HomeMy WebLinkAboutMOU-LYSD Ignatious Beans School 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
Ignatius Beans School
100 High School Road
Mountain Village, Alaska
Prepared for:
Mr. Robert Reed
Lower Yukon School District
PO Box 32089
Mountain Village, Alaska
Prepared by:
David C. Lanning PE, CEA
Stephanie N. Young EIT, CEAIT
July 11, 2012
Acknowledgment: “This material is based upon work supported by the
Department of Energy under Award Number DE-EE0000095
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
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 1
2.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Building Use .......................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Building Occupancy and Schedules ...................................................................... 4
2.3 Building Description ............................................................................................... 5
3.0 BENCHMARKING 2010 UTILITY DATA .......................................................................... 8
3.1 Total Energy Use and Cost of 2010 ...................................................................... 9
3.2 Energy Utilization Index of 2010 .......................................................................... 10
3.3 Cost Utilization Index of 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 Ignatius Beans School ............................... 16
4.3 Additional Modeling Methods .............................................................................. 17
5.0 BUILDING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M) .............................................. 18
5.1 Operations and Maintenance .............................................................................. 18
5.2 Commissioning .................................................................................................... 18
5.3 Building Specific Recommendations ................................................................... 19
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.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 ...................................................................... 31
Appendix E Analysis Methodology .............................................................................. 32
Appendix F Audit Limitations ...................................................................................... 33
Appendix G References .............................................................................................. 34
Appendix H Typical Energy Use and Cost – Fairbanks and Anchorage ..................... 35
Appendix I Typical Energy Use and Cost – Continental U.S. .................................... 36
Appendix J List of Conversion Factors and Energy Units .......................................... 37
Appendix K List of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Definitions .................................... 38
Appendix L Building Floor Plan .................................................................................. 39
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
1
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NORTECH has completed an ASHRAE Level II Energy Audit of the Ignatius Beans School, a
51,500 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 28,
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.
While the need for a major retrofit can typically be identified by an energy audit, upgrading
specific systems often requires collecting additional data and engineering and design efforts that
are beyond the scope of the Level II energy audit. The necessity and amount of design effort
and cost will vary depending on the scope of the specific EEMs planned and the sophistication
and capability of the entire design team, including the building owners and operators. During
the budgeting process for any major retrofit identified in this report, the building owner should
add administrative and supplemental design costs to cover the individual needs of their own
organization and the overall retrofit project.
The following table, from AkWarm, is a summary of the recommended EEMs for the Ignatius
Beans School. 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 Close Windows Estimated to reduce air
leakage by 10%. $20,273 $200 940 0.0
2
(18) Setback
Thermostats:
Elementary Wing
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for the
Elementary Wing space.
$71,557 $40,000 24 0.6
3 Lighting: E-4, H-
31, H-5
Replace with 2 FLUOR CFL, A
Lamp 15W $25 $10 15 0.4
4
(20) Setback
Thermostats:
High School and
Middle School
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 60.0 deg F for the
Ignatius Beans School space.
$14,718 $15,000 13 1.0
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.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)
5
Lighting: Exit
Lights: Voc Ed
Shop
Replace with 2 LED (2) 4W
Module StdElectronic $146 $200 4.3 1.4
6 Lighting:
Principal
Replace with FLUOR CFL, A
Lamp 15W $3 $5 3.6 1.6
7
Lighting:
Hallways and
some classrooms
Replace FLUOR T8 32W with
25W Energy Saver Instant
StdElectronic
$1,644 $10,608 1.0 6.4
TOTAL, cost-effective measures $108,341 $66,023 20.7 0.6
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
3
Modeled Building Energy Cost Breakdown
The above charts are a graphical representation of the modeled energy usage for the Ignatius
Beans School. The greatest portion of energy cost for the building is envelope air losses 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, reducing unoccupied temperatures and
potentially upgrading the envelope. Detailed improvements for ventilation, air leakage, 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.
The majority of the calculated savings, $ 106,000, result from changes to the heating system.
The changes suggested include repairing problems with the heating control system caused by a
lack of maintenance and creating temperature setbacks.
Envelope
Air
Losses
$193,489
Ceiling
$25,459 Window
$12,220
Wall/Door
$32,588
Floor
$51,427
Water
Heating
$15,961
Fans
$112
Lighting
$14,149 Refriger-
ation
$5,798
Existing Building Energy Cost
$361,262
Envelope
Air
Losses
$117,687
Ceiling
$22,370
Window
$5,836
Wall/Door
$24,316
Floor
$38,905
Water
Heating
$15,980
Fans
$112
Lighting
$11,810
Refriger-
ation,
$5,548
Other
Electrical
$10,356
EEM
Savings
$108,367
Existing Building Energy Cost
$252,985
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
4
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
Ignatius Beans School serves as the K-12 education facility for the community of Mountain
Village.
2.2 Building Occupancy and Schedules
Approximately 250 students attend the school with 40 teachers and support staff. The school
operates from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday during the school year. The school
year begins in late August and ends midway through May. Sports and activities sometimes keep
the gym open after hours, which is typically 2 to 6 hours per week during Friday or Saturday
evenings.
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
5
2.3 Building Description
The school has three distinct portions. The elementary school, including kitchen and cafeteria
was constructed in 1992, and added to in 1997. The high school, including gym and vocational
education center was constructed in 1994. In 2010, a middle school connecting the two
previously separate structures was constructed. All three portions of the school have similar
construction types, varying mainly in the amount of insulation installed. The entire structure is
built on a slab-on-grade foundation and is single story with a few second story mechanical
rooms.
Building Envelope
Building Envelope: Walls
Wall Type Description Insulation Notes
Above-grade walls:
High School and
Elementary
Structural insulated stressed skin
panels R-25 insulation No signs of damage
Above-grade walls:
Middle School
Structural insulated stressed skin
panels R-33 insulation No signs of damage
Building Envelope: Floors
Floor Type Description Insulation Notes
On Grade Floor Uninsulated slab None None
Building Envelope: Roof
Roof Type Description Insulation Notes
All Roofs Cold roofs framed with wood
trusses.
12-inches of fiberglass
batt.
No signs of insulation
damage.
Building Envelope: Doors and Windows
Door and Window
Type Description Estimated
R-Value Notes
All Doors Insulated metal doors, some with
1/4 light windows 4.0
All Windows Vinyl framed, double-paned
windows 2.0
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
6
Heating and Ventilation Systems
Each of the three building sections have separate heating systems.
Heating
Heat to the elementary school is supplied by two boilers, and distributed via baseboard heaters
in the perimeter classrooms and through the four Air Handling Units (AHUs) in all of the rooms.
The heat in the elementary wing is controlled by a pneumatic controls system which is not
functioning properly due to reported problems with the compressor and zone valves. Since the
thermostats, which are powered by the compressor, do not function, the maintenance person
has been shutting off all three of the glycol pumps during school hours and turning them back
on during the night, resulting in overheated classrooms in the morning. When the teachers
arrive, they open windows to cool of their rooms, regardless of the weather.
The high school heat is provided by two boilers and distributed by a system of base boards, unit
heaters in the vocational education room and mechanical rooms, and the two high school
AHUs. The heat is controlled by pneumatic thermostats which appear to be operating correctly.
The middle school and administrative offices have heat supplied by two small boilers and
distributed via base boards. The area is not ventilated. Heat is controlled by programmable
digital thermostats.
Ventilation
According to information provided by the maintenance person, the AHUs are scheduled to
operate only during school hours.
Elementary school AHUs, 1 and 3 supply heat only to the elementary classrooms; the outside
air dampers were fully closed, therefore no fresh air was being provided during the audit.
The kitchen make-up AHU has not been operated for a long time, neither has elementary school
AHU 2 which should serve the cafeteria.
The high school AHU 1 supplies the gym and operates as expected, except that outside air
dampers are intentionally closed.
The high school AHU 2 appears not to be operating properly and the maintenance person has
intentionally left it off.
A Heat Recovery Ventilator (HRV) was installed to serve the middle school classrooms, but
apparently has never been used. Additionally AHU 4 is designed to ventilate the administrative
area and library, but is manually shut off.
Only three of the eight ventilation units in the building are currently operating. None of the units
is set up to provide fresh air to the building; instead the three units only provide heat.
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
7
Air Conditioning System
No building-wide air conditioning system is installed in the building however the ventilation
system could be set up to provide cooling to the building.
A single, stand-alone air conditioning unit provides cooling for the server room.
Energy Management
No energy management system is installed in the building.
Lighting Systems
Lighting in the building consists of mainly fluorescent fixtures with T8 (one-inch, four foot) bulbs
on occupancy sensor controls. The gym is lit by fluorescent high bay fixtures with T5 (5/8-inch,
four foot) bulbs. Exterior lighting is metal halide on photocell control.
Domestic Hot Water
Three separate hot water heaters, one in each addition, provide domestic hot water to the
building. Hot water does not re-circulate.
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
8
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-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
9
3.1 Total Energy Use and Cost of 2010
The energy use profiles below show the energy and cost breakdowns for the Ignatius Beans
School. The total 2010 energy use is 7,217 mm BTUs and the total 2010 cost for the building is
$331,496. These charts show the portion of use for a fuel type and the portion of its cost.
The above charts indicate that the highest portion of energy use is for fuel oil and the highest
portion of cost is for fuel oil. Fuel oil consumption correlates directly to space heating and
domestic hot water while electrical use can correlate to lighting systems, plug loads, and HVAC
equipment. The energy type with the highest cost often provides the most opportunity for
savings.
Electric
202
3%
Oil
7,015
97%
Energy Use Total (mmBTU)
Electric
29,839
9%
Oil
301,656
91%
Energy Cost Total ($)
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
10
3.2 Energy Utilization Index of 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 Ignatius Beans School has an EUI of 140,000 BTUs per
square foot per year.
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 Ignatius Beans School relative to these values. These findings are discussed further
in Appendix H.
140,000
62,000
123,000
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
Btu/ Sq. FtAnnual Energy Utilization Index (Total Energy/ SF)
Ignatious Beans School Fairbanks Schools Anchorage Schools
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
11
3.3 Cost Utilization Index of 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 Ignatius Beans School is about $ 6.44 dollars per square foot per year. This is
based on utility costs from 2010 and the following rates:
Electricity at $ 0.69 / kWh ($ 20.22 / therm)
# 1 Fuel Oil at $ 6.02 / gallon ($ 4.30 / therm)
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 Ignatius Beans School relative to these values. More details
are included in Appendix H.
$6.44
$2.42
$2.11
$0.00
$1.00
$2.00
$3.00
$4.00
$5.00
$6.00
$7.00
Annual Energy Cost Index (Total Cost/ SF)
Ignatious Beans School Fairbanks Schools Anchorage Schools
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.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 while the heating fuel baseline often reflects year round hot
water usage. The clear relation of increased energy usage during periods of cold weather can
be seen in the months with higher usage.
Fuel data was not available for the period after August 2010.
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
Jan-09Mar-09May-09Jul-09Sep-09Nov-09Jan-10Mar-10May-10Jul-10Sep-10Nov-10Jan-11Mar-11May-11Jul-11KWHElectrical Consumption
Ignatious Beans School
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
Jan-09Mar-09May-09Jul-09Sep-09Nov-09Jan-10Mar-10May-10Jul-10Sep-10Nov-10Jan-11Mar-11May-11Jul-11GallonsFuel Oil Deliveries
Ignatious Beans School
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.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 can be installed. They
display and record real-time energy usage and accumulated energy use and cost. There are
several types which have all of the information accessible via Ethernet browser.
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.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 Level II 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-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
15
4.1 Understanding How AkWarm Models Energy Consumption
NORTECH used the AkWarm model for evaluating the overall energy consumption at (Building
Name). 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.
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-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
16
4.2 AkWarm Calculated Savings for the Ignatius Beans School
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 Cooking Clothes
Drying
Ventilation
Fans
Service
Fees Total
Existing
Building $315,184 $15,961 $14,149 $5,525 $8,973 $1,154 $145 $112 $60 $361,262
With All
Proposed
Retrofits
$209,114 $15,980 $11,810 $5,548 $8,997 $1,154 $145 $112 $60 $252,921
Savings $106,070 -$19 $2,338 -$23 -$24 $0 $0 $0 $0 $108,341
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-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
17
4.3 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.
Ignatius Beans School was difficult to model well in AKWarm. The uncontrolled heat input to the
elementary classrooms is too variable to model without error. An estimated temperature setting
of 90 degrees Fahrenheit was used; however observations indicate that the temperature
frequently goes above that. The savings resulting from retrofits to the elementary heating
system are believed to be conservatively estimated and so it seems likely that implementing the
EEM suggested will result in more savings than calculated.
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
18
5.0 BUILDING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M)
5.1 Operations and Maintenance
A well-implemented operation and maintenance (O & M) plan is often the driving force behind
energy savings. Such a plan includes preserving institutional knowledge, directing preventative
maintenance, and scheduling regular inspections 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.
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
19
5.3 Building Specific Recommendations
The Ignatius Beans School has two dedicated staff members assigned to maintenance. During
the audit, several maintenance issues were noted:
Many vital pieces of equipment have been out of service for extended periods of time
without being reported for repairs--costing excessive money, time and energy.
The three heating systems with various controls are difficult to maintain as a whole and
maintenance staff need further training for the digitally controlled system.
Mechanical rooms are being used as unorganized storage space, limiting the access to
equipment for repairs and inspection.
These are all vital issues that result in large yearly expenses.
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
20
APPENDICES
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.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 should be installed in the high school and elementary wing and
programmed in the middle school area. Programmable thermostats allow for automatic
temperature setback, which reduce usage more reliably than manual setbacks. Reduction of
the nighttime temperature set points will decrease the energy usage.
Rank Building Space Recommendation
2 Elementary Wing
Implement a Heating Temperature
Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the
Elementary Wing space.
Installation Cost $40,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $71,557
Breakeven Cost $967,282 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 24.2 Simple Payback (yr) 1
Rank Building Space Recommendation
4 High School and Middle School wings
Implement a Heating Temperature
Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the
Ignatius Beans School space.
Installation Cost $15,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $14,718
Breakeven Cost $198,982 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 13.3 Simple Payback (yr) 1
There are two options for creating programmable setbacks in the Ignatius Beans School. The
malfunctioning pneumatic system could be repaired and a second pressure line could be run to
allow use of pneumatic setback thermostats in the high school and elementary wings. The other
option is to remove the existing pneumatic system and replace all of the controls with a digital
system following the design of the middle school area. This option is recommended as the
existing digital system is quite simple and, with some training, it is believed the maintenance
staff could manage the entire school as a whole.
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.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.
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
3 E-4, H-31, H-5 2 INCAN A Lamp, Halogen 75W with
Manual Switching
Replace with 2 FLUOR CFL, A
Lamp 15W
Installation Cost $10 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $25
Breakeven Cost $157 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 15.7 Simple Payback (yr) 0
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
5 Elementry Hallway 32 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 32 FLUOR T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $128 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $193
Breakeven Cost $1,196 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 9.3 Simple Payback (yr) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
6
E-45, E-48, E-53, E-
33, E-31, E-52, E-
51, E-34, E-32, S
Elementary Hall
11 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual
Switching, Multi-Level Switch
Replace with 11 FLUOR T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $44 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $51
Breakeven Cost $317 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 7.2 Simple Payback (yr) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
7 Main Arctic Entry 4 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 4 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $32 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $32
Breakeven Cost $187 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 5.9 Simple Payback (yr) 1
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
23
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
8
East Arctic Entry,
South Arctic Entry,
Main Entry
18 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 18 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $144 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $121
Breakeven Cost $709 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 4.9 Simple Payback (yr) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
9 S Elementary Hall
2 FLUOR (5) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
(2) Instant StdElectronic with Manual
Switching
Replace with 2 FLUOR (5) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver (2)
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $40 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $28
Breakeven Cost $176 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 4.4 Simple Payback (yr) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
10 Exit Lights: Voc Ed
Shop
2 FLUOR [Unknown Lamp] with Manual
Switching
Replace with 2 LED (2) 4W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $200 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $146
Breakeven Cost $861 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 4.3 Simple Payback (yr) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
11 Principal INCAN A Lamp, Std 40W with Manual
Switching
Replace with FLUOR CFL, A
Lamp 15W
Installation Cost $5 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $3
Breakeven Cost $18 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.6 Simple Payback (yr) 2
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
12 Voc Ed Access Hall 2 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 2 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $16 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $8
Breakeven Cost $49 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.1 Simple Payback (yr) 2
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
12 Voc Ed Access Hall 2 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 2 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $16 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $8
Breakeven Cost $49 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.1 Simple Payback (yr) 2
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
24
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
13
Maintenance Office,
Maintenance Office
1
8 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 8 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $64 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $33
Breakeven Cost $195 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.0 Simple Payback (yr) 2
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
14
E50, Office Hall, HS
NE Entry, HS NW
Entry, Gym Hall,
Middle School Hall,
Kitchen Loading Bay
30 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 30 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $240 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $94
Breakeven Cost $548 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.3 Simple Payback (yr) 3
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
15
E-4, Boy's Locker,
Girl's Locker, High
School Hall, Boy's
Restroom, E-42, H-
36, Women's
Restroom, H-4, H-
34, H-11, Men's
Restroom Outside
Gym
57 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 57 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $456 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $162
Breakeven Cost $1,005 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.2 Simple Payback (yr) 3
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
16 E-15, E-39, E-43, S
Elementary Hall
12 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 12 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $360 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $83
Breakeven Cost $699 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.9 Simple Payback (yr) 4
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
17
E-44, E-37, E-31,
Kitchen, E-4, E-7, E-
9, H-28, H-29, H-2,
H-34
50 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
(2) Instant StdElectronic with Manual
Switching
Replace with 50 FLUOR (3) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver (2)
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $600 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $183
Breakeven Cost $1,133 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.9 Simple Payback (yr) 3
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
25
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
18 Library Display
Case, E-38
19 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 19 FLUOR T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $285 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $50
Breakeven Cost $423 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.5 Simple Payback (yr) 6
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
19 H-25
8 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
(2) Instant StdElectronic with Manual
Switching
Replace with 8 FLUOR (3) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver (2)
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $96 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $20
Breakeven Cost $115 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.2 Simple Payback (yr) 5
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
20
M5/Office
AHU/Boiler Room,
Elementary AH
Room 1, Elementary
AH Room 2
18 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 18 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $144 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $27
Breakeven Cost $155 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.1 Simple Payback (yr) 5
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
21 E-44, Boy's
Restroom
14 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W
Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 14 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Program StdElectronic
Installation Cost $1,862 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $212
Breakeven Cost $1,784 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.0 Simple Payback (yr) 9
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
22
Library Book Drop,
E-39, E-40, Girl's
Restroom, Main
Office Storage,
Girl's Restroom at
Main Entry, E-17, E-
17 Bathroom,
Kitchen Office,
Middle School
Storage, M-6, H-7
20 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual
Switching, Occupancy Sensor
Replace with 20 FLUOR (3) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $900 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $85
Breakeven Cost $719 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.8 Simple Payback (yr) 11
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
26
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
23 S Elementary Hall 7 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 7 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $931 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $88
Breakeven Cost $743 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.8 Simple Payback (yr) 11
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
24 Principal
13 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
(2) Instant StdElectronic with Manual
Switching
Replace with 13 FLUOR (3) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver (2)
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $585 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $32
Breakeven Cost $247 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback (yr) 18
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
25 Boiler Room 4 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 4 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $32 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $2
Breakeven Cost $13 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback (yr) 19
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
26 Library, Alaska
Room
16 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 16 FLUOR (3) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $720 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $35
Breakeven Cost $268 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback (yr) 20
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
27 Elementary Boiler
Room
4 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
(2) StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 4 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver (2)
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $532 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $24
Breakeven Cost $146 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback (yr) 23
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
28
Mechanical Access,
HS AHU Room, HS
Storage, HS Storage
#2
17 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W
Standard StdElectronic with Manual
Switching
Replace with 17 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $2,261 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $55
Breakeven Cost $420 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.2 Simple Payback (yr) 41
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
27
A.3 Building Envelope: Recommendations for change
A.3.1 Exterior Walls
No EEMs are recommended in this area as adding insulation to the walls is cost-prohibitive.
A.3.2 Foundation and/or Crawlspace
Adding perimeter insulation could be beneficial in prevention of heat loss, however the measure
is not cost-effective at this time.
A.3.3 Roofing and Ceiling
The existing roofing is in good condition. Adding insulation is not cost-effective at this time.
A.3.4 Windows
The existing windows have been recently upgraded are very energy efficient. Replacing the
windows will not provide energy savings.
A.3.5 Doors
The existing doors are high quality commercial doors that do not need replacing or repair.
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
29
E-24, H-13, Boy's
Locker, H-12, H-15,
Elementary
Mechanical Entry
17 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with 17 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant
StdElectronic
Installation Cost $136 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $
Breakeven Cost $0 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.0 Simple Payback (yr) 1000
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
28
A.4 Building Heating System / Air Conditioning
A.4.1 Heating and Heat Distribution
No specific EEMs are recommended in this area however as part of the controls upgrade
recommended in the temperature setback section, it might be very beneficial to remove the
existing boilers and replace them with a single set of two boilers to supply the entire school.
Doing so would reduce stack and idle losses by more than half, and reduce the maintenance
costs. Additional benefits include having a simpler, single system to maintain.
A.4.2 Air Conditioning
No EEMs are recommended in this area as there is not an air conditioning system installed in
the building.
A.4.3 Ventilation
No EEMs are recommended in this area however the ventilation system needs extensive
repairs to become fully operational.
A.4.4 Air Changes and Air Tightening
As a result of fixing the controls for the elementary heating system and the kitchen ventilation,
windows and doors will no longer need to be left open during the winter. This will significantly
reduce the amount of air losses from the building. The following is a conservative estimate of
how much energy and money this measure will save.
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
1
Elementary
Windows and
Kitchen Doors
High Volume of air leakage Perform air sealing to reduce air
leakage by 10%.
Installation Cost $200 Estimated Life of Measure (yr) 10 Energy Savings (/yr) $20,273
Breakeven Cost $188,006 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 940.0 Simple Payback (yr) 0
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.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)
25 Lighting: E50
Replace with 13 FLUOR T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
$15 $195 0.5 13
29
Lighting: E-48, E-45,
E-53, E-33, E-31, E-
52, E-51, E-34, E-32,
E-28, E-30, E-10, E-
11, HS-26, H-30,
Weight Room, M-2,
M-2, M-1, M-9, H-32,
H-31
Replace with 195 FLUOR (3)
T8 4' F32T8 25W Energy-
Saver (2) Instant
StdElectronic
$290 $8,775 0.2 30
30 Lighting: E-8
Replace with 2 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
$2 $60 0.2 37
32 Lighting: Multi-
Purpose
Replace with 40 FLUOR T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
$85 $5,320 0.1 62
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
30
Appendix C Significant Equipment List
HVAC Equipment
Equipment Manufacturer Model No. Notes
Boiler Burnham V906 Two identical units
Boiler Weil McLain BL-776 Two identical units
Boiler Burnham V-76 Two identical units
Water Heater AO Smith 315A350 ---
Water Heater Peek n/a ---
Water Heater Rheem ELD30-B ---
Unit Heaters Dunham Bush n/a Multiple units
AHUs Trane K55HXLZH-6204 seven units
Circulation Pumps Grundfos UPS 40-160F Multiple units
Lighting
Location Lighting Type Bulb Type Quantity KWH/YR Cost/YR
Classrooms Fluorescent T8 321 10,793 $ 6,044
Restrooms & Hallways Fluorescent T8 153 7,752 4,341
Exterior Lights Metal Halide 75W 25 5,569 3,119
Library, Alaska Room Fluorescent T8 55 1,896 1,062
Gym Fluorescent T5 20 1,750 980
Mechanical Rooms Fluorescent T8 30 1,112 622
Multi-Purpose Room Fluorescent T12 40 957 536
Exit Lights Fluorescent 40 2 701 393
Mechanical Rooms Fluorescent T12 21 698 391
Principal Fluorescent T8 12 598 335
Vocational Education Metal Halide 400W 6 30 17
Energy Consumption calculated by AkWarm based on wattage, schedule, and an electricity rate of $0.69/kWh
Plug Loads
Equipment Location Manufacturer KWH/YR Cost/YR
Full size refrigerator &
freezer Kitchen varies 9,000 $ 5,040
Kitchen Equipment Kitchen varies 7,497 4,198
Classroom Equipment Classrooms/Offices varies 4,928 2,760
Computers Classrooms/Offices varies 3,309 1,853
Server Server Room varies 1,057 592
Mini Refrigerator Classroom varies 750 420
Water fountain Hallways varies 750 420
Energy Consumption calculated by AkWarm based on wattage, schedule, and an electricity rate of $0.69/kWh
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
31
Appendix D Local Utility Rate Structure
The information in this section was provided directly from the local utility, the Alaska Village
Electric Cooperative (AVEC) 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. Ignatius Beans K-12 School is classified as a Large Power GS-2 customer.
Alaska Village Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AVEC)
4831 Eagle St.
Anchorage, Alaska, 99503
(907) 561-1818
AVEC Large Power (GS-2) Rate Structure
Rate Component Unit Charge
Customer Charge $45.00
First 1500 kWh $0.12 per kWh
Over 1500 kWh $0.04 per kWh
Demand Charge $45.00/KW
Cost of Fuel $0.3135 per kWh
Regulatory Cost Charge (RCC) $0.000492 per kWh
Average Rate
(Ignatius Beans K12 School) $0.69 per kWh
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.
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.
Demand Charge
This charge is based upon high KW demand during the month or 85% of the highest KW
demand (rachet) during the past 12 months, whichever is higher.
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
32
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-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
33
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.
Disclaimer: "This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the
United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor
any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability
or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus,
product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned
rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name,
trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,
recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The
views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the
United States Government or any agency thereof."
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
34
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-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
35
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-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
36
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-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
37
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 F°
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 approximately 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 KBTU = 1,000 BTU
1 KWH = 3413 BTU
1 KW = 3413 BTU/Hr
1 Boiler HP = 33,400 BTU/Hr
1 Pound Steam = approximately 1000 BTU
1 CCF of natural gas = approximately 1 Therm
1 inch H2O = 250 Pascal (Pa) = 0.443 pounds/square inch (psi)
1 atmosphere (atm) = 10,1000 Pascal (Pa)
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-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
38
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.
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CUI Cost Utilization Index
CDD Cooling Degree Days
DDC Direct Digital Control
EEM Energy Efficiency Measure
EER Energy Efficient Ratio
EUI Energy Utilization Index
FLUOR Fluorescent
Grade The finished ground level adjoining a building at the
exterior walls
HDD Heating Degree Days
HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and 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 Target temperature that a control system operates
the heating and cooling system
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.
ACH Air Changes per Hour
Energy Audit-Final Report
Ignatius Beans School
Mountain Village, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-600 Calista Region\50-630 Calista SD\50-650 Lower Yukon SD\50-652 Mtn Village Ignatius Beans
School\Reports\Final\2012.07.09 Final AHFC Report MOU LYSD Ignatious Beans School.Docx
39
Appendix L Building Floor Plan
Floor plan provided by
Lower Yukon School
District and annotated
by NORTECH field
team.