HomeMy WebLinkAboutBET Bethel Courthouse 2012-EEManaging Office
2400 College Road 3105 Lakeshore Dr. Suite 106A 4402 Thane Road
Fairbanks, Alaska 99709 Anchorage, Alaska 99517 Juneau, Alaska 99801
p. 907.452.5688 p. 907.222.2445 p: 907.586.6813
f. 907.452.5694 f. 907.222.0915 f: 907.586.6819
www.nortechengr.com
ENERGY AUDIT
BETHEL COURT BUILDING
204 State Highway
Bethel, Alaska
Prepared for:
Mr. Lee Foley
PO Box 1388
Bethel, Alaska
Prepared by:
David Lanning PE, CEA
Jeremy Spargur EIT, CEAIT
March 21, 2012
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, HEALTH & SAFETY
Anch: 3105 Lakeshore Dr. Ste 106A, 99517 907.222.2445 Fax: 222.0915
Fairbanks: 2400 College Road, 99709 907.452.5688 Fax: 452.5694
Juneau: 4402 Thane Road, 99801 907.586.6813 Fax: 586.6819
info@nortechengr.com www.nortechengr.com
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 1
2.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 6
2.1 Building Use .......................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Building Occupancy and Schedules ...................................................................... 6
2.3 Building Description ............................................................................................... 6
3.0 BENCHMARKING 2010 UTILITY DATA .......................................................................... 8
3.1 Total Energy Use and Cost in 2010 ...................................................................... 9
3.2 Energy Utilization Index for 2010 ........................................................................ 10
3.3 Cost Utilization Index for 2010 ............................................................................ 11
3.4 Seasonal Energy Use Patterns ........................................................................... 12
3.5 Future Energy Monitoring .................................................................................... 13
4.0 MODELING ENERGY CONSUMPTION ......................................................................... 14
4.1 Understanding How AkWarm Models Energy Consumption ............................... 15
4.2 AkWarm Calculated Savings for the Bethel Court Building ................................. 16
4.3 AkWarm Projected Energy Costs after Modifications .......................................... 17
4.4 Additional Modeling Methods .............................................................................. 18
5.0 BUILDING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M) .............................................. 19
5.1 Operations and Maintenance .............................................................................. 19
5.2 Commissioning .................................................................................................... 19
5.3 Building Specific Recommendations ................................................................... 19
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
ii
APPENDICES
Appendix A Recommended Energy Efficiency Measures ........................................... 21
Appendix B Energy Efficiency Measures that are NOT Recommended ..................... 29
Appendix C Significant Equipment List ....................................................................... 30
Appendix D Local Utility Rate Structure ...................................................................... 33
Appendix E Analysis Methodology .............................................................................. 34
Appendix F Audit Limitations ...................................................................................... 35
Appendix G References .............................................................................................. 36
Appendix H Typical Energy Use and Cost – Fairbanks and Anchorage ..................... 37
Appendix I Typical Energy Use and Cost – Continental U.S. .................................... 38
Appendix J List of Conversion Factors and Energy Units .......................................... 39
Appendix K List of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Definitions .................................... 40
Appendix L Building Floor Plan .................................................................................. 41
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
1
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NORTECH has completed an ASHRAE Level II Energy Audit of the Bethel Court Building, a
28,820 square foot facility. The audit began with benchmarking which resulted in a calculation
of the energy consumption per square foot. A site inspection was completed on November 16,
2011 to obtain information about the lighting, heating, ventilation, cooling and other building
energy uses. The existing usage data and current systems were then used to develop a
building energy consumption model using AkWarm.
Once the model was calibrated, a number of Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs) were
developed from review of the data and observations. EEMs were evaluated and ranked on the
basis of both energy savings and cost using a Savings/Investment Ratio (SIR). While these
modeling techniques were successful in verifying that many of the EEMs would save energy,
not all of the identified EEMs were considered cost effective based on the hardware, installation,
and energy costs at the time of this audit.
The following table, from AkWarm, is a summary of the recommended EEMs for the Bethel
Court Building. Additional discussion of the modeling process can be found in Section 3.
Details of each individual EEM can be found in Appendix A of this report. A summary of EEMs
that were evaluated but are not currently recommended is located in Appendix B.
PRIORITY LIST – ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES (EEMs)
Rank Feature/
Location Improvement Description
Estimated
Annual
Energy
Savings
Estimated
Installed
Cost
Savings to
Investment
Ratio, SIR
Simple
Payback
(Years)
1 Ventilation
Reduce outside air to by
repairing controls closing
dampers (4000 CFM)
$43,102 $20,000 29 0.5
2
Lighting:
Probation
Bathroom,
Elevator
Replace with 2 LED 8W
Module StdElectronic $158 $75 13 0.5
3 Lighting: Office 1,
Visiting Judge
Replace with 2 LED 17W
Module StdElectronic $98 $75 7.9 0.8
4
Lighting: Hall A,
Hall G, Hall H,
S/L, Grand Jury
Replace with 6 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic $381 $960 5.8 2.5
5 Lighting: Jury
Deliberation 2,
Replace with LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic $94 $240 5.7 2.6
6
Lighting: JS
Office, Hall 3,
Hearing Room 1,
Court Room 2,
Court Room 4,
Court Room 6,
Replace with 10 LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic $941 $2,400 5.7 2.6
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
2
PRIORITY LIST – ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES (EEMs)
Rank Feature/
Location Improvement Description
Estimated
Annual
Energy
Savings
Estimated
Installed
Cost
Savings to
Investment
Ratio, SIR
Simple
Payback
(Years)
7
Lighting:
Customer Lobby,
Clerk's Office,
Security
Screening, Arctic
North,
Replace with 4 LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic $268 $960 3.8 3.6
8 Other Electrical:
headbolts
Remove Manual Switching and
Add new Clock Timer or Other
Scheduling Control
$2,187 $4,000 3.4 1.8
9 HVAC And DHW
grundfos ups 40-80 to Magna
($2000),, replace two ups
40/240s to magna ($4500)
$1,605 $6,500 3.3 4.1
10
Refrigeration:
Full Size
Refrigerator
Replace with 2 Full Size
Refrigerator $726 $1,690 2.6 2.3
11 Lighting: Exterior
Wall/Ceiling Pack
Replace with 25 LED 17W
Module StdElectronic $2,298 $6,000 2.4 2.6
12
Lighting: clerk of
court reception,
clerk of court,
stor 100E,
offices:1-7,9,11,
conference 1, rr
1, attorney 1,
district attorney,
jury deliberation,
vistiting judge,
judicial asst,
district ct judge,
jury deliberation
120
Replace with 69 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic $1,811 $11,040 2.2 6.1
13
Lighting: Hall A,
Hall B, Hall C,
Hall D, ASAP
110, Hall E, Hall
F, Toilet 137B,
Toilet 132A, Hall
G, Hall H,
Courtroom 5,
Toilet 115A,
Toilet 115B,
Holding Corridor,
Sound Lock 45L,
1SL, 2SL, Toilet
220A, Toilet
220B, Elevator
House, Court 5
Corridor, Hall X,
Hall Y, AHU 2 3
6,
Replace with 56 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic $1,112 $8,960 1.8 8.1
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
3
PRIORITY LIST – ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES (EEMs)
Rank Feature/
Location Improvement Description
Estimated
Annual
Energy
Savings
Estimated
Installed
Cost
Savings to
Investment
Ratio, SIR
Simple
Payback
(Years)
14
Lighting: Holding
Corridor, Juvinile
HC 1, HC 2,
HC3, HC4,
Replace with 9 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic $179 $1,440 1.8 8.1
15
Lighting: DOL
Storage, DOL
Storage 2, Hall F,
File #1,
Reception Area,
Corrections
Reception,
Probation
Clerical,
Probation Bath,
Hall H,
Courtroom 5,
Jury Deliberation
2, Hall 3, Hearing
Room 1, 1/2 SL,
Court Room 2,
Court Room 4,
Court Room 6,
AC, Law Library,
Jury 102, Grand
Jury, AC 104,
Replace with 72 LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic $2,117 $17,280 1.8 8.2
16
Lighting: copy
room, sec/rec,
conf 2, visiting
attorney, DOL
bath, conf 3, JS
off
Replace with 24 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic $896 $3,840 1.4 4.3
17
Lighting:
Women's W-1,
Men's W-1,
Women's HC,
Men's HC, Toilet
128A, Toilet
138A, Toilet
134A, Stair 1,
Replace with 16 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic $226 $2,560 1.2 11.3
18
Lighting: Storage
100E, Arctic 1,
Arctic 2, Office
13, 132SL, Toilet
124A, Toilet 122,
Hall 100E, Hall
100C, Hall J, Hall
K, S/L, Holding
Corridor 217,
Corridor 2, Lobby
210, Sump
Room, Sump
Room 2,
Replace with 28 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic $396 $4,480 1.2 11.3
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
4
PRIORITY LIST – ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES (EEMs)
Rank Feature/
Location Improvement Description
Estimated
Annual
Energy
Savings
Estimated
Installed
Cost
Savings to
Investment
Ratio, SIR
Simple
Payback
(Years)
19
Lighting: Jan J-1,
Elect/Phone,
Elev. Equip. 113,
COC Storage,
Mechanical
Room,
Phone/Data C1,
Attic Access A B
C D, AHU 4 5,
Replace with 33 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic $466 $5,280 1.2 11.3
20
Lighting: Clerk's
Office, Customer
Lobby, Courts
Coord., Security
Screening, Copy
Area, DOL
Clerical, Attorney
2, Office 13,
Office 8, Office
10, Office 12,
Magistrates
Office, Judicial
Assistant,
Superior Court
Judge, Judge
138, Law Clerk
Replace with 72 LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic $1,051 $17,280 0.82 16.4
21 Lighting: Exterior
Storage
Replace with LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic $14 $160 0.53 11.4
TOTAL, cost-effective measures $60,127 $115,220 6.68 1.9
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
5
Modeled Building Energy Cost Breakdown
The preceding charts are a graphical representation of the modeled energy usage for the Bethel
Court Building. The greatest portions of energy cost for the building are envelope air losses and
lighting. This indicates that the greatest savings can be found in reducing the amount of outside
air provided to the building mechanically or through air leakage, upgrading lighting and
potentially upgrading the envelope. Detailed improvements for ventilation, lighting and other
cost effective measures can be found in Appendix A.
The chart breaks down energy usage by cost into the following categories:
Envelope Air Losses—the cost to provide heated fresh air to occupants, air leakage,
heat lost in air through the chimneys and exhaust fans, heat lost to wind and other
similar losses.
Envelope
o Ceiling—quantified heat loss transferred through the ceiling portion of the
envelope.
o Window—quantified heat loss through the window portion of the envelope.
o Wall/Door—quantified heat loss through the wall and door portions of the
envelope.
o Floor—quantified heat loss through the floor portion of the envelope.
Water Heating—energy cost to provide domestic hot water.
Fans—energy cost to run ventilation, and exhaust fans.
Lighting—energy cost to light the building.
Refrigeration—energy costs to provide refrigerated goods for the occupants.
Other Electrical—includes energy costs not listed above including cooking loads, laundry
loads, other plug loads and electronics.
Envelope
Air Losses
$158,898
58%
Ceiling
$11,350
4%
Window
$2,838
1%
Wall/Door
$8,512
3%
Floor
$11,350
4%
Water
Heating
$12,138
4%
Fans
$1,889
1%
Lighting
$38,837
14%
Refriger-
ation
$5,798
Other
Electrical
$23,439
9%
Existing Building Energy Cost
Breakdown $275,048
Envelope
Air Losses
$116,528
42%
Ceiling
$11,369
4%
Window
$2,842
1%Wall/Door
$8,526
3%
Floor
$11,369
4%
Water
Heating
$12,138
4%
Fans
$1,889
1%
Lighting
$24,230
9%
Refriger-
ation
$5,798
Other
Electrical
$21,253
8%
EEM
Savings
$60,127
22%
Retrofit Building Energy Cost
Breakdown $214,921
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
6
2.0 INTRODUCTION
NORTECH contracted with the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation to perform ASHRAE
Level II Energy Audits for publically owned buildings in Alaska. This report presents the findings
of the utility benchmarking, modeling analysis, and the recommended building modifications,
and building use changes that are expected to save energy and money.
The report is organized into sections covering:
description of the facility,
the building’s historic energy usage (benchmarking),
estimating energy use through energy use modeling,
evaluation of potential energy efficiency or efficiency improvements, and
recommendations for energy efficiency with estimates of the costs and savings.
2.1 Building Use
The Bethel Court Building serves as the legal hub for the Kuskokwim River communities and
consists primarily of court rooms and office space for the Alaska State Court System.
2.2 Building Occupancy and Schedules
Approximately 50 people occupy this building from 8 am – 5 pm Monday through Friday.
Several people are in the building for a few hours on each weekend day as well. On occasion,
up to 200 people can occupy this building for trials and other public events.
2.3 Building Description
The Bethel Court Building is a two story-wood framed building that sits on pilings. The single
story portion of the building was built in 2000 and the two story addition was built in 2006. The
windows are primarily double pane vinyl windows and the doors are insulated metal doors,
some with windows.
Building Envelope
Building Envelope: Walls
Wall Type Description Insulation Notes
Above-grade walls Wood-framed with 2x8 studs
spaced 16-inches on center. R-25 fiberglass batt. No signs of insulation
damage.
Building Envelope: Floors
Floor Type Description Insulation Notes
Elevated Floor 2x12 Joists R-38 fiberglass batt None
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
7
Heating and Ventilation Systems
The building is heated with a single boiler, six air handling units (AHUs) and two heat recovery
ventilation units (HRV). Three sets of pumps distribute the heat from the boiler to the following
building zones:
Baseboards and AHUs in the original portion of the building
Heat trace
Baseboards and AHUs in the two story addition
The AHUs operate on a schedule from 6 am-10 pm seven days a week.
Air Conditioning System
The Court Building is not equipped with an air conditioning system, but utilizes economizer
cooling. Installation of an air conditioning system is being considered.
Energy Management
The Court Building is equipped with an energy management system. The ventilation system
utilizes CO2 sensors and Demand Control Ventilation during the winter months and temperature
sensors in the summer to limit outside air intake.
Lighting Systems
The primary lighting type in this building is ceiling mounted fluorescent fixtures containing 32
watt T8 (1” diameter, 4’ long) lamps. The exterior is lit with wall packs containing high pressure
sodium lamps.
Building Envelope: Roof
Roof Type Description Insulation Notes
All Roofs Hot roof with 2x12 R-38 fiberglass batts No signs of insulation
damage.
Building Envelope: Doors and Windows
Door and Window
Type Description Estimated
R-Value Notes
Window Double pane, vinyl, air gap >3/8,
not south 2 None
Window Double pane, vinyl, air gap >3/8,
south 2 None
Window
Double pane, aluminum with
thermal break, air gap >3/8, not
south
1.6 None
Window
Double pane, aluminum with
thermal break, air gap >3/8,
south
1.6 None
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
8
Domestic Hot Water
The domestic hot water is produced by a two-stage heating system. In order to save on electric
costs, the water is initially heated through a heat exchanger, then an electric heater. The water
is provided at approximately 140°F.
3.0 BENCHMARKING 2010 UTILITY DATA
Benchmarking building energy use consists of obtaining and then analyzing two years of energy
bills. The original utility bills are necessary to determine the raw usage, and charges as well as
to evaluate the utility’s rate structure. The metered usage of electrical and natural gas
consumption is measured monthly, but heating oil, propane, wood, and other energy sources
are normally billed upon delivery and provide similar information. During benchmarking,
information is compiled in a way that standardizes the units of energy and creates energy use
and billing rate information statistics for the building on a square foot basis. The objectives of
benchmarking are:
to understand patterns of use,
to understand building operational characteristics,
for comparison with other similar facilities in Alaska and across the country, and
to offer insight in to potential energy savings.
The results of the benchmarking, including the energy use statistics and comparisons to other
areas, are discussed in the following sections.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
9
3.1 Total Energy Use and Cost in 2010
The energy use profiles below show the energy and cost breakdowns for the Bethel Court
Building. The total annual energy use was 5,534 MMBTUs and cost for the building was
$286,574. These charts show the portion of use for a fuel type and the portion of its cost.
The above charts indicate that the highest portion of energy use is for oil and the highest portion
of cost is for electricity. Fuel oil consumption correlates directly to space heating and domestic
hot water while electrical use can correlate to lighting systems, plug loads, and HVAC
equipment. The fuel type with the highest cost often provides the most opportunity for savings.
Electric
1,279
23%
Oil
4,255
77%
2010 Energy Use Total (mmBTU)
Electric
$159,721
56%
Oil
$126,853
44%
2010 Energy Cost Total
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
10
3.2 Energy Utilization Index for 2010
The primary benchmarking statistic is the Energy Utilization Index (EUI). The EUI is calculated
from the utility bills and provides a simple snapshot of the quantity of energy actually used by
the building on a square foot and annual basis. The calculation converts the total energy use
for the year from all sources in the building, such as heating fuel and electrical usage, into
British Thermal Units (BTUs). This total annual usage is then divided by the number of square
feet of the building. The EUI units are BTUs per square foot per year.
The benchmark analysis found that the Bethel Court Building has an EUI of 192,000 BTUs per
square foot per year. This is high for a wood building with a well managed HVAC system.
The EUI is useful in comparing this building’s energy use to that of other similar buildings in
Alaska and in the Continental United States. The EUI can be compared to average energy use
in 2003 found in a study by the U.S. Energy Information Administration of commercial buildings
(abbreviated CBECS, 2006). That report found an overall average energy use of about 90,000
BTUs per square foot per year while studying about 6,000 commercial buildings of all sizes,
types, and uses that were located all over the Continental U.S. (see Table C3 in Appendix I).
In a recent and unpublished state-wide benchmarking study sponsored by the Alaska Housing
Finance Corporation, schools in Fairbanks averaged 62,000 BTUs per square foot and schools
in Anchorage averaged 123,000 BTUs per square foot annual energy use. The chart below
shows the Bethel Court Building relative to these values. These findings are discussed further in
Appendix H.
192,000
62,000
123,000
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
Btu/ Sq. FtAnnual Energy Use Index (Total Energy/ SF)
Bethel Courthouse Fairbanks Schools Anchorage Schools
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
11
3.3 Cost Utilization Index for 2010
Another benchmarking statistic that is useful is the Cost Utilization Index (CUI), which is the cost
for energy used in the building on a square foot basis per year. The CUI is calculated from the
cost for utilities for a year period. The CUI permits comparison of buildings on total energy cost
even though they may be located in areas with differing energy costs and differing heating
and/or cooling climates. The cost of energy, including heating oil, natural gas, and electricity,
can vary greatly over time and geographic location and can be higher in Alaska than other parts
of the country.
The CUI for Bethel Court Building is about $9.94/SF. This is based on utility costs from 2010
and the following rates:
Electricity at $ 0.43 / kWh
# 1 Fuel Oil at $ 4.27 / gallon
The Department of Energy Administration study, mentioned in the previous section (CBECS,
2006) found an average cost of $2.52 per square foot in 2003 for 4,400 buildings in the
Continental U.S (Tables C4 and C13 of CBDES, 2006). Schools in Fairbanks have an average
cost for energy of $2.42 per square foot while Anchorage schools average $2.11 per square
foot. The chart below shows the Bethel Court Building relative to these values. More details are
included in Appendix H.
$9.94
$2.42 $2.11
$0.00
$2.00
$4.00
$6.00
$8.00
$10.00
$12.00
Annual Energy Cost Index (Total Cost/ SF)
Bethel Courthouse Fairbanks Schools Anchorage Schools
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
12
3.4 Seasonal Energy Use Patterns
Energy consumption is often highly correlated with seasonal climate and usage variations. The
graphs below show the electric and fuel consumption of this building over the course of two
years. The lowest monthly use is called the baseline use. The electric baseline often reflects
year round lighting consumption. The clear relation of increased energy usage during periods of
cold weather can be seen in the months with higher usage.
No fuel data available prior to July 2009.
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
Jan-09Mar-09May-09Jul-09Sep-09Nov-09Jan-10Mar-10May-10Jul-10Sep-10Nov-10Jan-11KWHElectrical Consumption
City of Bethel - Court Bldg
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
Jan-09Mar-09May-09Jul-09Sep-09Nov-09Jan-10Mar-10May-10Jul-10Sep-10Nov-10GallonsFuel Oil Deliveries
City of Bethel - Court Bldg
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
13
3.5 Future Energy Monitoring
Energy accounting is the process of tracking energy consumption and costs. It is important for
the building owner or manager to monitor and record both the energy usage and cost each
month. Comparing trends over time can assist in pinpointing major sources of energy usage and
aid in finding effective energy efficiency measures. There are two basic methods of energy
accounting; manual and automatic. Manual tracking of energy usage may already be performed
by an administrative assistant, however if the records are not scrutinized for energy use, then
the data is merely a financial accounting. Digital energy tracking systems, such as Smart Meters
can be installed. They display and record real-time energy usage and accumulated energy use
and cost. There are several other types including OptoEMU by Opto22 which has all of the
information accessible via Ethernet browser.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
14
4.0 MODELING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
After benchmarking of a building is complete and the site visit has identified the specific systems
in the building, a number of different methods are available for quantifying the overall energy
consumption and to model the energy use. These range from relatively simple spreadsheets to
commercially available modeling software capable of handling complex building systems.
NORTECH has used several of these programs and uses the worksheets and software that
best matches the complexity of the building and specific energy use that is being evaluated.
Modeling of an energy efficiency measure (EEM) requires an estimate of the current energy
used by the specific feature, the estimated energy use of the proposed EEM and its installed
cost. EEMs can range from a single simple upgrade, such as light bulb type or type of motor, to
reprogramming of the controls on more complex systems. While the need for a major retrofit
can typically be identified by an energy audit, the specific system upgrades often require
engineering and design expertise beyond the scope of the standard energy audit.
Based on the field inspection results and discussions with the building owners/operators,
auditors developed potential EEMs for the facility. Common EEMs that could apply to almost
every older building include:
Reduce the envelope heat losses through:
o increased building insulation, and
o better windows and doors
Reduce temperature difference between inside and outside using setback thermostats
Upgrade inefficient:
o lights,
o motors,
o refrigeration units, and
o other appliances
Reduce running time of lights/appliances through:
o motion sensors,
o on/off timers,
o light sensors, and
o other automatic/programmable systems
The objective of the following sections is to describe how the overall energy use of the building
was modeled and the potential for energy savings. The specific EEMs that provide these overall
energy savings are detailed in Appendix A of this report. While the energy savings of an EEM is
unlikely to change significantly over time, the cost savings of an EEM is highly dependent on the
current energy price and can vary significantly over time. An EEM that is not currently
recommended based on price may be more attractive at a later date or with higher energy
prices.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
15
4.1 Understanding How AkWarm Models Energy Consumption
NORTECH used the AkWarm-C model for evaluating the overall energy consumption at Bethel
Court Building. The AkWarm program was developed by the Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation (AHFC) to model residential energy use. The original AkWarm is the modeling
engine behind the successful residential energy upgrade program that AHFC has operated for a
number of years. In the past few years, AHFC has developed a version of this model for
commercial buildings, referred to AkWarm-C. Although this report and commercial energy
auditors often refer to AkWarm, the actual model program used for this project is AkWarm-C.
Energy use in buildings is modeled by calculating energy losses and consumption, such as:
Heat lost through the building envelope components, including windows, doors, walls,
ceilings, crawlspaces, and foundations. These heat losses are computed for each
component based on the area, heat resistance (R-value), and the difference between
the inside temperature and the outside temperature. AkWarm has a library of
temperature profiles for villages and cities in Alaska.
Window orientation, such as the fact that south facing windows can add heat in the
winter but north-facing windows do not.
Inefficiencies of the heating system, including the imperfect conversion of fuel oil or
natural gas due to heat loss in exhaust gases, incomplete combustion, excess air, etc.
Some electricity is also consumed in moving the heat around a building through
pumping.
Inefficiencies of the cooling system, if one exists, due to various imperfections in a
mechanical system and the required energy to move the heat around.
Lighting requirements and inefficiencies in the conversion of electricity to light; ultimately
all of the power used for lighting is converted to heat. While the heat may be useful in
the winter, it often isn’t useful in the summer when cooling may be required to remove
the excess heat. Lights are modeled by wattage and operational hours.
Use and inefficiencies in refrigeration, compressor cooling, and heat pumps. Some units
are more efficient than others. Electricity is required to move the heat from inside a
compartment to outside it. Again, this is a function of the R-Value and the temperature
difference between the inside and outside of the unit.
Plug loads such as computers, printers, mini-fridges, microwaves, portable heaters,
monitors, etc. These can be a significant part of the overall electricity consumption of
the building, as well as contributing to heat production.
The schedule of operation for lights, plug loads, motors, etc is a critical component of
how much energy is used.
AkWarm adds up these heat losses and the internal heat gains based on individual unit usage
schedules. These estimated heat and electrical usages are compared to actual use on both a
yearly and seasonal basis. If the AkWarm model is within 5 % to 10% of the most recent 12
months usage identified during benchmarking, the model is considered accurate enough to
make predictions of energy savings for possible EEMs.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
16
4.2 AkWarm Calculated Savings for the Bethel Court Building
Based on the field inspection results and discussions with the building owners/operators,
auditors developed potential EEMs for the facility. These EEMs are then entered into AkWarm
to determine if the EEM saves energy and is cost effective (i.e. will pay for itself). AkWarm
calculates the energy and money saved by each EEM and calculates the length of time for the
savings in reduced energy consumption to pay for the installation of the EEM. AkWarm makes
recommendations based on the Savings/Investment Ratio (SIR), which is defined as ratio of the
savings generated over the life of the EEM divided by the installed cost. Higher SIR values are
better and any SIR above one is considered acceptable. If the SIR of an EEM is below one, the
energy savings will not pay for the cost of the EEM and the EEM is not recommended.
Preferred EEMs are listed by AkWarm in order of the highest SIR.
A summary of the savings from the recommended EEMs are listed in this table.
Description Space
Heating
Water
Heating Lighting Refrigeration Other
Electrical
Ventilation
Fans Total
Existing
Building $192,947 $12,138 $38,837 $5,798 $23,439 $1,889 $275,048
With All
Proposed
Retrofits
$150,634 $12,138 $24,230 $4,777 $21,253 $1,889 $214,921
Savings $42,313 $0 $14,607 $1,021 $2,186 $0 $60,127
Savings in these categories do not reflect interaction with other categories. So, for example, the
savings in lighting does not affect the added space heating cost to make up for the heat saved
in replacing less-efficient lights with more-efficient lights that waste less heat.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
17
4.3 AkWarm Projected Energy Costs after Modifications
The AkWarm recommended EEMs appear to result in significant savings in space heating and
lighting. The energy cost by end use breakdown was provided by AkWarm based on the field
inspection and does not indicate that all individual fixtures and appliances were directly
measured. The current energy costs are shown below on the left hand bar of the graph and the
projected energy costs, assuming use of the recommended EEMs, are shown on the right.
This graphical format allows easy visual comparison of the various energy requirements of the
facility. In the event that not all recommended retrofits are desired, the proposal energy savings
can be estimated from visual interpretation from this graph.
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
Existing Retrofit
Ventilation and Fans
Space Heating
Refrigeration
Other Electrical
Lighting
Domestic Hot Water
Annual Energy Costs by End Use
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
18
4.4 Additional Modeling Methods
The AkWarm program effectively models wood-framed and other buildings with standard
heating systems and relatively simple HVAC systems. AkWarm models of more complicated
mechanical systems are sometimes poor due to a number of simplifying assumptions and
limited input of some variables. Furthermore, AKWarm is unable to model complex HVAC
systems such as variable frequency motors, variable air volume (VAV) systems, those with
significant digital or pneumatic controls or significant heat recovery capacity. In addition, some
other building methods and occupancies are outside AkWarm capabilities.
This report section is included in order to identify benefits from modifications to those more
complex systems or changes in occupant behavior that cannot be addressed in AkWarm.
The Court Building could be modeled well in AKWarm. Retrofits for the HVAC system were
adequately modeled in AkWarm and did not require additional calculations.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
19
5.0 BUILDING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M)
5.1 Operations and Maintenance
A well-implemented operation and maintenance (O & M) plan, by preserving institutional
knowledge and directing preventative maintenance, is often the driving force behind energy
savings. Such a plan includes a regularly scheduled inspection of each piece of HVAC
equipment within the building. Routine maintenance includes the timely replacement of filters,
belts and pulleys, the proper greasing of bearings and other details such as topping off the
glycol tanks. Additional benefits to a maintenance plan are decreased down time for
malfunctioning equipment, early indications of problems, prevention of exacerbated
maintenance issues, and early detection of overloading/overheating issues. A good
maintenance person knows the building’s equipment well enough to spot and repair minor
malfunctions before they become major retrofits.
Operations and Maintenance staff implementing a properly designed O & M plan will:
Track and document
o Renovations and repairs,
o Utility bills and fuel consumption, and
o System performance.
Keep available for reference
o A current Building Operating Plan including an inventory of installed systems,
o The most recent available as-built drawings,
o Reference manuals for all installed parts and systems, and
o An up-to-date inventory of on-hand replacement parts.
Provide training and continuing education for maintenance personnel.
Plan for commissioning and re-commissioning at appropriate intervals.
5.2 Commissioning
Commissioning of a building is the verification that the HVAC systems perform within the design
or usage ranges of the Building Operating Plan. This process ideally, though seldom, occurs as
the last phase in construction. HVAC system operation parameters degrade from ideal over time
due to incorrect maintenance, improper replacement pumps, changes in facility tenants or
usage, changes in schedules, and changes in energy costs or loads. Ideally, re-commissioning
of a building should occur every five to ten years. This ensures that the HVAC system meets
the potentially variable use with the most efficient means.
5.3 Building Specific Recommendations
The maintenance staff for the Bethel Court Building does a good job with maintaining the
equipment and is currently replacing faulty CO2 sensors which are believed to be responsible for
poorly controlled excess ventilation.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
20
APPENDICES
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
21
Appendix A Recommended Energy Efficiency Measures
A number of Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs) are available to reduce the energy use and
overall operating cost for the facility. The EEMs listed below are those recommended by
AkWarm based on the calculated savings/investment ration (SIR) as described in Appendix E.
AkWarm also provides a breakeven cost, which is the maximum initial cost of the EEM that will
still return a SIR of one or greater.
This section describes each recommended EEM and identifies the potential energy savings and
installation costs. This also details the calculation of breakeven costs, simple payback, and the
SIR for each recommendation. The recommended EEMs are grouped together generally by the
overall end use that will be impacted.
A.1 Temperature Control
Programmable thermostats are not recommended to be installed in the Bethel Court Building
which provide an automatic temperature setback. Analysis of utility bills and on-site inspections
indicates that the current boiler is not large enough to reheat the building after a setback on the
coldest day of the year. On other days of the year that are not as cold setbacks could be
implemented and energy saved.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
22
A.2 Electrical Loads
A.2.1 Lighting
The electricity used by lighting eventually ends up as heat in the building. In areas where
electricity is more expensive than other forms of energy, or in areas where the summer
temperatures require cooling; this additional heat can be both wasteful and costly. Converting
to more efficient lighting reduces cooling loads in the summer and allows the user to control
heat input in the winter. The conversion from T12 (one and a half inch fluorescent bulbs) to T8
(one inch), T5 (5/8 inch), Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFL), or LED bulbs provides a significant
increase in efficiency. LED bulbs can be directly placed in existing fixtures. The LED bulb
bypasses the ballast altogether, which removes the often irritating, “buzzing” noise that
magnetic ballasts tend to make.
The cost of electricity in Bethel makes it cost effective to retrofit the current T8 lamps in the
ceiling mounted fixtures with 17 watt LED tubes. Furthermore, decreasing the amount of
wattage used in lighting will decrease the amount of heat entering the building. During the
summer a building gains heat from human occupancy and lighting. Decreasing the heat from
the lights will allow the building to be able to run the economizer cooling more effectively and
longer into the season as well as decrease the air conditioning size and run time when installed.
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 Probation Bathroom,
Elevator
2 INCAN [Unknown Lamp] with Manual
Switching
Replace with 2 LED 8W Module
StdElectronic
Installation Cost $75 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $158
Breakeven Cost $980 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 13 Simple Payback yrs 0
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
3 Office 1, Visiting
Judge
2 INCAN A Lamp, Halogen 75W with
Manual Switching
Replace with 2 LED 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $75 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $98
Breakeven Cost $594 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 7.9 Simple Payback yrs 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
4 Hall A, Hall G, Hall
H, S/L, Grand Jury
6 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 6 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $960 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $381
Breakeven Cost $5,573 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 5.8 Simple Payback yrs 3
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
5 Jury Deliberation 2, FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $240 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $94
Breakeven Cost $1,375 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 5.7 Simple Payback yrs 3
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
23
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
6
JS Office, Hall 3,
Hearing Room 1,
Court Room 2, Court
Room 4, Court
Room 6,
10 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 10 LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $2,400 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $941
Breakeven Cost $13,744 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 5.7 Simple Payback yrs 3
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
7
Customer Lobby,
Clerk's Office,
Security Screening,
Arctic North,
4 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 4 LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $960 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $268
Breakeven Cost $3,621 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.8 Simple Payback yrs 4
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
11 Exterior Wall/Ceiling
Pack
25 HPS 70 Watt StdElectronic with Manual
Switching
Replace with 25 LED 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $6,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $2,298
Breakeven Cost $14,227 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.4 Simple Payback yrs 3
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
12
clerk of court
reception, clerk of
court, stor 100E,
offices:1-7,9,11,
conference 1, rr 1,
attorney 1, district
attorney, jury
deliberation, vistiting
judge, judicial asst,
district ct judge, jury
deliberation 120
69 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual
Switching, Multi-Level Switch
Replace with 69 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $11,040 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,811
Breakeven Cost $24,545 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.2 Simple Payback yrs 6
Delamping
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
24
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
13
Hall A, Hall B, Hall
C, Hall D, ASAP
110, Hall E, Hall F,
Toilet 137B, Toilet
132A, Hall G, Hall H,
Courtroom 5, Toilet
115A, Toilet 115B,
Holding Corridor,
Sound Lock 45L,
1SL, 2SL, Toilet
220A, Toilet 220B,
Elevator House,
Court 5 Corridor,
Hall X, Hall Y, AHU
2 3 6,
56 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 56 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $8,960 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,112
Breakeven Cost $16,253 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.8 Simple Payback yrs 8
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
14
Holding Corridor,
Juvinile HC 1, HC 2,
HC3, HC4,
9 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 9 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $1,440 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $179
Breakeven Cost $2,612 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.8 Simple Payback yrs 8
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
15
DOL Storage, DOL
Storage 2, Hall F,
File #1, Reception
Area, Corrections
Reception,
Probation Clerical,
Probation Bath, Hall
H, Courtroom 5,
Jury Deliberation 2,
Hall 3, Hearing
Room 1, 1/2 SL,
Court Room 2, Court
Room 4, Court
Room 6, AC, Law
Library, Jury 102,
Grand Jury, AC 104,
72 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 72 LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $17,280 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $2,117
Breakeven Cost $30,925 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.8 Simple Payback yrs 8
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
25
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
16
copy room, sec/rec,
conf 2, visiting
attorney, DOL bath,
conf 3, JS off
24 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 24 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $3,840 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $896
Breakeven Cost $5,411 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.4 Simple Payback yrs 4
Delamping
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
17
Women's W-1,
Men's W-1,
Women's HC, Men's
HC, Toilet 128A,
Toilet 138A, Toilet
134A, Stair 1,
16 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 16 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $2,560 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $226
Breakeven Cost $3,063 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.2 Simple Payback yrs 11
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
18
Storage 100E, Arctic
1, Arctic 2, Office
13, 132SL, Toilet
124A, Toilet 122,
Hall 100E, Hall
100C, Hall J, Hall K,
S/L, Holding
Corridor 217,
Corridor 2, Lobby
210, Sump Room,
Sump Room 2,
28 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 28 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $4,480 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $396
Breakeven Cost $5,353 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.2 Simple Payback yrs 11
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
19
Jan J-1,
Elect/Phone, Elev.
Equip. 113, COC
Storage, Mechanical
Room, Phone/Data
C1, Attic Access A B
C D, AHU 4 5,
33 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 33 LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $5,280 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $46
6
Breakeven Cost $6,297 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.2 Simple Payback yrs 11
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
26
A.2.2 Other Electrical Loads
Having the headbolt heaters on for the entire day is not always necessary. Installing a timer to
control the headbolt heaters will help decrease energy usage. When the temperature is above
20°F all of the outlets will be off, when the temperature is between -20°F and 20°F half of the
outlets will be off and rotate on half hour cycles through the day, and at below -20°F all the
outlets will be on. Also, eliminating the use of two full size refrigerators with one will decrease
energy usage.
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
20
Clerk's Office,
Customer Lobby,
Courts Coord.,
Security Screening,
Copy Area, DOL
Clerical, Attorney 2,
Office 13, Office 8,
Office 10, Office 12,
Magistrates Office,
Judicial Assistant,
Superior Court
Judge, Judge 138,
Law Clerk
72 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual
Switching, Multi-Level Switch
Replace with 72 LED (3) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $17,280 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,051
Breakeven Cost $14,202 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.8 Simple Payback yrs 16
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
21 Exterior Storage FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $160 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $14
Breakeven Cost $85 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.5 Simple Payback yrs 11
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
8 headbolts 16 headbolt outlets with Manual Switching
Remove Manual Switching and
Add new Clock Timer or Other
Scheduling Control
Installation Cost $4,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $2,187
Breakeven Cost $13,535 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.4 Simple Payback yrs 2
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
10 Full Size
Refrigerator 2 Full Size Refrigerator Replace with Full Size
Refrigerator
Installation Cost $1,690 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $726
Breakeven Cost $4,384 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.6 Simple Payback yrs 2
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
27
A.3 Building Envelope: Recommendations for change
A.3.1 Exterior Walls
No EEMs are recommended in this category. The cost to increase the insulation on the walls
outweighs the energy savings.
A.3.2 Foundation and/or Crawlspace
No EEMs are recommenced in this category. The cost to increase the insulation on the
foundation outweighs the energy savings.
A.3.3 Roofing and Ceiling
No EEMs are recommended in this category. The cost to increase the insulation on the ceiling
outweighs the energy savings.
A.3.4 Windows
No EEMs are recommended in this category. The cost to replace the windows with better
insulated windows outweighs the energy savings.
A.3.5 Doors
No EEMs are recommended in this category. The cost to replace the doors with better insulated
doors outweighs the energy savings.
A.4 Building Heating System / Air Conditioning
A.4.1 Heating and Heat Distribution
Replacing the current circulation pumps with variable speed pumps such as the Grundfos
Magna pumps will decrease the electrical consumption and cost.
A.4.2 Air Conditioning
The court building is not equipped with an air conditioning system. The City of Bethel is
considering installing air conditioning in the building to make the summer months more
comfortable. The size of these units may not need to be as large a previously thought because
the recommended EEMs will significantly reduce the heating load. The Court Building currently
utilizes economizer cooling with the air handlers. It is believed that the lighting heat savings will
not negate the need for air conditioning but will reduce the required size, capital cost, and run
time expense.
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
9 grundfos ups 40-80 to Magna ($2000),, replace two ups 40/240s to magna ($4500)
Installation Cost $6,500 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,605
Breakeven Cost $21,686 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.3 Simple Payback yrs 4
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
28
A.4.3 Ventilation
A lot of energy is needed to heat outside air to a comfortable temperature. Significant savings
can be achieved by ensuring that only the necessary amount of outside air is brought into the
building and heated. This can be achieved in the court building by recommissioning the HVAC
system and repairing all demand control ventilation sensors and controls.
A large portion of the building energy costs involve ventilation and additional inspection is
warranted to achieve all possible savings. An ASHRAE Level III Energy Audit is recommended.
This involves more detailed inspection and modeling than this limited audit and would result in
very specific equipment and control retrofit recommendations for the HVAC system. Additional
energy savings are likely to be found with an ASHRAE Level III Energy Audit. Requesting this
second audit should occur approximately one year after these retrofits are implemented and in
the intervening time, all efforts to track energy usage and savings should be made.
A.4.4 Air Changes and Air Tightening
No EEMs are recommended in this area because of the difficulty of quantifying the amount of
leaking air and the savings. However, by using a blower door to depressurize the building and
an infra-red camera, the location of significant air leaks can be determined so they can be
repaired. Several locations on the envelope in the City Shop have damage that allows heat to
escape that should be repaired.
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
1 Reduce outside air to by repairing controls closing dampers (4000 CFM)
Installation Cost $20,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $43,102
Breakeven Cost $581,456 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 29 Simple Payback yrs 0
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
29
Appendix B Energy Efficiency Measures that are NOT Recommended
As indicated in other sections of the report, a number of potential EEMs were identified that
were determined to be NOT cost effective by the AkWarm model. These EEMs are not
currently recommended on the basis of energy savings alone because each may only save a
small amount of energy, have a high capital cost, or be expensive to install. While each of
these EEMs is not cost effective at this time, future changes in building use such as longer
operating hours, higher energy prices, new fixtures or hardware on the market, and decreases
in installation effort may make any of these EEMs cost effective in the future. These potential
EEMs should be reviewed periodically to identify any changes to these factors that would
warrant re-evaluation.
Although these upgrades are not currently cost effective on an energy cost basis, the fixtures,
hardware, controls, or operational changes described in these EEMs should be considered
when replacing an existing fixture or unit for other reasons. For example, replacing an existing
window with a triple-pane window may not be cost effective based only on energy use, but if a
window is going to be replaced for some other reason, then the basis for a decision is only the
incremental cost of upgrading from a less efficient replacement window to a more efficient
replacement window. That incremental cost difference will have a significantly shorter payback,
especially since the installation costs are likely to be the same for both units.
The following measures were not found to be cost-effective:
Rank Feature/Location Improvement Description
Annual
Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
Savings to
Investment
Ratio, SIR
Simple
Payback
(Years)
21
Exterior Door:
Half/Full Lite Metal
Foam
Remove existing door and
install standard pre-hung U-
0.16 insulated door, including
hardware.
$196 $5,672 0.81 28.9
22 Above-Grade Wall:
House
Install R-30 rigid foam board
to exterior and cover with T1-
11 siding or equivalent.
$3,650 $129,438 0.66 35.5
23 Lighting: Exterior
Storage
Replace with LED (2) 17W
Module StdElectronic $14 $160 0.53 11.3
24
Window/Skylight:
Double Alum Therm
Brk >3/8 Other
Replace existing window with
U-0.30 vinyl window $447 $16,829 0.46 37.7
25
Window/Skylight:
Double Alum Therm
Brk >3/8: South
Replace existing window with
U-0.30 vinyl window $248 $9,617 0.45 38.8
26 Cathedral Ceiling:
House
Install R-10 rigid board
insulation. No cost included
for covering insulation.
$2,078 $127,197 0.38 61.2
27
Window/Skylight:
Double Vynil >3/8:
South
Replace existing window with
U-0.30 vinyl window $157 $8,819 0.31 56.1
28
Window/Skylight:
Doubel vinyl >3/8
Other
Replace existing window with
U-0.30 vinyl window $771 $43,242 0.31 56.1
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
30
Appendix C Significant Equipment List
HVAC Equipment
Equipment Manufacturer Model No. Fuel Type Notes
Boiler Burnham n/a #1 Fuel Oil Only one boiler
Pump Grundfos UPS 40-80/4F Electric 1/2 HP
Pump Fasco V12508E2JAB687D Electric 5 HP
Pump Grundfos 40-240 Electric 2 Units, 1 1/8 HP
AHU2 supply motor AO Smith n/a Electric 2 HP
AHU2 return motor Century n/a Electric 1 HP
AHU3 supply motor Century n/a Electric 1 1/2 HP
AHU3 return motor AO Smith n/a Electric 1/2 HP
AHU4 supply motor Century n/a Electric 3 HP
AHU4 return motor Marathon n/a Electric 1 1/2 HP
AHU5 supply motor Century n/a Electric 1 1/2 HP
AHU5 return motor n/a n/a Electric 3/4 HP
AHU6 supply motor Century n/a Electric 1 1/2 HP
AHU6 return motor Century n/a Electric 3/4 HP
AHU7 motor Century n/a Electric 7 1/2 HP
Water Heater American E61 Electric 4.5 kw
Pump Grundfos UP 15-42 Electric n/a
Heaters n/a n/a Electric 15 units
Lighting
Location Lighting
Type Bulb Type Quantity KWH/YR
DOL Storage, DOL Storage 2, Hall F, File #1, Reception
Area, Corrections Reception, Probation Clerical, Probation
Bath, Hall H, Courtroom 5, Jury Deliberation 2, Hall 3,
Hearing Room 1, 1/2 SL, Court Room 2, Court Room 4,
Court Room 6, AC, Law Library, Jury 102, Grand Jury, AC
104
Fluorescent T8 216 16,782
Clerk's Office, Customer Lobby, Courts Coord., Security
Screening, Copy Area, DOL Clerical, Attorney 2, Office 13,
Office 8, Office 10, Office 12, Magistrates Office, Judicial
Assistant, Superior Court Judge, Judge 138, Law Clerk
Fluorescent T8 216 11,748
clerk of court reception, clerk of court, stor 100E, offices:1-
7,9,11, conference 1, rr 1, attorney 1, district attorney, jury
deliberation, vistiting judge, judicial asst, district ct judge,
jury deliberation 120
Fluorescent T8 207 11,258
Hall A, Hall B, Hall C, Hall D, ASAP 110, Hall E, Hall F,
Toilet 137B, Toilet 132A, Hall G, Hall H, Courtroom 5,
Toilet 115A, Toilet 115B, Holding Corridor, Sound Lock
45L, 1SL, 2SL, Toilet 220A, Toilet 220B, Elevator House,
Court 5 Corridor, Hall X, Hall Y, AHU 2 3 6
Fluorescent T8 112 8,827
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
31
JS Office, Hall 3, Hearing Room 1, Court Room 2, Court
Room 4, Court Room 6 Fluorescent T8 30 7,549
Exterior HPS 70W 25 6,788
copy room, sec/rec, conf 2, visiting attorney, DOL bath,
conf 3, JS off Fluorescent T8 72 5,594
Jan J-1, Elect/Phone, Elev. Equip. 113, COC Storage,
Mechanical Room, Phone/Data C1, Attic Access A B C D,
AHU 4 5
Fluorescent T8 66 5,202
Storage 100E, Arctic 1, Arctic 2, Office 13, 132SL, Toilet
124A, Toilet 122, Hall 100E, Hall 100C, Hall J, Hall K, S/L,
Holding Corridor 217, Corridor 2, Lobby 210, Sump Room,
Sump Room 2
Fluorescent T8 56 4,414
Hall A, Hall G, Hall H, S/L, Grand Jury Fluorescent T8 12 3,027
Customer Lobby, Clerk's Office, Security Screening, Arctic
North Fluorescent T8 12 2,984
Women's W-1, Men's W-1, Women's HC, Men's HC, Toilet
128A, Toilet 138A, Toilet 134A, Stair 1 Fluorescent T8 32 2,522
Holding Corridor, Juvinile HC 1, HC 2, HC3, HC4 Fluorescent T8 18 1,419
Jury Deliberation 2 Fluorescent T8 3 746
Probation Bathroom, Elevator incandescent A lamp 2 526
Office 1, Visiting Judge incandescent A lamp 2 411
Exit Sign LED 4W 4 383
Exterior Storage Fluorescent T8 2 158
Office 1 Fluorescent Cfl 1 74
Energy Consumption calculated by AkWarm based on Wattage and Schedule
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
32
Plug Loads
Equipment Location Manufacturer KWH/YR
Headbolt Heaters Exterior n/a 15255
Computer Monitors Offices Varies 9971
IT Equipment n/a Varies 9073
Computer Towers Offices Varies 5040
Full Size Refrigerators Breakrooms n/a 4174
Pop Machines Breakrooms n/a 4000
Mini Refrigerators Offices n/a 3600
Water Coolers Offices n/a 1710
Battery Backups Offices n/a 1688
Laptops Offices n/a 1643
Elevator Hydraulic
Pump Elevator Room n/a 1603
Desk Radios Offices Varies 1578
Vending Machine Breakrooms n/a 1578
Microwaves Offices Varies 1148
Energy Consumption calculated by AkWarm based on Wattage and Schedule
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
33
Appendix D Local Utility Rate Structure
The information in this section was provided directly from the local utility or gathered from the
local utility’s publicly available information at the time of the audit. All language used in this
section was provided by the local utility and believed to be current at the time of the audit.
Energy use terms, specific fees, and other specific information are subject to change. Updated
rate structure information should be gathered from the utility during future discussion of rates,
rate structures and utility pricing agreements.
Bethel Utilities Corporation Rate Structure for March 1, 2011 bill:
RATE TYPE
Customer Charge $42.93
Demand Charge $30.02/KW
Energy Charge $0.2925/KWH
Power Adjustment Surcharge $0.0820/KWH
RCC $0.000552/KWH
Effective Rate $0.4662/KWH
***The effective rate is all of the charges totaled together and divided by the kilowatt hour used.
Customer Charge
A flat fee that covers costs for meter reading, billing and customer service.
Utility Charge (kWh charge)
This charge is multiplied by the number of kilowatt-hours (kWh) used in a monthly billing period.
It covers the costs to maintain power plants and substations, interest on loans as well as wires,
power poles and transformers.
Fuel and Purchased Power
This charge is based on a combination of forecasted and actual power costs. The monthly
charge allows Golden Valley to pass on increases and decreases in fuel and energy purchases
to our members. It is calculated quarterly and multiplied by the kilowatt-hours used each month.
Regulatory Charge
This charge of .000492 per kWh is set by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA). Since
November 1, 1992, the Regulatory Commission of Alaska has been funded by a Regulatory
Charge to the utilities it regulates rather than through the State general fund. The charge,
labeled "Regulatory Cost Charge." on your bill, is set by the RCA, and applies to all retail
kilowatt-hours sold by regulated electric utilities in Alaska.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
34
Appendix E Analysis Methodology
Data collected was processed using AkWarm energy use software to estimate current energy
consumption by end usage and calculate energy savings for each of the proposed energy
efficiency measures (EEMs). In addition, separate analysis may have been conducted to
evaluate EEMs that AkWarm cannot effectively model to evaluate potential reductions in annual
energy consumption. Analyses were conducted under the direct supervision of a Certified
Energy Auditor, Certified Energy Manager, or a Professional Engineer.
EEMs are evaluated based on building use, maintenance and processes, local climate
conditions, building construction type, function, operational schedule and existing conditions.
Energy savings are calculated based on industry standard methods and engineering
estimations. Each model created in AkWarm is carefully compared to existing utility usage
obtained from utility bills. The AkWarm analysis provides a number of tools for assessing the
cost effectiveness of various improvement options. The primary assessment value used in this
audit report is the Savings/Investment Ratio (SIR). The SIR is a method of cost analysis that
compares the total cost savings through reduced energy consumption to the total cost of a
project over its assumed lifespan, including both the construction cost and ongoing maintenance
and operating costs. Other measurement methods include Simple Payback, which is defined as
the length of time it takes for the savings to equal the total installed cost and Breakeven Cost,
which is defined as the highest cost that would yield a Savings/Investment Ratio of one.
EEMs are recommended by AkWarm in order of cost-effectiveness. AkWarm first calculates
individual SIRs for each EEM, and then ranks the EEMs by SIR, with higher SIRs at the top of
the list. An individual EEM must have a SIR greater than or equal to one in order to be
recommended by AkWarm. Next AkWarm modifies the building model to include the installation
of the first EEM and then re-simulates the energy use. Then the remaining EEMs are re-
evaluated and ranked again. AkWarm goes through this iterative process until all suggested
EEMs have been evaluated.
Under this iterative review process, the savings for each recommended EEM is calculated
based on the implementation of the other, more cost effective EEMs first. Therefore, the
implementation of one EEM affects the savings of other EEMs that are recommended later.
The savings from any one individual EEM may be relatively higher if the individual EEM is
implemented without the other recommended EEMs. For example, implementing a reduced
operating schedule for inefficient lighting may result in relatively higher savings than
implementing the same reduced operating schedule for newly installed lighting that is more
efficient. If multiple EEMs are recommended, AkWarm calculates a combined savings.
Inclusion of recommendations for energy savings outside the capability of AkWarm will impact
the actual savings from the AkWarm projections. This will almost certainly result in lower
energy savings and monetary savings from AkWarm recommendations. The reality is that only
so much energy is consumed in a building. Energy savings from one EEM reduces the amount
of energy that can be saved from additional EEMs. For example, installation of a lower wattage
light bulb does not save energy or money if the bulb is never turned on because of a schedule
or operational change at the facility.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
35
Appendix F Audit Limitations
The results of this audit are dependent on the input data provided and can only act as an
approximation. In some instances, several EEMs or installation methods may achieve the
identified potential savings. Actual savings will depend on the EEM selected, the price of
energy, and the final installation and implementation methodology. Competent tradesmen and
professional engineers may be required to design, install, or otherwise implement some of the
recommended EEMs. This document is an energy use audit report and is not intended as a
final design document, operation, and maintenance manual, or to take the place of any
document provided by a manufacturer or installer of any device described in this report.
Cost savings are calculated based on estimated initial costs for each EEM. Estimated costs
include labor and equipment for the full up-front investment required to implement the EEM.
The listed installation costs within the report are conceptual budgetary estimates and should not
be used as design estimates. The estimated costs are derived from Means Cost Data, industry
publications, local contractors and equipment suppliers, and the professional judgment of the
CEA writing the report and based on the conditions at the time of the audit.
Cost and energy savings are approximations and are not guaranteed.
Additional significant energy savings can usually be found with more detailed auditing
techniques that include actual measurements of electrical use, temperatures in the building and
HVAC ductwork, intake and exhaust temperatures, motor runtime and scheduling, and infrared,
air leakage to name just a few. Implementation of these techniques is the difference between a
Level III Energy Audit and the Level II Audit that has been conducted.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
36
Appendix G References
Although not all documents listed below are specifically referenced in this report, each contains
information and insights considered valuable to most buildings.
Alaska Department of Education and Early Development; Education Support Services/Facilities.
(1999). Alaska School Facilities Preventative Maintenance Handbook. Juneau, AK:
Alaska Department of Education and Early Development.
Alaska Housing Finance Corportation. (2010). Retrofit Energy Assessment for Loans. AHFC.
ASHRAE. (1997). 1997 ASHRAE Handbook: Fundamentals. Atlanta, GA: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. (2007). ASHRAE Standard 105-2007 Expressing and Comparing Building Energy
Performance. Retrieved from ASHRAE: www.ashrae.org
ASHRAE. (2007). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007 Energy Standards for buildings Except Low-
Rise Residential Buildings. Retrieved from ASHRAE: www.ashrae.org
ASHRAE. (2010). ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2010 Ventilaton for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality.
Retrieved from ASHRAE: www.ashrae.org
ASHRAE. (2010). ASHRAE Standard 62.2-2010 Ventilation and Acceptable Indoor Air Quality in
Low Rise Residential Buildings. Retrieved from ASHRAE: www.ashrae.org
ASHRAE RP-669 and SP-56. (2004). Procedures for Commercial Building Energy Audits.
Atlanta, GA: ASHRAE.
Coad, W. J. (1982). Energy Engineering and Management for Building Systems. Scarborough,
Ontario, Canada: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.
Daley, D. T. (2008). The Little Black Book of Reliability Management. New York, NY: Industrial
Press, Inc.
Federal Energy Management Program. (2004, March 3). Demand Controlled Ventilation Using
CO2 Sensors. Retrieved 2011, from US DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/fta_co2.pdf
Federal Energy Management Program. (2006, April 26). Low-Energy Building Design
Guidelines. Retrieved 2011, from Department of Energy; Federal Energy Management
Program: http://www.eren.doe.gov/femp/
Institute, E. a. (2004). Variable Speed Pumping: A Guide to Successful Applications. Oxford,
UK: Elsevier Advanced Technology.
International Code Council. (2009). International Energy Conservation Code. Country Club Hills,
IL: International Code Council, Inc.
Leach, M., Lobato, C., Hirsch, A., Pless, S., & Torcellini, P. (2010, September). Technical
Support Document: Strategies for 50% Energy Savings in Large Office Buildings.
Retrieved 2011, from National Renewable Energy Laboratory:
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy10osti/49213.pdf
Thumann, P.E., C.E.M., A., Younger, C.E.M., W. J., & Niehus, P.E., C.E.M., T. (2010).
Handbook of Energy Audits Eighth Edition. Lilburn, GA: The Fairmont Press, Inc.
U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2006). Commercial Building Energy Consumption
Survey (CBECS). Retrieved 2011, from Energy Information Administration:
http://www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
37
Appendix H Typical Energy Use and Cost – Fairbanks and Anchorage
This report provides data on typical energy costs and use on selected building in Fairbanks and
Anchorage, Alaska for comparative purposes only. The values provided by the US Energy
Information Administration CBECS study included a broader range of building types for the
Continental U.S. are not necessarily good comparatives for buildings and conditions in Alaska.
An assortment of values from CBECS may be found in Appendix I.
The Alaska data described in this report came from a benchmarking study NORTECH and other
Technical Services Providers (TSPs) completed on publicly owned buildings in Alaska under
contract with AHFC. This study acquired actual utility data for municipal buildings and schools
in Alaska for the two recent full years. The utility data included costs and quantities including
fuel oil, electricity, propane, wood, steam, and all other energy source usage. This resulted in a
database of approximately 900 buildings. During the course of the benchmarking study, the
comparisons made to the CBECS data appeared to be inappropriate for various reasons.
Therefore, this energy use audit report references the average energy use and energy cost of
Anchorage and Fairbanks buildings as described below.
The Alaska benchmarking data was evaluated in order to find valid comparison data. Buildings
with major energy use information missing were eliminated from the data pool. After detailed
scrutiny of the data, the most complete information was provided to NORTECH by the
Fairbanks North Star Borough School District (FNSBSD) and the Anchorage School District
(ASD). The data sets from these two sources included both the actual educational facilities as
well as the district administrative buildings and these are grouped together in this report as
Fairbanks and Anchorage schools. These two sources of information, being the most complete
and reasonable in-state information, have been used to identify an average annual energy
usage for Fairbanks and for Anchorage in order to provide a comparison for other facilities in
Alaska.
Several factors may limit the comparison of a specific facility to these regional indicators. In
Fairbanks, the FNSBSD generally uses number two fuel oil for heating needs and electricity is
provided by Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA). GVEA produces electricity from a coal
fired generation plant with additional oil generation upon demand. A few of the FNSBSD
buildings in this selection utilize district steam and hot water. The FNSBSD has recently (the
last ten years) invested significantly in envelope and other efficiency upgrades to reduce their
operating costs. Therefore a reader should be aware that this selection of Fairbanks buildings
has energy use at or below average for the entire Alaska benchmarking database.
Heating in Anchorage is through natural gas from the nearby natural gas fields. Electricity is
also provided using natural gas. As the source is nearby and the infrastructure for delivery is in
place, energy costs are relatively low in the area. As a result, the ASD buildings have lower
energy costs, but higher energy use, than the average for the entire benchmarking database.
These special circumstances should be considered when comparing the typical annual energy
use for particular buildings.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
38
Appendix I Typical Energy Use and Cost – Continental U.S.
Released: Dec 2006
Next CBECS will be conducted in 2007
Table C3. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003
All Buildings* Sum of Major Fuel Consumption
Number of
Buildings
(thousand)
Floorspace
(million
square feet)
Floorspace
per Building
(thousand
square feet)
Total
(trillion
BTU)
per
Building
(million
BTU)
per
Square
Foot
(thousand
BTU)
per
Worker
(million
BTU)
All Buildings* 4,645 64,783 13.9 5,820 1,253 89.8 79.9
Building Floorspace (Square Feet)
1,001 to 5,000 2,552 6,789 2.7 672 263 98.9 67.6
5,001 to 10,000 889 6,585 7.4 516 580 78.3 68.7
10,001 to 25,000 738 11,535 15.6 776 1,052 67.3 72.0
25,001 to 50,000 241 8,668 35.9 673 2,790 77.6 75.8
50,001 to 100,000 129 9,057 70.4 759 5,901 83.8 90.0
100,001 to 200,000 65 9,064 138.8 934 14,300 103.0 80.3
200,001 to 500,000 25 7,176 289.0 725 29,189 101.0 105.3
Over 500,000 7 5,908 896.1 766 116,216 129.7 87.6
Principal Building Activity
Education 386 9,874 25.6 820 2,125 83.1 65.7
Food Sales 226 1,255 5.6 251 1,110 199.7 175.2
Food Service 297 1,654 5.6 427 1,436 258.3 136.5
Health Care 129 3,163 24.6 594 4,612 187.7 94.0
Inpatient 8 1,905 241.4 475 60,152 249.2 127.7
Outpatient 121 1,258 10.4 119 985 94.6 45.8
Lodging 142 5,096 35.8 510 3,578 100.0 207.5
Retail (Other Than Mall) 443 4,317 9.7 319 720 73.9 92.1
Office 824 12,208 14.8 1,134 1,376 92.9 40.3
Public Assembly 277 3,939 14.2 370 1,338 93.9 154.5
Public Order and Safety 71 1,090 15.5 126 1,791 115.8 93.7
Religious Worship 370 3,754 10.1 163 440 43.5 95.6
Service 622 4,050 6.5 312 501 77.0 85.0
Warehouse and Storage 597 10,078 16.9 456 764 45.2 104.3
Other 79 1,738 21.9 286 3,600 164.4 157.1
Vacant 182 2,567 14.1 54 294 20.9 832.1
This report references the Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), published by the U.S.
Energy Information Administration in 2006. Initially this report was expected to compare the annual energy
consumption of the building to average national energy usage as documented below. However, a direct comparison
between one specific building and the groups of buildings outlined below yielded confusing results. Instead, this
report uses a comparative analysis on Fairbanks and Anchorage data as described in Appendix F. An abbreviated
excerpt from CBECS on commercial buildings in the Continental U.S. is below.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
39
Appendix J List of Conversion Factors and Energy Units
1 British Thermal Unit is the energy required to raise one pound of water one degree
1 Watt is approximately 3.412 BTU/hr
1 horsepower is approximately 2,544 BTU/hr
1 horsepower is approximately 746 Watts
1 "ton of cooling” is 12,000 BTU/hr, the amount of power required to melt one short
ton of ice in 24 hours
1 Therm = 100,000 BTU
1 KWH = 3413 BTU
1 KW = 3413 BTU/Hr
1 Boiler HP = 33,400 BTU/Hr
1 Pound Steam = 1000 BTU
1 CCF of natural gas = about 1 Therm
1 Pascal (Pa) = 1 inch H2O = 0.363 pounds/square inch (psi)
1 Pascal (Pa) = 0.0025 atmospheres (atm)
BTU British Thermal Unit
CCF 100 Cubic Feet
CFM Cubic Feet per Minute
GPM Gallons per minute
HP Horsepower
Hz Hertz
kg Kilogram (1,000 grams)
kV Kilovolt (1,000 volts)
kVA Kilovolt-Amp
kVAR Kilovolt-Amp Reactive
KW Kilowatt (1,000 watts)
KWH Kilowatt Hour
V Volt
W Watt
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
40
Appendix K List of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Definitions
ACH Air Changes per Hour
AFUE Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency
Air Economizer A duct, damper, and automatic control system that
allows a cooling system to supply outside air to reduce
or eliminate the need for mechanical cooling.
Ambient Temperature Average temperature of the surrounding air
Ballast A device used with an electric discharge lamp to cause
the lamp to start and operate under the proper circuit
conditions of voltage, current, electrode heat, etc.
CO carbon monoxide
CUI Cost Utilization Index
CDD Cooling Degree Days
CMU Concrete Masonry Unit
DDC Direct Digital Control
EEM Energy Efficiency Measure
EER Energy Efficient Ratio
EUI Energy Utilization Index
FLOUR Fluorescent
Grade The finished ground level adjoining a building at the
exterior walls
HDD Heating Degree Days
HVAC Heating Ventilation Air-Conditioning
INCAN Incandescent
NPV Net Present Value
R-value Thermal resistance measured in BTU/Hr-SF-̊F (Higher
value means better insulation)
SCFM Standard Cubic Feet per Minute
Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) Savings over the life of the EEM divided by Investment
capital cost. Savings includes the total discounted dollar
savings considered over the life of the improvement.
Investment in the SIR calculation includes the labor and
materials required to install the measure.
Set Point Reduction of heating or cooling by changing the set point
during hours when the building or space is unoccupied
Simple payback A cost analysis method whereby the investment cost of
an EEM is divided by the first year’s savings of the EEM
to give the number of years required to recover the cost
of the investment.
Energy Audit
Bethel Court Building
Bethel, Alaska
\\NFS1\Current_Data\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-610 Bethel\50-613 Court Bldg\Reports\Final\2012.03.23 AHFC Report
Bethel Courthouse.Docx
41
Appendix L Building Floor Plan
204’ 155’ Copies of on-site fire escape plans N Second Floor