Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
AHTNA-Z93-CAEC CRSD Glennallen School 2012-EE
Glennallen School 1976 Aurora Drive Glennallen, Alaska 99588 AkWarm ID No. AHTNA-Z93-CAEC-04 Submitted by: Central Alaska Engineering Company Contact: Jerry P. Herring, P.E., C.E.A. 32215 Lakefront Drive Soldotna, Alaska 99669 Phone (907) 260-5311 akengineer@starband.net June 14, 2012 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE i OF iv CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE ii OF iv CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE iii OF iv AEE ...................................................................................................................... Association of Energy Engineers AHFC ........................................................................................................... Alaska Housing Finance Corporation AHU .............................................................................................................................................. Air Handling Unit ARIS ............................................................................................................... Alaska Retrofit Information System ARRA .................................................................................................. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ASHRAE .................................. American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers BPO .................................................................................................................................... Building Plant Operator BTU ......................................................................................................................................... British Thermal Unit CAEC ......................................................................................................... Central Alaska Engineering Company CCF .................................................................................................................................... Hundreds of Cubic Feet CFL ......................................................................................................................................... Compact Fluorescent CFM ...................................................................................................................................... Cubic Feet per Minute CRSD .......................................................................................................................... Copper River School District DDC ........................................................................................................................................ Direct Digital Control deg F ........................................................................................................................................... Degrees Fahrenheit DHW ........................................................................................................................................ Domestic Hot Water ECI .............................................................................................................................................. Energy Cost Index EEM .............................................................................................................................. Energy Efficiency Measure EMCS ........................................................................................................... Energy Management Control System EPA ................................................................................................................... Environmental Protection Agency EUI .................................................................................................................................... Energy Utilization Index hr(s) ................................................................................................................................................................ Hour(s) HP ........................................................................................................................................................... Horsepower HPS ........................................................................................................................................ High Pressure Sodium H&V ................................................................................................................................... Heating and Ventilation IES ....................................................................................................................... Illuminating Engineering Society IGA ..................................................................................................................................... Investment Grade Audit kBtu ................................................................................................................ Thousands of British Thermal Units kWh .................................................................................................................................................... Kilowatt Hour LED ......................................................................................................................................... Light Emitting Diode ORNL .................................................................................................................... Oak Ridge National Laboratory sf ............................................................................................................................................................... Square Feet SIR ............................................................................................................................... Savings to Investment Ratio SP ...................................................................................................................................................... Simple Payback W ....................................................................................................................................................................... Watts CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE iv OF iv REPORT DISCLAIMER This Investment Grade Audit (IGA) was performed using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds, managed by Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). IGA’s are the property of the State of Alaska, and may be incorporated into AkWarm-C, the Alaska Retrofit Information System (ARIS), or other state and/or public information systems. AkWarm-C is a building energy modeling software developed under contract by AHFC. This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE- EE0000095. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. This energy audit is intended to identify and recommend potential areas of energy savings, estimate the value of the savings and approximate the costs to implement the recommendations. Any modifications or changes made to a building to realize the savings must be designed and implemented by licensed, experienced professionals in their fields. Lighting recommendations should all be first analyzed through a thorough lighting analysis to assure that the recommended lighting upgrades will comply with State of Alaska Statute as well as Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) recommendations. Central Alaska Engineering Company bears no responsibility for work performed as a result of this report. Payback periods may vary from those forecasted due to the uncertainty of the final installed design, configuration, equipment selected, and installation costs of recommended Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs), or the operating schedules and maintenance provided by the owner. Furthermore, EEMs are typically interactive, so implementation of one EEM may impact the cost savings from another EEM. Neither the auditor, Central Alaska Engineering Company, AHFC, nor any other party involved in preparation of this report accepts liability for financial loss due to EEMs that fail to meet the forecasted payback periods. This energy audit meets the criteria of a Level 2 IGA per the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). The life of the IGA may be extended on a case- by-case basis, at the discretion of AHFC. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 1 OF 28 This report presents the findings of an investment grade energy audit conducted for: Copper River School District Contact: Ryan Radford PO Box 108 Glennallen, AK 99588 Email: rradford@crsd.us Alaska Housing Finance Corporation Contact: Rebekah Luhrs 4300 Boniface Parkway Anchorage, AK 99510 Email: rluhrs@ahfc.us This audit was performed using ARRA funds to promote the use of innovation and technology to solve energy and environmental problems in a way that improves the State’s economy. This can be achieved through the wiser and more efficient use of energy. The purpose of the energy audit is to identify cost-effective system and facility modifications, adjustments, alterations, additions and retrofits. Systems investigated during the audit included heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), interior and exterior lighting, motors, building envelope, and energy management control systems (EMCS). The January 2010 – December 2011 average annual utility costs at this facility are as follows: Electricity $ 141,166 Fuel Oil $ 155,493 Total $ 296,659 Energy Utilization Index: 112.1 kBtu/sf Energy Cost Index: 3.80 $/sf Energy Use per Occupant: 29.4 MMBtu per Occupant Energy Cost per Occupant: $995 per Occupant The potential annual energy savings are shown on the following page in Table 1.1 which summarizes the Energy Efficiency Measures (EEM’s) analyzed for Glennallen School. Listed are the estimates of the annual savings, installed cost, and two different financial measures of return on investment. Be aware that the measures are not cumulative because of the interrelation of several of the measures. The cost of each measure for this level of auditing is considered to be + 30% until further detailed engineering, specifications, and hard proposals are obtained. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 2 OF 28 Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings (w/Maint. Savings) Installed Cost1 Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR2 Simple Payback (w/Maint. Savings)3 1 Setback Thermostat: High School Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the High School space. $3,382 $10,000 4.59 3.0 2 Setback Thermostat: Gymnasium Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gymnasium space. $2,987 $10,000 4.06 3.3 3 Setback Thermostat: Entrance/Aud itorium Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Entrance/Auditorium space. $2,820 $10,000 3.83 3.5 4 HVAC And DHW Install premium efficiency motors (9 @ $3,500 each = $31,500). Implement a reduced run time scheme through DDC controls for motors and DHW to reduce heat wasted during unoccupied hours ($1,500 per pump = $13,500). Remove and replace oil-fired water heater with a side-arm water maker. ($4,000 for new unit with install, $2,000 for removal) $10,715 ($500) $51,000 3.50 4.8 (4.6) 5 Lighting - Power Retrofit: Misc. Incandescent Replace with 19 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 20W $421 $1,900 2.60 4.5 6 Setback Thermostat: Elementary School Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Elementary School space. $1,836 $10,000 2.49 5.3 7 Lighting - Power Retrofit: Entry Incandescent Replace with 11 FLUOR CFL, Spiral 26 W $191 $1,100 1.86 5.7 8 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: Voc Ed building lights Replace with 50 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $3,597 ($5,000) $69,600 1.46 19.3 (8.1) CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 3 OF 28 Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings (w/Maint. Savings) Installed Cost1 Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR2 Simple Payback (w/Maint. Savings)3 9 Ventilation Refine operating schedule of ventilation system through DDC controls. Incorporate the use of CO2 sensors to optimize performance. (Assumes $1500 per AHU (8), $1000 per EF (12)). DDC Control refinement should allow the currently installed VFDs to run below 100% capacity. Install variable frequency drives to adjust fan motor HP and CFM (6 units @ $3,000 each = $18,000, $2,000 installation per unit = $12,000). Install premium efficiency motors (4 @ $2,000 each = $8,000). $5,533 $62,000 1.36 11.2 10 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 6 bulb T-5 HO High school Replace with 20 FLUOR (6) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Standard StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,016 $4,800 1.31 4.7 11 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: Exterior HPS Pole Mounted Replace with 6 LED 150W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,507 ($600) $26,400 0.94 17.5 (12.5) 12 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 2 bulb T-12 U- tube Replace with 30 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U-Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $953 ($300) $17,350 0.85 18.2 (13.8) 13 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: Exterior HPS 150 W Replace with 20 LED 50W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $2,107 ($1,000) $48,000 0.76 22.8 (15.4) 14 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: Exterior HPS 70 W Replace with 12 LED 25W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $649 ($600) $19,200 0.69 29.6 (15.4) 15 Other Electrical - Controls Retrofit: Roof Drain Heat Traces Add new Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control $147 $3,000 0.57 20.5 16 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 3 bulb T-8 Replace with 306 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $4,923 ($3,060) $172,650 0.55 35.1 (21.6) 17 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 2 bulb T-8 Replace with 35 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $379 ($350) $19,175 0.45 50.6 (26.3) CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 4 OF 28 Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings (w/Maint. Savings) Installed Cost1 Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR2 Simple Payback (w/Maint. Savings)3 18 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 2 bulb T-8 U- tube Replace with 80 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U-Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $759 ($800) $44,400 0.42 58.5 (28.5) 19 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 1 bulb T-8 Replace with 24 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $134 ($240) $13,400 0.33 99.9 (35.8) 20 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 4 bulb T-8 Replace with 10 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit $49 ($100) $5,250 0.33 106.3 (35.2) TOTAL, all measures $44,105 ($12,550) $599,225 1.25 13.6 (10.5) Table Notes: 1. Cost estimates were generated using the Program Demand Cost Model for Alaskan Schools, 12th Edition, Updated 2011, developed for the State of Alaska DOE, Education Support Services/Facilities. Renovations Projects Manual provides information on school renovation costs. Upon developing a final scope of work for an upgrade with detailed engineering completed, detailed savings and benefits can then be better determined. Some of the EEM’s should be completed when equipment meets the burn-out phase and is required to be replaced and in some cases will take significant investment to achieve. 2. Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) is a life-cycle cost measure calculated by dividing the total savings over the life of a project (expressed in today’s dollars) by its investment costs. The SIR is an indication of the profitability of a measure; the higher the SIR, the more profitable the project. An SIR greater than 1.0 indicates a cost-effective project (i.e. more savings than cost). Remember that this profitability is based on the position of that Energy Efficiency Measure (EEM) in the overall list and assumes that the measures above it are implemented first. 3. Simple Payback (SP) is a measure of the length of time required for the savings from an EEM to payback the investment cost, not counting interest on the investment and any future changes in energy prices. It is calculated by dividing the investment cost by the expected first-year savings of the EEM. With all of these energy efficiency measures in place, the annual utility cost can be reduced by $44,105 per year, or 13.8% of the buildings’ total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $599,225, for an overall simple payback period of 13.6 years. If only the cost-effective measures are implemented (i.e. SIR > 1.0), the annual utility cost can be reduced by $32,499 per year, or 10.2% of the buildings’ total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $230,400, for an overall simple payback period of 7.1 years. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 5 OF 28 Table 1.2 below is a breakdown of the annual energy cost across various energy end use types, such as Space Heating and Water Heating. The first row in the table shows the breakdown for the building as it is now. The second row shows the expected breakdown of energy cost for the building assuming all of the retrofits in this report are implemented. Finally, the last row shows the annual energy savings that will be achieved from the retrofits. Description Space Heating Water Heating Lighting Refrigeration Other Electrical Ventilation Fans Total Cost Existing Building $192,333 $15,327 $47,570 $2,519 $33,728 $28,340 $319,819 With All Proposed Retrofits $173,783 $11,009 $30,750 $2,519 $33,582 $24,071 $275,714 SAVINGS $18,550 $4,319 $16,820 $0 $147 $4,270 $44,105 While the intent of many Energy Efficiency Measures is to increase the efficiency of fuel-burning and electrical equipment, an important factor of energy consumption lies in the operational profiles which control the equipment usage. Such profiles can be managed by administrative controls and departmental leadership. They determine how and when equipment is used, and therefore have a greater impact on energy savings potential than simple equipment upgrades alone. Significant energy cost savings can be realized when EEMs are combined with efficient minded operational profiles. Operational profiles may be outlined by organization policy or developed naturally or historically. These profiles include, but are not limited to; operating schedules, equipment set-points and control strategies, maintenance schedules, and site and equipment selection. Optimization of operational profiles can be accomplished by numerous methods so long as the intent is reduction in energy-using equipment runtime. Due to the numerous methods of optimization, energy cost savings solely as a result of operational optimization are difficult to predict. Quantification, however, is easy to accomplish by metering energy usage during and/or after implementation of energy saving operational profiles and EEMs. Optimization of site selection includes scheduling and location of events. If several buildings in a given area are all lightly used after regularly occupied hours, energy savings can be found when after-hour events are consolidated and held within the most energy efficient buildings available for use. As a result, unoccupied buildings could be shut-down to the greatest extent possible to reduce energy consumption. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 6 OF 28 Operational behaviors which can be combined with equipment upgrades are operating schedules and equipment control strategies including set-points. Occupancy and daylight sensors can be programmed to automatically shut-off or dim lighting when rooms are unoccupied or sufficiently lit from the sun. Operating schedules can be optimized to run equipment only during regular or high-occupancy periods. Also, through a central control system, or with digital programmable thermostats, temperature set-points can be reduced during low-occupancy hours to maximize savings. In addition, domestic hot water circulation systems and sporadically used equipment can be shut-down during unoccupied hours to further save energy. In general, having equipment operating in areas where no occupants are present is inefficient, and presents an opportunity for energy savings. Operational profiles can also be implemented to take advantage of no or low cost EEMs. Examples include heating system optimizations (boiler section cleaning, boiler flush-through cleaning, and completing preventative maintenance on outside air damper and temperature reset systems) and tighter controls of equipment set-backs and shut-downs (unoccupied zones equipment shut-down, easier access to and finer control of equipment for after-hours control). In a large facility management program, implementation of these measures across many or all sites will realize dramatic savings due to the quantity of equipment involved. Changes to building operational profiles can only be realized while simultaneously addressing health, safety, user comfort, and user requirements first. It is impractical to expect users to occupy a building or implement operational behaviors which do not meet such considerations. That said, it is quite practical for management groups to implement administrative controls which reduce losses brought about by excess and sub-optimum usage. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 7 OF 28 This comprehensive energy audit covers the 78,073 square foot Glennallen School, depicted below in Figure 2.1, including classrooms, restrooms, two gymnasiums, a theater, and administrative offices. Utility information was collected and analyzed for two years of energy use by the building. This information was used to analyze operational characteristics, calculate energy benchmarks for comparison to industry averages, estimate savings potential and establish a baseline to monitor the effectiveness of implemented measures. An excel spreadsheet was used to enter, sum, and calculate benchmarks and to graph energy use information (refer to Appendix A for the Benchmark Report). The Annual Energy Utilization Index (EUI) is expressed in Thousands of British Thermal Units/Square Foot (kBtu/sf) and can be used to compare energy consumption to similar building types or to track consumption from year to year in the same building. The EUI is calculated by converting annual consumption of all fuels used to Btu’s then dividing by the area (gross conditioned square footage) of the building. EUI is a good indicator of the relative potential for energy savings. A comparatively low EUI indicates less potential for large energy savings. Building architectural drawings were utilized to calculate and verify the gross area of the facility. The gross area was confirmed on the physical site investigation. Refer to Section 6.0 of this report for additional details on EUI issues. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 8 OF 28 After gathering the utility data and calculating the EUI, the next step in the audit process was to review the drawings to develop a building profile which documented the building age, type, usage, and major energy consuming equipment or systems such as lighting, heating and ventilation (H&V), domestic hot water heating, refrigeration, etc. The building profile is utilized to generate, and answer, possible questions regarding the facility’s energy usage. These questions were then compared to the energy usage profiles developed during the utility data gathering step. After this information is gathered, the next step in the process is the physical site investigation (site visit). The site visit was completed on May 8, 2011 and was spent inspecting the actual systems and answering specific questions from the preliminary review. Occupancy schedules, O&M practices, building energy management program, and other information that has an impact on energy consumption were obtained. Photos of the major equipment and building construction were taken during the site visit. Several of the site photos are included in this report as Appendix D. Additionally during the site visit, thermal images of the building’s exterior were taken. These thermal images illustrate heat loss exhibited by the school. Several of the thermal images are included in this report as Appendix E. The post-site work includes evaluation of the information gathered during the site visits, developing the AkWarm-C Energy Model for the building, researching possible conservation opportunities, organizing the audit into a comprehensive report, and making recommendations on mechanical, electrical and building envelope improvements. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 9 OF 28 Central Alaska Engineering Company (CAEC) began the site survey after completing the preliminary audit tasks noted in Section 2.0. The site survey provided critical input in deciphering where energy opportunities exist within the facility. The audit team walked the entire site to inventory the building envelope (roof, walls, windows and doors, etc.), the major equipment including HVAC, water heating, lighting, and equipment in kitchens, offices, classrooms, gymnasium and the voc-ed building. The site survey was used to determine an understanding of how the equipment is used. The collected data was entered into the AkWarm-C Commercial© Software (AkWarm-C), a building energy modeling program developed for Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). The data was processed by AkWarm-C to model a baseline from which energy efficiency measures (EEMs) could be considered. The model was compared to actual utility costs to ensure the quality of baseline and proposed energy modeling performed by AkWarm-C. The recommended EEMs focus on the building envelope, HVAC systems, water heating, lighting, and other electrical improvements that will reduce annual energy consumption. EEMs are evaluated based on building use and processes, local climate conditions, building construction type, function, operational schedule, existing conditions, and foreseen future plans. Energy savings are calculated based on industry standard methods and engineering estimations. When new equipment is proposed, energy consumption is calculated based on the manufacturer’s information where possible. Energy savings are calculated by AkWarm-C. Implementation of more than one EEM often affects the savings of other EEMs. The savings may in some cases be relatively higher if an individual EEM is implemented in lieu of multiple recommended EEMs. For example, implementing reduced operating schedule for specific inefficient lighting systems will result in a greater relative savings than merely replacing fixtures and bulbs. Implementing reduced operating schedules for newly installed efficient lighting will result in a lower relative savings, because there is less energy to be saved. If multiple EEM’s are recommended to be implemented, the combined savings is calculated and identified appropriately. Cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy costs for the building. Cost estimates were generated using the Program Demand Cost Model for Alaskan Schools, 12th Edition, Updated 2011, developed for the State of Alaska DOE, Education Support Services/Facilities. Renovations Projects Manual provides information on school renovation costs. The Geographic Area Cost Factor dated April 2011 for the Copper River area has an index of 113.9 and was used in this report. Installation costs include design, labor, equipment, overhead and profit for school renovation projects and used to evaluate the initial investment required to implement an EEM. These are applied to each recommendation with simple paybacks calculated. In addition, where applicable, maintenance cost savings are estimated and applied to the net savings. The costs and savings are applied and a Simple Payback (SP) and Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) are calculated. These are listed in Section 7.0 and summarized in Table 1.1 of this report. The SP is based on the years that it takes for the net savings to payback the net installation cost (Cost divided by Savings). The SIR is calculated as a ratio by dividing the break even cost by the initial installed cost. The lifetime for each EEM is estimated based on the typical life of the equipment being replaced or altered. The energy savings is extrapolated throughout the lifetime of the EEM. The total energy savings is calculated as the total lifetime multiplied by the yearly savings. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 10 OF 28 The analysis provides a number of tools for assessing the cost effectiveness of various improvement options. These tools utilize Life-Cycle Costing, which is defined in this context as a method of cost analysis that estimates the total cost of a project over the period of time that includes both the construction cost and ongoing maintenance and operating costs. Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) = Savings divided by Investment Savings includes the total discounted dollar savings considered over the life of the improvement. When these savings are added up, changes in future fuel prices (usually inflationary) as projected by the Alaska Department of Energy are included in the model. Future savings are discounted to the present to account for the time-value of money (i.e. money’s ability to earn interest over time). The Investment in the SIR calculation includes the labor and materials required to install the measure. An SIR value of at least 1.0 indicates that the project is cost-effective - total savings exceed the investment costs. Simple payback is a cost analysis method whereby the investment cost of a project is divided by the first year’s savings of the project to give the number of years required to recover the cost of the investment. This may be compared to the expected time before replacement of the system or component will be required. For example, if a boiler costs $50,000 and results in a savings of $5,000 a year, the payback time is 10 years. If the boiler has an expected life to replacement of 20 years, it would be financially viable to make the investment since the payback period of 10 years is less than the project life. The Simple Payback calculation does not consider likely increases in future annual savings due to energy price increases. As an offsetting simplification, Simple Payback does not consider the need to earn interest on the investment (i.e. it does not consider the time-value of money). Because of these simplifications, the SIR figure is considered to be a better financial investment indicator than the Simple Payback measure. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 11 OF 28 All results are dependent on the quality of input data provided. In this case, the site investigation was limited to observable conditions. No testing or destructive investigations were undertaken. Although energy-conserving methods are described in the EEMs, in some instances several methods may also achieve the identified savings. Detailed engineering is required in order to develop the EEMs to a realizable project. This audit and report are thus intended to offer approximations of the results achievable by the listed improvements. This report is not intended to be a final design document. The design professional or other persons following the recommendations shall accept responsibility and liability for the results. An accurate model of the building performance can be created by simulating the thermal performance of the walls, roof, windows and floors of the building. The HVAC system and central plant are modeled as well, accounting for the outside air ventilation required by the building and the heat recovery equipment in place. The model uses local weather data and is trued up to historical energy use to ensure its accuracy. The model can be used now and in the future to measure the utility bill impact of all types of energy projects, including improving building insulation, modifying glazing, changing air handler schedules, increasing heat recovery, installing high efficiency boilers, using variable air volume air handlers, adjusting outside air ventilation and adding cogeneration systems. For the purposes of this study, Glennallen School was modeled using AkWarm-C energy use software to establish a baseline space heating and cooling energy usage. Climate data from Glennallen, Alaska was used for analysis. From this, the model was be calibrated to predict the impact of theoretical energy savings measures. Once annual energy savings from a particular measure were predicted and the initial capital cost was estimated, payback scenarios were approximated. Project cost estimates are provided in the Section 7.0 of this report reviewing the Energy Efficiency Measures. Limitations of the AkWarm-C Commercial© Software are reviewed in this section. The AkWarm-C model is based on typical mean year weather data for Glennallen, Alaska. This data represents the average ambient weather profile as observed over approximately 30 years. As such, the fuel oil and electric profiles generated will not likely compare perfectly with actual energy billing information from any single year. This is especially true for years with extreme warm or cold periods, or even years with unexpectedly moderate weather. The heating and cooling load model is a simple two-zone model consisting of the building’s core interior spaces and the building’s perimeter spaces. This simplified approach loses accuracy for buildings that have large variations in cooling/heating loads across different parts of the building. AkWarm-C does not model HVAC systems that simultaneously provide both heating and cooling to the same building space (typically done as a means of providing temperature control in the space). The energy balances shown were derived from the output generated by the AkWarm-C simulations. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 12 OF 28 The structure of Glennallen School was originally a one story facility that was built in 1975 as a standalone gymnasium. This building has had four (4) additions made to it, adding more classroom space, a theater, and an elementary school with a small gymnasium and kitchen facility. From the audit, it was determined to be a well built and functional school facility. The school typically opens at 6AM by staff with faculty and student occupancy from 7AM to 4PM during the weekdays. Additional occupancy time keeping the school open late or on weekends occurs occasionally with community and rental activities. There are an estimated 298 full time students, faculty, and staff occupants using the building. The insulation values and conditions were modeled using the data provided in the architectural drawings. No destructive testing was completed for the audit to verify insulation type and quality. The following are the assumptions made for the AkWarm-C building model: Exterior walls of the building have double paned, vinyl framed windows in place which have an estimated U-factor of 0.45 to 0.50 Btu/hr-sf-F. All of these windows appear to be in acceptable condition. All doors on this building are commercial grade, insulated and metal framed that are either windowed or solid. The doors appear to be in adequate condition, but could use additional weather stripping installed. This school is built on pilings with an insulated floor. Floor insulation consists of 12-inches of blown cellulose in the high school portion, while the elementary portion uses R-38 fiberglass batt. The above grade walls of the school use 6-inch studs filled with fiberglass batt insulation. This gives an estimated composite R-value of R- 18 throughout the school. Wall height varies from 25-feet to 38-feet, depending on location. The different wall constructions can be noted in the IR images provided in Appendix E of this report. The roof system of the elementary school is a sloped cathedral ceiling insulated with fiberglass batt insulation for an estimated R-31 composite value. The roof of the high school portion is of similar construction, using fiberglass batt insulation for an estimated R-31 composite value. The majority of the roof is covered with corrugated metal roofing. The roof of the elementary school gymnasium is covered with a durable moisture barrier over the insulation. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 13 OF 28 The building is heated by six (6) fuel oil-fired cast iron boilers which were installed at different times during the construction of the building. The high school boilers are located in the building’s eastern mechanical room which is large in size and neatly configured. The elementary school boilers are located in the northwest mechanical room which is small in size, but neatly configured. The hydronic heating system is circulated throughout the building by circulation pumps located in both mechanical rooms. Heat is provided to the Air Handling Units (AHUs) and unit heaters through the various building hydronic loops. This building has a DDC control systems in place with end devices using electronic controls. The heating plants used in the building are described as follows: Boiler’s 1, 2, & 3 Fuel Type: Fuel Oil Input Rating: 686,000 Btu/hr (4.9 Gallons/hr) Rated Efficiency: 82 % (estimated) Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic, Glycol Boiler Operation: All Year Boiler 4 Fuel Type: Fuel Oil Input Rating: 812,000 Btu/hr (5.8 Gallons/hr) Rated Efficiency: 82 % (estimated) Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic, Glycol Boiler Operation: All Year Boiler’s 5 & 6 Fuel Type: Fuel Oil Input Rating: 3,010,000 Btu/hr (21.5 Gallons/hr) Rated Efficiency: 85 % (estimated) Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic, Glycol Boiler Operation: All Year CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 14 OF 28 Domestic Hot Water (DHW) is supplied by two (2) indirect fired storage hot water makers and one oil fired storage water heater. DHW is circulated 24/7 around the building and supplies hot water to the showers, restrooms, kitchen, and the various sinks in the building. The indirect fired hot water makers are located in the northernmost mechanical rooms, near the kitchen. The oil fired water heater is located in the high school boiler room. Storage Water Heaters 1 & 2 Fuel Type: Side-arm, shell and tube exchanger Input Rating: 500,000 Btu/hr (estimated) Rated Efficiency: 74 % (estimated) Heat Distribution Type: Circulation 24/7 DHW Maker Operation: All Year Oil Fired Water Heater 1 Fuel Type: Fuel oil, Storage Input Rating: 623,000 Btu/hr (estimated) Rated Efficiency: 75 % (estimated) Heat Distribution Type: Circulation 24/7 DHW Maker Operation: All Year There are eight (8) AHUs located inside of the building providing ventilation to the building. These AHUs use electronically controlled end devices, controlled by the DDC system. Three (3) of the AHUs in the school have variable frequency drives (VFDs) installed, and were running near 55% motor capacity during the audit. Outside air is drawn into the building primarily through these AHUs. Excess air is removed from the building with the use of various exhaust fans and pressure relief dampers located throughout the facility. The International Mechanical Code for this application requires the building to bring in a calculated value of 27,325 CFM of outdoor air (minimum design for classroom space specifies 35 occupants/1,000 sf @ 10 CFM/occupant for the 78,073 sf school = 27,325 CFM). The capacity of the exhaust fans equal 13,350 CFM, indicating the school is over-ventilated at 44.8 CFM/occupant, assuming the exhaust system is operated per design capacity at current occupant level of 298 during school hours. The outdoor air should never be provided at less than 10 CFM/occupant to be code compliant. However, a reduced rate of outside air down to 10 CFM/occupant on average is an achievable goal with improved operation of VFD controllers and improved demand control response. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 15 OF 28 There are several types of light systems throughout the building. The majority of the building uses T8 lights. The elementary school gym lighting system uses T5 HO fluorescent lights to accomplish illumination, including the use of occupancy sensors. The high school gym also uses a T5 HO fluorescent light system, though these lights were not controlled with occupancy sensors. The T8 lighting systems remaining in the building were evaluated for replacement to new Energy-Saver T8, programmable start electronic ballast and occupancy sensor based controls. The High Pressure Sodium (HPS) lights mounted on the outside of the building are also good candidates for replacement. There have been recent advances in LED technology making it a viable option to replace the HPS systems. Several EEM’s are provided in this report reviewing the lighting system upgrade recommendations. There are several large plug loads throughout the building. This includes the commercial kitchen equipment, computers, monitors, copy machine, refrigerators, microwave ovens, coffee pots and shop equipment. These building plug loads are estimated in the AkWarm-C modeling program at 0.8 Watts/sf. Following the completion of the field survey a detailed building major equipment inventory was created and is attached as Appendix C. The equipment listed is considered to be the major energy consuming items in the building whose replacement or upgrade could yield substantial energy savings. An approximate age was assigned to the equipment if a manufactured date was not shown on the equipment’s nameplate. As listed in the 2011 ASHRAE Handbook for HVAC Applications, Chapter 37, Table 4, the service life for the equipment along with the remaining useful life in accordance to the ASHRAE standard are also noted in the equipment list. Where there are zero (0) years remaining in the estimated useful life of a piece of equipment, this is an indication that maintenance costs are likely on the rise and more efficient replacement equipment is available which will lower the operating costs of the unit. Maintenance costs should also fall with the replacement. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 16 OF 28 Tables provided in Appendix A, Energy Benchmark Data Report, represent the electric and fuel oil energy usage for the surveyed facility from January 2010 to December 2011. Copper Valley Electric Association supplies electricity under their large commercial rate schedules. Fuel Oil was being provided by Fisher Fuels under their commercial rate schedule. The electric utility bills for consumption in kilowatt-hours (kWh) and for maximum demand in kilowatts (kW). One kilowatt-hour is equivalent to 3,413 Btu’s. The consumption (kWh) is determined as the wattage times the hours it is running. For example, 1,000 watts running for one hour, or 500 watts running for two hours is a kWh. The maximum demand is simply the sum of all electrical devices on simultaneously. For example, ten, 100 watt lights running simultaneously would create a demand of 1,000 watts (1 kW). Demand is averaged over a rolling window, usually 15 minutes. Thus, the facility must be concerned not only with basic electricity usage (consumption) but also the rate at which it gets used. The basic usage charges are shown as generation service and delivery charges along with several non-utility generation charges. Identify your school’s major equipment, know when it is used and work with staff to adjust time and duration of use. Also, consider using smart thermostats, relays, timers, on/off switches, and circuit breakers to shut down non-essential equipment and lights before starting equipment which draws a large amount of power. Relays or timers can prevent two large loads from being on at the same time. Peak demand can be best managed if first understood when it occurs. Know your school’s peak months, days and hours. Billing information can be used to acquire your benchmark data on the demand load and cost for the school building. Demand costs can be managed by scheduling times of the day when your electric usage is lowest to run equipment that uses the most power. You may want to pay special attention to equipment such as pumps, electric water heaters, 5-horsepower and larger motors, electric heat and commercial appliances. Most equipment has an identification tag or nameplate that lists the kW, or demand. Some tags may only list the amperage (amps and voltage the equipment uses). You can still use this information to figure the approximate usage rate in kilowatts. Multiply amps by volts and divide by 1,000 to get kilowatts. To help manage demand load and cost, install a special meter that records 15 minute load profile information, allowing you to view the electric power consumption over time. This data can help in determining when the peak loads occur. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 17 OF 28 The fuel oil usage profile shows the predicted fuel oil energy usage for the building. As actual oil usage records were available, the model used to predict usage was calibrated to approximately match actual usage. Fuel oil is sold to the customer in units of a gallon (GAL), which contains approximately 140,000 BTUs of energy. The average billing rates for energy use are calculated by dividing the total cost by the total usage. Based on the electric and fuel oil utility data provided, the 2010 through 2011 costs for the energy and consumption at the surveyed facility are summarized in Table 6.1 below. 2010 2011 Average Electric 0.24 $/kWh 0.27 $/kWh 0.26 $/kWh Fuel Oil 3.04 $/GAL 3.38 $/GAL 3.21 $/GAL Total Cost $265,101 $328,215 $296,658 ECI 3.40 $/sf 4.20 $/sf 3.80 $/sf Electric EUI 23.1 kBtu/sf 25.2 kBtu/sf 24.2 kBtu/sf Fuel Oil EUI 88.6 kBtu/sf 87.3 kBtu/sf 88.0 kBtu/sf Building EUI 111.7 kBtu/sf 112.4 kBtu/sf 112.1 kBtu/sf Data from the U.S.A. Energy Information Administration provides information for U.S.A. Commercial Buildings Energy Intensity Using Site Energy by Census Region. In 2003, the U.S.A. average energy usage for Education building activity is shown to be 83.0 kBtu/sf. For reference, data from the ARRA funded utility benchmark survey for the subject fiscal years completed on 84 schools in the Anchorage School District computed an average EUI of 106.5 kBtu/sf, and ECI of 1.77 $/sf, with an average building size of 86,356 square feet. Over the analyzed period, the surveyed facility was calculated to have an estimated EUI of 112.1 kBtu/sf. This means the surveyed facility uses a total of 35.1% more energy than the US average and only 5.3% more energy than the Anchorage School District average on a per square foot basis. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 18 OF 28 At current utility rates, the Copper River School District is modeled to pay approximately $319,819 annually for electricity and other fuel costs for the Glennallen School. Figure 6.1 below reflects the estimated distribution of costs across the primary end uses of energy based on the AkWarm-C computer simulation. Comparing the “Retrofit” bar in the figure to the “Existing” bar shows the potential savings from implementing all of the energy efficiency measures shown in this report. Figure 6.2 below shows how the annual energy cost of the building splits between the different fuels used by the building. The “Existing” bar shows the breakdown for the building as it is now; the “Retrofit” bar shows the predicted costs if all of the energy efficiency measures in this report are implemented. $0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 Existing Retrofit Ventilation and Fans Space Heating Refrigeration Other Electrical Lighting Domestic Hot Water Annual Energy Costs by End Use CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 19 OF 28 Figure 6.3 below addresses only Space Heating costs. The figure shows how each heat loss component contributes to those costs; for example, the figure shows how much annual space heating cost is caused by the heat loss through the Walls/Doors. For each component, the space heating cost for the Existing building is shown (blue bar) and the space heating cost assuming all retrofits are implemented (yellow bar) are shown. The tables below show AkWarm-C ’s estimate of the monthly fuel use for each of the fuels used in the building. For each fuel, the fuel use is broken down across the energy end uses. Electrical Consumption (kWh) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Lighting 839 764 839 811 839 811 839 839 811 839 811 839 Refrigeration 13400 12211 13236 12679 12799 3622 3743 8573 12679 13101 12823 13400 Other Electrical 18638 16985 18638 18037 17126 5836 6031 11947 18000 18638 18037 18638 Ventilation Fans 9798 8929 9798 9482 9634 7846 8108 8980 9482 9798 9482 9798 DHW 486 443 486 471 486 471 486 486 471 486 471 486 Space Heating 8749 7973 8749 8466 8749 8466 8749 8749 8466 8749 8466 8749 Fuel Oil Consumption (Gallons) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec DHW 301 278 310 316 359 459 570 449 346 319 296 302 Space Heating 9258 6775 5682 3405 2053 879 595 1033 2017 4190 6786 8894 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 20 OF 28 Energy Utilization Index (EUI) is a measure of a building’s annual energy utilization per square foot of building. This calculation is completed by converting all utility usage consumed by a building for one year, to British Thermal Units (Btu) or kBtu’s, and dividing this number by the building square footage. EUI is a good measure of a building’s energy use and is utilized regularly for comparison of energy performance for similar building types. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Buildings Technology Center under a contract with the U.S. Department of Energy maintains a Benchmarking Building Energy Performance Program. The ORNL website determines how a building’s energy use compares with similar facilities throughout the U.S. and in a specific region or state. Source use differs from site usage when comparing a building’s energy consumption with the national average. Site energy use is the energy consumed by the building at the building site only. Source energy use includes the site energy use as well as all of the losses to create and distribute the energy to the building. Source energy represents the total amount of raw fuel that is required to operate the building. It incorporates all transmission, delivery, and production losses, which allows for a complete assessment of energy efficiency in a building. The type of utility purchased has a substantial impact on the source energy use of a building. The EPA has determined that source energy is the most comparable unit for evaluation purposes and overall global impact. Both the site and source EUI ratings for the building are provided to understand and compare the differences in energy use. The site and source EUIs for this building are calculated as follows. (See Table 6.4 for details): Building Site EUI = (Electric Usage in kBtu + Fuel Oil Usage in kBtu) Building Square Footage Building Source EUI = (Electric Usage in kBtu X SS Ratio + Fuel Oil Usage in kBtu X SS Ratio) Building Square Footage where “SS Ratio” is the Source Energy to Site Energy ratio for the particular fuel. Energy Type Building Fuel Use per Year Site Energy Use per Year, kBTU Source/Site Ratio Source Energy Use per Year, kBTU Electricity 548,646 kWh 1,872,530 3.340 6,254,250 #2 Oil 55,874 gallons 7,710,605 1.010 7,787,711 Total 9,583,135 14,041,961 BUILDING AREA 78,073 Square Feet BUILDING SITE EUI 112 kBTU/Ft²/Yr BUILDING SOURCE EUI 180 kBTU/Ft²/Yr * Site - Source Ratio data is provided by the Energy Star Performance Rating Methodology for Incorporating Source Energy Use document issued March 2011. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 21 OF 28 The Energy Efficiency Measures are summarized below: Electrical & Appliance Measures The goal of this section is to present lighting energy efficiency measures that may be cost beneficial. It should be noted that replacing current bulbs with more energy-efficient equivalents will have a small effect on the building heating and cooling loads. The building cooling load will see a small decrease from an upgrade to more efficient bulbs and the heating load will see a small increase, as the more energy efficient bulbs give off less heat. Lighting Measures – Replace Existing Fixtures/Bulbs and Lighting Controls Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 5 Misc. Incandescent 19 INCAN A Lamp, Halogen 60W with Manual Switching Replace with 19 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 20W Installation Cost $1,900 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $421 Breakeven Cost $4,944 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.6 Simple Payback (yrs) 5 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends replacement of all the existing incandescent lights around the building with energy efficient CFL bulbs. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 7 Entry Incandescent 11 INCAN A Lamp, Std 75W with Manual Switching Replace with 11 FLUOR CFL, Spiral 26 W Installation Cost $1,100 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $191 Breakeven Cost $2,051 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.9 Simple Payback (yrs) 6 Auditors Notes: See EEM # 5 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 8 Voc Ed building lights 50 MH 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 50 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $69,600 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $3,597 Maintenance Savings ($/yr) $5,000 Breakeven Cost $101,942 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.5 Simple Payback (yrs) 19 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends replacement of the Metal-Halide lights in the metal and wood shop with a modern efficient T5 High Output system. Installation of the more efficient lights and installation of a lighting control package with occupancy sensors and multi-level switching can greatly reduce the buildings lighting energy consumption. The T5 HO system has already been implemented in both of the schools gymnasiums. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 22 OF 28 Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 10 6 bulb T-5 HO High school 20 FLUOR (6) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Standard StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 20 FLUOR (6) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Standard StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $4,800 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings ($/yr)) $1,016 Breakeven Cost $6,291 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.3 Simple Payback (yrs) 5 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends the installation of occupancy sensors to supplement the lighting system in the high school gymnasium. An occupancy based system is already in place in the elementary school gymnasium. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 11 Exterior HPS Pole Mounted 6 HPS 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 6 LED 150W Module StdElectronic and Add new Motion Sensor Installation Cost $26,400 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $1,507 Maintenance Savings ($/yr) $600 Breakeven Cost $24,869 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.9 Simple Payback (yrs) 18 Auditors Notes: All of the high pressure sodium lights mounted on the outside of the building are considered to be good candidates for replacement as the heat they emit is wasted to the outdoors. There have been recent advances in LED technology and are recommended to replace the HPS systems. This recommendation assumes a Dark Campus environment where the lights are turned off during the late evening and early morning hours and are turned on under motion sensor activation, security alarm activation, or when controlled by the Building Automation System, when available. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 12 2 bulb T-12 U-tube 30 FLUOR (2) T12 F40T12 40W U-Tube Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 30 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U-Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $17,350 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $953 Maintenance Savings ($/yr) $300 Breakeven Cost $14,777 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.9 Simple Payback (yrs) 18 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 35-Watt T12 U-Tube lights in the building be replaced with 30-Watt Energy Saver T8 U-Tube bulbs and programmable start ballasts and be placed on occupancy sensors. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 13 Exterior HPS 150 W 20 HPS 150 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 20 LED 50W Module StdElectronic and Add new Motion Sensor Installation Cost $48,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $2,107 Maintenance Savings ($/yr) $1,000 Breakeven Cost $36,693 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.8 Simple Payback (yrs) 23 Auditors Notes: See EEM #11 for similar notes. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 23 OF 28 Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 14 Exterior HPS 70 W 12 HPS 70 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 12 LED 25W Module StdElectronic and Add new Motion Sensor Installation Cost $19,200 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 13 Energy Savings ($/yr) $649 Maintenance Savings ($/yr) $600 Breakeven Cost $13,171 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.7 Simple Payback (yrs) 30 Auditors Notes: See EEM #11 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 16 3 bulb T-8 306 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 306 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $172,650 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $4,923 Maintenance Savings ($/yr) $3,060 Breakeven Cost $94,353 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.5 Simple Payback (yrs) 35 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 32-Watt T8 lights in the building be replaced with 28-Watt Energy Saver T8 bulbs and programmable start ballasts. Additionally, these lights should be installed with occupancy sensors. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 17 2 bulb T-8 35 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 35 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $19,175 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $379 Maintenance Savings ($/yr) $350 Breakeven Cost $8,634 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.5 Simple Payback (yrs) 51 Auditors Notes: See EEM #16 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 18 2 bulb T-8 U-tube 80 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 32W U-Tube Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 80 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U-Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $44,400 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $759 Maintenance Savings ($/yr) $800 Breakeven Cost $18,461 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback (yrs) 59 Auditors Notes: See EEM #12 for similar notes. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 24 OF 28 Other Electrical Measures Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 19 1 bulb T-8 24 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 24 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy- Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $13,400 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $134 Maintenance Savings ($/yr) $240 Breakeven Cost $4,441 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback (yrs) 100 Auditors Notes: See EEM #16 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 20 4 bulb T-8 10 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 10 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit Installation Cost $5,250 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $49 Maintenance Savings ($/yr) $100 Breakeven Cost $1,724 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback (yrs) 106 Auditors Notes: See EEM #16 for similar notes. Rank Location Description of Existing Efficiency Recommendation 15 Roof Drain Heat Traces 15 Heat Tape with Manual Switching Add new Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control Installation Cost $3,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $147 Breakeven Cost $1,722 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.6 Simple Payback (yrs) 20 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends placing the roof drain heat traces on a temperature controlled control system. This will reduce the amount of time that the heat traces are left turned on when they are not needed. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 25 OF 28 Heating System Measures Rank Building Space Recommendation 1 High School Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the High School space. Installation Cost $10,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $3,382 Breakeven Cost $45,921 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 4.6 Simple Payback yrs 3 Auditors Notes: There are economic reasons why the thermostatic controller set points should be setback during off peak use hours. However one important control data input concerns the water dew point of the air. The water dew point of the inside air varies with the seasons. Currently, there is no humidity measuring instruments normally available to or monitored by the control system or staff and this data is needed before choosing the ideal “setback” temperatures which varies with the season. As outside air temperatures rise, the inside air dew point also rises. The staff is likely to complain about mildew and mold smells if the temperature is dropped below the dew point and condensation occurs. In keeping with this mildew and mold concern, it is recommended that the control system monitor the water dew point within the building to select how far back the temperature can be set during low use periods. If the water dew point is above 70 oF, then set up the temperature not back. If the water dew point is 50 oF or below, then reduce the setback temperature control toward 60oF. Other parameters relating to the building setback temperature include warm-up time required to reheat the building and preventing any water pipes near the building perimeter from freezing. During extreme cold periods, reducing the setback temperature limit and time appropriately is required to prevent possible problems. Rank Building Space Recommendation 2 Gymnasium Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gymnasium space. Installation Cost $10,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $2,987 Breakeven Cost $40,558 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 4.1 Simple Payback yrs 3 Auditors Notes: See EEM #1 for similar notes. Rank Building Space Recommendation 3 Entrance/Auditorium Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Entrance/Auditorium space. Installation Cost $10,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $2,820 Breakeven Cost $38,283 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.8 Simple Payback yrs 4 Auditors Notes: See EEM #1 for similar notes. Rank Building Space Recommendation 6 Elementary School Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Elementary School space. Installation Cost $10,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,836 Breakeven Cost $24,935 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.5 Simple Payback yrs 5 Auditors Notes: See EEM #1 for similar notes. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 26 OF 28 Rank Recommendation 4 Install premium efficiency motors (9 @ $3,500 each = $31,500). Implement a reduced run time scheme through DDC controls for motors and DHW to reduce heat wasted during unoccupied hours ($1,500 per pump = $13,500). Remove and replace oil-fired water heater with a side-arm water maker. ($4,000 for new unit with install, $2,000 for removal) Installation Cost $51,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $10,715 Maintenance Savings (/yr) $500 Breakeven Cost $178,481 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.5 Simple Payback yrs 5 Auditors Notes: * The combination of these energy efficiency measures are bundled in the AkWarm-C program calculations. The recommendations of this EEM include several retrofit options. Individual retrofit considerations are discussed below in detail. AkWarm-C considers all upgrades to the heating system as one item and therefore predicts a combined savings. Because of this, the savings of individual upgrades, shown below, do not directly compare to the predicted overall savings of a complete upgrade of the heating system. A. Install premium efficiency motors on main building heating circulation pumps will reduce excess power used to supply heated glycol to the various air handlers and baseboard radiators in the building. With premium efficiency motors throughout the school, the total cost is estimated to be $31,500 for an annual energy savings equivalent to $3,092. B. Implementing a reduced operating time scheme for the pumps throughout the heating water distribution system will reduce the amount of power used by motors during non-critical times of the day. This upgrade would include programming the new system to better manage the existing heating and ventilation equipment in the school. This upgrade is expected to cost $13,500 and produce an annual energy savings equivalent to $2,288. C. Removing the oil-fired water heater and replacing it with an indirect fired model will reduce the amount of fuel used to heat water for the various water outlets throughout the building. This EEM is expected to cost $6,000 for an annual energy savings of $2,069. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 27 OF 28 Ventilation System Measures Rank Description Recommendation 9 Refine operating schedule of ventilation system through DDC controls. Incorporate the use of CO2 sensors to optimize performance. (Assumes $1500 per AHU (8), $1000 per EF (12)). DDC Control refinement should allow the currently installed VFDs to run below 100% capacity. Install variable frequency drives to adjust fan motor HP and CFM (6 units @ $3,000 each = $18,000, $2,000 installation per unit = $12,000). Install premium efficiency motors (4 @ $2,000 each = $8,000). Installation Cost $62,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $5,533 Breakeven Cost $84,396 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.4 Simple Payback yrs 11 Auditors Notes: * The cost of upgrading the pneumatic system was allocated across several of the mechanical energy efficiency measures. The recommendations of this EEM include several retrofit options. Individual retrofit considerations are discussed below in detail. AkWarm-C considers all upgrades to the ventilation system as one item and therefore predicts a combined savings. Because of this, the savings of individual upgrades, shown below, do not directly compare to the predicted overall savings of a complete upgrade of the building ventilation system. A. The programming of ventilation equipment to cycle on and off during low use periods has the potential to save a portion of the total electric power cost. This can be done with no noticeable difference to the occupants of the building, which is vacant or near vacant during low use periods. There is no need for fresh air when the building is vacant. For the ventilation system, this upgrade is expected to cost $24,000 for an annual energy savings equivalent to $1,478. B. Replacing the large motors on the building ventilation system with premium efficiency motors, combined with installing variable frequency drives, will produce an energy savings based on the reduced amount of power used. With this EEM, a refined schedule from the DDC system will reduce the savings from more efficient motors and the reduced power requirements from VFD’s, as mentioned earlier in the first paragraph of this EEM. With motor replacement and VFD installation where missing, the total cost is estimated to be $32,000 for an annual energy savings equivalent to $4,050. C. There is peak electric demand costs which can be reduced by operating the equipment strategically to minimize all building lights and electric fan motors from being brought on line at once causing a large demand charge from the electric utility. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐04 PAGE 28 OF 28 Through inspection of the energy-using equipment on-site and discussions with site facilities personnel, this energy audit has identified several energy-saving measures. The measures will reduce the amount of fuel burned and electricity used at the site. The projects will not degrade the performance of the building and, in some cases, will improve it. Several types of EEMs can be implemented immediately by building staff, and others will require various amounts of lead time for engineering and equipment acquisition. In some cases, there are logical advantages to implementing EEMs concurrently. For example, if the same electrical contractor is used to install both lighting equipment and motors, implementation of these measures should be scheduled to occur simultaneously. The Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) Alaska Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund (AEERLF) is a State of Alaska program enacted by the Alaska Sustainable Energy Act (Senate Bill 220, A.S. 18.56.855, “Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund”). The AEERLF will provide loans for energy efficiency retrofits to public facilities via the Retrofit Energy Assessment for Loan System (REAL). As defined in 15 AAC 155.605, the program may finance energy efficiency improvements to buildings owned by: a. Regional educational attendance areas; b. Municipal governments, including political subdivisions for municipal governments; c. The University of Alaska; d. Political subdivisions of the State of Alaska, or e. The State of Alaska Refer to the Retrofit Energy Assessment for Loans manual which can be obtained from AHFC for more information on this program. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX A Appendix A Benchmark Report First Name Last Name Middle Name Phone Loreen Kramer 822‐3234 State Zip AK 99588 Monday‐ Friday Saturday Sunday Holidays 24‐724‐724‐724‐7 Average # of Occupants During 298 5 0 0 Renovations/Notes Date 07/01/1975 07/01/1986 07/01/1987 07/01/1994 Automotive-woodshop constructed / Classroom addition 07/01/2006 07/01/2008 PART II – ENERGY SOURCES Heating Oil Electricity Natural Gas Propane Wood Coal $ /gallon $ / kWh $ / CCF $ / gal $ / cord $ / ton Other energy sources? Building upgrades Elementary school addition 1. Please check every energy source you use in the table below. If known, please enter the base rate you pay for the energy source. 2. Provide utilities bills for the most recent two‐year period for each energy source you use. Classroom addition Contact Person Email lkramer@crsd.k12.ak.us Mailing Address City P.O. Box 108 Glennallen Primary Operating Hours Details Gymnasium addition Auditorium addition Facility Address Facility City Facility Zip 1976 Aurora Drive Glennallen 99588 Building Type Community Population Year Built Mixed 554 1975 Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage Glennallen K‐12 Education ‐ K ‐ 12 78,073 Copper River School District Regional Education Attendance 05/24/12 REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date Glennallen K-12 Buiding Size Input (sf) =78,073 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Natural Gas Cost ($)0 2010 Electric Consumption (kWh)527,760 2010 Electric Cost ($)128,726 2010 Oil Consumption (Therms)69,162.46 2010 Oil Cost ($)136,375 2010 Propane Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Propane Cost ($)0.00 2010 Coal Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Coal Cost ($)0.00 2010 Wood Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Wood Cost ($)0.00 2010 Thermal Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Thermal Cost ($)0.00 2010 Steam Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Steam Cost ($)0.00 2010 Total Energy Use (kBtu)8,717,490 2010 Total Energy Cost ($)265,101 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf)23.1 2010 Oil (kBtu/sf) 88.6 2010 Propane (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Coal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Wood (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Steam (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)111.7 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)1.65 2010 Oil Cost Index ($/sf)1.75 2010 Propane Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Coal Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Wood Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Steam Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)3.40 2011 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)0.00 2011 Natural Gas Cost ($)0 2011 Electric Consumption (kWh)575,440 2011 Electric Cost ($)153,605 2011 Oil Consumption (Therms)68,124.54 2011 Oil Cost ($)174,610 2011 Propane Consumption (Therms)0.00 2011 Propane Cost ($)0 2011 Coal Consumption (Therms)0.00 2011 Coal Cost ($)0 2011 Wood Consumption (Therms)0.00 2011 Wood Cost ($)0 2011 Thermal Consumption (Therms)0.00 2011 Thermal Cost ($)0 2011 Steam Consumption (Therms)0.00 2011 Steam Cost ($)0 2011 Total Energy Use (kBtu)8,776,431 2011 Total Energy Cost ($)328,215 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2011 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Electricity (kBtu/sf)25.2 2011 Oil (kBtu/sf)87.3 2011 Propane (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Coal (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Wood (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Thermal (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Steam (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)112.4 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2011 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2011 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)1.97 2011 Oil Cost Index ($/sf)2.24 2011 Propane Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2011 Coal Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2011 Wood Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2011 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2011 Steam Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2011 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)4.20 Note: 1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's Glennallen K-12ElectricityBtus/kWh =3,413Provider Customer # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (kWh) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Electric Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/kWh) Demand Cost ($)CVEA Jan‐10569601,944$15,646$0.27CVEA Feb‐10623202,127$16,353$0.26CVEA Mar‐10532001,816$13,592$0.26CVEA Apr‐10500801,709$12,706$0.25CVEA May‐10524001,788$12,493$0.24CVEA Jun‐10299201,021$5,617$0.19CVEA Jul‐10 15680 535 $2,728 $0.17CVEA Aug‐10 16720 571 $3,180 $0.19CVEA Sep‐10 32720 1,117 $6,381 $0.20CVEA Oct‐10 46960 1,603 $10,455 $0.22CVEA Nov‐10 54480 1,859 $14,096 $0.26CVEA Dec‐10 56320 1,922 $15,479 $0.27CVEA Jan‐11 58480 1,996 $17,263 $0.30CVEA Feb‐11 64240 2,193 $16,937 $0.26CVEA Mar‐11 57200 1,952 $16,146 $0.28CVEA Apr‐11 54080 1,846 $16,429 $0.30CVEA May‐11 47840 1,633 $13,222 $0.28CVEA Jun‐11 34880 1,190 $8,353 $0.24CVEA Jul‐11 18480 631 $4,317 $0.23CVEA Aug‐11 25920 885 $5,942 $0.23CVEA Sep‐11 33360 1,139 $8,000 $0.24CVEA Oct‐11 53880 1,839 $12,127 $0.23CVEA Nov‐11 59640 2,036 $15,480 $0.26CVEA Dec‐11 67440 2,302 $19,389 $0.29Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total:527,760 18,012 0 $128,726 $0Jan ‐ 11 to Dec ‐ 11 total:575,440 19,640 0 $153,605 $0$0.24$0.27Jan ‐ 11 to Dec ‐ 11 avg:Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg: $0$5,000$10,000$15,000$20,000$25,00001000020000300004000050000600007000080000Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Date (Mon ‐Yr)Glennallen K‐12 ‐Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Electric Cost ($) Glennallen K-12OilBtus/Gal =132,000Provider Customer # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (Gal) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Oil Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/Therm) Demand Cost ($)Fisher FuelJan‐10 7344.3 9,871 $18,021 1.83Fisher FuelFeb‐10 7416.2 9,789 $18,615 1.90Fisher FuelMar‐10 6452 8,517 $16,551 1.94Fisher FuelApr‐10 2611.9 3,448 $7,068 2.05Fisher FuelMay‐10 3208 4,235 $8,758 2.07Fisher FuelJun‐10 0 0 $0 0.00Jul‐100 0 $0 0.00Aug‐10 0 0 $0 0.00Sep‐10 0 0 $0 0.00Fisher FuelOct‐10 7478.1 9,871 $19,967 2.02Fisher FuelNov‐10 5678 7,495 $15,160 2.02Fisher FuelDec‐10 12073.5 15,937 $32,236 2.02Fisher FuelJan‐11 10592.1 13,982 $30,764 2.20Fisher FuelFeb‐11 8112.9 10,709 $25,785 2.41Fisher FuelMar‐11 7946 10,489 $27,984 2.67Fisher FuelApr‐11 3479.2 4,593 $13,142 2.86Fisher FuelMay‐11 2630 3,472 $10,402 3.00Jun‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Jul‐110 0 $0 0.00Aug‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Sep‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Fisher Fuel Oct‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Fisher Fuel Nov‐11 6158.8 8,130 $21,516 2.65Fisher Fuel Dec‐11 12690.5 16,751 $45,016 2.69Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total:44,918 69,162 0 $136,375 $0Jan ‐ 11 to Dec ‐ 11 total:51,610 68,125 0 $174,610 $0Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg:1.97Jan ‐ 11 to Dec ‐ 11 avg:2.56 $0.00$5,000.00$10,000.00$15,000.00$20,000.00$25,000.00$30,000.00$35,000.00$40,000.00$45,000.00$50,000.0002,0004,0006,0008,00010,00012,00014,00016,00018,000Oil Cost ($)Oil Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr)Glennallen K‐12 ‐Oil Consumption (Therms) vs. Oil Cost ($)Oil Consumption (Therms)Oil Cost ($) CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX B Appendix B AkWarm Short Report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software GLENNALLEN SCHOOL Page 1 APPENDIX B ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 6/13/2012 3:46 PM General Project Information PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION Building: Glennallen K-12 Auditor Company: Central Alaska Engineering Co. Address: 1976 Aurora Drive Auditor Name: Jerry P. Herring, PE, CEA City: Glennallen Auditor Address: 32215 Lakefront Dr Soldotna, AK 99669 Client Name: Ryan Radford Client Address: P.O. Box 108 Glennallen, AK 99588 Auditor Phone: (907) 260-5311 Auditor FAX: ( ) - Client Phone: (907) 822-3234 Auditor Comment: Client FAX: ( ) - Design Data Building Area: 78,073 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 3,932,467 Btu/hour with Distribution Losses: 4,139,439 Btu/hour Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and 25% Safety Margin: 6,310,121 Btu/hour Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load, if served. Typical Occupancy: 164 people Design Indoor Temperature: 70 deg F (building average) Actual City: Glennallen Design Outdoor Temperature: -40.6 deg F Weather/Fuel City: Glennallen Heating Degree Days: 14,067 deg F-days Utility Information Electric Utility: Copper Valley Electric Assn 1 - Commercial - Lg Fuel Oil Supplier: Fischer Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.255/kWh Average Annual Cost/gallon: $3.21/gallon Annual Energy Cost Estimate Description Space Heating Space Coolin g Water Heating Lighting Refrige ration Other Electric al Cookin g Clothes Drying Ventilatio n Fans Service Fees Total Cost Existing Building $192,333 $0 $15,327 $47,570 $2,519 $33,728 $0 $0 $28,340 $0 $319,819 With Proposed Retrofits $173,783 $0 $11,009 $30,750 $2,519 $33,582 $0 $0 $24,071 $0 $275,714 SAVINGS $18,550 $0 $4,319 $16,820 $0 $147 $0 $0 $4,270 $0 $44,105 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software GLENNALLEN SCHOOL Page 2 APPENDIX B $0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 Existing Retrofit Ventilation and Fans Space Heating Refrigeration Other Electrical Lighting Domestic Hot Water Annual Energy Costs by End Use Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software GLENNALLEN SCHOOL Page 3 APPENDIX B PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 1 Setback Thermostat: High School Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the High School space. $3,382 $10,000 4.59 3 2 Setback Thermostat: Gymnasium Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gymnasium space. $2,987 $10,000 4.06 3.3 3 Setback Thermostat: Entrance/Auditoriu m Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Entrance/Auditorium space. $2,820 $10,000 3.83 3.5 4 HVAC And DHW Install premium efficiency motors (9 @ $3,500 each = $31,500). Implement a reduced run time scheme through DDC controls for motors and DHW to reduce heat wasted during unoccupied hours ($1,500 per pump = $13,500). Remove and replace oil-fired water heater with a side-arm water maker. ($4,000 for new unit with install, $2,000 for removal) $10,715 + $500 Maint. Savings $51,000 3.50 4.8 5 Lighting - Power Retrofit: Misc. Incandescent Replace with 19 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 20W $421 $1,900 2.60 4.5 6 Setback Thermostat: Elementary School Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Elementary School space. $1,836 $10,000 2.49 5.4 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software GLENNALLEN SCHOOL Page 4 APPENDIX B PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 7 Lighting - Power Retrofit: Entry Incandescent Replace with 11 FLUOR CFL, Spiral 26 W $191 $1,100 1.86 5.7 8 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: Voc Ed building lights Replace with 50 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $3,597 + $5,000 Maint. Savings $69,600 1.46 19.3 9 Ventilation Refine operating schedule of ventilation system through DDC controls. Incorporate the use of CO2 sensors to optimize performance. (Assumes $1500 per AHU (8), $1000 per EF (12)). DDC Control refinement should allow the currently installed VFDs to run below 100% capacity. Install variable frequency drives to adjust fan motor HP and CFM (6 units @ $3,000 each = $18,000, $2,000 installation per unit = $12,000). Install premium efficiency motors (4 @ $2,000 each = $8,000). $5,533 $62,000 1.36 11.2 10 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 6 bulb T-5 HO High school Replace with 20 FLUOR (6) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Standard StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,016 $4,800 1.31 4.7 11 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: Exterior HPS Pole Mounted Replace with 6 LED 150W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,507 + $600 Maint. Savings $26,400 0.94 17.5 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software GLENNALLEN SCHOOL Page 5 APPENDIX B PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 12 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 2 bulb T-12 U-tube Replace with 30 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U- Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $953 + $300 Maint. Savings $17,350 0.85 18.2 13 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: Exterior HPS 150 W Replace with 20 LED 50W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $2,107 + $1,000 Maint. Savings $48,000 0.76 22.8 14 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: Exterior HPS 70 W Replace with 12 LED 25W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $649 + $600 Maint. Savings $19,200 0.69 29.6 15 Other Electrical - Controls Retrofit: Roof Drain Heat Traces Add new Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control $147 $3,000 0.57 20.5 16 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 3 bulb T-8 Replace with 306 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $4,923 + $3,060 Maint. Savings $172,650 0.55 35.1 17 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 2 bulb T-8 Replace with 35 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $379 + $350 Maint. Savings $19,175 0.45 50.6 18 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 2 bulb T-8 U-tube Replace with 80 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U- Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $759 + $800 Maint. Savings $44,400 0.42 58.5 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software GLENNALLEN SCHOOL Page 6 APPENDIX B PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 19 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 1 bulb T-8 Replace with 24 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $134 + $240 Maint. Savings $13,400 0.33 99.9 20 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 4 bulb T-8 Replace with 10 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit $49 + $100 Maint. Savings $5,250 0.33 107.1 TOTAL $44,105 + $12,550 Maint. Savings $599,225 1.25 13.6 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – ENERGY EFFICIENT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Building Envelope Insulation Rank Location Existing Type/R-Value Recommendation Type/R- Value Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Exterior Doors – Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Windows and Glass Doors – Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Air Leakage Rank Location Estimated Air Leakage Recommended Air Leakage Target Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 2. Mechanical Equipment Mechanical Rank Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software GLENNALLEN SCHOOL Page 7 APPENDIX B 4 Install premium efficiency motors (9 @ $3,500 each = $31,500). Implement a reduced run time scheme through DDC controls for motors and DHW to reduce heat wasted during unoccupied hours ($1,500 per pump = $13,500). Remove and replace oil-fired water heater with a side-arm water maker. ($4,000 for new unit with install, $2,000 for removal) $51,000 $10,715 + $500 Maint. Savings Setback Thermostat Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 1 High School Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the High School space. $10,000 $3,382 2 Gymnasium Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gymnasium space. $10,000 $2,987 3 Entrance/Auditori um Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Entrance/Auditorium space. $10,000 $2,820 6 Elementary School Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Elementary School space. $10,000 $1,836 Ventilation Rank Recommendation Cost Annual Energy Savings 9 Refine operating schedule of ventilation system through DDC controls. Incorporate the use of CO2 sensors to optimize performance. (Assumes $1500 per AHU (8), $1000 per EF (12)). DDC Control refinement should allow the currently installed VFDs to run below 100% capacity. Install variable frequency drives to adjust fan motor HP and CFM (6 units @ $3,000 each = $18,000, $2,000 installation per unit = $12,000). Install premium efficiency motors (4 @ $2,000 each = $8,000). $62,000 $5,533 3. Appliances and Lighting Lighting Fixtures and Controls Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software GLENNALLEN SCHOOL Page 8 APPENDIX B 5 Misc. Incandescent 19 INCAN A Lamp, Halogen 60W with Manual Switching Replace with 19 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 20W $1,900 $421 7 Entry Incandescent 11 INCAN A Lamp, Std 75W with Manual Switching Replace with 11 FLUOR CFL, Spiral 26 W $1,100 $191 8 Voc Ed building lights 50 MH 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 50 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $69,600 $3,597 + $5,000 Maint. Savings 10 6 bulb T-5 HO High school 20 FLUOR (6) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Standard StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 20 FLUOR (6) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Standard StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $4,800 $1,016 11 Exterior HPS Pole Mounted 6 HPS 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 6 LED 150W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $26,400 $1,507 + $600 Maint. Savings 12 2 bulb T-12 U- tube 30 FLUOR (2) T12 F40T12 40W U-Tube Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 30 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U- Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $17,350 $953 + $300 Maint. Savings 13 Exterior HPS 150 W 20 HPS 150 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 20 LED 50W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $48,000 $2,107 + $1,000 Maint. Savings 14 Exterior HPS 70 W 12 HPS 70 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 12 LED 25W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $19,200 $649 + $600 Maint. Savings 16 3 bulb T-8 306 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 306 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $172,650 $4,923 + $3,060 Maint. Savings Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software GLENNALLEN SCHOOL Page 9 APPENDIX B 17 2 bulb T-8 35 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 35 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $19,175 $379 + $350 Maint. Savings 18 2 bulb T-8 U-tube 80 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 32W U-Tube Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 80 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U- Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $44,400 $759 + $800 Maint. Savings 19 1 bulb T-8 24 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 24 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $13,400 $134 + $240 Maint. Savings 20 4 bulb T-8 10 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 10 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit $5,250 $49 + $100 Maint. Savings Refrigeration Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Other Electrical Equipment Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 15 Roof Drain Heat Traces 15 Heat Tape with Manual Switching Add new Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control $3,000 $147 Cooking/Clothes Drying Rank Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings ------------------------------------------ AkWarmCalc Ver 2.1.4.2, Energy Lib 3/1/2012 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX C Appendix C Major Equipment List CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYGLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORTTAG LOCATION FUNCTION MAKE MODEL TYPE CAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZEASHRAE SERVICE LIFEESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFENOTESB-1 GHS BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT WEIL-MCLAIN BL-876 S W OIL/CAST IRON 4.9 GPH OIL 82.0% - 35 10B-2 GHS BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT WEIL-MCLAIN BL-876 S W OIL/CAST IRON 4.9 GPH OIL 82.0% - 35 10B-3 GHS BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT WEIL-MCLAIN BL-876 S W OIL/CAST IRON 4.9 GPH OIL 82.0% - 35 13B-4 GHS BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT BURNHAM V-906 OIL/CAST IRON 5.8 GPH OIL 82.0% - 35 19B-5 GES BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT WEIL-MCLAIN 1088 OIL/CAST IRON 21.5 GPH OIL 85.0% - 35 31B-6 GES BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT WEIL-MCLAIN 1088 OIL/CAST IRON 21.5 GPH OIL 85.0% - 35 31WH-1 KITCHEN MECH RM DHW SUPPLY A.O. SMITH TJV 200M 000 INDIRECT STORAGE 180 GALLONS 80.0% - 24 20WH-2 KITCHEN MECH RM DHW SUPPLY AMTROL N/A INDIRECT STORAGE 120 GALLONS 80.0% - 24 20WH-3 GHS BOILER RM DHW SUPPLY N/A N/A OIL-FIRED SOTRAGE EST. 623 MBH ~75% - 25 0CP-1 A/B GES BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT B&G 1510 BASE-MOUNTED 200 GPM @ 30' 90.2% 3 HP 20 16 VFDCP-2 A/B GES BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT B&G 1510 BASE-MOUNTED 236 GPM @ 50' 89.5% 3 HP 20 16 VFDCP-3 GES BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT B&G 80 INLINE 200 GPM @ 20' 78.5% 2 HP 10 6CP-4 GES BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT B&G 80 INLINE 200 GPM @ 20' 78.5% 2 HP 10 6CP-5 GES FAN RM KITCHEN DHW B&G NBF INLINE 3 GPM @ 20' NEMA 0.17 HP 10 6CP-6 KITCHEN MECH RM DHW CIRC GRUNDFOS N/A INLINE EST 50 GPM NEMA ~0.25 HP 10 6CP-7 KITCHEN MECH RM DHW CIRC GRUNDFOS N/A INLINE EST 50 GPM NEMA 0.25 HP 10 6CP-8 GHS BOILER RM DHW CIRC GRUNDFOS 15-42 F INLINE EST 30 GPM NEMA 85 W 10 0CP-9 GHS BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT GRUNDFOS 50-160 INLINE EST 100 GPM NEMA 1150 W 10 0 TAG CIRC. PUMP #4CP-10 A/B GHS BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT N/A N/A BASE-MOUNTED EST 200 GPM 90.2% 3 HP 20 0 PRIMARY CIRC PUMPS FOR GHSCP-11 GHS BOILER RM DHW CIRC GRUNDFOS 15-42 SF INLINE EST 30 GPM NEMA 85 W 10 0CP-12 GHS BOILER RM BUILDING HEAT GRUNDFOS 50-160 INLINE EST 100 GPM NEMA 1150 W 10 4 TAG CP-2EF-1 KITCHEN EA GREENHECK CSP-B150 CENTRIFUGAL 100 CFM @ 0.5" NEMA 129 W 25 21EF-2 RESTROOMS EA GREENHECK SQ-95-D CENTRIFUGAL 450 CFM @ 0.5" NEMA 0.13 HP 25 21EF-3 SCIENCE RM EA BROAN 88000 CENTRIFUGAL 350 CFM @ 0.5" NEMA EST 0.13 HP 25 21EF-4 RESTROOMS EA GREENHECK SQ-95-D CENTRIFUGAL 450 CFM @ 0.5" NEMA 0.13 HP 25 21EF-5 KITCHEN EA GREENHECK CUBE-220-15 CENTRIFUGAL 4,500 CFM @ 1.0" NEMA 1.5 HP 25 21EF-6 BREAK RM EA BROAN 88000 CENTRIFUGAL 350 CFM @ 0.5" NEMA EST 0.13 HP 25 21EF-7 GES COMMONS EA GREENHECK SFB-18-20 CENTRIFUGAL 5,000 CFM @ 0.75" NEMA 2.0 HP 25 21EF-8 KITCHEN EA GREENHECK CUBE-101-4 CENTRIFUGAL 700 CFM @ 0.75" NEMA 0.25 HP 25 21EF-9 RESTROOMS EA TRANE N/A CENTRIFUGAL EST 225 CFM NEMA EST 80 W 25 0EF-10 RESTROOMS EA TRANE N/A CENTRIFUGAL EST 225 CFM NEMA EST 80 W 25 0EF-11 GHS MULTI FAN RM EA PENN Z-101 CENTRIFUGAL EST 500 CFM NEMA EST 0.25 HP 25 16EF-12 GHS MULTI FAN RM EA PENN Z-101 CENTRIFUGAL EST 500 CFM NEMA EST 0.25 HP 25 16CAF-1 GES BOILER RM CA GREENHECK SS2-36-605-B20 AXIAL 7,083 CFM @ 0.75" NEMA 2.0 HP 20 16CAF-2 GHS BOILER RM CA GREENHECK SS2-24-600-A7 AXIAL 2,914 CFM @ 0.75" NEMA 0.75 HP 20 16MAU-1 ABOVE GES KITCHEN KITCHEN SA MCQUAY N/A CENTRIFUGAL 5,200 CFM @ 0.5" 89.5% 3.0 HP 25 21 TAG MAU-1; VFD TAG MAU-3RA91.7% 7.5 HP 25 21 TAG AHU-2; VFD TAG RF-12 @ 64.2%SANEMA EST 15 HP 25 21 TAG AHU-2; VFD TAG AHU-12 @ 54.2%RA CENTRIFUGAL 93.0% 15 HP 25 21 TAG AHU-1; VFD TAG RF-11SA AXIAL 94.1% 30 HP 20 16 TAG AHU-1; VFD TAG AHU-11 @ 52.3%AHU-3 GHS GYM FAN RM SA TRANE N/A AXIAL EST 15,000 CFM 91.7% 7.5 HP 20 0 TAG AH-1; VFDAHU-4 GHS GYM FAN RM SA TRANE 36A-9-1HC AXIAL EST 15,000 CFM 91.7% 7.5 HP 20 0 TAG CF-1AHU-5 GHS MULTI FAN RM SA DUNHAM-BUSH AHFS022HL CENTRIFUGAL EST 3,000 CFM 81.5% 1.0 HP 25 16 TAG AHU-6 (SERCC) & AHU-3AHU-6 GHS MULTI FAN RM SA DUNHAM-BUSH AHFS032HL CENTRIFUGAL EST 4,000 CFM 81.5% 1.5 HP 25 16 TAG AHU-7 (SERCC) & AHU-2AHU-7 GHS MULTI FAN RM SA DUNHAM-BUSH N/A CENTRIFUGAL EST 6,000 CFM 81.5% 3.0 HP 25 16 TAG AHU-8AHU-8 GHS MULTI FAN RM SA PACE A-11 FC SI CENTRIFUGAL 2000 CFM @ 1.25" NEMA EST 0.75 HP 25 16 TAG AHU-5 (SERRC) & AHU-1MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORYAHU-1 ABOVE GES KITCHEN MCQUAY N/A CENTRIFUGAL 15,000 CFM @ 2.0 "GES FAN & SERVER ROOMAHU-2 MCQUAY N/A 30,000 CFM @ 2.0 "APPENDIX C CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D Appendix D Site Visit Photos CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 1. Windows typical of high school construction. 2. Windowed doors on high school. 3. School’s vocational technology shop 4. School’s electric meter CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 5. Exterior light fixtures near high school entrance. 6. Pole-mounted exterior light fixtures typical of school parking area. 7. Interior incandescent light fixture. 8. Gymnasium T5 HO light fixtures. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 9. Metal shop and wood shop building light fixtures 10. Roof mounted exhaust fans. 11. Roof overview. 12. Roof-drain heat trace (typical). CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 13. Overall view of high school boiler room. 14. Oil-fired water heater in high school boiler room. 15. Side-arm water heater. (1) 16. Side-arm water heater. (2) CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 17. Elementary school boiler B-1. 18. Elementary school boiler B-2. 19. Base-mounted boiler water circulation pumps in elementary school boiler room. 20. Base-mounted glycol circulation pumps in elementary school boiler room. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 21. Example of air handling units found throughout school. 22. Variable frequency drive’s for AHUs. (typical) 23. Outdoor walk-in refrigeration units. 24. Indoor walk-in refrigeration units. (Freezer within refrigerator package) CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E Appendix E Thermal Site Visit Photos CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 1. Front of school. (A) Heat loss exhibited near peak of roof. (B) Entrance of school, expected heat loss surrounding doorways. (C) Opened window showing a high heat loss, as expected. B A C CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 2. Overall view of the side of the school. Windows appear cooler as they reflect less heat than the corrugated metal siding. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 3. Back of school, heat loss exhibited in wall corner. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 4. Back of school. (A) Heat loss expected because of open window. (B) Heat loss seen at top of overhead door. A B CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 5. Back of school. Expected heat loss (A) around doorway (B) from foundation insulation. A B CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 6. Back of school. Expected heat loss from electrical box. Corner appears cool due to shading from sun. (note the presence of snow) CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 7. Back of school. Heat being reflected from sun, not lost from school. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 8. Back of school. (A) Heat loss seen from building exhaust vent and (B) noted at connection of different building types. A B CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 9. Back of school. Expected heat loss (A) from exhaust vent (B) around doorway. B A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 10. Elementary school window, heat loss around frame is higher than should be expected. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 11. Overall view of front of school. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY GLENNALLEN SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 12. Metal and wood shop. (A) Exhaust vents, heat loss expected. (B) Heat loss exhibited around ceiling, possibly due to inadequate insulation or age. A B