HomeMy WebLinkAboutASRC-PHO-RSA Point Hope Fire Station 2012-EE
Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC
Mechanical/Electrical Engineer
Comprehensive
Point Hope
Project #
North Slope Borough
Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC
1
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Performed by: __________________________
Richard Armstrong, PE, CEM
CEA #178, CEM #13557
1. Executive Summary 4
2. Audit and Analysis Background 9
3. Acknowledgements 10
4. Building Description & Function 11
5. Historic Energy Consumption 12
6. Interactive Effects of Projects 13
7. Loan Program 13
Appendix A: Mechanical Schedule 14
Appendix B: Lighting Schedule 16
Appendix C: Building Floor Plan 17
Appendix D: Lighting Plan 18
Appendix E: Mechanical Schematic 19
Appendix F: AkWarm6C Summary Report 21
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 analyzed through a thorough lighting analysis to assure that the
recommended lighting upgrades will comply with State of Alaska Statue as well
as IES recommendations.
Payback periods may 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, Alaska
Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC), or 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 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.
IGA’s 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.
AkWarm&C is a building energy modeling software developed under contract by
AHFC.
4
1. Executive Summary
This Comprehensive Energy Audit is performed in connection with AHFC’s Retrofit
Energy Assessment for Loans (REAL) program.
Subject Building:
Fire Station
429 Nanuq Street
Point Hope, Alaska
Building Owner:
North Slope Borough
P.O Box 69
Barrow, AK 99723
Building contact:
Willard Humicutt, Fire Chief
907&368&2773 office
The site visit to subject building occurred on March 5, 2012.
Point Hope is a village of approximately 750 residents. The subject building houses
the fire department and is nearly identical to the Fire Stations in Wainwright, Nuiqsut,
Atqasuk and several other villages.
The building was constructed in 1982. At some unknown date, the windows and
overhead doors were replaced with upgraded units. Boilers were also replaced
sometime around 2004.
The building houses the fire chief’s office, a day room used for breaks and training, a
small amount of storage and warehouse space and vehicle, or apparatus bay.
The interior of this building is very well maintained and in above&average condition,
exterior is in average condition.
Energy Consumption, waste heat and benchmark data
The building utilizes fuel oil and electricity for energy, and has no access to waste
heat.
Fuel oil benchmark data was provided by the Tikigaq Corporation. Fuel oil
consumption was based on oil delivery receipts obtained from Corporation records
for the period 2010 through 2011. Summarized values for electrical, fuel oil and
waste heat consumption are shown in Table 1 below:
5
Table 1
2010 2011
Consumption Cost Consumption Cost
Electricity - kWh
65,730 $ 21,206 62,005 $ 19,517
Fuel Oil - gallons Not Avail Not Avail 5,320 $ 22,610
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 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. The comparative values for the subject building are shown in Table 2
below.
Table 2
Subject
Building
Atqasuk
Fire
Station
Anaktuvuk
Pass FS
Energy Use Index (EUI) - kBTU/SF 201 181 163
Energy Cost Index (ECI) - $/SF $8.88 $6.64 $5.97
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. EEMs are recommended for reasons including: 1.) they have a
reasonably good payback period, 2.) for code compliance, 3.) end of life (EOL)
replacement, or 4.) reasons pertaining to efficient building management strategy,
operations, maintenance and/or safety. For example several lighting upgrade
recommendations are ranked quite low (i.e. long payback periods), but the entire
facility should be upgraded, re&lamped and re&ballasted to maintain consistent
lighting and standard lighting parts inventory, regardless of the payback. Individual
rooms that are infrequently used may not show a very good payback for a lighting
upgrade, but consistency and ease of maintenance dictate a total upgrade.
All the EEMs considered for this facility are detailed in the attached AkWarm&C
Energy Audit Report in Appendix F. Each EEM includes payback times, estimated
installation costs and estimated energy savings.
The four summary EEM’s that follow are a distillation of the highest priority
recommendations from three perspectives: overall efficiency of building
management, reduction in energy consumption and return on investment (ROI).
Efficient building management dictates, for example, that all lights be upgraded, that
lamp inventory variations be minimized, that all appropriate rooms have similar
occupancy controls and setback thermometers, etc. These EEM’s are grouped by
6
type (i.e. all relevant lighting upgrades are summed and listed as a single upgrade,
all thermostat setback retrofits are grouped together and listed as a single upgrade,
etc.) and are prioritized with the highest ROI (shortest payback) listed first. Table 3
at the end of this section summarizes these EEM’s.
A.) AIR INFILTRATION
A single overhead door left open for 1 hour can result in up to 5 air
changes in the vehicle bay, which translates to $30 in fuel oil heating
costs per hour, per open door (calculation based on 90F inside to
outside temperature difference, 2560 sq foot bay x 20’ high). It is
recommended to close the door as soon as possible after exiting the
building. Also, it is recommended that the doors be serviced, including
installation of new weatherstripping.
Air Infiltration EEM:
Estimated cost $ 2,400
Annual Savings $ 1,954
Payback 1.2 years
B.) SETBACK THERMOSTATS
With a few exceptions, all rooms in this building have thermostats
which control room and/or zone temperatures. It is recommended that
setback thermostats be installed and programmed to reduce room
temperatures to 55F during unoccupied periods. Also, room
temperatures should be kept at 70 degrees during occupied times, not
85&90 degrees as found. If a heating setback thermostat is installed in
the vehicle bay a 0.1 year payback would be made, and if 3 more are
installed in the office, training room, and shop, there would be a
payback of 0.6 years.
Combined Setback Thermostat EEM’s:
Estimated cost $1,600
Annual Savings $5,261
Payback 0.3 years
C.) LIGHTING AND LIGHTING CONTROLS
Interior Lighting & This building has a mix of lighting, which adds to
maintenance and inventory costs as well as inefficient energy use. It
appears that some but not all fixtures have been upgraded from
magnetic to electronic ballasts, and from T12 to T8 lamps as the
original fixtures and lamps burned out. Consequently, there are still
potential savings, from both energy consumption and maintenance
standpoints if the rest of the T&12 lamps and magnetic ballasts are
replaced. Changing the lamps and ballasts in 6 rooms would cost
$1,775, and have an annual energy savings of $1,173 for a 1.5 year
payback.
7
It is also recommended that the vehicle bay lighting be retrofitted from
Metal Halide to high bay, high output T5 florescent fixtures controlled
by dual technology occupancy sensors. There is a negligible energy
savings resulting directly from the fixture/lamp change, but T5 fixtures,
because they have no warm&up time, allow the use of occupancy
sensors, which can result in a 30&60% energy savings. The estimated
cost for this change is $ 6,300, with an annual payback of $ 1,667, for
a 3.8 year payback.
Additionally, in the interest of occupant comfort and energy and
building management efficiency, at the next building re&lamp all the T8&
32 watt lamps should be replaced with T8&28 watt. Energy saver lamps
which result in a 4% reduction in light output (typically not noticeable),
but a 12% reduction in energy consumption.
Lighting Controls: Occupant controls sense the presence of occupants,
turn the lights on at a pre&determined level, and then turn the lights off
after a programmed time period of no occupancy. It is recommended to
install motion sensing occupancy sensors in the existing duplex
switch boxes for all offices, corridors and stairwells, and to install
ceiling mounted, dual technology sensors where obstacles may
interfere with line&of&sight sensors, such as in lavatories, corridors,
vehicle bays, and storage areas. The second technology in these
sensors activates lighting based on sound. Occupancy sensors can
reduce power consumption by 25&60%. Paybacks on occupancy
sensors range from 1 to 3 years, depending on the light fixture
consumption and occupancy of the room.
This EEM combines the upgrade of the lighting, ballasts, and lighting
controls for simplicity.
Table 3
Combined total of priority, high-ROI,
strategically recommended EEM’s listed
above:
Estimated total cost $ 21,015
Annual Savings $ 12,808
Simple payback 1.6 years
Does not include design or construction management expenses.
In addition to EEMs, various Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) are
recommended since they are policies or procedures that are followed by
management and employees that require no capital outlay. Examples of
recommended ECMs for this facility include:
8
1. Turning lights off when leaving a room that is not controlled by an
occupancy sensor.
2. All man&doors, roll&up doors and windows should be properly
maintained and adjusted to close and function properly.
3. Turn off computers, printers, faxes, etc. when leaving the office.
4. Close overhead doors immediately after entering or exiting the vehicle
bay.
9
2. Audit and Analysis Background
Program Description: This audit included services to identify, develop, and
evaluate energy efficiency measures for 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 based on their payback period, life cycle replacement or for
reasons pertaining to optimizing building management, building maintenance,
operations and/or safety.
a. 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 (walls, doors, windows, etc)
ii. Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning
iii. Lighting systems and controls
iv. Building specific equipment
v. Plumbing Systems
b. Benchmark Utility Data Validation: Benchmark utility data provided
through AHFC’s initial phase of their REAL program is validated,
confirming that meter numbers on the subject building match the meters
from which the energy consumption and cost data were collected. If the
data is inaccurate or missing, new benchmark data is obtained. In the
event that there are inconsistencies or gaps in the data, the existing data
is evaluated and missing data points are interpolated. Waste heat, if it is
in use, is calculated and/or estimated based on available data.
c. Method of Analysis: The information gathered prior to the site visit and
during the site visit is entered into AkWarm&C, an energy modeling
software program developed specifically for Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation (AHFC) to identify forecasted energy consumption which can
then be compared to actual energy consumption. AkWarm&C also has
some pre&programmed EEM retrofit options that can be analyzed with
projected energy savings based on occupancy schedules, utility rates,
building construction type, building function, existing conditions, and
climatic data 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.
Energy cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy costs
for the building. Installation costs include the labor and equipment
required to implement an EEM retrofit, but design and construction
management costs are excluded. Cost estimates are +/& 30% for this level
of audit, and are derived from one or more of the following: Means Cost
Data, industry publications, experience of the auditor, local contractors
and/or equipment suppliers. Brown Electric, Haakensen Electric, Proctor
10
Sales, Pioneer Door, and J.P. Sheldon, all in Anchorage, were consulted
for some of the lighting, boiler, overhead door and air handling
(respectively) retrofit and/or replacement costs. Maintenance savings are
calculated, where applicable, and are added to the energy savings for
each EEM.
The costs and savings are considered and a simple payback period and
ROI is calculated. The simple payback period is based on the number of
years that it takes for the savings to pay back the net installation cost (Net
Installation costs divided by Net Savings.) In cases where the EEM
recommends replacement at EOL, the incremental cost difference
between the standard equipment in place, and the higher efficiency
equipment being recommended is used as the cost basis for payback
calculation. The SIR found in the AkWarm&C report is the Savings to
Investment Ratio, defined as the breakeven cost divided by the initial
installed cost.
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 may 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 engineering and design of these projects
in not included in the cost estimate for each EEM recommendation, but
these costs can be approximated at 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. The North Slope Borough (Owner): The NSB provided building sizing
information, building schedules and functions, as well as building age.
c. Nortech Engineering (Benchmark TSP): Nortech Engineering
Company compiled the electrical data received from the North Slope
Borough (NSB) and entered that data into the statewide building
database, called the Alaska Retrofit Information System (ARIS).
11
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 Engineering,
cataloged which buildings would have the greatest potential payback, and
with the building owner, 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 and assigned their selected sub&
contractors to the selected buildings, and performed quality control
reviews of the resulting audits. They 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 site visit and survey of subject building occurred on March 5, 2012. This
building has 4608 square feet on one floor, consisting of offices, day room, bunk
room, mechanical rooms and a vehicle or “apparatus” bay.
The building was constructed in 1982 on pilings using what appear (in the plans) to
be 24” glue lam floor support beams. The roof is constructed of 8” pre&fabbed
structural insulated panels, also finished on the with exterior metal roofing and
gypsum on the interior. All windows, except one (see Appendix A photos) are in
excellent condition, vinyl, triple&pane, and appear to have been upgraded from their
original 1982 installation.
Building details are as follows:
a. Heating System: Heat is supplied by (2) Weil McLain 295 MBH, oil
fired, 83% efficient, cast iron sectional boilers. Heat is provided by
hydronic baseboard fin tube heaters in perimeter rooms and interior
offices, all valve and fan controlled by zone thermostats. Heat is
provided to storage spaces, shops, and vehicle bays via hydronic
unit heaters which are fan controlled by low voltage zone
thermostats. Soot accumulation on the top of the boilers indicates
that the boilers need to be serviced and cleaned. This would return
the boilers to their original design efficiency.
b. Ventilation: Ventilation is provided to the offices through the a
Logicaire air handler. Air handler heat is provided by hydronic coils
valve&controlled by a zone thermostat. There are vehicle exhaust
fans in the equipment bay, as well as a make&up air unit and a large
supply fan in adjacent rooms (presumably interlocked to the
12
exhaust fans). The toilet room and shower room have exhaust fans
shown on plans to exhaust 170 CFM each.
c. Appliances: A commercial clothes washer and residential type
clothes dryer are located in the utility room. The set appears to be
heavily used for both personal clothing and fire station related
laundry. A ½ size refrigerator, microwave and 2&burner electric
range are located in the day/break room, they support the itinerant
housing in the building.
d. Plumbing Fixtures: The building contains one toilet, one lavatory
sink, one kitchen sink, one utility sink in the vehicle bay and two
showers. All fixtures are manually operated and appear to be post&
1992. The toilet consumes 1.4 gpf and the shower head’s at least
2.6 gpm.
e. Domestic Hot Water: Hot water is provided to shower, lavatories
and clothes washers by a 41 gallon, Amtrol indirect fired hot water
generator located in the boiler room.
f. Head Bolt Heaters: There are 4 head bolt heaters on the south
side of the building, all of which are suitable for retrofit. They are
typically used by employees during working hours and for a second
emergency medical vehicle.
g. Interior Lighting & Controls: This building has an inconsistent mix
of interior lighting which includes magnetic and electronic ballasts,
T12 and T8 lamps, metal halide fixtures, compact florescent and
incandescent bulbs.
h. Exterior Lighting: Exterior lighting consists of 250 watt HPS wall
packs controlled by photo&sensors and two, seldom used 400 watt
metal halide wall packs on a manual switch.
i. Building Shell: The building shell appears to be in good condition,
although by today’s standards, it is under&insulated. The high cost
and relatively low ROI on adding insulation, precludes any
recommendations to increase the insulation value of the shell at
this time.
j. Living Quarters: Itinerant living quarters (the “bunk room”) are
used regularly.
5. Historic Energy Consumption: Energy consumption is modeled within the
AkWarm&C program. The program typically analyzes twelve months of data. Two
year’s worth of somewhat random fuel oil delivery receipts were used to identify fuel
oil consumption, this data was summed, split in half and graphed into a reasonable
seasonal&use curve to create twelve months of data points, which were then input
into AKWarm&C. Waste heat consumption was based upon calculated glycol flow
13
rates exiting the village power generations station, piping capacity and friction loss
calculations and an assumed temperature difference in and out of the hot side of the
Fire Station heat exchanger (the waste heat system was not in use during this audit).
Energy consumption was analyzed using two factors: the Energy Cost Index (ECI)
and the Energy Use Index (EUI). The energy cost index takes the average cost of
gas and electrical energy over the surveyed period of time (typically two years) and
averages the cost, divided by the square footage of the building. The ECI for this
building is $8.88/SF. The ECI for a similar fire station in Anaktuvuk Pass is $5.97.
The energy use index (EUI) is the total average electrical and heating energy
consumption per year expressed in thousands of BTUs/SF. The average of the 2009
and 2010 EUI for this building is 201 kBTU/SF; the average EUI for the Anaktuvuk
Pass Fire Station is 163.5 kBTU/SF.
6. 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. 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. 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.
7. 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;
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.
14
Appendix A – Mechanical Schedule
SCHEDULES COMPILED FROM ON-SITE NAMEPLATE OBSERVATION - WHERE
ACCESSIBLE
AIR HANDLER SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL FAN CFM
MOTOR DATA
HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS
AHU-1 Logicaire 14CF-800A 775 .5/208/3 located in southeast storage closet
MAU-1 Logicaire MCF-3650A 3700 2/230/1 located maintenance room
PUMP SCHEDULE
SYMBOL
(no tags) MFGR/MODEL est. GPM
MOTOR DATA
HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS
CP-1 Grundfos UPC50-160 45 980W/230/1 Boiler room, Glycol circ pump
CP-2 Grundfos UPC50-160 45 980W/230/1 Boiler room, Glycol circ pump
CP-3 Grundfos UP26-64 5 185W/115/1 Glycol circ to DHW generator
CP-4 Grundfos UP15-42 3 85W/115/1 DHW circulation
CP-5 Grundfos UPS32-80 15 280W/115/1 Glycol circ to Waste heat exchanger
BOILER SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL
MOTOR DATA
HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS
B-1 Weil McLain AB-WGO-9 .14/115/1
Oil fired, 295 MBH gross IBR, 255MBH
net IBR, 87% efficient, cast iron
sectional
B-2 Weil McLain AB-WGO-9 .14/115/1
Oil fired, 295 MBH gross IBR, 255MBH
net IBR, 87% efficient, cast iron
sectional
UNIT HEATER SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL
est.
CFM
MOTOR DATA
HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS
UH - no
tag Trane UHSA 42S Hydronic 668 .05/115/1 in maintenance room
UH - no
tag Trane UHSA 42S Hydronic 668 .05/115/1 in storage room 11
VUH - Trane UHSA 60S Hydronic 1800 .17/115/1 vehicle bay - large VUH
15
no tag
VUH -
no tag Trane UHSA 60S Hydronic 1800 .17/115/1 vehicle bay - large VUH
VUH -
no tag Trane UHSA 60S Hydronic 1200 .17/115/1 vehicle bay - small VUH
VUH -
no tag Trane UHSA 60S Hydronic 1200 .17/115/1 vehicle bay - small VUH
VUH -
no tag Trane UHSA 60S Hydronic 1200 .17/115/1 vehicle bay - small VUH
VUH -
no tag Trane UHSA 60S Hydronic 1200 .17/115/1 vehicle bay - small VUH
UH-9 Berko Electric 2024 800 300w/240/1 vehicle bay - 20Kw heating coil
VUH -
no tag Trane UHSA 60S Hydronic 1200 .17/115/1 Boiler room - small VUH
VUH -
no tag Trane UHSA 60S Hydronic 1200 .17/115/1 Storage room 12 - small VUH
CUH-1 Trane E46A002 220 .05/115/1 Vestibule - east
CUH-2 Trane E46A002 220 .05/115/1 Vestibule - west
HOT WATER GENERATOR SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL
GALLO
NS
NUMBER
OF
ELEMENTS ELEMENT SIZE
HW-2 Amtrol WH7PDW 41 Indirect water generator
PLUMBING FIXTURES
SYMBOL
(no tags) FIXTURE GPF QUANTITY REMARKS
P-1 W.C. 1.4 1 manually operated
P-2 Lavatory - 1 manually operated
P-3 Kitchen sink - 1 manually operated
P-4 Showers 2.6 2 manually operated
P-5
Commercial Clothes
Washer 1 Heavy duty, 2+ hr cycle
16
From Plans:
17
Appendix B – Lighting Schedule
18
Appendix C
Building Floor Plan
19
Appendix E
Lighting Plan
20
Appendix E – Mechanical Schematic
1982 Heating and Ventilation Plan
21
Appendix F – Mechanical Schematics
22
Appendix F – AkWarmC Summary
ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 3/19/2012 4:03 PM
General Project Information
PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION
Building: Point Hope Fire Department Auditor Company: Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC
Address: 429 Nanuq Street Auditor Name: Richard S. Armstrong
City: Point Hope Auditor Address: 2321 Merrill Field Drive
C’6
Anchorage, Ak 99501
Client Name: Willard Huumcutt, Jr.
Client Address: 429 Nanuq Street
Point Hope, Alaska 99766
Auditor Phone: (907) 276’0521
Auditor FAX: (907) 276’1751
Client Phone: (907) ’ Auditor Comment:
Client FAX:
Design Data
Building Area: 4,608 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 252,494 Btu/hour
with Distribution Losses: 280,549 Btu/hour
Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and 25%
Safety Margin: 427,666 Btu/hour
Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load, if
served.
Typical Occupancy: 3 people Design Indoor Temperature: 77.8 deg F (building average)
Actual City: Point Hope Design Outdoor Temperature: ’39.7 deg F
Weather/Fuel City: Point Hope Heating Degree Days: 16,501 deg F’days
Utility Information
Electric Utility: North Slope Borough Utilities ’ Commercial ’
Sm
Natural Gas Provider: None
Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.293/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.000/ccf
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
$22,811 $0 $2,044 $8,696 $0 $7,658 $0 $205 $618 $180 $42,212
With
Proposed
Retrofits
$16,738 $0 $2,123 $2,996 $0 $6,559 $0 $201 $608 $180 $29,405
SAVINGS $6,073 $0 ’$79 $5,700 $0 $1,100 $0 $3 $11 $0 $12,808
23
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
Existing Retrofit
Service Fees
Ventilation and Fans
Space Heating
Other Electrical
Lighting
Domestic Hot Water
Clothes Drying
Annual Energy Costs by End Use
24
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
1 Setback Thermostat:
Vehicle Bay
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 55.0 deg F for the
Vehicle Bay space.
$3,206 $400 108.78 0.1
2 Setback Thermostat:
Offices, itinerant
quarters, mechanical
rooms
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 55.0 deg F for the
Offices, itinerant quarters,
mechanical rooms space.
$2,055 $1,200 23.24 0.6
3 Other Electrical: Head
Bolt Heaters
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Other Controls
$1,021 $600 10.53 0.6
4 Air Tightening Perform air sealing to reduce
air leakage by 25%.
$1,954 $2,400 7.58 1.2
5 Lighting: T12’2 lamp,
magnetic ballast, 6
rooms
Replace with 24 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy’
Saver Instant
HighEfficElectronic and
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$1,173 $1,775 4.02 1.5
6 Lighting: Exterior HPS
Wall Packs
Replace with 5 LED 72W
Module StdElectronic
$1,355 $3,000 2.80 2.2
7 Lighting: T12’4 lamp,
magnetic ballasts, add
OS 1 room
Replace with 4 FLUOR (4)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy’
Saver Instant
HighEfficElectronic and
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$307 $750 2.48 2.4
8 Lighting: Metal Halide
Vehicle high bay
lighting
Replace with 12 FLUOR (4)
T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO
Energy’Saver HighLight
HighEfficElectronic and
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$1,667 $6,300 1.59 3.8
9 Lighting: 250 Watt
Metal Halide
Replace with 2 FLUOR (4)
T5 45.2" F54W/T5 HO
Energy’Saver StdElectronic
$147 $1,200 0.72 8.2
10 Lighting: Incandescent Replace with FLUOR CFL, A
Lamp 15W and Remove
Manual Switching and Add
new Occupancy Sensor
$20 $190 0.62 9.7
11 Lighting: T8’4 lamp, 1
room add 2 OS
Replace with FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 28W Energy’Saver
Instant StdElectronic and
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$23 $372 0.36 16.5
12 Lighting: Exterior
Metal Halide Wall
Packs
Replace with 2 LED 25W
Module StdElectronic
$22 $2,000 0.07 89.6
25
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
13 Lighting: T12’2 lamp,
2 rooms, add OS
Replace with 13 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy’
Saver Instant StdElectronic
and Improve Manual
Switching, Occupancy Sensor
’$141 $828 ’1.03 ’5.9
TOTAL $12,808 $21,015 5.89 1.6
Wall thermostat found at 90 F
Wall thermostat found at 85 F
Boilers with soot ’ needs tune up
T’12 light fixtures
26
Front view of PHO FD
PHO Fuel Tank
’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’
AkWarmCalc Ver 2.1.4.2, Energy Lib 3/1/2012