HomeMy WebLinkAboutASRC-PIZ-RSA Cully Kali School 2012-EE
Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC
Mechanical/Electrical Engineer
Comprehensive Energy Audit
of
Point Lay Cully (AKA Kali) School
Project # ASRC!PIZ!RSA!1
Prepared for:
North Slope Borough School District
Contact: Pat Kennedy Jr, Director of Maintenance & Operations
March 20, 2012
Prepared by:
Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC
2321 Merrill Field Drive, C!6
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Executive Summary 1
2. Audit and Analysis Background 5
3. Acknowledgements 6
4. Building Description & Function 7
5. Historic Energy Consumption 8
6. Energy Efficiency Measures Considered 8
7. Interactive Effects of Projects 9
8. Loan Program 9
Appendix A – AkWarm4C Report 10
Appendix B – Building Plans & Equipment Schedules 20
Submitted by:
_______________________________
Richard S. Armstrong, PE, CEM, CEA
Date: March 20st, 2012
iii
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
1
Investment Grade Energy Audit
Point Lay Cully (aka Kali) School
1. Executive Summary:
This comprehensive Energy Audit is performed in connection with AHFC’s
Retrofit Energy Assessment for Loans (REAL) program.
Select Building:
Point Hope Cully School
1029 Qasigiaklik St
Point Lay, Alaska 99759
Building Owner:
North Slope Borough School District
Pat Kennedy Jr, Director of Maintenance & Operations
Building Contact:
Daryl Daugaard, School Principal
(907) 85270311
The Cully School was originally constructed around 1981. The school has seen
several additions and remodels, performed in 1994, 1995, 2002, and 2003. This
analysis measured an area of 35,558 SF. Energy consumption recorded for this
school is noted below, with the basis being the actual fuel bills for 2010, and the
reported power. The power bills have been averaged for two years, 2009 and
2010, but the report models less power use than actual. This could be the result
of inaccurate model estimating, or the result of actual electricity reported
potentially including other out buildings, such as teacher housing or storage
buildings which were not included in the report.
Table 1
2010 2011
Utility Consumption Cost/Year
Electricity+kWh 549,440 $ 191,055
Oil
Consumption
(gallons)
26,393 $112,171
Total Energy
(kBtu) 5,359,664 $303,226
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
2
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 order to develop the most
accurate EUI and ECI comparisons possible, only North Slope Borough Schools
in remote communities were used to develop the baseline averages. This allows
for similar energy cost, facility usage, and climate comparison between the
subject school and the benchmark average. The EUI and ECI baseline averages
are comprised of two years worth of data (2010 & 2011). The comparative
values for the subject building are listed in Table 2 below:
Table 2
Point Lay
Cully School
Wainwright Alak
School
Atqasuk Meade
River School
Energy Use Index
(EUI)
kBTU/SF 2010
150.7 209
224
Energy Cost Index
(ECI)
Average 2010
$8.53 $9.07
$8.52
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 have a payback period or those that are
recommended for code compliance, life cycle replacement, or other reasons are
also included.
Specific EEMs recommended for this facility are detailed in the attached
AkWarm Energy Audit Report along with specific payback times, as well as
estimated installation costs and estimated energy savings. The higher priority
items are summarized below:
a. Exterior Lighting Upgrades: Replace all exterior building wall mounted HID
fixtures with new dark sky compliant LED type wall mounted light fixtures:
LED technology has come a long way, and for applications like this, LED
lights are ready for prime time. LED fixtures use nano reflector technology
with drivers offering 50,000 hours life. That equates to about 6 years, as
compared to only 20,000 hours with HID fixtures. LED fixtures offer the
instant7on feature of fluorescent, but use significantly less energy than the
HID fixtures. LED lamps like the cold, have been factory tested to operate
down to 740 deg F (actual installations in Antarctica and Fairbanks
indicate they operate at lower temperatures as well, depending on
manufacturer. The proposed LED fixtures are dark sky compliant by using
100% cutoff optics to reduce light pollution. The following chart indicates
energy savings for the various exterior building mounted light fixtures
(HSP High Pressure Sodium) using Scotopic lighting measurements:
3
HID Lamp HID
System
Wattage
LED
System
Wattage
Energy
Savings
(%)
70W HPS 105W 27W 74
250W HPS 300W 108W 64
b. Occupancy Sensor Lighting Control Upgrades: Occupancy sensors have
evolved over the years to now be more reliable, and have fewer false
starts and stops. Dual technology occupancy sensors combine passive
infrared (PIR) and ultrasonic technologies into one unit to achieve precise
coverage and to eliminate false triggers. The sensors can be mounted on
the wall in place of the existing light switch, or on the ceiling where more
uniform coverage and detection is desired in a larger room.
Wall switch type automatic occupancy sensors are appropriate for small
rooms, such as utility rooms, one person toilet rooms, small open offices,
and places where the wall switch is located such that occupants can be
detected with line7of7sight from anywhere in the room. They can turn
lights on and off based on both occupancy and ambient light levels.
Devices in break rooms, utility rooms, storage rooms, small offices, and
small open (non7partitioned) bathrooms can save up to 60% of the cost of
the lighting where rooms are infrequently used, but the lights are typically
left on.
c. Air Handling Unit Upgrades: Install a CO2 sensor in the return air stream
of air handlers serving classrooms, gyms, or multipurpose rooms to
reduce outside air requirements. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a known tracer
gas for human metabolic activity, and has been recognized by ASHRAE
and code authorities as a credible way to reduce minimum outside air
(OSA) requirements in air handling units (AHUs). The CO2 sensor would
drive the outside air dampers to provide return air from the rooms with
CO2 levels at or below CO2 set7point, (typically <750 PPM CO2), thus
avoiding over7ventilation of the space. The two primary sources of heat
loss from a building are conduction through the building envelope and loss
of heated air through ventilation or infiltration. Ventilation loads approach
conduction loads in well ventilated buildings located in cold climates.
Additionally, building DDC static pressure controls should be implemented
if not already in place. The payback for this ECM is very difficult to assess
without extensive historical review of actual OSA settings, but it is
estimated to save 25% of the OSA heating requirements caused by over7
ventilating. The payback cost, assuming a cost of $1,500 to install and
program each CO2 sensor, is under 2 years.
4
d. Install Programmable Set7back Thermostats: Buildings that are not
continuously occupied do not require continuous heating levels at 70
degrees, so they can be set back to 55 or 60 degrees F. This is typically
done with relatively inexpensive programmable set7back thermostats or
through DDC systems. The cost of each thermostat with installation
should not exceed $250, with paybacks of one year or less in most cases.
The school has a JCI DDC system, but we could not verify if the
baseboard thermostats are set back through the DDC system. If they are
already set back, ignore this recommendation.
e. Fuel Oil Metering: In order to understand current and future fuel consumption, a
fuel meter is essential to be installed at the fuel supply to the building, assuming
the supply is piped. The Pathfinder Instruments FM7200 meter is for fuel pipes
sized ¾” to 1” (different meters, must specify pipe size), and they cost around
$225 each. They operate at a flow range of 4720 GPM. These are mechanical
meters with strainers and 37digit display that shows both present fuel use, and
cumulative fuel use. Any ESCO contract, or AHFC financed contract will require
fuel metering to verify paybacks of energy conservation measures. Electronic
turbine meters are also available. Fuel consumption was tallied by reviewing
actual fuel receipts for 2010, but the total fuel accounted for by the receipts did
not agree with the fuel consumption reported by the NSBSD. It is possible that
the reported NSBSD numbers included teacher housing and other outbuildings,
that would account for the higher numbers. See
http://pathfinderinstruments.com/gpifuel.htm?gclid=CJuzvdzon6kCFSUaQgodvg
JDvQ.
f. Air Infiltration Reduction: It is estimated that door and window weatherstripping
could be replaced or upgraded by local maintenance personnel at an estimated
cost of $5,000. If this could reduce infiltration into the school by 10%, the
payback would be only 2.9 years.
g. Relamp using 28 watt fluorescent lamps: The school presently uses 32 watt T78
flourescent lamps. At the next re7lamping it is recommended that all 32 watt
lamps be replaced with 28 watt lamps. This results in a 4% reduction in light
output, but a 12% reduction in energy consumed.
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:
• Turn off lights when leaving a room that is not controlled by an occupancy
sensor that automatically turns off lights.
• All doors and windows should be properly maintainedand adjusted to
close and function properly.
• Turn off computers, monitors, printers, faxes, coffee makers, etc when
leaving the office for the day.
5
The 60 priority recommendations in the detailed report (Appendix A) are estimated
to save $17,325 /year, with an installed cost of $29,560, for a 1.7 year payback.
This assumes that maintenance people could install most of the upgrades as part of
their normal assigned duties, and does not include design or CA services, but
overall it does indicate a cost effective energy savings program.
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.
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 AkWarm7C, an energy modeling program
developed for Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) specifically to
identify forecasted energy consumption which can be compared to actual
energy consumption. AkWarm7C also has some pre7programmed EEM
retrofit 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 in7house labor and equipment to
estimate the full up7front investment required for implementing a change,
but design and construction management costs are excluded.
Maintenance savings are calculated were applicable and are added to the
energy savings for each EEM.
6
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 life7time calculation is shown for each EEM. The life7time for
each EEM is estimated based on the typical life of the equipment being
replaced or altered. The energy savings is extrapolated throughout the
life7time of the EEM. The total energy savings is calculated as the total
life7time 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 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 School District (Owner): The NSBSD provided
building sizing information, two years energy billing data, building
schedules and functions, as well as building age.
c. Nortech Engineering (Benchmark TSP): Nortech Engineering
Company 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, North
Slope Borough area, and the Nana area. The firm gathered all relevant
benchmark information provided to them by Nortech Engineering
Company, cataloged which buildings would have the greatest potential
7
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 sub7contracted auditors,
assigned auditors 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 performed this audits to assure current knowledge of
existing conditions.
4. Building Description and Function: The subject structure is called the Kali
School, but was formerly known as the Cully School. This facility was originally
constructed in 1982, and four additions, renovations or upgrades have occurred
since the original construction in 1993, 1995, 2002, and 2003. The building is
located on pilings and is mostly a one story structure with a peaked roof and
drop ceilings. The only second floor space utilized is the fan room and the
communications room.
a. Heating System: The building heating system consists of three Weil
McLain 988 cast iron oil fired boilers with John Zink Burners. The boilers
and burners appear to have been installed in 2004 and are in good
condition, despite the fact that two of the three were down for repairs
during the audit. The boilers are used to heat the buildings’ hydronic
heating system, which in turn provides all of the heating for the building
through baseboard, unit heaters, and heating coils in the air handlers.
The building has six main loops, with each loop equipped with a primary
and a backup circulator. All circulators were set to operate at speed 2,
which agrees with the design intent settings on the plans.
b. Ventilation System: The ventilation system for the School is composed
of numerous fans and air handlers that provide the outside ventilation air
for the facility. Each of the fans has been modeled in the AkWarm7C
program to hopefully understand the total air movement. The fans
include: eight air handlers, four make7up air units, 14 exhaust fans, and
two return fans. As mentioned on the executive summary, carbon dioxide
sensors are recommended to be installed at the air handlers and
programmed through the DDC system to modulate down the outside air
dampers to only maintain required CO2 levels, so the amount of outside
air could be reduced to reflect the actual need for fresh air rather than
constantly dumping excessive amounts of outside air to the space. The
air handlers are operated on a time clock program provided through the
DDC system, and they all appeared to be functioning correctly except the
kitchen exhaust and make up which was operating after normal school
8
hours, and another air handler that was found to have the motor controller
overridden to manual.
c. Plumbing System: The Cully School appears to have energy efficient
plumbing fixtures, reflecting the relatively new construction of the facility.
No replacement plumbing fixtures are recommended at this time.
d. Domestic Hot Water: Hot water for the Cully School is produced by two
120 gallon hot water generator (Amtrol Boilermate WHS7120ZCDW). The
hot water generators have a first hour rating of 372 gallons at a
temperature rise of 90 °F and a continuous flow rating of 268 gallons per
hour. The current hot water generator was installed in 2004 when the
boiler room and boilers were upgraded.
e. Lighting: Typical lighting throughout the building is comprised of T78
fluorescent fixtures with electronic ballasts. The lighting in the gym is
comprised of new T75 high output fluorescent fixtures which can be
switched off when not in use since the lights can be started without any
restrike time as found on high intensity discharge fixtures. The three
summary level lighting recommendations are:
i. Change 32 watt fluorescent lamps with 28 watt lamps during the
next re7lamping effort. This reduces light output by 4% but reduces
energy consumption by 12%.
ii. Change the outside HPS lighting fixtures out with LED fixtures.
iii. Install occupancy sensor switches at the classrooms and other
spaces so the lights go off when occupants leave the space.
5. Historic Energy Consumption: Energy consumption is modeled within the
AkWarm7C program. The program only analyzes 12 months of data, so where
24 months of data are available, the data is averaged and input to AkWarm7C to
provide more accuracy. The energy consumption data is presented and graphed
in the attached AkWarm7C program results.
The 2010 electric consumption for the building is 549,440 kWh/year at an
average cost of $191,055 /year. The 2010 fuel oil consumption is 26,393
gallons/year, at a 2010 cost of $112,171 /year. This results in the total utility
costs for the building of $303,226 /year.
6. Energy Efficiency Measures considered or recommended: The building was
examined for application of a multitude of potential EEMs. Those EEMs that
appear to have an application for the subject building are further analyzed for
estimated payback periods, either within the AkWarm7C program or separately.
The accuracy of the cost estimates and paybacks varies significantly due to a
multitude of conditions, but is estimated to be approximately +/7 25%.
9
Assumptions made regarding energy costs and the life of the EEM, noting that
post7construction measurement and verification are based on energy savings,
not energy cost savings. Many of the selected EEMs are analyzed within the
AkWarm7C program using the schedules and estimated costs input into the
model.
7. Interactive Effects of Projects: The AkWarm7C 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 AkWarm7C.
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;
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.
Appendix A
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Cully School aka Kali School
Page 1
ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 3/21/2012 4:34 PM
General Project Information
PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION
Building: Cully School aka Kali School Auditor Company: Richard S. Armstrong, PE, LLC
Address: 1029 Qasigialik St Auditor Name: Richard S. Armstrong, PE
City: Point Lay Auditor Address: 2321 Merrill Field Drive
Unit C-6
Anchorage, Ak 99501
Client Name: Daryl Daugaard
Client Address: 1029 Qasigialik St
Point Lay, Alaska 99759
Auditor Phone: (907) 229-0331
Auditor FAX: (907) 276-1751
Client Phone: (907) 852- 031 Auditor Comment:
Client FAX:
Design Data
Building Area: 35,558 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 2,941,571
Btu/hour
with Distribution Losses: 3,268,412 Btu/hour
Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and
25% Safety Margin: 4,982,335 Btu/hour
Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load,
if served.
Typical Occupancy: 201 people Design Indoor Temperature: 69.4 deg F (building average)
Actual City: Point Lay Design Outdoor Temperature: -37 deg F
Weather/Fuel City: Point Lay Heating Degree Days: 19,109 deg F-days
Utility Information
Electric Utility: North Slope Borough Utilities -
Commercial - Lg
Natural Gas Provider: None
Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.320/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.000/ccf
Annual Energy Cost Estimate
Description Space
Heating
Space
Cooling
Water
Heating Lighting Refrige
ration
Other
Electric
al
Cooking Clothes
Drying
Ventilatio
n Fans
Service
Fees Total Cost
Existing
Building
$115,41
8
$0 $11,605 $12,176 $23,30
5
$26,07
9
$0 $0 $3,421 $0 $192,004
With
Proposed
Retrofits
$102,23
8
$0 $13,110 $6,526 $23,30
5
$26,07
9
$0 $0 $3,421 $0 $174,680
SAVINGS $13,180 $0 -$1,505 $5,650 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,325
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Cully School aka Kali School
Page 2
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
Existing Retrofit
Ventilation and Fans
Space Heating
Refrigeration
Other Electrical
Lighting
Domestic Hot Water
Annual Energy Costs by End Use
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
Existing Retrofit
#1 Oil Electricity
Annual Energy Costs by Fuel
$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000
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
Cully School aka Kali School
Page 3
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
1 Setback Thermostat:
Classroom - 122
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Classroom - 122 space.
$1,100 $200 74.61 0.2
2 Setback Thermostat:
Classroom - 116
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Classroom - 116 space.
$1,067 $200 72.34 0.2
3 Setback Thermostat:
Library - 105
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Library - 105 space.
$990 $200 67.15 0.2
4 Setback Thermostat:
Classroom - 123
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Classroom - 123 space.
$904 $200 61.31 0.2
5 Setback Thermostat:
Storage - 168
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Storage - 168 space.
$763 $200 51.72 0.3
6 Setback Thermostat:
Classroom - 110
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Classroom - 110 space.
$672 $200 45.60 0.3
7 Setback Thermostat:
Classroom 112
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Classroom 112 space.
$612 $200 41.50 0.3
8 Setback Thermostat:
Classroom - 113
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Classroom - 113 space.
$606 $200 41.07 0.3
9 Setback Thermostat:
Classroom 111
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Classroom 111 space.
$597 $200 40.51 0.3
10 Setback Thermostat:
Classroom - 120
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Classroom - 120 space.
$502 $200 34.04 0.4
11 Setback Thermostat:
Classroom - 121
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Classroom - 121 space.
$497 $200 33.74 0.4
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Cully School aka Kali School
Page 4
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
12 Setback Thermostat:
Science - 109
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Science - 109 space.
$479 $200 32.51 0.4
13 Setback Thermostat:
Classroom - 119
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Classroom - 119 space.
$358 $200 24.26 0.6
14 Setback Thermostat:
Work Room - 104
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Work Room - 104
space.
$356 $200 24.14 0.6
15 Lighting: K-90, 90
watt HPS exterior
Replace with 6 LED 25W
Module StdElectronic
$1,102 $1,200 22.09 1.1
16 Setback Thermostat:
Principal - 101
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Principal - 101 space.
$321 $200 21.78 0.6
17 Setback Thermostat:
Conference - 102
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Conference - 102
space.
$301 $200 20.44 0.7
18 Setback Thermostat:
Student Store - 108
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Student Store - 108
space.
$217 $200 14.71 0.9
19 Setback Thermostat:
Office - 103
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Office - 103 space.
$217 $200 14.70 0.9
20 Setback Thermostat:
Commons - 107
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Commons - 107 space.
$190 $200 12.88 1.1
21 Setback Thermostat:
Office - 163
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Office - 163 space.
$101 $200 6.82 2
22 Setback Thermostat:
Kitchen - 162
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Kitchen - 162 space.
$94 $200 6.39 2.1
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Cully School aka Kali School
Page 5
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
23 Lighting: 2002
Addition D3 Shop
Lights
Replace with 21 FLUOR (3)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver (2) Instant
StdElectronic
$30 $30 6.06 1
24 Lighting: I-100 Boiler
room and maint
office lights
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$818 $1,500 4.47 1.8
25 Lighting: U100
Corridor lights
Replace with 6 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$69 $120 3.39 1.7
26 Air Tightening Perform air sealing to
reduce air leakage by 10%.
$1,781 $5,000 3.31 2.8
27 Lighting: 2002
Addition canopy
lights
Replace with 3 LED 25W
Module StdElectronic
$479 $900 3.30 1.9
28 Lighting: P90 HPS
Exterior
Replace with 6 LED 25W
Module StdElectronic
$721 $1,500 2.97 2.1
29 Lighting: Shop
Classroom Lighting
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$21 $500 2.77 23.4
30 Lighting: 1995
Addition Exterior
HPS fixtures
Replace with 7 LED 25W
Module StdElectronic
$669 $1,500 2.76 2.2
31 Lighting: B-100
Suspended louvered
classroom fixture
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$24 $600 2.32 25.1
32 Lighting: B-200
Suspended louvered
classroom fixture
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$140 $3,000 1.64 21.4
33 Lighting: 2002
Addition 4-tube
classroom lights
Replace with 16 FLUOR (4)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver (2) Instant
StdElectronic
$30 $160 1.14 5.3
34 Lighting: 1995
Addition classroom
lights B
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$81 $500 0.97 6.2
35 Lighting: 2003
Addition B-3 fixtures
Replace with 12 FLUOR (3)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver (2) Instant
StdElectronic
$19 $120 0.96 6.2
36 Lighting: 1995
Addition Pool and
locker room lighting
D
Replace with 21 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$20 $150 0.79 7.6
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Cully School aka Kali School
Page 6
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
37 Lighting: 1995
Addition B1 Fixture
CR
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$31 $250 0.75 7.9
38 Lighting: 2002
Addition A2 Fixtures
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$30 $250 0.71 8.5
39 Lighting: B-100
Suspended louvered
classroom fixture
Replace with 12 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$14 $120 0.67 8.8
40 Lighting: 1995
Addition classroom
lights B
Replace with 27 FLUOR (3)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver (2) Instant
StdElectronic
$28 $270 0.63 9.5
41 Lighting: 2002
Addition D3 Shop
Lights
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$48 $500 0.56 10.5
42 Lighting: 2002
Addition 4-tube
classroom lights
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$47 $500 0.56 10.5
43 Lighting: 1995
Addition under
cabinet task lights
Replace with 5 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Program
StdElectronic
$4 $50 0.48 12.5
44 Lighting: 2003
Addition D2 lights
Replace with 6 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver (2) Instant
HighEfficElectronic
$5 $60 0.45 13.1
45 Lighting: 2003
addition A3 fixtures
Replace with 12 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$8 $120 0.38 15.5
46 Lighting: I-100 Boiler
room and maint
office lights
Replace with 42 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$27 $420 0.38 15.7
47 Lighting: 2003 D-2
fixtures
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$21 $500 0.25 23.6
48 Lighting: 2003
Addition D2 lights
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$9 $250 0.21 28.3
49 Lighting: 1995
Addition B1 Fixture
CR
Replace with 8 FLUOR (4)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver (2) Instant
StdElectronic
$10 $320 0.18 33.2
50 Lighting: 1995
Addition corridor C &
D fixtures
Replace with 16 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$5 $160 0.16 35.4
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Cully School aka Kali School
Page 7
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
51 Lighting: B-200
Suspended louvered
classroom fixture
Replace with 60 FLUOR (4)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$62 $2,400 0.15 38.5
52 Lighting: 2002
Addition A2 Fixtures
Replace with 5 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$1 $50 0.12 49.2
53 Lighting: 2003
addition A3 fixtures
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$7 $350 0.12 49.8
54 Lighting: 2003 D-2
fixtures
Replace with 18 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$3 $130 0.11 51.4
55 Lighting: G-100
Water resistant
Room Lights
Replace with 18 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$5 $360 0.08 70.9
56 Lighting: D100
Corridor lights
Replace with 31 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$9 $620 0.08 71
57 Lighting: H100 or
I100 surface mount
Replace with 15 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-
Saver Instant StdElectronic
$4 $300 0.08 70.8
58 Setback Thermostat:
Chase - 131
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Chase - 131 space.
$0 $200 0.00 Infinity
59 Setback Thermostat:
Warehouse - 169
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Warehouse - 169
space.
$0 $200 0.00 Infinity
60 Setback Thermostat:
Storage 201
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for
the Storage 201 space.
$0 $200 0.00 Infinity
TOTAL $17,325 $29,560 7.48 1.7
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Cully School aka Kali School
Page 8
School Exterior
School Exterior
Circulators
Additional circulators
Boilers
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Cully School aka Kali School
Page 9
Johnson Controls Metysys Controls
Old pneumatic control panel
Plugged air inlet preheat coil at AHU
AHU starter on manual
------------------------------------------
AkWarmCalc Ver 2.1.4.2, Energy Lib 3/1/2012