HomeMy WebLinkAboutASRC-BRW-RSA Barrow Sanitation Building 2012-EERichard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC
Mechanical/Electrical Engineer
Comprehensive Energy Audit
of
Barrow Sanitation Building
Beach Road Building 3490
Project # ASRC#BRW#RSA#08
Prepared for:
The North Slope Borough
Department of Public Works
September 23, 2011
Prepared by:
Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC
2321 Merrill Field Drive, C#6
Anchorage, Ak 99501
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Executive Summary 4
2. Audit and Analysis Background 7
3. Acknowledgements 9
4. Building Description & Function 10
5. Historic Energy Consumption 11
6. Energy Efficiency Measures Considered 12
7. Interactive Effects of Projects 14
8. Loan Program 14
Photos
AkWarm5C Report
Equipment Schedules
Building Plan
Submitted by:
_______________________________
Richard S. Armstrong, PE, CEM, CEA
Date:__________________________
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
3
REPORT DISCLAIMERS
The information contained in this report, including any attachments, is
intended solely for use by the building owner and the AHFC. No others
are authorized to disclose, copy, distribute or retain this report, in whole or
part, without written authorization from Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC,
2321 Merrill Field Drive, C#6, Anchorage, Ak 99501. Additionally, this
report contains recommendations that, in the opinion of the auditor, will
cause the owner to realize energy savings over time. All
recommendations must be designed by a registered engineer, licensed in
the State of Alaska, in the appropriate discipline. Lighting
recommendations should all be first reviewed by running a lighting
analysis to assure that the recommended lighting upgrades will comply
with State of Alaska Statue as well as IES recommendations.
Payback periods may well vary from those forecast 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,
Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC, AHFC, or others involved in preparation of
this report will accept liability for financial loss due to EEMs that fail to
meet the forecasted payback periods.
This audit meets the criteria of an Investment Grade Audit (IGA) per the
Association of Energy Engineers definition, and is valid for one year. The
life of the IGA may be extended on a case#by#case basis, at the discretion
of the AHFC.
IGSs are the property of the State, and may be incorporated into AkWarm#
C, the Alaska Energy Data Inventory (ARIS), or other state and/or public
information system
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
4
Investment Grade Energy Audit
Barrow Sanitation Building
1. Executive Summary: The Barrow Sanitation Building is estimated
to have been originally constructed in 1985, but it underwent a
ventilation and heating upgrade in 2009 based on plans for the
remodel/addition project.
Table 1
2009 2009 2010 2010
Utility Consumption Cost/Year Consumption Cost/Year
Electricity#kWh 428,400 $46,252 480,360 $52,610
Natural Gas#CCF
Combined Heavy
and Warehouse
331,302 $115,636 321,881 $93,367
Ttl Energy
Costs
$161,888
$145,977
A benchmark measure of energy use relative to other similar function
buildings in the area is the Energy Use Index (EUI), which takes the
total annual energy used by the facility divided by the square footage
area of the building, for a value expressed in terms of kBTU/SF.
This number can then be compared to other buildings to see if it is
about average, higher or lower than similar buildings in the area.
Likewise, the Energy Cost Index (ECI) is the cost of all energy used
by the building expressed in $/SF of building area. In this case,
since the Sanitation Building is burning trash, the process costs will
not be directly comparable to other non#process type buildings. The
comparative values for the subject building are listed in Table 2
below:
Table 2
Sanitation
Building #3490
& whse
Barrow Avg Fire Station #1
Energy Use Index (EUI)
kBTU/SF Avg 2009, 2010
379 211 207
Energy Cost Index (ECI)
Average 2009, 2010
$3.15 $1.68 $1.92
Various Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs) have been analyzed for
this building to determine if they would be applicable for energy
savings with reasonably good payback periods. Those EEMs that
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
5
have a payback period or those that are recommended for code
compliance, life cycle replacement, or other reasons are also
included. Also, where a lighting upgrade is recommended from T#12
lamps with magnetic ballasts to T#8 lamps with electronic ballasts,
then the entire facility should be re#lamped and re#ballasted to
maintain a standard lighting parts inventory, regardless of the
payback. For example, a storage room that is infrequently used may
not show a very good payback for a lighting upgrade, but
consistency dictates a total upgrade.
Specific EEMs recommended for this facility are summarized below,
and are detailed in the attached AkWarm Energy Audit Report along
with specific payback times, as well as estimated installation costs
and estimated energy savings. Several of the EEMs are not
modeled in the AkWarm#C program because they will require
engineering to determine costs and payback once the technical
savings are estimated. The higher priority items are summarized
below:
a. Stack Heat Recovery: As detailed below, it is estimated
that 3#6 million BTUH is wasted up the incinerator stack,
which appears to be enough energy to heat the entire
building, including heating of domestic hot water. The
possibility of installing a heat recovery coil on the incinerator
stack should be investigated and implemented as soon as
possible.
b. Pressurization Control: The tipping floor is freely
communicating with the rest of the building, preventing
effective pressure control between the spaces. It is
recommended that a coiling type door be installed between
the tipping floor and the adjacent shop.
c. Exhaust Fan Speed Control: The exhaust fan EF#2 was
found to be operating at full speed, evacuating 11,000 CFM
from the building continuously. With the rated air flow of
this fan, it is estimated that at #30F outside air temperature,
1.2 million BTUH of heat is lost. This system needs to be
brought under control to conserve energy.
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
6
d. Variable Frequency Drive Circulators: The hydronic
glycol circulators are operating at full speed, 24/7.
Exponential energy savings can be realized if the circulators
are put on a variable frequency drive to only provide the
amount of glycol flow needed to transfer the heat needed at
any given time. This is difficult to calculate, but it is
estimated that 50% pump energy savings can be realized
with a VFD retrofit.
e. Flourescent Lighting Upgrades: In general, all of the T#
12 flourescent lamps, and all of the magnetic ballasts
throughout the building should be replaced with new T#8
lamps with electronic ballasts. Typical savings in power
consumption varies 10#30% with this upgrade.
f. Lighting Control Upgrades: Many lights were found to be
left on with nobody in the space. Occupant controls can
sense the presence of workers, and turn the lights on. The
occupancy controller can then turn the lights off after a
programmed time period of no occupancy. These controls
can reduce total kWh consumption for the lighting in the
order of 30#90%, depending on the amount of time the lights
are manually left on.
g. Shop Lighting Upgrades: The shops are lit with high
intensity discharge 250 watt HPS lights, 38 fixtures. It is
recommended that all fixtures be replaced with new 6#lamp
high output fluorescent fixtures that can be switched with
occupancy sensors. While the power consumption may rise
slightly, the on time will be reduced, which would result in
an overall lighting energy reduction of about 40% per year,
with only a 2% lighting output reduction.
h. Ventilation: It is recommended that six destratification fans
be installed in the high bay areas to put the heat down on
the floor level and reduce heating stratification near the
ceiling.
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
7
i. Task Lighting: There is insufficient task lighting above the
incinerator door openings. It is recommended that
additional flood lighting be installed to focus light down into
the incinerator when the doors are opened.
j. Refrigerator: Newer Energy Star refrigerators use about
411 watts, compared to 1990 versions that used 1,044
watts. While this would have a 7.4 year payback, it is still
recommended due to the relatively low cost and quick
payback.
2. Audit and Analysis Background:
a. Program Description: This audit included services to identify,
develop, and evaluate energy efficiency measures at the
subject building. The scope of this project included evaluating
the building shell, lighting, other electrical systems, and
heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment.
Measures were selected such that an overall simple payback
period of 8 years or less could be achieved.
b. Audit Description and Methodology: Preliminary audit
information was gathered in preparation for the site survey,
including benchmark utility consumption data, floor and lighting
plans, and equipment schedules where available. A site visit is
then performed to inventory and evaluate the actual building
condition, including:
i. Building envelope (roof, windows, etc)
ii. Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning
iii. Lighting systems and controls
iv. Building specific equipment
v. Plumbing systems
c. Method of Analysis: The information gathered prior to the site
visit and at the site visit is entered into AkWarm#C, an energy
modeling developed for Alaska Housing Finance Corporation
(AHFC) specifically to identify forecasted energy consumption
which can be compared to actual energy consumption.
AkWarm#C also has some pre#programmed EEM retrofit
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
8
options that can be analyzed with energy savings forecasted
based on occupancy schedules, utility rates, building
construction type, building function, existing conditions, and
climatic data that is already uploaded to the program based on
the zip code of the building. When new equipment is
proposed, energy consumption is calculated based on
manufacturer’s cataloged information.
Cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy
costs for the building. Installation costs include labor and
equipment to estimate the full up#front investment required to
implement a change, but design and construction management
costs are excluded. Costs are derived from Means Cost Data,
industry publications, experience of the auditor, local
contractors and equipment suppliers. Haakensen Electric was
consulted for some of the lighting retrofit costs. Maintenance
savings are calculated were applicable and are added to the
energy savings for each EEM.
The cost and savings are applied and a simple payback and
simple return on investment (ROI) is calculated. The simple
payback is based on the number of years that it takes for the
savings to pay back the net installation cost (Net Installation
divided by Net Savings.)
A simple life#time calculation is shown for each EEM. The life#
time for each EEM is estimated based on the typical life of the
equipment being replaced or altered. The energy savings is
extrapolated throughout the life#time of the EEM. The total
energy savings is calculated as the total life#time multiplied by
the yearly savings.
d. Limitations of the Study: All results are dependent on the
quality of input data provided, and can only act as an
approximation. In some instances, several methods may
achieve the identified savings. This report is not intended as a
final design document. A design professional, licensed to
practice in Alaska and in the appropriate discipline, who is
following the recommendations, shall accept full responsibility
and liability for the results. Budgetary estimates for
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
9
engineering and design of these projects in not included in the
cost estimate for each measure, but these costs generally run
around 15% of the cost of the work.
3. Acknowledgements: We wish to acknowledge the help of
numerous individuals who have contributed information that was
used to prepare this report, including:
a. Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (Grantor): AHFC
provided the grant funds, contracting agreements, guidelines,
and technical direction for providing the audits. AHFC
reviewed and approved the final short list of buildings to be
audited based on the recommendation of the Technical
Service Provider (TSP).
b. North Slope Borough (Owner): The NSB provided building
sizing information, two years energy billing data, building
schedules and functions, as well as building age. Scott Barr,
manager of the facility, was very helpful in providing an insight
into the operations and potential energy savings at the
building.
c. Nortech Engineering (Benchmark TSP): Nortech
Engineering compiled the data received from the NSB and
entered that data into the statewide building database, called
the Alaska Retrofit Information System (ARIS).
d. Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC (Audit TSP): This is the
TSP who was awarded the projects in the Arctic Slope
Regional Corporation, Bering Straits area, and the Nana area.
The firm gathered all relevant benchmark information provided
to them by Nortech, cataloged which buildings would have the
greatest potential payback, and prioritized buildings to be
audited based on numerous factors, including the Energy Use
Index (EUI), the Energy Cost Index (ECI), the age of the
building, the size of the building, the location of the building,
the function of the building, and the availability of plans for the
building. They also trained their selected sub#contracted
auditors, assigned auditors to the selected buildings, and
performed quality control reviews of the resulting audits. They
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
10
prepared a listing of potential EEMs that each auditor must
consider, as well as the potential EEMs that the individual
auditor may notice in the course of his audit. Richard S.
Armstrong, PE, LLC also performed some of the audits to
assure current knowledge of existing conditions.
4. Building Description and Function: The subject structure is called
the Barrow Sanitation Building. It is believed that it was originally
constructed around 1985, and had a remodel constructed in 2009
after there was an explosion in the incinerator that damaged that end
of the building. The building is mostly a one story high bay structure,
except for the two story office on the west end. The principal
function of the building is to burn trash, thus sanitizing and reducing
volume going to the landfill by an estimated 99%. Scott Barr,
Operations Manager, estimates that 12 tons of trash are burned
each day, with operations continuing 24/7. During the summer, the
trash is estimated to contain 3,000 to 3,500 BTU/lb, and in the winter
it contains 7,000 BTU/lb according to Scott. At the low estimate of
3,000 BTU/lb and 12 tons burned per day, the facility produces an
average of 3 million BTU/Hr. This number doubles during the winter
to over 6 million BTU/Hr. While the plans indicate that some heat
recovery occurs via a transfer fan between the incinerator room and
the adjacent shop, there is no heat recovery from the stack, which is
reported to operate at around 1,500 degrees F. Also, there is no
destratification fan system in the building, so the areas in the
incinerator get so hot that lighting fixtures continually burn out from
overheating.
a. Heating System: The building heating system consists of two
Burnham PF#521 cast iron gas fired boilers with Power Flame
Burners, model C3#G#25. The boilers provide heat the make#
up air system, offices, and shop areas. The boilers were
installed in the late 1980s. Hot glycol is circulated around the
building using two Taco Model 16#50957#130101#1782
circulators, each with 10 HP motors. The pumps are NOT
equipped with VFD drives, so they run at full speed at all times.
Hydronic and gas fired unit heaters also provide heat to the
spaces.
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
11
b. Ventilation System: There are several air handlers, transfer
fans, and exhaust fans. Exhaust fan EF#2, for example is a 3
HP Pace U#33#FC Std fan that moves 11,510 CFM of air at full
speed. This fan moves air across the shop area and is
exhausted. During cold weather, when the air temperature
difference is 100 degrees F, it is estimated that this fan
removes 1,243,000 BTUH of energy if the fan is running at
100% speed. During our visit, the fan continuously operated at
99% of VFD control. There are also two transfer fans, one
from the tipping floor to the shop, and a second from the fire
pump room to the center shop. The make#up air system is
located about 13’ above the floor, so it was not possible to
gather specific data on that unit.
c. Plumbing System: Toilets with lavs, showers, and clothes
washing facilities are provided for the workers, in addition to a
break sink.
d. Domestic Hot Water: How water is generated using a 400
MBH natural gas fired hot water tank heater, with the tank
estimated to be 200 gallons capacity.
e. Lighting: Typical lighting throughout the building is comprised
of T#12 fluorescent fixtures, using magnetic ballasts in the
offices and low spaces, with HPS lighting fixtures in the shops
and tipping floor area. Exterior lighting utilizes 250 watt high
pressure sodium (HPS) wall packs.
5. Historic Energy Consumption: Energy consumption is modeled
within the AkWarm#C program. The program only analyzes 12
months of data, so where 24 months of data are available, the data
is averaged and input to AkWarm#C to provide more accuracy. The
energy consumption data is presented and graphed in the attached
AkWarm#C program results.
The average electric consumption for the building is 453,300
kWh/year at an average cost of $49,429/year. The average natural
gas consumption was 326,589 ccf/year, at an average annual cost of
$104,504/year. While some of this gas is used to start the
incinerator, much is also used to fire the boilers and water heater.
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
12
6. Energy Efficiency Measures considered or recommended: The
building was examined for application of a multitude of potential
EEMs that are discussed below. Those EEMs that appear to have
an application for the subject building are further analyzed for
estimated payback periods, either within the AkWarm#C program or
separately within this report. The accuracy of the cost estimates and
paybacks varies significantly due to a multitude of conditions, but is
estimated to be approximately +/# 25%. Assumptions made
regarding energy costs and the life of the EEM, noting that post#
construction measurement and verification are based on energy
savings, not energy cost savings. Many of the selected EEMs are
analyzed within the AkWarm#C program using the schedules and
estimated costs input into the model.
a. Incinerator Stack Heat Recovery: While there is some
measure of heat recovery used with the transfer fans, much
more is available through the exhaust stack in the incinerator.
At 1,500 degrees F stack temperature, it should be possible to
provide most if not all of the heating requirements presently
handled by independent glycol boilers, since an estimated 3
million BTUH is wasted up the stack during incinerator
operation. This will require a more in#depth engineering
investigation and discussions with the incinerator
manufacturer, but the payback should be well below 7 years if
implemented.
b. Pressurization Control: There is a large (13’ tall x 15’#6”
wide) opening between the tipping floor and the adjacent shop
area. This opening is preventing any effective pressurization
of the shop areas relative to the incinerator. Scott Barr advises
that they do not need the opening, as they rarely operate
equipment between the two spaces. It is recommended that a
12’ wide x 12’ high coiling door be installed in this opening to
allow for effective pressurization of the shop area relative to
the incinerator tipping floor.
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
13
c. Destratification Fans: The tall building creates the
opportunity for warm air to stagnate toward the ceiling. The
incinerator room has reported frequent burn out of lighting
fixtures, presumably due to the excessive heat near the ceiling.
Furthermore, without destratification fans, heating the work
zone for comfort will require more energy if the room is
stratified. All tall spaces should have destratification fans to
reduce energy and to reduce the frequency of light fixture burn
out.
d. Office Lighting: The offices and other low spaces all have T#
12 lamps with magnetic ballasts. The AkWarm#C program
models these lamps and shows the payback period if they are
all changed to T#8 lamps with electronic programmable
ballasts. It is recommended that all T#12 lights be retrofitted to
T#8 with magnetic ballasts for lamp and ballast standardization,
regardless of the payback period.
e. Shop Lighting: The lighting in the building is on 24/7, even
though all spaces are not occupied all the time. It is
recommended that all shop lights be changed to T#5 high
output fluorescent, since those lamps light instantly, which
means they can be easily controlled with motion sensors. It is
recommended that all shop lighting fixtures have individual
motion sensors integral to the fixture, so as workers move
around a space, the respective light fixture will turn on. One or
more “night lights” could also be wired to be on continuously if
desired, or 1#2 lamps within each fixture could be wired to be
on continuously, with the rest of the lamps coming on when
occupants are present.
f. Make5up Air Control: The EF#2 fan was observed to be
operating at 99% of full capacity, even with the VFD control.
This presents the probability that the control is not set up
properly, or some other issue is preventing the fan from
slowing down. This is wasting a huge amount of energy, both
fan and heat energy, so it needs to be investigated and
corrected.
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
14
7. Interactive Effects of Projects: The AkWarm#C program
calculates savings assuming that all recommended EEM are
implemented. If some EEMs are not implemented, savings for the
remaining EEMs will be affected, in some cases positively, and in
others, negatively. For example, if the fan motors are not replaced
with premium efficiency motors, then the savings for the project to
install variable speed drives (VFDs) on the fans will be increased.
In general, all projects were evaluated sequentially so that energy
savings associated with one EEM would not be attributed to another
EEM as well. For example, the night setback EEM was analyzed
using the fan and heating load profile that will be achieved after
installation of the VFD project is completed. By modeling the
recommended projects sequentially, the analysis accounts for
interactive effects between the EEMs and does not “double count”
savings.
Interior lighting, plug loads, facility equipment, and occupants
generate heat within the building. When the building is in cooling
mode, these contribute to the overall cooling demands of the
building; therefore lighting efficiency improvements will reduce
cooling requirements on air conditioned buildings. Conversely,
lighting efficiency improvements are anticipated to increase heating
requirements slightly. Heating penalties are included in the lighting
project analysis that is performed by AkWarm#C.
8. Loan Program: 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 of
municipal governments;
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
15
c. The University of Alaska;
d. Political subdivisions of the State of Alaska, or
e. The State of Alaska
Native corporations, tribal entities, and subsidiaries of the federal
government are not eligible for loans under this program.
Barrow Sanitation Building Comprehensive Energy Audit
16
Attachments:
Photos
AkWarm5C Report
Building Plans
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Barrow Shop III/TDS Facility
Page 1
ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 11/5/2011 11:17 AM
General Project Information
PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION
Building: Barrow Shop III/TDS Facility Auditor Company: Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC
Address: Beach Road Landfill Auditor Name: Richard S. Armstrong
City: Barrow Auditor Address: 2321 Merrill Field Drive
Anchorage, Ak 99501 Client Name: Scott Barr
Client Address: Beach Road Sanitation Building #3490 Auditor Phone: (907) 229-0331
Auditor FAX:
Client Phone: (907) 852-0349 Auditor Comment:
Client FAX:
Design Data
Building Area: 17,152 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 3,085,823 Btu/hour
with Distribution Losses: 3,175,149 Btu/hour
Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and 25%
Safety Margin: 4,840,166 Btu/hour
Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load, if
served.
Typical Occupancy: 20 people Design Indoor Temperature: 70 deg F (building average)
Actual City: Barrow Design Outdoor Temperature: -41 deg F
Weather/Fuel City: Barrow Heating Degree Days: 20,370 deg F-days
Utility Information
Electric Utility: Barrow Utilities & Electric-elec -
Commercial - Lg
Natural Gas Provider: Barrow Utilities & Electric-gas -
Commercial - Lg
Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.109/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.305/ccf
Annual Energy Cost Estimate
Description Space
Heating
Space
Cooling
Water
Heating Lighting Other
Electrical Cooking Clothes
Drying
Ventilation
Fans
Service
Fees
Total
Cost
Existing
Building
$104,879 $0 $595 $21,055 $5,081 $37,946 $911 $4,476 $1,222 $176,973
With
Proposed
Retrofits
$104,445 $0 $592 $10,189 $3,800 $37,946 $911 $4,476 $1,222 $164,387
SAVINGS $434 $0 $3 $10,866 $1,282 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,585
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Barrow Shop III/TDS Facility
Page 2
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
Existing Retrofit
Service Fees
Ventilation and Fans
Space Heating
Refrigeration
Other Electrical
Lighting
Domestic Hot Water
Cooking
Clothes Drying
Annual Energy Costs by End Use
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
Existing Retrofit
Natural Gas
Electricity
Annual Energy Costs by Fuel
$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000
Floor
Wall/Door
Window
Ceiling
Air
Existing Retrofit
Annual Space Heating Cost by Component
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Barrow Shop III/TDS Facility
Page 3
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
1 Other Electrical:
Vending machines
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Other
Controls
$341 $200 10.86 0.6
2 Other Electrical:
Electric coffee maker
Replace with Electric
coffee maker and Improve
Other Controls
$818 $1,201 4.34 1.5
3 HVAC And DHW Install heat recovery at
Incinerator stack, use
energy to heat balance of
building.
$1,606 $8,000 3.14 5
4 Lighting: Incinerator
room, middle and
end bay lighting
Replace with 38 FLUOR (4)
T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO
Energy-Saver HighLight
HighEfficElectronic and
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$3,782 $9,500 2.54 2.5
5 Lighting: Office,
storage, boiler,
parts, restrooms
Replace with 134 FLUOR
(2) T8 4' F32T8 28W
Energy-Saver Program
HighEfficElectronic and
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$6,039 $17,000 2.26 2.8
6 Other Electrical:
Vending machines
Replace with Chilled
beverage vending machine
$0 $0 0.00 Infinity
TOTAL $12,585 $35,901 2.65 2.9
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
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Barrow Shop III/TDS Facility
Page 4
Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Air Leakage
Rank Location Estimated Air Leakage Recommended Air Leakage
Target
Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
2. Mechanical Equipment
Mechanical
Rank Recommendation Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
3 Install heat recovery at Incinerator stack, use energy to heat balance of building. $8,000 $1,606
Setback Thermostat
Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Ventilation
Rank Recommendation Cost Annual
Energy
Savings
3. Appliances and Lighting
Lighting Fixtures and Controls
Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
4 Incinerator room,
middle and end
bay lighting
38 HPS 250 Watt Magnetic with
Manual Switching
Replace with 38 FLUOR (4)
T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO
Energy-Saver HighLight
HighEfficElectronic and
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$9,500 $3,782
5 Office, storage,
boiler, parts,
restrooms
134 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12
40W Standard Magnetic with
Manual Switching
Replace with 134 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Program
HighEfficElectronic and
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$17,000 $6,039
Refrigeration
Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Other Electrical Equipment
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Barrow Shop III/TDS Facility
Page 5
Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
1 Vending machines Chilled beverage vending
machine with Manual
Switching
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Other
Controls
$200 $341
2 Electric coffee
maker
1 Electric coffee maker with
Other Controls
Replace with Electric coffee
maker and Improve Other
Controls
$1,201 $818
6 Vending machines Chilled beverage vending
machine with Manual
Switching
Replace with Chilled
beverage vending machine
$0 $0
Cooking/Clothes Drying
Rank Recommended Installed
Cost
Annual
Energy
Savings
Front view of building
Looking NE
Tipping floor with incinerator in rear
Incinerator feed door
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Barrow Shop III/TDS Facility
Page 6
Boilers
Gas water heater
Glycol pump skid
Shop area
VFD drive control for air system
Separation area between tipping and shop floors
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Barrow Shop III/TDS Facility
Page 7
Shop floor area
Shop floor area