29.6% 14.4% 17.8% 1975 82.6 36.1 33.8 79.7 232.2 34.3% 35.6% 15.5% 14.6% 1976 90.7 40.2 34.6 89.1 254.6 35.0% 35.6% 15.8% 13.6% 1977 118.2 43.5 37.9 94 293.6 32.0% 40.3% 14.8% 12.9% 1978 141 47 38.2 97.9 324.1 30.2% 43.5% 14.5% 11.8% 1979 139.1 38.4 36.4 85.8 299.7 28.6% 46.4% 12.8% 12.1% 1980 137.5 34.6 33.9 89.8 295.8 30.4% 46.5% 11.7% 11.5% 1981 106.1 34.8 37.5 101.2 279.6 36.2% 37.9% 12.4% 13.4% 1982 219.6 40.2 47 102.2 409 25.0% 53.7% 9.8% 11.5% 134 Year Trillions of BTUs Percent of All BTUs Industrial Residential Commercial Transportation Total Transportation % Industria l % Residential % Commercial % 1984 231 45.5 63.3 143 482.8 29.6% 47.8% 9.4% 13.1% 1985 215.6 46.8 58.1 153.9 474.4 32.4% 45.4% 9.9% 12.2% 1986 212 43.8 97.8 150.7 504.3 29.9% 42.0% 8.7% 19.4% 1987 234.3 42 88.9 133.9 499.1 26.8% 46.9% 8.4% 17.8% 1988 276.5 41.8 52.6 150.5 521.4 28.9% 53.0% 8.0% 10.1% 1989 303.4 46.2 53.1 173.4 576.1 30.1% 52.7% 8.0% 9.2% 1990 306.9 47.4 60.9 168.9 584.1 28.9% 52.5% 8.1% 10.4% 1991 340.5 45.6 60.1 156.4 602.6 26.0% 56.5% 7.6% 10.0% 1992 366.2 46.9 62.2 151.9 627.2 24.2% 58.4% 7.5% 9.9% 1993 357.8 47.9 64.6 154.5 624.8 24.7% 57.3% 7.7% 10.3% 1994 350.6 49.2 65.9 157.4 623.1 25.3% 56.3% 7.9% 10.6% 1995 413.6 50.3 66.6 173.7 704.2 24.7% 58.7% 7.1% 9.5% 1996 429.7 50.9 70.6 167.6 718.8 23.3% 59.8% 7.1% 9.8% 1997 403.4 48.8 68 188.7 708.9 26.6% 56.9% 6.9% 9.6% 1998 413.9 47.6 69.6 192.3 723.4 26.6% 57.2% 6.6% 9.6% 1999 394.5 52.2 71.2 207.5 725.4 28.6% 54.4% 7.2% 9.8% 2000 310.7 46.5 62.8 217.9 637.9 34.2% 48.7% 7.3% 9.8% 2001 410 54 66.3 205.5 735.8 27.9% 55.7% 7.3% 9.0% 2002 411.4 52 60.2 209.4 733 28.6% 56.1% 7.1% 8.2% 2003 402.5 52.6 58.5 218.5 732.1 29.8% 55.0% 7.2% 8.0% 2004 389.9 55.9 63.4 266 775.2 34.3% 50.3% 7.2% 8.2% 2005 418.1 53.5 62.4 263.8 797.8 33.1% 52.4% 6.7% 7.8% 2006 353.7 59.6 67.6 265.9 746.8 35.6% 47.4% 8.0% 9.1% 2007 356.3 53.8 63.1 250.5 723.7 34.6% 49.2% 7.4% 8.7% 2008 318.1 54.3 63.3 215.1 650.8 33.1% 48.9% 8.3% 9.7% 2009 325.4 53.4 61 190.6 630.4 30.2% 51.6% 8.5% 9.7% 135 AEA End-use Study Conclusions end-use research in residential and non-residential buildings in the Railbelt, Southeast, and rural region. It also includes conclusions on the targeted indepen dent studies undertaken. Railbelt and Southeast Residential Energy Use The average residence in Railbelt and Southeast Alaska regions uses 269 MMBTUs in energy each year, for a total energy use of 59 million MMBTUs. This estimate is based on calculations of energy use on different types of residences in each of Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8. Mean energy use values for each residence type were applied to the total number of residences within each region, according to the 2010 US Census. Residents of Railbelt and Southeast Alaska use about 80% of their total energy (in MMBTUs) to heat their homes. The balance of the energy use is divided between hot water heating (12%) and the energy required to power electrical appliances (8%). The proportion of the energy dedicated to home heating increases with more northerly Climate Zones. Single family detached residences use more energy than other types of residences. Single family residences use 334 MMBTUs of energy each year. Single family attached homes are the second highest energy users, with 264 MMBTUs per year, followed by mobile homes (249) and multifamily residences (multifamily apartments and condominiums), which use 176 MMBTUs each year. Natural gas is the primary fuel for home heating in 64% of households in Railbelt and Southeast Alaska. Half (50%) of the homes in Southeast Alaska (Climate Zone 6) rely on oil as the primary heating fuel. Southcentral (Climate Zone 7) residences prefer natural gas (58%), while oil is the primary (66.7%) heating fuel in Climate Zone 8. Domestic hot water uses between 9% and 11% of energy in Railbelt and Southeast Alaskan homes. The most commonly used primary water heating fuel in Climate Zones 6 and 8 is electricity, where people in Climate Zone seven are evenly split be tween natural gas and electricity to generate domestic hot water. Electrical appliances use between 8% and 10% of all MMBTUs among respondent households in Railbelt and Southeast Alaska. Households in Southeast Alaska (Climate Zone 6) use slightly more energy (21.5 MMBTUs) than those in either Climate Zone 7 (22.9) or Climate Zone 8(22.5.) 136 The operation of major appliances such as refrigerators, freezers, washers and dryers is the largest single residential use of electrical energy in all the Climate Zone s within Railbelt and Southeast Alaska (24% of electrical energy). The next highest electrical energy use is in the production of domestic hot water (14%.) Primary cooking accounts for about 10% of all residential electrical energy use. Electrical energy used for information technology and entertainment devices account for another 17% of MMBTUs. Interior and exterior lighting account for only 6%. Mobile homes have the highest level of energy intensity (kBTU/sq ft/year) for space heating. Domestic hot water production and the operation of electrical appliances are also higher in mobile homes. Primary cooking is the second highest energy use for all fuel types at 26%. Railbelt and Southeast Non-residential Energy Use Based on average energy use by various non-residential building types, Railbelt and Southeast Alaska regions use over 29,974.000 MMBTUs of energy each year. This estimate is based on calculations of energy use in different types of non-residential buildings in each of Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8. Mean energy use values were applied to the total number of non -residential buildings within each region. It is important to estimate both the total energy use in MMBTUs and the energy intensity in kBTUs per square foot. The first measure shows the total amount of energy by building type. It allows for a general understanding of the distribution of end uses within each facility type. However, it does not account for the size of the facility. Measuring energy intensity resolves this problem by dividing the total energy use by the square foot of the building. It also provides a baseline measurement for energy use that can be applied more broadly to facilities of different sizes. Food service facilities have higher energy intensity than any other type of building in Climate Zones 6, 7 and 8. Healthcare facilities have the second highest intensity, about one half that of food service buildings. Most other building types used between 1300 and 3200 MMBTUs per year. However, when energy intensity is examined, buildings for retail sales and food service are the highest energy users at 640 and 520 kBTUs respectively. Lighting uses the largest proportion of energy (28%) in non-residential buildings in all three Climate Zones. The second-largest use is for laundry, with 26% of all MMBTUs. The third largest energy use is for heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) at 25%. 137 Lighting is the highest use of energy in retail buildings, using over half of all of the energy consumed in MMBTUs. The energy demands of lighting in retail spaces is also seen when analyzing energy use by kBTUs per square foot. While total non-residential energy use is higher in more northerly Climate Zones, it appears to be lower when energy intensity is measured. Total non-residential energy use in MMBTUs for Climate Zone 8 is almost 2 times higher than in Climate Zones 6 and 7. The trend is completely reversed, however, when total energy use is divided by the building square footage. Total energy intensity is about one-third less in Climate Zone 8 than in Climate Zone 6 or 7 Energy use in rural Alaska Bethel is estimated to use almost 1.3 million MMBTUs of energy per year. This is a combined total which includes residential, non-residential, water and wastewater and street lighting uses . Bethel may be representative of Alaskan homes and communities and other HUB communities in its energy use patterns. Oil is the primary heating fuel for Bethel residential use. Survey data showed that over 87% of Bethel homes use heating oil as their primary fuel source. The use of electricity as a primary heating source in Bethel is lower than the Southeast (Climate Zone 6) or the Railbelt region (Climate Zones 7 and 8). On average, Bethel residents use almost 250MMBTUs of energy each year in home heating , domestic hot water, and the operation of electrical appliances. Families living in multifamily residences use the most energy, while those living in mobile homes use the least amount of energy. Space heating uses 72% of all energy among Bethel residences. Hot water requires another 12% and the operation of electrical appliances uses 16% of all MMBTUs. Operating major appliances, including refrigerators, freezers, washers and dryers, uses 35% of all electrical energy in Bethel households. The second largest uses are primary cooking (17%) and entertainment (16%). Interior and exterior lighting together comprise only three percent of total energy use. Office buildings in Bethel use more energy and MMBTUs than any other type of facility. These buildings use, on average, just under 1400 MMBTUs of energy each year. Facilities for lodging and retail purposes are approximately equal at about 830 MMBTUs per year. Food service facilities have the highest energy intensity, at 335 kBTUs per square foot of any building type. All other facilities surveyed, including health care organizations, are one half or less that level of energy intensity. 138 Almost three quarters (72%) of all energy used by non-residential buildings in Bethel is used for heating, ventilation and air-conditioning. The next highest use is for lighting (9%), followed by food service, cooking and refrigeration (7%). Space heating is the dominant use of energy in all building types except food service buildings . Space heating energy requirements range between 65% and 85% of all MMBTUs. Buildings that focus on food service, as expected, use the largest portion of their energy in food service, cooking and refrigeration. The same pattern is seen when measuring energy intensity. Together, the three communities included in the rural study use about 107 MMBTUs of energy per year. Over half of this (53%) is residential energy use. About one third is non-residential use. Almost 90% of all energy used in the three communities is for space heating. All other uses, including the operation of major appliances, production of domestic hot water and primary cooking comprise the remaining 11% of all energy use in MMBTUs and in kBTUs per square foot. There are differences in the distribution of residential energy use between communities. While all three communities dedicate the largest portion of energy to home heating, some use more energy per square foot than other communities in heating, domestic hot water, primary cooking, major appliances and other kitchen equipment. Still other communities appear to use greater amounts of energy for entertainment and office equipment. These community differences should be acknowledged when generalizing this data to other small rural Alaskan communities. Non-residential heating requires more energy in MMBTUs (72%) than any other application. The production of hot water is second (12%), followed by the operation of interior and exterior lighting (11%). Rural Non-Residential community buildings Most (92%) of the almost 2000 rural non-residential buildings examined in this study are heated with fuel oil. Fuel delivery in rural Alaska can be to one large tank and service several buildings. This makes the measurement of fuel use by specific buildings difficult. The building surge in rural Alaska during the 1980s suggests that many of the facilities may have inadequate insulation and weatherization. Other parts of the state may have some older buildings that were constructed during eras where energy conservation and energy -efficient construction methods were not as well understood. This could be a benefit to rural Alaska. 139 Water and sewer facilities There does not appear to be adequate data to measure the amount of energy used to operate rural water and sewer utilities. ANTHC, ARUC units of local government and other sources were consulted in an effort to compile a realistic utility energy use database. Without available data, predictive models were developed to calculate energy use and to identify systems components which were using the most energy. The statistical model that was developed has undergone peer review. However, the model has not undergone the required field verification or calibration required to refine the results to reflect actual conditions in the field. Operating water and sewer utilities at higher temperatures than necessary or having inadequate utilidor insulation results in significantly higher utility systems costs. While basic water heating and water loop heat losses dominate the water and sewer energy requirement s, there is still room for improvement in adjusting utility operating temperatures to protect systems from freezing, enhance efficiency and reduce cost . Additionally, energy costs can be reduced by providing as much as six or more inches of additional insulation on existing aboveground utilidors. Energy Data is typically not immediately available to operational staff at water and sewer facilities, especially rural facilities. Typically, operations & engineering staff did not have immediate access to the data, or immediate knowledge of their consumption. The utilities are very helpful with providing consumption reports. Some facilities have ready access to the total spent on energy, but not actual consumption data. Street lighting Communities who participated in the study used over 3.5 million kWh of energy to generate over 500,000 lumens of street lighting. Data was collected from 117 communities across the state. Eighty-seven percent of the communities who received surveys returned them. Sixty -nine percent of the communities had less than 1000 residents. High pressure sodium fixtures are clearly the most commonly used street lighting technology . These instruments use 75% of all electrical power and generate about 91% of all light produced by streetlights. These fixtures are seen as the most efficient way of lighting public spaces. Smaller communities are using more incandescent street lighting instruments than larger communities. They often use security lighting at individual residences rather than street lighting. There appears to be more interest among communities in switching to LED street lighting technology. However, the Department of Transportation and public facilities is unable to convert to LED lighting because those technologies do not meet FA A regulations. Most of the 140 communities that have switched to LED street lighting have a population between 100 and 10,000. Larger municipalities and cities have not yet converted. In addition, many of the communities currently using LED lighting technology were able to switch by using grant or other funding assistance. Energy Use Trends by Sector Industrial energy use comprises about half of all energy used in Alaska. The transportation sector l sectors each use about 10% of Alaska's energy. Therefore, the baseline data collected in this study comprises information on Statewide Energy use in Alaska appears to be declining . However, declines in energy use in the industrial and transportation sectors are more pronounced than changes in the residential or commercial sectors. The reasons for this decline is beyond the scope of this study. The interpretation of changes in energy use may benefit from the use of denominators. For example, using population as the denominator for residential energy use might give a more appropriate and defensible number for use in long-term energy use forecasts. Similarly, using total state economic output as a denominator for industrial energy use may help to better explain changes in long-term use and result in more reasonable forecasts. AEA should be cautious in selecting the time period that it will use in developing forecasts . Clearly, the use of all available data yields a far different forecast than one which relies on the last 10 years of available data. Methods ARIS (from AkWarm© energy raters) was supplemented with survey data to provide a comprehensive picture of residential energy use. Although the results of the baseline study have yet to be independently verified, this appears to be a reasonable and efficient way of compiling baseline energy use data. Survey research, combined with an on-site methodology, appears to be an effective way of collecting end-use energy data. A mix of telephone surveys and web based applications were supplemented by on-site data collection to produce a complete baseline end-use data set. However, the data collection costs are high. This resulted in some compromises in the representativeness of the data (margin of error). Energy Wise energy use data appears to a promising source of energy end-use characteristics in rural Alaskan communities. Energy Wise data (N= 212, mean = 108.60) was compared with similar information collected by AkWarm© energy raters (N=512, mean = 116.60) to check the 141 accuracy of fuel use estimates. Total MMBTU home heating calculations showed no significant difference (t=1.421, p=.156). However, additional research should be conducted to assure its reliability. The State should carefully examine this baseline data to determine which variables are likely candidates to be included in a performance measurement system of overall statewide energy use. Collecting energy data of this scope and complexity is an expensive and time-consuming undertaking. Among its many uses is the measurement of the extent to which Alaska has met its statutory target of a 15% improvement in energy efficiency by the year 202 0. This suggests an ongoing procedure for measuring energy use is required. Such a performance measurement system would likely collect data on a number of critical energy use variables, at the least, annually. This data could be recalibrated every few years, similar to the US Census, which recalibrates population data every 10 years. The data collection responsibilities for this end-use energy performance measurement system should be assigned to an operating unit of state government and data should be routinely collected and analyzed.