Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAHTNA-Z93-CAEC CRSD Slana School K-12 2012-EE Slana School Mile 4 Nabesna Road Slana, Alaska 99586 AkWarm ID No. AHTNA-Z93-CAEC-02 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 13, 2012 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE i OF iv  CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE ii OF iv  CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 1 OF 23  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 $ 47,455 Fuel Oil $ 4,466 Total $ 51,921 Energy Utilization Index: 134.9 kBtu/sf Energy Cost Index: 6.19 $/sf Energy Use per Occupant: 36.6 MMBtu per Occupant Energy Cost per Occupant: $1,677 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 Slana 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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 2 OF 23  Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost1 Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR2 Simple Payback (w/Maint. Savings)3 1 Refrigeration: Combined Refrigeration Add new Seasonal Shutdown $160 $1 1879.5 0.0 (N/A) 2 HVAC And DHW Install variable speed controls ($12,000). Interlock CP-1 with circulation pump in generator shed. Implement a reduced run time scheme through DDC controls for motors and DHW to reduce heat wasted during unoccupied hours ($1,000 per pump = $4,000). Remove and replace oil-fired hot water heater with an indirect fired water heater. ($9,000) $9,815 $28,500 6.92 2.9 (N/A) 3 Lighting: Exterior HPS Replace with 8 LED 50W Module StdElectronic $2,983 $12,000 2.92 4.0 (N/A) 4 Other Electrical: Portable Remove Portable Buildings $2,611 $33,814 2.53 12.9 (7.7) 5 Lighting: 3-bulb T12 Replace with 84 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit $5,512 $33,600 2.23 6.1 (5.3) 6 Setback Thermostat: School Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the School space. $193 $1,500 1.75 7.8 (N/A) 7 Lighting: Gym MH Replace with 6 FLUOR (3) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,338 $13,672 1.67 10.2 (7.1) 8 Lighting: 2-bulb T12 Replace with 30 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit $1,398 $12,000 1.67 8.6 (7.1) 9 Lighting: 8-ft T12 Replace with 8 FLUOR (2) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $41 $12,073 0.15 297.1 (99.8) 10 Ventilation Refine operating schedule of ventilation system through DDC controls. ($2,000) Install a dedicated exhaust fan for the crawlspace of the building. ($2,500) -$355 $4,500 -0.93 999.9 (N/A) TOTAL, all measures $23,696 $151,660 2.88 6.4 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 3 OF 23  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 $23,696 per year, or 44.5% of the buildings’ total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $151,660 for an overall simple payback period of 6.4 years. If only the cost-effective measures are implemented, (i.e. SIR > 1.0), the annual utility cost can be reduced by $24,010 per year, or 45.1% of the buildings’ total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $135,087 for an overall simple payback period of 5.6 years. 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 $19,193 $2,652 $24,030 $800 $5,616 $928 $53,219 With All Proposed Retrofits $11,246 $589 $12,759 $640 $3,005 $1,285 $29,523 SAVINGS $7,947 $2,063 $11,271 $160 $2,611 -$357 $23,696 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 4 OF 23  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. 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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 5 OF 23  This comprehensive energy audit covers the 8,400 square foot Slana School, depicted below in Figure 2.1, including classrooms, restrooms, and a gymnasium. There are two relocatable classrooms on campus, both of which were being used minimally at the time of the audit. 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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 6 OF 23  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 9, 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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 7 OF 23  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, gymnasium, and classrooms. 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 Ration (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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 8 OF 23  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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 9 OF 23  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, Slana School was modeled using AkWarm-C energy use software to establish a baseline space heating and cooling energy usage. Climate data from Copper Center, 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 Slana, 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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 10 OF 23  The structure of Slana School is a one story facility that was built in 1993. This building has had no additions made to it and from the audit it was determined to be a well built and functional school facility. The school typically opens at 7AM by staff with faculty and student occupancy from 8AM to 6PM during the weekdays. Additional occupancy time keeping the school open late or on weekends occurs occasionally. There are an estimated 31 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. The following are the assumptions made for the AkWarm-C building model: Exterior walls of the building have double paned, metal framed windows in place which have an estimated U-factor of 0.50 Btu/hr-sf-F. Most of these windows appear to be weather worn but are in acceptable condition given their age. Windows are often left open to allow heat to escape from the building, even during winter months, due to excessive waste heat distributed to the school. All doors on this building are commercial grade, insulated and metal framed that are half-windowed or solid. The doors appear to be in adequate condition, but could use additional weather stripping installed. The below grade exterior walls of the high school consist of 2-core concrete block walls furred out with 4-inch studs and insulated with 3-inches of rigid foam board insulation providing an estimated R-15 composite value. The above grade wall sections of the school are made up of 10-inch studs filled with fiberglass batt insulation, providing an estimated R-27 composite value. Upper wall sections are covered in wood siding with plywood sheathing. Wall height varies from 12 feet to 23 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 school is a sloped cathedral ceiling insulated with fiberglass batt for an insulating estimated R-62 composite value. The entirety of the roof is covered with corrugated metal roofing. Heat is provided to the school mainly through a waste heat recovery system, using the waste heat from the nearby AP&T generators. In the school generator building, there is a circulation pump which appears to be in continuous operation which causes the hydronic flow to continue to circulate even when CP-1 is shutdown (ghost flow). This is causing the school heating system to be uncontrolled, and can get overheated requiring the windows to be opened to reduce the heat. This pump needs to be shut down when CP-1 is shutdown. Addition to the waste heat, the building is heated by two (2) fuel oil-fired cast iron boilers which were installed in the year 2000. These boilers are typically used when temperatures in the area drop below -30 deg F and the waste heat is insufficient to keep the building warm. The boilers are located in the building’s mechanical room which is small in size, but neatly configured. The hydronic heating system is circulated throughout the building by two ¾ HP circulation pumps located in the mechanical room. Heat is provided to the Air Handling Unit (AHU) and unit heaters through the various building hydronic loops. This building has a DDC control system in place with end devices using electronic controls. The heating plants used in the building are described on the following page. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 11 OF 23  Boiler’s 1 & 2 Fuel Type: Fuel Oil Input Rating: 160,000 Btu/hr Rated Efficiency: 85 % (estimated) Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic, Glycol Boiler Operation: Low Waste Heat System Fuel Type: Fuel Oil Used at AT&P Generator Input Rating: 60,000 Btu/hr (estimated) Rated Efficiency: N/A Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic, Glycol Waste Heat Operation: All Year Domestic Hot Water (DHW) is supplied by an oil fired storage hot water maker. 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 hot water boiler located in the mechanical room is a good candidate for replacement to an indirect-fired hot water maker using the hydronic flow from the waste heat loop. Storage Water Heater Fuel Type: Fuel Oil Input Rating: 199,990 Btu/hr Rated Efficiency: 70 % (estimated) Heat Distribution Type: Circulation 24/7 DHW Maker Operation: All Year There is one (1) AHU located inside of the building providing ventilation to the gym. The AHU uses electronically controlled end devices, controlled by the DDC system. Outside air is drawn into the building primarily through windows and this AHU, when operated. During the audit, it was noted that this AHU was turned off at the motor starter in the mechanical room. Excess air is removed from the building with the use of an exhaust fan located near the primary AHU. The International Mechanical Code for this application requires the building to bring in 2,940 CFM of outdoor air (minimum design for classroom space specifies 35 occupants/1,000 sf @ 10 CFM/occupant for the 8,400 sf school = 2,940 CFM). The capacity of the exhaust fan equals 500 CFM, indicating the school appears to be slightly over-ventilated at 16.1 CFM/occupant, assuming the exhaust system is operated per design capacity at current occupant level of 31 during school hours. In reality, this exhaust fan is tied in with the light switch of the restrooms, meaning that ventilation occurs only when the restrooms lights are in use. The outdoor air should never be provided at less than 10 CFM/occupant to be code compliant. Currently, the mechanical ventilation system is turned off; meaning that adequate ventilation of the building is not being accomplished when the windows are kept closed. The AHU is also designed to provide ventilation of the crawlspace underneath the building. Having the AHU turned off allows for undesirable conditions below the building which can lead to indoor air quality issues. Installation of a dedicated crawlspace exhaust system is recommended if the AHU is to be kept in the off position. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 12 OF 23  There are several types of light systems throughout the building. The majority of the building uses older T12 lights, some with occupancy sensors. The gym lighting system uses different types of bulbs to accomplish illumination, though its main lights are 400-Watt Metal Halide (MH) bulbs which are good candidates for upgrading to the new T5 HO system. The T12 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 computers with monitors, copy machine, refrigerators, microwave ovens and coffee pots. These building plug loads are estimated in the AkWarm-C modeling program at 0.2 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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 13 OF 23  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. Alaska Power and Telephone provides the electricity under their large commercial rate schedules. Fuel Oil was being provided by Fisher Fuels under their commercial rate schedules. 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. The electrical rate being charged at the Slana School is high in comparison to other schools in the CRSD, averaging 0.70 $/kWh. This electric rate may take into account the waste heat which currently is not metered. This rate schedule should be analyzed to determine why it is so high, and if there is a charge for use of the waste heat. 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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 14 OF 23  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 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 0.74 $/kWh 0.86 $/kWh 0.80 $/kWh Fuel Oil 2.65 $/GAL 3.50 $/GAL 3.08 $/GAL Total Cost $50,956 $52,884 $51,920 ECI 6.07 $/sf 6.30 $/sf 6.19 $/sf Electric EUI 27.0 kBtu/sf 23.9 kBtu/sf 25.5 kBtu/sf Fuel Oil EUI 20.4 kBtu/sf 24.7 kBtu/sf 22.6 kBtu/sf Waste Heat EUI 86.9 kBtu/sf 86.9 kBtu/sf 86.9 kBtu/sf Building EUI 134.3 kBtu/sf 135.5 kBtu/sf 134.9 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 134.9 kBtu/sf. This means the surveyed facility uses a total of 62.5% more energy than the US average and 26.7% more energy than the Anchorage School District average on a per square foot basis. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 15 OF 23  At current utility rates, the Copper River School District is modeled to pay approximately $53,219 annually for electricity and other fuel costs for the Slana 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 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 Existing Retrofit Ventilation and Fans Space Heating Refrigeration Other Electrical Lighting Domestic Hot Water Annual Energy Costs by End Use CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 16 OF 23  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 2994 2728 2994 2897 2577 1112 1149 1804 2897 2994 2897 2994 Refrigeration 85 77 85 82 85 82 85 85 82 85 82 85 Other Electrical 723 659 723 700 604 188 195 382 700 723 700 723 Ventilation Fans 130 118 130 126 100 0 0 46 126 130 126 130 DHW 63 58 63 61 63 61 63 63 61 63 61 63 Space Heating 1861 1696 1861 1801 1861 1801 1861 1861 1801 1861 1801 1861 Fuel Oil Consumption (Gallons) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec DHW 72 65 72 69 72 69 72 72 69 72 69 72 Space Heating 107 79 68 44 31 28 29 29 31 52 80 102 Waste Heat Consumption (Millions of Btu’s) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec DHW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Space Heating 127 90 72 39 20 17 17 17 20 50 89 121 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 17 OF 23  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 61,887 kWh 211,220 3.340 705,475 #2 Oil 1,526 gallons 210,636 1.010 212,742 Hot Wtr District Ht 678.30 million Btu 678,297 1.280 868,220 Total 1,100,153 1,786,437 BUILDING AREA 8,400 Square Feet BUILDING SITE EUI 131 kBTU/Ft²/Yr BUILDING SOURCE EUI 213 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    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 18 OF 23  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 3 Exterior HPS 8 HPS 150 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 8 LED 50W Module StdElectronic and install motion activated sensors. Installation Cost $12,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $2,983 Breakeven Cost $35,035 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.9 Simple Payback (yrs) 4 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 5 3-bulb T12 84 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard EfficMagnetic with Manual Switching, Occupancy Sensor Replace with 84 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit Installation Cost $33,600 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $5,512 Breakeven Cost $74,774 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.2 Simple Payback (yrs) 6 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 40-Watt T12 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, if not already, and controls for daylight harvesting. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 19 OF 23  Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 7 Gym MH 6 MH 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching, Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control Replace with 6 FLUOR (3) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $13,672 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $1,338 Breakeven Cost $22,876 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.7 Simple Payback (yrs) 10 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends replacement of the gym lights 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 reduce the gym lighting energy consumption. Below is an example picture of a recently re-lamped elementary gym showing the T5 HO light system. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 8 2-bulb T12 30 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard EfficMagnetic with Manual Switching, Occupancy Sensor Replace with 30 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit Installation Cost $12,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $1,398 Breakeven Cost $20,006 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.7 Simple Payback (yrs) 9 Auditors Notes: See EEM #5 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 9 8-ft T12 8 FLUOR (2) T12 8' F96T12 75W Standard StdElectronic with Manual Switching, Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control Replace with 8 FLUOR (2) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $12,073 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings ($/yr) $41 Breakeven Cost $1,784 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.1 Simple Payback (yrs) 297 Auditors Notes: See EEM #7 for similar notes. The Gymnasium uses 8-foot T12 lights to supplement the MH bulbs. These lights should be upgraded to T5 HO’s as one project for the gym lighting upgrade. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 20 OF 23  Refrigeration Measures Heating/Cooling/Domestic Hot Water Measure Rank Location Description of Existing Efficiency Recommendation 1 Combined Refrigeration Refrigeration Add new Seasonal Shutdown Installation Cost $1 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $160 Breakeven Cost $1,880 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1,879.5 Simple Payback (yrs) 0 Auditors Notes:   This EEM evaluates the practice of beginning seasonal shutdown procedures of the various refrigeration systems throughout the building, including the kitchen and break room refrigerators.  Rank Recommendation 2 Install variable speed controls ($12,000). Interlock CP-1 with circulation pump in generator shed. Implement a reduced run time scheme through DDC controls for motors and DHW to reduce heat wasted during unoccupied hours ($7,500). Remove and replace oil-fired hot water heater with an indirect fired water heater. ($9,000) Installation Cost $28,500 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 30 Energy Savings (/yr) $9,815 Breakeven Cost $197,258 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 6.9 Simple Payback yrs 3 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 variable speed controllers on main building heating circulation pumps and interlock with circulation pump in the school’s generator shed. With variable speed controllers and pump shutdown, the total cost is estimated to be $12,000 for an annual energy savings equivalent to $1,683. 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 $7,500 and produce an annual energy savings equivalent to $5,720. C. Remove the currently installed oil-fired storage water heater and replace this unit with an indirect-fired storage water heater. Using the available waste heat loop will allow the school to reduce the fuel oil consumption load significantly. This retrofit is expected to cost $9,000 for an annual energy savings of $2,063. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 21 OF 23  Ventilation System Measures Night Setback Thermostat Measures Rank Description Recommendation 10 Refine operating schedule of ventilation system through DDC controls. ($2,000) Install a dedicated exhaust fan for the crawlspace of the building. ($2,500) Installation Cost $4,500 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) -$355 Breakeven Cost -$4,165 Savings-to-Investment Ratio -0.9 Simple Payback (yrs) 1000 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 $2,000 for an annual energy savings equivalent to $309. B. Installing a dedicated exhaust fan for the crawlspace of the school will increase the indoor air quality and the longevity of the building through reduced mold. This fan would be able to run independent of the main AHU. Installation of this fan is expected to cost $2,500 and is not expected to generate monetary savings. This is strictly for air quality purposes. Rank Building Space Recommendation 6 School Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the School space. Installation Cost $1,500 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $193 Breakeven Cost $2,620 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.7 Simple Payback (yrs) 8 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. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 22 OF 23  Portable Classroom Measures Rank Location Description of Existing Efficiency Recommendation 4 Relocatable 2 Portable Classroom with Manual Switching Remove 2 Portable Classroom Buildings Installation Cost $33,814 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 30 Energy Savings ($/yr) $2,611 Breakeven Cost $85,448 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.5 Simple Payback (yrs) 13 Auditors Notes:   This EEM evaluates removing the classroom portable units from the Slana School campus entirely. These portable buildings are not currently occupied and are used for storage only. No heat is provided to these buildings at this time. Each building has lights that are working and tied in with the main school. These lights, though used infrequently, add to the total electrical usage of the building and drive up the building EUI. Removal of the two portable buildings ensures there is no unnecessary electrical use. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  AkWarm ID No. AHTNA‐Z93‐CAEC‐02  PAGE 23 OF 23  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    SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX A   Appendix A Benchmark Reports CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY SLANA SCHOOL  K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT 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  25 5 0 0       Renovations/Notes Date PART II – ENERGY SOURCES  Heating Oil  Electricity  Natural Gas   Propane  Wood  Coal  $ /gallon  $ / kWh  $ / CCF  $ / gal  $ / cord  $ / ton Other energy  sources?  Copper River School District Regional Education Attendance 02/02/11 REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage Slana K‐12 Education ‐ K ‐ 12 8,400 Building Type Community Population Year Built Wood Frame 124 1993 Facility Address Facility City Facility Zip Mile 4 Nabesna Road Slana 99586 Contact Person Email lkramer@crsd.k12.ak.us Mailing Address City P.O. Box 108 Glennallen Primary  Operating  Hours Details 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.       APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY SLANA SCHOOL  K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT Slana K-12 Buiding Size Input (sf) =8,400 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Natural Gas Cost ($)0 2010 Electric Consumption (kWh)66,460 2010 Electric Cost ($)47,519 2010 Oil Consumption (Therms)1,709.40 2010 Oil Cost ($)3,437 2010 Propane Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Propane Cost ($)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)7,300.00 2010 Thermal Cost ($)0.00 2010 Steam Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Steam Cost ($)0.00 2010 Total Energy Use (kBtu)1,127,768 2010 Total Energy Cost ($)50,956 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf)27.0 2010 Oil (kBtu/sf) 20.4 2010 Propane (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Coal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Wood (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 86.9 2010 Steam (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2010 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)134.3 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)5.66 2010 Oil Cost Index ($/sf)0.41 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)6.07 APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY SLANA SCHOOL  K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT 2011 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)0.00 2011 Natural Gas Cost ($)0 2011 Electric Consumption (kWh)58,760 2011 Electric Cost ($)47,391 2011 Oil Consumption (Therms)2,075.17 2011 Oil Cost ($)5,494 2011 Propane Consumption (Therms)0.00 2011 Propane Cost ($)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)7,300.00 2011 Thermal Cost ($)0 2011 Steam Consumption (Therms)0.00 2011 Steam Cost ($)0 2011 Total Energy Use (kBtu)1,138,065 2011 Total Energy Cost ($)52,884 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2011 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Electricity (kBtu/sf)23.9 2011 Oil (kBtu/sf)24.7 2011 Propane (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Coal (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Wood (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Thermal (kBtu/sf)86.9 2011 Steam (kBtu/sf)0.0 2011 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)135.5 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2011 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2011 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)5.64 2011 Oil Cost Index ($/sf)0.65 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 ($/sf)0.00 2010 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)6.30 Note: 1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYSLANA SCHOOL  K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORTSlana 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 ($)AP&T Jan‐10 6980 238 $5,162 $0.74AP&T Feb‐10 8220 281 $5,765 $0.70AP&T Mar‐10 5100 174 $3,884 $0.76AP&T Apr‐10 7320 250 $5,222 $0.71AP&T May‐10 5440 186 $4,019 $0.74AP&T Jun‐10 2700 92 $2,258 $0.84AP&T Jul‐10 2020 69 $1,857 $0.92AP&T Aug‐10 3020 103 $2,494 $0.83AP&T Sep‐10 5140 175 $3,921 $0.76AP&T Oct‐10 6580 225 $4,793 $0.73AP&T Nov‐10 6260 214 $4,492 $0.72AP&T Dec‐10 7680 262 $3,652 $0.48AP&T Jan‐11 6380 218 $4,750 $0.74AP&T Feb‐11 7780 266 $5,580 $0.72AP&T Mar‐11 5780 197 $4,376 $0.76AP&T Apr‐11 6580 225 $4,874 $0.74AP&T May‐11 5800 198 $4,791 $0.83AP&T Jun‐11 2580 88 $2,564 $0.99AP&T Jul‐11 1180 40 $1,307 $1.11AP&T Aug‐11 1580 54 $1,719 $1.09AP&T Sep‐11 4000 137 $3,369 $0.84AP&T Oct‐11 5620 192 $4,632 $0.82AP&T Nov‐11 5580 190 $4,605 $0.83AP&T Dec‐11 5900 201 $4,824 $0.82Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total:66,460 2,268 0 $47,519 $0Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total:58,760 2,005 0 $47,391 $0$0.74$0.86Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg:Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg:APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYSLANA SCHOOL  K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT$0$1,000$2,000$3,000$4,000$5,000$6,000$7,0000100020003000400050006000700080009000Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Date (Mon ‐Yr)Slana K‐12 ‐Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Electric Cost ($)APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYSLANA SCHOOL  K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORTSlana 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‐10 125 165 $311 1.88Fisher FuelFeb‐10 140 185 $354 1.92Fisher FuelMar‐10 84 111 $217 1.95Fisher FuelApr‐10 75 99 $206 2.08Fisher FuelMay‐10 96 126 $263 2.08Jun‐10 0 0 $0 0.00Jul‐10 0 0 $0 0.00Aug‐10 0 0 $0 0.00Sep‐10 0 0 $0 0.00Fisher FuelOct‐10 388 512 $1,044 2.04Fisher FuelNov‐10 100 132 $269 2.04Fisher FuelDec‐10 287 379 $773 2.04Fisher FuelJan‐11 100 132 $300 2.27Fisher FuelFeb‐11 225 297 $709 2.39Fisher FuelMar‐11 179 236 $646 2.73Apr‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Fisher FuelMay‐11 60 79 $239 3.02Jun‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Jul‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Aug‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Sep‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Oct‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Nov‐11 0 0 $0 0.00Fisher FuelDec‐11 1008 1,331 $3,599 2.70Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total:1,295 1,709 0$3,437 $0Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total:1,572 2,075 0$5,494$0Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg:2.01Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg:2.65APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYSLANA SCHOOL  K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT$0.00$500.00$1,000.00$1,500.00$2,000.00$2,500.00$3,000.00$3,500.00$4,000.0002004006008001,0001,2001,400Oil Cost ($)Oil Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr)Slana K‐12 ‐Oil Consumption (Therms) vs. Oil Cost ($)Oil Consumption (Therms)Oil Cost ($)APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYSLANA SCHOOL  K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORTSlana K-12ThermalBtu/Btu =1Provider Customer # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (BTU) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Thermal Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/Therm) Demand Cost ($)Jan‐10 90000000 900 $0Feb‐10 80000000 800 $0Mar‐10 65000000 650 $0Apr‐10 55000000 550 $0May‐10 45000000 450 $0Jun‐10 30000000 300 $0Jul‐10 30000000 300 $0Aug‐10 45000000 450 $0Sep‐10 55000000 550 $0Oct‐10 65000000 650 $0Nov‐10 80000000 800 $0Dec‐10 90000000 900 $0Jan‐11 90000000 900 $0Feb‐11 80000000 800 $0Mar‐11 65000000 650 $0Apr‐11 55000000 550 $0May‐11 45000000 450 $0Jun‐11 30000000 300 $0Jul‐11 30000000 300 $0Aug‐11 45000000 450 $0Sep‐11 55000000 550 $0Oct‐11 65000000 650 $0Nov‐11 80000000 800 $0Dec‐11 90000000 900 $0Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total:730,000,000.00 7,300.00$0 $0 $0Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total:730,000,000.00 7,300.00$0 $0 $0Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg:$0Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg:$0APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYSLANA SCHOOL  K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT$0$0$0$1$1$1$101002003004005006007008009001000Thermal Cost ($)Thermal Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr)Building Name ‐Thermal Consumption (Therms) vs Coal Cost ($)Thermal Consumption (Therms)Thermal Cost ($)APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  APPENDIX B  Appendix B AkWarm Short Report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 Page 1  APPENDIX B   ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 6/13/2012 8:24 AM General Project Information PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION Building: Slana K-12 Auditor Company: Central Alaska Engineering Co. Address: Mile 4 Nabesna Road Auditor Name: Jerry P. Herring, PE, CEA City: Slana Auditor Address: 32215 Lakefront Dr Soldotna, AK 99669 Client Name: Ryan Radford Client Address: PO 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: 8,400 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 155,016 Btu/hour with Distribution Losses: 168,496 Btu/hour Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and 25% Safety Margin: 256,853 Btu/hour Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load, if served. Typical Occupancy: 31 people Design Indoor Temperature: 70 deg F (building average) Actual City: Slana Design Outdoor Temperature: -37.7 deg F Weather/Fuel City: Slana Heating Degree Days: deg F-days Utility Information Electric Utility: Slana-APT - Commercial Fuel Oil Provider: None Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.800/kWh Average Annual Cost/gallon: $3.08/gallon Annual Energy Cost Estimate Description Space Heating Space Cooling Water Heating Lighting Refrige ration Other Electri cal Cooking Clothes Drying Ventilatio n Fans Service Fees Total Cost Existing Building $19,193 $0 $2,652 $24,030 $800 $5,616 $0 $0 $928 $0 $53,219 With Proposed Retrofits $11,246 $0 $589 $12,759 $640 $3,005 $0 $0 $1,285 $0 $29,523 SAVINGS $7,947 $0 $2,063 $11,271 $160 $2,611 $0 $0 -$357 $0 $23,696 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 Page 2  APPENDIX B   $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 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  SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 Page 3  APPENDIX B   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 1 Refrigeration - Controls Retrofit: Combined Refrigeration Add new Seasonal Shutdown $160 $1 1879.50 0 2 HVAC And DHW Install premium efficiency motors (4 @ $3,000 each = $12,000). Implement a reduced run time scheme through DDC controls for motors and DHW to reduce heat wasted during unoccupied hours ($1,000 per pump = $4,000). Remove and replace oil-fired hot water heater with an indirect fired water heater. ($9,000) $9,815 $28,500 6.92 2.9 3 Lighting - Power Retrofit: Exterior HPS Replace with 8 LED 50W Module StdElectronic $2,983 $12,000 2.92 4 4 Other Electrical - Power Retrofit: Relocatable Replace with 2 Relo Classroom $2,611 + $1,800 Maint. Savings $33,814 2.53 12.9 5 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 3-bulb T12 Replace with 84 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit $5,512 + $840 Maint. Savings $33,600 2.23 6.1 6 Setback Thermostat: School Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the School space. $193 $1,500 1.75 7.8 7 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: Gym MH Replace with 6 FLUOR (3) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,338 + $600 Maint. Savings $13,672 1.67 10.2 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 Page 4  APPENDIX B   PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 8 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 2-bulb T12 Replace with 30 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit $1,398 + $300 Maint. Savings $12,000 1.67 8.6 9 Lighting - Combined Retrofit: 8-ft T12 Replace with 8 FLUOR (2) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $41 + $80 Maint. Savings $12,073 0.15 297.1 10 Ventilation Refine operating schedule of ventilation system through DDC controls. ($2,000) Install a dedicated exhaust fan for the crawlspace of the building. ($2,500) -$355 $4,500 -0.93 -12.7 TOTAL $23,696 + $3,620 Maint. Savings $151,660 2.88 6.4 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 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 Page 5  APPENDIX B   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 2 Install premium efficiency motors (4 @ $3,000 each = $12,000). Implement a reduced run time scheme through DDC controls for motors and DHW to reduce heat wasted during unoccupied hours ($1,000 per pump = $4,000). Remove and replace oil-fired hot water heater with an indirect fired water heater. ($9,000) $28,500 $9,815 Setback Thermostat Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 6 School Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 70.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the School space. $1,500 $193 Ventilation Rank Recommendation Cost Annual Energy Savings 10 Refine operating schedule of ventilation system through DDC controls. ($2,000) Install a dedicated exhaust fan for the crawlspace of the building. ($2,500) $4,500 -$355 3. Appliances and Lighting Lighting Fixtures and Controls Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 3 Exterior HPS 8 HPS 150 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 8 LED 50W Module StdElectronic $12,000 $2,983 5 3-bulb T12 84 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard EfficMagnetic with Manual Switching, Occupancy Sensor Replace with 84 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit $33,600 $5,512 + $840 Maint. Savings Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison  AkWarm Commercial Audit Software  SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 Page 6  APPENDIX B   7 Gym MH 6 MH 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching, Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control Replace with 6 FLUOR (3) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $13,672 $1,338 + $600 Maint. Savings 8 2-bulb T12 30 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard EfficMagnetic with Manual Switching, Occupancy Sensor Replace with 30 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Controls retrofit $12,000 $1,398 + $300 Maint. Savings 9 8-ft T12 8 FLUOR (2) T12 8' F96T12 75W Standard StdElectronic with Manual Switching, Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control Replace with 8 FLUOR (2) T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO Energy-Saver HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $12,073 $41 + $80 Maint. Savings Refrigeration Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 1 Combined Refrigeration Refrigeration Add new Seasonal Shutdown $1 $160 Other Electrical Equipment Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 4 Relocatable 2 Relo Classroom with Manual Switching Replace with 2 Relo Classroom $33,814 $2,611 + $1,800 Maint. Savings ------------------------------------------ AkWarmCalc Ver 2.2.0.3, Energy Lib 5/18/2012 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY    SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX C   Appendix C Major Equipment List CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYSLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORTTAG LOCATION FUNCTION MAKE MODEL TYPE CAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZEASHRAE SERVICE LIFEESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFENOTESB-1 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT BURNHAM V-15A OIL/CAST IRON 160 MBH 85% - 35 23B-2 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT BURNHAM V-15A OIL/CAST IRON 160 MBH 85% - 35 23WH-1 BOILER ROOM DHW SUPPLY STATE SBT8 199 OIL/SHELL&TUBE 199 MBH / 80 GAL 70% - 24 5HWCP-1 BOILER ROOM DHW CIRC GRUNDFOS UP 15-18 SU INLINE 5 GPM @ 10' 85% 85 W 10 0CP-1 BOILER ROOM GLYCOL SYSTEMS GRUNDFOS UPC 50-160 INLINE 27 GPM @ 40' 82% 0.75 HP 10 0CP-2 BOILER ROOM GLYCOL SYSTEMS GRUNDFOS UPC 50-160 INLINE 27 GPM @ 40' 82% 0.75 HP 10 0CP-3 GENERATOR ROOM GLYCOL SYSTEMS DAYTON N/A BASE-MOUNTED EST. 30 GPM 82% 2.0 HP 15 0AHU-1 FAN ROOM AIR CIRC LASALLE HHV-08 HORIZONTAL 4,000 CFM @ 1.5" 85% 2.0 HP 20 0EF-1 FAN ROOM EXHAUST PENN ZC10 CENTRIFIGUL 500 CFM @ 0.75" 82% 0.25 HP 20 0MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORYAPPENDIX C CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX D   Appendix D Site Visit Photos CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX D   1. Overview of boiler room. 2. Close-up of boiler B-1. 3. Heated glycol circulation pumps. 4. Heated glycol supply lines. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX D   5. Overview of school showing generator building. 6. One of the school’s portable classrooms. 7. Waste heat recovery system lines below building. 8. Overview of fan room, depicting AHU-1 and ductwork for EF-1. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX E  Appendix E Thermal Site Visit Photos CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX E  1. Front of school. High heat loss shown in hallway window. This window was opened during the site visit. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX E  2. (A) Typical school doorway, expected heat loss. (B) Differing temperature across electrical panels. A B CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX E  3. Gymnasium window, expected heat loss surrounding window frame. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX E  4. Small classroom window typical of school, high heat loss suggests window is open. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX E  5. Close up of school’s foundation insulation, heat loss expected. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX E  6. Back entrance of school, expected heat loss surrounding door opening and window frames. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX E  7. Windows typical of school, expected heat loss surrounding windows. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX E  8. Exhaust fan for restrooms is shown to be on. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY      SLANA SCHOOL K‐12 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT   APPENDIX E  9. Windows typical of school, expected heat loss surrounding windows. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY SLANA SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT  APPENDIX F  Appendix F Waste Heat Recovery Meter 46 Appendix F Waste Heat: Add instrumentation per schematic below, to measure the amount of waste heat being utilized by the subject building. This information will complete the picture regarding energy input to the building and inform owner/management decisions regarding capital and energy related improvements. Outside Inside building Temperature sensor Flow meter measuring glycol flow rate Tin From power plant Supply glycol To power plant Return glycol Temperature sensor Measuring Tout Amount of waste heat (BTU/hr) = flow rate (gallons/minute) x (Tin-Tout) x 450 •Temperature is in degrees F •Shenitech ultrasonic flowmeter (or equivalent) can be used to determine temperatures and flow rate, data sheet attached as Appendix H. Appendix F Main Unit Repeatability Better than 0.2% Accuracy For flow measurement: r1% of reading, plus r0.006m/s (r0.02ft/s) in velocity Response Time 0.5s. Configurable between 0.5s and 99s Velocity -16 ~ +16m/s (-52 ~ +52 ft/s), bi-directional Display / Keypad LCD with backlight. 2 x 20 letters. 4 x 4 tactile-feedback membrane keypad. Displays instantaneous energy rate, total energy (positive, negative and net), temperatures, flow rate, time, analog inputs, etc. Units English (U.S.) or metric Signal Outputs Current output: 4-20mA isolated output for energy rate, flowrate, velocity or sound speed. Impedance 0-1k. Accuracy 0.1% OCT output: isolated Open Collector Transistor output. Up to 0.5A load Relay output: 1A@125VAC or 2A@30VDC Can be programmed as pulse signal for energy/flow totalization; ON/OFF signal for relay drive or alarm drive; batch control Sound alarm Temperature and other Analog Inputs RTD interface: two temperature channels that can accommodate two PT100 3-wire temperature sensors for thermal energy measurement. Analog input: one channel of 4-20mA input. Can be used for temperature, pressure and level Recording Automatically records the totalizer data of the last 128 days / 64 months / 5years Optional SD data logger (2GB space) or external USB data logger Communication Interface Isolated RS-485 with power surge protection. Supports the MODBUS protocol StufManagerTM PC software for real-time data acquisition (optional) Optional wireless module (GPRS/GSM/RF) for remote monitoring (STUF-300RnB only) Enclosure Protection Class: IP65 (NEMA 4X) weather-resistant. Additional protection enclosure (large polycarbonate enclosure) available upon request (STUF-300R2B model only). Dimension: 230mm x 150mm x 75mm (9” x 5.9” x 3”) LiquidsLiquid Types Virtually all commonly used liquids (full pipe) Liquid Temp -40˚C ~ 100˚C or -40˚C ~ 155˚C, depending on transducer type Suspension concentration <20,000ppm, or, < 2%, particle size smaller than 100um. PipePipe Size DN15 ~ DN6,000mm (0.5" ~ 240"), depending on transducer type Pipe Material All metals, most plastics, fiber glass, etc. Allow pipe liner. Straight Pipe Section Longer than 15D, where D is pipe diameter. If a pump or a valve is nearby upstream, the straight pipe section following the pump should be > 25D. Cable Shielded transducer cable. Standard length 15’ (5m). Can be extended to 1640’ (500m). Contact the manufacturer for longer cable requirement. Environment Temperature Main unit: -10˚C ~ 70˚C (14˚F ~ 158˚F) Ultrasonic Transducer: -40˚C ~ 100˚C (-40˚F ~ 212˚F) for standard version -40˚C ~ 155˚C (-40˚F ~ 312˚F) for higher temperature version PT100 temperature sensor: -40˚F ~ 312˚F (-40˚C ~ 155˚C) Humidity Main unit: 85% RH Ultrasonic Transducer: water-immersible, water depth less than 10’ (3m) Power DC: 12 ~ 24VDC, or, AC: 90 ~ 260VAC Power consumption: < 1.5W at 12VDC Weight Main unit: 2 kg (4 lbs) for standard version, 2.5 kg (5 lbs) for network version Specifications: Applications: The STUF-300R1B thermal energy measurement system is an ideal choice for a wide range of applications in HVAC, energy production, energy transfer, building management, university facility management, district heating and cooling, geothermal or solar-thermal system monitoring, and all other liquid-based thermal energy production/transferring. Some examples are: x Chilled water sub-metering x Hot water sub-metering x Condenser water x Glycol x Thermal storage x Geothermal system x Solar hot-water system x Lake source cooling x Chemical feed, ammonia feed x Energy meter network x Power plants Transducer Options: Type HF x : Special transducer for small size pipes DN15 ~ DN 25mm (0.5” ~ 1”) Temperature range -20˚C ~ 60˚C (0˚F ~ 140˚F) x represents pipe material: 0-Copper; 1–Tubing; 2–ANSI Plastic; 3-ANSI Metal Type S1 x : Standard-S1 transducer (magnetic) for pipes DN25 ~ DN100mm (1” ~ 4”) Temperature range -40˚C ~ 80˚C (-40˚F ~ 175˚F) x represents pipe material. Same as above Type S1HT x : High-temp S1 transducer for small size pipes DN25 ~ DN100mm (1” ~ 4”) Temperature range -40˚C ~ 155˚C (-40˚F ~ 312˚F) x represents pipe material. Same as above Type M1: Standard-M1 transducer (magnetic) for med ium size pipes DN50 ~ DN700mm (2” ~ 28”) Temperature range -40˚C ~ 80˚C (-40˚F ~ 175˚F) Type M1HT: High-temp M1 transducer for medium size pipes DN50 ~ DN700mm (2” ~ 28”) Temperature range -40˚C ~ 155˚C (-40˚F ~ 312˚F) Type L1: Standard-L1 transducer for large size pip es DN300 ~ DN6,000mm (11” ~ 240”) Temperature range -40˚C ~ 80˚C (-40˚F ~ 175˚F) PT100SM: surface-mount temperature sensor, 3-wire PT100 Thermal isolation around the sensor is recommended in order to get a temperature reading close to the liquid temperature PT100IN: Insertion type temperature sensor, 3-wire PT100 Users may use their own RTD temperature sensor Model Selection: S T U F - 3 0 0 R 1 B - ฀ - ฀ - ฀ - ฀ - ฀ -฀ - ฀ Example: Model# STUF-300R1B-M1-PT100SM-A-DN100-M5-AO-DLSD stands for standard main unit, M1-type clamp-on transducer and PT100 surface-mount sensor for pipe size DN100mm, 1m lead for temperature sensor and 5 meter cable for flow transducer, with 4-20mA output and SD data logger. Note: If you prefer to work with the English system for the model number, please put “IN” (for inch) or “F” (for foot) right before the dimension values. For example, the above model# in the English system will be: STUF-300R1B-M1-PT100SM-A-IN4-F15-AO-DLSD. SHENITECH, LLC 10-214 Tower Office Park, Woburn, MA 01801, USA Tel. +1 781-932-0900, +1 888-738-0188 (Toll-free) Fax +1 978 418 9170 sales@shenitech.com,www.shenitech.com ©2007 Copyright Shenitech. All rights reserved. SHENITECH R Transducer: HFx – Special transducer for 0.5”-1” * S1x – Standard S1-type for pipes 1” – 4” * S1HTx – High-temperature version of the S1-type * M1 – Standard M1-type for pipes 2” – 28” M1HT – High-temperature version of the M1-type *x represents pipe material: 0-Copper; 1–Tubing; 2–ANSI Plastic; 3-ANSI Metal Transducer Cable Length: Mxx - Cable length in meters Fxx – Cable length in ft Pipe Size: DNxxx (metric) or INxxx (English) 4-20mA Output: AO – With 4-20mA output NAO or absent – No 4-20mA output Other Options: DLSD – With SD data logger (2GB) DLUSB – With external USB data logger SW – StufManagerTM PC software 485USB – RS485-to-USB convertor Temperature Sensor: PT100SM – With a pair of PT100 sensors, surface-mount PT100IN – With a pair of PT100 sensors, insertion mount NO or absent – No temperature sensor Temperature Sensor Lead Length: A –1meter (3ft); B – 3meters(9ft); C – 10meters (30ft)