Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CIRI-ANC-CAEC ASD Klatt Elementary School 2012-EE
Klatt Elementary School 1190 Juniper Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99517 AkWarm-C ID No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-28 Submitted by: Central Alaska Engineering Company Contact: Jerry P. Herring, P.E., C.E.A. 32215 Lakefront Drive Soldotna, Alaska 99669 Phone (907) 260-5311 akengineer@starband.net June 30, 2012 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE i OF ii CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE ii OF ii This Investment Grade Audit (IGA) was performed using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds, managed by Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). IGA’s are the property of the State of Alaska, and may be incorporated into AkWarm-C, the Alaska Retrofit Information System (ARIS), or other state and/or public information systems. AkWarm-C is a building energy modeling software developed under contract by AHFC. This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE- EE0000095. 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. This energy audit is intended to identify and recommend potential areas of energy savings, estimate the value of the savings and approximate the costs to implement the recommendations. Any modifications or changes made to a building to realize the savings must be designed and implemented by licensed, experienced professionals in their fields. Lighting recommendations should all be first analyzed through a thorough lighting analysis to assure that the recommended lighting upgrades will comply with State of Alaska Statute as well as Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) recommendations. Central Alaska Engineering Company bears no responsibility for work performed as a result of this report. Payback periods may vary from those forecasted due to the uncertainty of the final installed design, configuration, equipment selected, and installation costs of recommended Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs), or the operating schedules and maintenance provided by the owner. Furthermore, EEMs are typically interactive, so implementation of one EEM may impact the cost savings from another EEM. Neither the auditor, Central Alaska Engineering Company, AHFC, nor any other party involved in preparation of this report accepts liability for financial loss due to EEMs that fail to meet the forecasted payback periods. This energy audit meets the criteria of a Level 2 IGA per the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). The life of the IGA may be extended on a case- by-case basis, at the discretion of AHFC. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 1 OF 21 This report presents the findings of an investment grade energy audit conducted for: Anchorage School District Contact: Calvin Mundt 1301 Labar Street Anchorage, AK 99515 Email: mundt_calvin@asdk12.org Alaska Housing Finance Corporation Contact: Rebekah Luhrs 4300 Boniface Parkway Anchorage, AK 99510 Email: rluhrs@ahfc.us This audit was performed using ARRA funds to promote the use of innovation and technology to solve energy and environmental problems in a way that improves the State’s economy. This can be achieved through the wiser and more efficient use of energy. The purpose of the energy audit is to identify cost-effective system and facility modifications, adjustments, alterations, additions and retrofits. Systems investigated during the audit included heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), interior and exterior lighting, motors, building envelope, and energy management control systems (EMCS). The January 2010 – December 2010 annual utility costs at this facility are as follows: Electricity $ 43,431 Natural Gas $ 34,723 Total $ 87,917 Energy Utilization Index: 105.5 kBtu/sf Energy Cost Index: 1.56 $/sf The potential annual energy savings are shown on the following page in Table 1.1 which summarizes the Energy Efficiency Measures (EEM’s) analyzed for Klatt Elementary School. Listed are the estimates of the annual savings, installed cost, and two different financial measures of return on investment. Be aware that the measures are not cumulative because of the interrelation of several of the measures. The cost of each measure for this level of auditing is considered to be + 30% until further detailed engineering, specifications, and hard proposals are obtained. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 2 OF 21 Table 1.1 PRIORITY LIST – ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR1 Simple Payback (Years)2 1 Setback Thermostat: Gym Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gym space. $798 $2,340 4.34 2.9 2 HVAC And DHW Replace existing storage water heater with indirect-fired water heater (estimated $10,000). Install premium efficiency motors (9 @ $1,000 each = $9,000). Place DHW circulation pump on timer ($1,000). Refine operating schedule of heating distribution pumps. ($8,000) $6,482 $28,000 3.82 4.3 3 Setback Thermostat: School w/o Gym Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the School w/o Gym space. $5,575 $29,154 2.43 5.2 4 Ventilation Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (16 @ $850 = $13,600) Reduce outside air into AHUs. ($8,000) $2,843 $21,600 1.65 7.6 5 Lighting: Incandescent Hallway Replace with 14 LED 48W Module StdElectronic $490 $6,790 1.38 13.9 6 Lighting: Gym Lights Replace with 12 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F28T5 28W High Lumen (3050 L) HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi- Level Switch $578 $36,620 0.59 63.3 7 Lighting: Exterior Pole Lights Replace with 20 LED 150W Module (20) StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,583 $44,000 0.55 27.8 8 Lighting: Classrooms Replace with 336 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $2,859 $186,960 0.40 65.4 9 Lighting: Fluorescent Hallway Replace with 36 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic $176 $17,460 0.37 99.4 10 Lighting: Classroom Hung Lights Replace with 216 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,333 $116,760 0.36 87.6 11 Lighting: Entrance Lights Replace with 18 LED 34W Module StdElectronic $325 $13,500 0.32 41.5 TOTAL, all measures $23,043 $503,184 0.81 21.8 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 3 OF 21 Table Notes: 1. Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) is a life-cycle cost measure calculated by dividing the total savings over the life of a project (expressed in today’s dollars) by its investment costs. The SIR is an indication of the profitability of a measure; the higher the SIR, the more profitable the project. An SIR greater than 1.0 indicates a cost-effective project (i.e. more savings than cost). Remember that this profitability is based on the position of that Energy Efficiency Measure (EEM) in the overall list and assumes that the measures above it are implemented first. 2. Simple Payback (SP) is a measure of the length of time required for the savings from an EEM to payback the investment cost, not counting interest on the investment and any future changes in energy prices. It is calculated by dividing the investment cost by the expected first-year savings of the EEM. With all of these energy efficiency measures in place, the annual utility cost can be reduced by $23,043 per year, or 26.3% of the buildings’ total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $503,184, for an overall simple payback period of 21.8 years. If only the cost-effective measures are implemented (i.e. SIR > 1.0), the annual utility cost can be reduced by $16,189 per year, or 18.5% of the buildings’ total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $87,884, for an overall simple payback period of 5.4 years. Table 1.2 below is a breakdown of the annual energy cost across various energy end use types, such as Space Heating and Water Heating. The first row in the table shows the breakdown for the building as it is now. The second row shows the expected breakdown of energy cost for the building assuming all of the retrofits in this report are implemented. Finally, the last row shows the annual energy savings that will be achieved from the retrofits. Table 1.2 Annual Energy Cost Estimate Description Space Heating Space Cooling Water Heating Lighting Refrigeration Other Electrical Ventilation Fans Total Cost Existing Building $55,445 $0 $4,570 $13,047 $360 $2,629 $11,593 $87,644 With All Proposed Retrofits $42,895 $0 $2,679 $5,703 $360 $2,629 $10,334 $64,601 SAVINGS $12,550 $0 $1,891 $7,344 $0 $0 $1,258 $23,043 Cost estimates were generated using the Program Demand Cost Model for Alaskan Schools, 12th Edition, Updated 2011, developed for the State of Alaska DOE, Education Support Services/Facilities. Renovations Projects Manual provides information on school renovation costs. Upon developing a final scope of work for an upgrade with detailed engineering completed, detailed savings and benefits can then be better determined. Some of the EEM’s should be completed when equipment meets the burn- out phase and is required to be replaced and in some cases will take significant investment to achieve. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 4 OF 21 This comprehensive energy audit covers the 50,160 square foot Klatt Elementary School, depicted below in Figure 2.1, including classrooms, restrooms, administrative offices, a gymnasium, and an outside portable classroom. Utility information was collected and analyzed for two years of energy use by the building. This information was used to analyze operational characteristics, calculate energy benchmarks for comparison to industry averages, estimate savings potential and establish a baseline to monitor the effectiveness of implemented measures. An excel spreadsheet was used to enter, sum, and calculate benchmarks and to graph energy use information (refer to Appendix A for the Benchmark Report). The Annual Energy Utilization Index (EUI) is expressed in Thousands of British Thermal Units/Square Foot (kBtu/sf) and can be used to compare energy consumption to similar building types or to track consumption from year to year in the same building. The EUI is calculated by converting annual consumption of all fuels used to Btu’s then dividing by the area (gross conditioned square footage) of the building. EUI is a good indicator of the relative potential for energy savings. A comparatively low CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 5 OF 21 EUI indicates less potential for large energy savings. Building architectural, mechanical and electrical drawings were utilized to calculate and verify the gross area of the facility. The gross area was confirmed on the physical site investigation. Refer to Section 6.0 of this report for additional details on EUI issues. After gathering the utility data and calculating the EUI, the next step in the audit process was to review the drawings to develop a building profile which documented the building age, type, usage, and major energy consuming equipment or systems such as lighting, heating, ventilation and air condition (HVAC), domestic hot water heating, refrigeration, snow-melt, etc. The building profile is utilized to generate, and answer, possible questions regarding the facility’s energy usage. These questions were then compared to the energy usage profiles developed during the utility data gathering step. After this information is gathered, the next step in the process is the physical site investigation (site visit). The site visit was completed on September 28, 2011 and was spent inspecting the actual systems and answering specific questions from the preliminary review. Occupancy schedules, O&M practices, building energy management program, and other information that has an impact on energy consumption were obtained. Photos of the major equipment and building construction were taken during the site visit. Several of the site photos are included in this report as Appendix D. An additional site visit was completed on October 26, 2011 where thermal images of the building’s exterior were taken. These thermal images illustrate heat loss exhibited by the school. Several of the thermal images are included in this report as Appendix E. The post-site work includes evaluation of the information gathered during the site visits, developing the AkWarm-C Energy Model for the building, researching possible conservation opportunities, organizing the audit into a comprehensive report, and making recommendations on mechanical, electrical and building envelope improvements. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 6 OF 21 Central Alaska Engineering Company (CAEC) began the site survey after completing the preliminary audit tasks noted in Section 2.0. The site survey provided critical input in deciphering where energy opportunities exist within the facility. The audit team walked the entire site to inventory the building envelope (roof, walls, windows and doors, etc.), the major equipment including HVAC, water heating, lighting, and equipment in kitchens, offices, gymnasium, and classrooms. The site survey was used to determine an understanding of how the equipment is used. The collected data was entered into the AkWarm Commercial© Software (AkWarm-C), a building energy modeling program developed for Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). The data was processed by AkWarm-C to model a baseline from which energy efficiency measures (EEMs) could be considered. The model was compared to actual utility costs to ensure the quality of baseline and proposed energy modeling performed by AkWarm-C. The recommended EEMs focus on the building envelope, HVAC systems, water heating, lighting, and other electrical improvements that will reduce annual energy consumption. EEMs are evaluated based on building use and processes, local climate conditions, building construction type, function, operational schedule, existing conditions, and foreseen future plans. Energy savings are calculated based on industry standard methods and engineering estimations. When new equipment is proposed, energy consumption is calculated based on the manufacturer’s information where possible. Energy savings are calculated by AkWarm-C. Implementation of more than one EEM often affects the savings of other EEMs. The savings may in some cases be relatively higher if an individual EEM is implemented in lieu of multiple recommended EEMs. For example, implementing reduced operating schedule for specific inefficient lighting systems will result in a greater relative savings than merely replacing fixtures and bulbs. Implementing reduced operating schedules for newly installed efficient lighting will result in a lower relative savings, because there is less energy to be saved. If multiple EEM’s are recommended to be implemented, the combined savings is calculated and identified appropriately. Cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy costs for the building. Cost estimates were generated using the Program Demand Cost Model for Alaskan Schools, 12th Edition, Updated 2011, developed for the State of Alaska DOE, Education Support Services/Facilities. Renovations Projects Manual provides information on school renovation costs. The Geographic Area Cost Factor dated April 2011 for Anchorage has an index of 100 and was used in this report. Installation costs include design, labor, equipment, overhead and profit for school renovation projects and used to evaluate the initial investment required to implement an EEM. These are applied to each recommendation with simple paybacks calculated. In addition, where applicable, maintenance cost savings are estimated and applied to the net savings. The costs and savings are applied and a Simple Payback (SP) and Savings to Investment Ration (SIR) are calculated. These are listed in Section 7.0 and summarized in Table 1.1 of this report. The SP is based on the years that it takes for the net savings to payback the net installation cost (Cost divided by Savings). The SIR is calculated as a ratio by dividing the break even cost by the initial installed cost. The lifetime for each EEM is estimated based on the typical life of the equipment being replaced or altered. The energy savings is extrapolated throughout the lifetime of the EEM. The total energy savings is calculated as the total lifetime multiplied by the yearly savings. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 7 OF 21 The analysis provides a number of tools for assessing the cost effectiveness of various improvement options. These tools utilize Life-Cycle Costing, which is defined in this context as a method of cost analysis that estimates the total cost of a project over the period of time that includes both the construction cost and ongoing maintenance and operating costs. Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) = Savings divided by Investment Savings includes the total discounted dollar savings considered over the life of the improvement. When these savings are added up, changes in future fuel prices (usually inflationary) as projected by the Alaska Department of Energy are included in the model. Future savings are discounted to the present to account for the time-value of money (i.e. money’s ability to earn interest over time). The Investment in the SIR calculation includes the labor and materials required to install the measure. An SIR value of at least 1.0 indicates that the project is cost-effective - total savings exceed the investment costs. Simple payback is a cost analysis method whereby the investment cost of a project is divided by the first year’s savings of the project to give the number of years required to recover the cost of the investment. This may be compared to the expected time before replacement of the system or component will be required. For example, if a boiler costs $50,000 and results in a savings of $5,000 in the first year, the payback time is 10 years. If the boiler has an expected life to replacement of 20 years, it would be financially viable to make the investment since the payback period of 10 years is less than the project life. The Simple Payback calculation does not consider likely increases in future annual savings due to energy price increases. As an offsetting simplification, Simple Payback does not consider the need to earn interest on the investment (i.e. it does not consider the time-value of money). Because of these simplifications, the SIR figure is considered to be a better financial investment indicator than the Simple Payback measure. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 8 OF 21 All results are dependent on the quality of input data provided. In this case the site investigation was limited to observable conditions. No testing or destructive investigations were undertaken. Although energy-conserving methods are described in the EEMs, in some instances several methods may also achieve the identified savings. Detailed engineering is required in order to develop the EEMs to a realizable project. This audit and report are thus intended to offer approximations of the results achievable by the listed improvements. This report is not intended to be a final design document. The design professional or other persons following the recommendations shall accept responsibility and liability for the results. Limitations of the AkWarm Commercial© Software are reviewed on Section 6.0 of this report. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 9 OF 21 The original structure of Klatt Elementary School is a single story facility that was built in 1983. This building has had no additions made to it, though there have been several renovation projects. Renovation projects include installation of two high-efficiency condensing boilers, a reroofing project, and other ventilation and structural upgrades. The school has a single portable unit located on the southern side of the building. The school is typically occupied from 8AM to 6PM during the weekdays, including an after school program. There are additional activities happening occasionally in the evenings and weekends in the gymnasium and classroom areas. There are an estimated 412 full time student and staff occupants using the building. As architectural drawings were provided for this audit, shell insulation values were assumed using the provided information. No destructive testing was completed for the audit. The insulation values and conditions were modeled using the data provided in the architectural drawings. The following are the assumptions made for the AkWarm-C building model: Exterior walls of the building have double paned metal framed windows in place and have an estimated U-factor ranging from 0.68 – 0.81 Btu/hr-sf-F. Most of these windows appear to be in good condition. The exterior walls of the elementary school consist of 6-inch metal studs filled with fiberglass batt insulation for an R-value of 21. The exterior of the building is covered in 1/2-inch of plaster. Wall height varies from 12 feet to 25 feet, depending on location. The roof system of the school was recently renovated in 2002. The whole school has been brought to an average insulation value of R-38 over the entire roof using fiberglass batt. The floor/foundation of the building is a concrete slab-on-grade configuration. The slab edge appears to be insulated on the outside, though there is no indication there is insulation installed under the concrete slab from the architectural drawings reviewed for the audit. All doors on this building are commercial grade, metal framed and insulated doors that are half- windowed or solid. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 10 OF 21 Heat is provided to the main school building by two (2) natural gas-fired condensing boilers. The portable classroom is heated electrically. The boilers are located in the first floor mechanical room. A hydronic heating system is circulated throughout the building by circulation pumps located in the boiler room and provides heat to the air handling units. There is a building DDC control system in place with end devices using pneumatic controls. At the time of the field audit, upgrades were being installed to interface the boiler control panels with the building Direct Digital Control (DDC) system. The heating plants used in the building can be described as follows: Boiler 1 Year Installed 2009 Fuel Type: Natural Gas Input Rating: 1,500,000 BTU/hr Rated Efficiency: 88.8 % Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic Boiler Operation: All Year Boiler 2 Year Installed 2009 Fuel Type: Natural Gas Input Rating: 1,500,000 BTU/hr Rated Efficiency: 88.8 % Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic Boiler Operation: All Year Storage Water Heater Fuel Type: Natural Gas Input Rating: 540,000 BTU/hr Rated Efficiency: 65.0 % Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic Boiler Operation: All Year Domestic hot water is supplied by a natural draft, gas fired, hot water storage tank. DHW is circulated around the building and supplies the kitchen, restrooms, teacher’s lounge, and the classroom sinks. The domestic hot water heater is located in the mechanical room. Outside air is drawn into the building primarily through air handling units. There are five (5) Air Handling Units (AHUs) located inside of the building providing ventilation to the school. Excess air is removed from the building with the use of exhaust fans located throughout the building. The ventilation system is controlled via the building DDC system with pneumatically controlled end devices. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 11 OF 21 There are several types of light systems throughout the building. Lighting upgrade opportunities provide some of the best investment opportunities in the building. There is an outdated gym lighting system in place which if updated to modern systems can produce more illumination with a third less energy. The T12 lighting systems remaining in the building are good candidates for replacement to new Energy-Saver T8 systems. The high pressure sodium lights (HPS) mounted on the outside of the building are good candidates for replacement. There have been recent advances in LED technology making it a viable option to replace the HPS systems. Several EEM’s are provided in this report reviewing the lighting system upgrade recommendations. There are several large plug loads throughout the building. This includes the kitchen equipment, computers with monitors, copy machines, vending machines, clothing dryer, washing machine, refrigerators, microwave ovens and coffee pots. These building plug loads are estimated in the AkWarm-C modeling program at 0.1 watts/sf. Following the completion of the field survey a detailed building major equipment inventory was created and is attached as Appendix C. The equipment listed are considered to be the major energy consuming items in the building whose replacement or upgrade could yield substantial energy savings. An approximate age was assigned to the equipment if a manufactured date was not shown on the equipment’s nameplate. As listed in the 2011 ASHRAE Handbook for HVAC Applications, Chapter 37, Table 4, the service life for the equipment along with the remaining useful life in accordance to the ASHRAE standard are also noted in the equipment list. Where there are zero (0) years remaining in the estimated useful life of a piece of equipment, this is an indication that maintenance costs are likely on the rise and more efficient replacement equipment is available which will lower the operating costs of the unit. Maintenance costs should also fall with the replacement. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 12 OF 21 Tables provided in Appendix A, Energy Benchmark Data Report, represent the electric and natural gas energy usage for the surveyed facility from January 2009 to December 2010. Chugach Electric Association provides the electricity under their large commercial rate schedules. Natural gas is provided by ENSTAR Natural Gas Company under their large commercial rate schedules. The electric utility bills for consumption in kilowatt-hours (kWh) and for maximum demand in kilowatts (kW). One kilowatt-hour is equivalent to 3,413 Btu’s. The consumption (kWh) is determined as the wattage times the hours it is running. For example, 1,000 watts running for one hour, or 500 watts running for two hours is a kWh. The maximum demand is simply the sum of all electrical devices on simultaneously. For example, ten, 100 watt lights running simultaneously would create a demand of 1,000 watts (1 kW). Demand is averaged over a rolling window, usually 15 minutes. Thus, the facility must be concerned not only with basic electricity usage (consumption) but also the rate at which it gets used. The basic usage charges are shown as generation service and delivery charges along with several non-utility generation charges. The natural gas usage profile shows the predicted natural gas energy usage for the building. If actual gas usage records were available, the model used to predict usage was calibrated to approximately match actual usage. Natural gas is sold to the customer in units of 100 cubic feet (CCF), which contains approximately 100,000 BTUs of energy. The average billing rates for energy use are calculated by dividing the total cost by the total usage. Based on the electric and natural gas utility data provided, the 2009 and 2010 costs for the energy and consumption at the surveyed facility are summarized in Table 6.1 below. 2009 2010 Average Electric 0.13 $/kWh 0.11 $/kWh 0.12 $/kWh Natural Gas 1.04 $/CCF 0.92 $/CCF 0.98 $/kWh Total Cost $101,971 $78,154 $90,063 ECI 2.03 $/sf 1.56 $/sf 1.80 $/sf Electric EUI 28.3 kBtu/sf 26.5 kBtu/sf 27.4 kBtu/sf Natural Gas EUI 92.5 kBtu/sf 78.9 kBtu/sf 85.7 kBtu/sf Building EUI 120.7 kBtu/sf 105.5 kBtu/sf 113.1 kBtu/sf Data from the U.S.A. Energy Information Administration provides information for U.S.A. Commercial Buildings Energy Intensity Using Site Energy by Census Region. In 2003, the U.S.A. average energy usage for Education building activity is shown to be 83 kBtu/sf. Data from the ARRA funded utility benchmark survey for the subject fiscal years completed on 84 schools in the ASD computed an average EUI of 106.5 kBtu/sf, and ECI of 1.77 $/sf. Energy consumption was reduced from the 2009 data compared to the 2010 data due to the installation of the high efficiency gas boilers in this building. During 2010, the surveyed facility was calculated to have an average EUI of 105.5 kBtu/sf. This means the surveyed facility uses a total of 27.1 % more energy than the US average and -0.9% less energy than the ASD average on a per square foot basis. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 13 OF 21 At current utility rates, the Anchorage School District is modeled to pay approximately $87,644 annually for electricity and other fuel costs for Klatt Elementary. Figure 6.1 below reflects the estimated distribution of costs across the primary end uses of energy based on the AkWarm-C computer simulation. Comparing the “Retrofit” bar in the figure to the “Existing” bar shows the potential savings from implementing all of the energy efficiency measures shown in this report. Figure 6.2 below shows how the annual energy cost of the building splits between the different fuels used by the building. The “Existing” bar shows the breakdown for the building as it is now; the “Retrofit” bar shows the predicted costs if all of the energy efficiency measures in this report are implemented. $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 Existing Retrofit Ventilation and Fans Space Heating Refrigeration Other Electrical Lighting Domestic Hot Water Annual Energy Costs by End Use CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 14 OF 21 Figure 6.3 below addresses only Space Heating costs. The figure shows how each heat loss component contributes to those costs; for example, the figure shows how much annual space heating cost is caused by the heat loss through the Walls/Doors. For each component, the space heating cost for the Existing building is shown (blue bar) and the space heating cost assuming all retrofits are implemented (yellow bar) are shown. The tables below show AkWarm-C’s estimate of the monthly fuel use for each of the fuels used in the building. For each fuel, the fuel use is broken down across the energy end uses. Note, in the tables below “DHW” refers to Domestic Hot Water heating. Electrical Consumption (kWh) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Lighting 11553 10529 11553 11181 8248 1669 1724 6797 11181 11553 11181 11553 Refrigeration 255 232 255 246 255 246 255 255 246 255 246 255 Other Electrical 2379 2168 2379 2302 1545 218 225 1337 2302 2379 2302 2379 Ventilation Fans 10220 9313 10220 9890 6974 1775 1834 6162 9890 10220 9890 10220 DHW 54 49 54 53 54 53 54 54 53 54 53 54 Space Heating 14890 13569 14890 14409 14890 14409 14889 14889 14409 14890 14409 14890 Space Cooling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Natural Gas Consumption (ccf) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec DHW 389 355 389 377 389 377 389 389 377 389 377 389 Space Heating 6226 4945 4377 2673 1268 187 112 153 1178 3079 4771 6127 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 15 OF 21 Energy Utilization Index (EUI) is a measure of a building’s annual energy utilization per square foot of building. This calculation is completed by converting all utility usage consumed by a building for one year, to British Thermal Units (Btu) or kBtu’s, and dividing this number by the building square footage. EUI is a good measure of a building’s energy use and is utilized regularly for comparison of energy performance for similar building types. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Buildings Technology Center under a contract with the U.S. Department of Energy maintains a Benchmarking Building Energy Performance Program. The ORNL website determines how a building’s energy use compares with similar facilities throughout the U.S. and in a specific region or state. Source use differs from site usage when comparing a building’s energy consumption with the national average. Site energy use is the energy consumed by the building at the building site only. Source energy use includes the site energy use as well as all of the losses to create and distribute the energy to the building. Source energy represents the total amount of raw fuel that is required to operate the building. It incorporates all transmission, delivery, and production losses, which allows for a complete assessment of energy efficiency in a building. The type of utility purchased has a substantial impact on the source energy use of a building. The EPA has determined that source energy is the most comparable unit for evaluation purposes and overall global impact. Both the site and source EUI ratings for the building are provided to understand and compare the differences in energy use. The site and source EUIs for this building are calculated as follows. (See Table 6.4 for details): Building Site EUI = (Electric Usage in kBtu + Natural Gas Usage in kBtu) Building Square Footage Building Source EUI = (Electric Usage in kBtu X SS Ratio + Natural Gas Usage in kBtu X SS Ratio) Building Square Footage where “SS Ratio” is the Source Energy to Site Energy ratio for the particular fuel. Energy Type Building Fuel Use per Year Site Energy Use per Year, kBTU Source/Site Ratio Source Energy Use per Year, kBTU Electricity 406,313 kWh 1,386,745 3.340 4,631,730 Natural Gas 39,680 ccf 3,967,969 1.047 4,154,464 Total 5,354,714 8,786,193 BUILDING AREA 50,160 Square Feet BUILDING SITE EUI 107 kBTU/Ft²/Yr BUILDING SOURCE EUI 175 kBTU/Ft²/Yr * Site - Source Ratio data is provided by the Energy Star Performance Rating Methodology for Incorporating Source Energy Use document issued March 2011. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 16 OF 21 An accurate model of the building performance can be created by simulating the thermal performance of the walls, roof, windows and floors of the building. The HVAC system and central plant are modeled as well, accounting for the outside air ventilation required by the building and the heat recovery equipment in place. The model uses local weather data and is trued up to historical energy use to ensure its accuracy. The model can be used now and in the future to measure the utility bill impact of all types of energy projects, including improving building insulation, modifying glazing, changing air handler schedules, increasing heat recovery, installing high efficiency boilers, using variable air volume air handlers, adjusting outside air ventilation and adding cogeneration systems. For the purposes of this study, Klatt Elementary School was modeled using AkWarm-C energy use software to establish a baseline space heating and cooling energy usage. Climate data from Anchorage, Alaska was used for analysis. From this, the model was be calibrated to predict the impact of theoretical energy savings measures. Once annual energy savings from a particular measure were predicted and the initial capital cost was estimated, payback scenarios were approximated. Project cost estimates are provided in the Section 7.0 of this report reviewing the Energy Efficiency Measures. The AkWarm-C model is based on typical mean year weather data for Anchorage, Alaska. This data represents the average ambient weather profile as observed over approximately 30 years. As such, the gas and electric profiles generated will not likely compare perfectly with actual energy billing information from any single year. This is especially true for years with extreme warm or cold periods, or even years with unexpectedly moderate weather. The heating and cooling load model is a simple two-zone model consisting of the building’s core interior spaces and the building’s perimeter spaces. This simplified approach loses accuracy for buildings that have large variations in cooling/heating loads across different parts of the building. The model does not model HVAC systems that simultaneously provide both heating and cooling to the same building space (typically done as a means of providing temperature control in the space). The energy balances shown in this section were derived from the output generated by the AkWarm-C simulations. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 17 OF 21 The Energy Efficiency Measures are summarized below: Mechanical Equipment Measures Night Setback Thermostat Measures Rank Building Space Recommendation 1 Gym Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gym space. Installation Cost $2,340 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $798 Breakeven Cost $10,159 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 4.3 Simple Payback yrs 3 Auditors Notes: There are economic reasons why the thermostatic controller set points should be setback during off peak use hours. However one important control data input concerns the water dew point of the air. The water dew point of the inside air varies with the seasons. Currently, there is no humidity measuring instruments normally available to or monitored by the control system or staff and this data is needed before choosing the ideal “setback” temperatures. As outside air temperatures rise, the inside air dew point also rises. The workers are likely to complain about mildew and mold smells if the building temperature is dropped below the dew point. In keeping with this mildew and mold concern, it is recommended that the control system monitor the water dew point within the building to select how far back the temperature can be set during low use periods. If the water dew point is above 70 oF, then set up the temperature not back. If the water dew point is 50 oF or below, then reduce the setback temperature control toward 60oF. Other parameters relating to the building setback temperature include warm-up time required to reheat the building and preventing any water pipes near the building perimeter from freezing. During extreme cold periods, reducing the setback temperature limit and time appropriately is required to prevent possible problems on a site by site basis. Rank Building Space Recommendation 3 School w/o Gym Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the School w/o Gym space. Installation Cost $29,154 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $5,575 Breakeven Cost $70,940 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.4 Simple Payback yrs 5 Auditors Notes: See EEM #1 for similar notes. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 18 OF 21 Heating/Cooling/Domestic Hot Water Measure Ventilation System Measures Rank Recommendation 2 Replace existing storage water heater with indirect-fired water heater (estimated $10,000). Install premium efficiency motors (9 @ $1,000 each = $9,000). Place DHW circulation pump on timer ($1,000) and include reduced operating schedule for building heat pumps ($8,000). Installation Cost $28,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $6,482 Breakeven Cost $106,863 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.8 Simple Payback yrs 4 Auditors Notes: * The combination of these energy efficiency measures are bundled in the AkWarm-C program calculations The recommendations of this EEM include several retrofit options. Individual retrofit considerations are discussed below in detail. AkWarm-C considers all upgrades to the heating system as one item and therefore predicts a combined savings. Because of this, the savings of individual upgrades, shown below, do not directly compare to the predicted overall savings of a complete upgrade of the heating system. A. Installing an indirect fired water heater to replace the current natural draft, gas fired, hot storage water storage tank and incorporating a refined operating schedule for the DHW recirculation pump will produce energy savings. An indirect fired water heater will take advantage of the high efficiency provided by the newly installed boilers. The overall efficiency of the new water heater will still be less than that of the new condensing gas boilers; though will be more efficient than the previous configuration. Replacement of the current water heater and implementation of a refined pump schedule is expected to cost $11,000 for an annual savings of $1,257. B. Replacing the electric motors throughout the building with premium efficiency motors will produce an energy savings based on the reduced amount of power used. With motor replacement and a refined operating schedule, the total cost is estimated to be $17,000 for an annual energy savings equivalent to $5,428. It was noted during the site visit that the glycol plate heat exchangers associated with the air handling units do not have any insulation blankets in place. It is recommended that these heat exchangers be covered with thermal blankets to help improve the heat transfer efficiency between the building hot water supply system and the glycol system in the air handlers. Rank Description Recommendation 4 Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (16 @ $850 = $13,600) Reduce outside air CFM by 5% ($8,000). Installation Cost $21,600 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $2,843 Breakeven Cost $35,617 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.6 Simple Payback yrs 8 Auditors Notes: Replacing the motors throughout the building with premium efficiency motors will produce an energy savings based on the reduced amount of power used. In addition, reducing the amount of outside air available to the air handling units by 5% will save energy as there will be less tempered air required. With motor replacement and outside CFM reduction, the total cost is estimated to be $21,600 for an annual energy savings equivalent to $2,843. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 19 OF 21 Electrical & Appliance Measures Lighting Measures The goal of this section is to present lighting energy efficiency measures that may be cost beneficial. It should be noted that replacing current bulbs with more energy-efficient equivalents will have a small effect on the building heating and cooling loads. The building cooling load will see a small decrease from an upgrade to more efficient bulbs and the heating load will see a small increase, as the more energy efficient bulbs give off less heat. Lighting Measures – Replace Existing Fixtures/Bulbs and Lighting Controls Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 5 Incandescent Hallway 14 INCAN Reflector, Std 250W R40 with Manual Switching Replace with 14 LED 48W Module StdElectronic Installation Cost $6,790 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $490 Breakeven Cost $9,361 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.4 Simple Payback yrs 14 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends replacement of all the existing incandescent hallway lights throughout the building with energy efficient LED lights. LEDs have been manufactured in a variety of shapes and sizes. There are also retrofit kits that allow for simple modification of existing lights to accommodate LED technology. The benefits of LED technology can be substantial. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 6 Gym Lights 12 MV 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 12 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F28T5 28W High Lumen (3050 L) HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch Installation Cost $36,620 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)15 Energy Savings (/yr) $578 Breakeven Cost $21,427 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.6 Simple Payback yrs 63 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends replacement of the gym lights with a modern efficient T-5 High Output system. Installation of the more efficient lights and installation of a lighting control package with occupancy sensors and multi-level switching can reduce the gym lighting energy consumption. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 7 Exterior Pole Lights 20 HPS 400 Watt (20) Magnetic with Manual Switching, Daylight Sensor Replace with 20 LED 150W Module (20) StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $44,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,583 Breakeven Cost $24,205 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.6 Simple Payback yrs 28 Auditors Notes: All of the metal-halide and high pressure sodium lights mounted on the outside of the building are considered to be good candidates for replacement. There have been recent advances in LED technology and are recommended to replace the HPS systems. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 20 OF 21 Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 8 Classrooms 336 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy- Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 336 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $186,960 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $2,859 Breakeven Cost $75,213 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 65 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 34-Watt Energy Saver T12 lights in the classrooms be replaced with 28-Watt Energy Saver T8 bulbs and be installed with occupancy sensors. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 9 Fluorescent Hallway 36 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy- Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 36 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Installation Cost $17,460 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $176 Breakeven Cost $6,455 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 99 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 34-Watt Energy Saver T12 lights in the hallways be replaced with 28-Watt Energy Saver T8 bulbs and be installed with occupancy sensors. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 10 Classroom Hung Lights 216 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy- Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 216 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $116,760 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,333 Breakeven Cost $42,154 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 88 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 34-Watt Energy Saver T12 hanging lights in the classrooms be replaced with 28-Watt Energy Saver T8 bulbs and be installed with occupancy sensors. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 11 Entrance Lights 18 INCAN A Lamp, Std 100W with Manual Switching Replace with 18 LED 34W Module StdElectronic Installation Cost $13,500 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $325 Breakeven Cost $4,319 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback yrs 42 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends replacement of all the existing incandescent entrance lights around the building with energy efficient LED lights. LEDs have been manufactured in a variety of shapes and sizes. There are also retrofit kits that allow for simple modification of existing lights to accommodate LED technology. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ANC‐CAEC‐28 PAGE 21 OF 21 Through inspection of the energy-using equipment on-site and discussions with site facilities personnel, this energy audit has identified several energy-saving measures. The measures will reduce the amount of fuel burned and electricity used at the site. The projects will not degrade the performance of the building and, in some cases, will improve it. Several types of EEMs can be implemented immediately by building staff, and others will require various amounts of lead time for engineering and equipment acquisition. In some cases, there are logical advantages to implementing EEMs concurrently. For example, if the same electrical contractor is used to install both lighting equipment and motors, implementation of these measures should be scheduled to occur simultaneously. The Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) Alaska Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund (AEERLF) is a State of Alaska program enacted by the Alaska Sustainable Energy Act (Senate Bill 220, A.S. 18.56.855, “Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund”). The AEERLF will provide loans for energy efficiency retrofits to public facilities via the Retrofit Energy Assessment for Loan System (REAL). As defined in 15 AAC 155.605, the program may finance energy efficiency improvements to buildings owned by: a. Regional educational attendance areas; b. Municipal governments, including political subdivisions for municipal governments; c. The University of Alaska; d. Political subdivisions of the State of Alaska, or e. The State of Alaska Refer to the Retrofit Energy Assessment for Loans manual which can be obtained from AHFC for more information on this program. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX A Appendix A Benchmark Reports CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT First Name Last Name Middle Name Phone Steven Golab 348‐5132 State Zip AK Monday‐ Friday Saturday Sunday Holidays 8‐4:30 Average # of Occupants During 427 Renovations Date PART II – ENERGY SOURCES Heating Oil Electricity Natural Gas Propane Wood Coal $ /gallon $ / kWh $ / CCF $ / gal $ / cord $ / ton Other energy sources? Golab_Steven@asdk12.org 11900 Juniper Dr Contact Person City Anchorage 1. Please check every energy source you use in the table below. If known, please enter the base rate you pay for the energy source. 2. Provide utilities bills for the most recent two‐year period for each energy source you use. Anchorage 261,500 Facility ZipFacility Address Details Mailing Address Primary Operating Hours 99517 Email REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Owner MOA Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage Facility Owned By Date 07/26/11 Building Type Mixed Community Population Facility City 1983 Municipal Klatt Elementary Education ‐ K ‐ 12 50,160 Year Built APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT Klatt Elementary Buiding Size Input (sf) =50,160 2009 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)46,379.00 2009 Natural Gas Cost ($)46,240 2009 Electric Consumption (kWh)415,216 2009 Electric Cost ($)55,731 2009 Oil Consumption (Therms)0.00 2009 Oil Cost ($)0 2009 Propane Consumption (Therms)0.00 2009 Propane Cost ($)0.00 2009 Coal Consumption (Therms)0.00 2009 Coal Cost ($)0.00 2009 Wood Consumption (Therms)0.00 2009 Wood Cost ($)0.00 2009 Thermal Consumption (Therms)0.00 2009 Thermal Cost ($)0.00 2009 Steam Consumption (Therms)0.00 2009 Steam Cost ($)0.00 2009 Total Energy Use (kBtu)6,055,032 2009 Total Energy Cost ($)101,971 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2009 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 92.5 2009 Electricity (kBtu/sf)28.3 2009 Oil (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Propane (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Coal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Wood (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Steam (kBtu/sf) 0.0 2009 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)120.7 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2009 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf)0.92 2009 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)1.11 2009 Oil Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2009 Propane Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2009 Coal Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2009 Wood Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2009 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2009 Steam Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2009 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)2.03 APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)39,596.00 2010 Natural Gas Cost ($)34,723 2010 Electric Consumption (kWh)389,662 2010 Electric Cost ($)43,431 2010 Oil Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Oil Cost ($)0 2010 Propane Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Propane Cost ($)0 2010 Coal Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Coal Cost ($)0 2010 Wood Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Wood Cost ($)0 2010 Thermal Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Thermal Cost ($)0 2010 Steam Consumption (Therms)0.00 2010 Steam Cost ($)0 2010 Total Energy Use (kBtu)5,289,516 2010 Total Energy Cost ($)78,154 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf)78.9 2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf)26.5 2010 Oil (kBtu/sf)0.0 2010 Propane (kBtu/sf)0.0 2010 Coal (kBtu/sf)0.0 2010 Wood (kBtu/sf)0.0 2010 Thermal (kBtu/sf)0.0 2010 Steam (kBtu/sf)0.0 2010 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)105.5 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf)0.69 2010 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)0.87 2010 Oil Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Propane Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Coal Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Wood Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Steam Cost Index ($/sf)0.00 2010 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)1.56 Note: 1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYKLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORTKlatt ElementaryNatural GasBtus/CCF =100,000Provider Meter # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (CCF) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Natural Gas Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/Therm) Demand Cost ($)Enstar NGC7281 Jan‐09 12/30/08 02/02/09349,5999,599$9,685$1.01Enstar NGC7281 Feb‐09 02/02/09 02/27/09255,9765,976$6,054$1.01Enstar NGC7281 Mar‐09 02/27/09 04/01/09336,8026,802$6,881$1.01Enstar NGC7281 Apr‐09 04/01/09 04/29/09283,6243,624$3,696$1.02Enstar NGC7281 May‐09 04/29/09 06/01/09332,5372,537$2,607$1.03Enstar NGC7281/598 Jun‐09 06/01/09 06/30/09291,0241,024$1,091$1.07Enstar NGC598 Jul‐09 06/30/09 07/31/0931222222$287$1.29Enstar NGC598 Aug‐09 07/31/09 08/31/0931568568$634$1.12Enstar NGC598 Sep‐09 08/31/09 09/30/09301,4951,495$1,564$1.05Enstar NGC598 Oct‐09 09/30/09 10/29/09292,4532,453$2,525$1.03Enstar NGC598 Nov‐09 10/29/09 11/30/09326,2346,234$6,317$1.01Enstar NGC598 Dec‐09 11/30/09 12/31/09315,8455,845$4,900$0.84Enstar NGC598Jan‐10 12/31/09 02/01/10326,7366,736$5,637$0.84Enstar NGC598 Feb‐10 02/01/10 03/01/10284,4564,456$3,751$0.84Enstar NGC598 Mar‐10 03/01/10 04/01/10314,6244,624$3,928$0.85Enstar NGC598 Apr‐10 04/01/10 04/30/10292,7362,736$2,352$0.86Enstar NGC598 May‐10 04/30/10 05/27/10271,4381,438$1,269$0.88Enstar NGC598 Jun‐10 05/27/10 06/29/10331,0401,040$936$0.90Enstar NGC598 Jul‐10 06/29/10 07/29/1030800800$736$0.92Enstar NGC598 Aug‐10 07/29/10 08/30/1032747747$959$1.28Enstar NGC598 Sep‐10 08/30/10 10/01/10321,6901,690$1,713$1.01Enstar NGC598 Oct‐10 10/01/10 10/28/10272,6512,651$2,482$0.94Enstar NGC598 Nov‐10 10/28/10 11/29/10324,9254,925$4,301$0.87Enstar NGC598 Dec‐10 11/29/10 12/29/10307,7537,753$6,660$0.86Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total:46,37946,3790$46,240$0Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total:39,59639,5960$34,723$0$1.04$0.92Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg:Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg:APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYKLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT$0$2,000$4,000$6,000$8,000$10,000$12,00002,0004,0006,0008,00010,00012,000Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr)Klatt Elementary ‐Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) vs. Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Natural Gas Cost ($)APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYKLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORTKlatt ElementaryElectricityBtus/kWh =3,413Provider Customer # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (kWh) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Electric Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/kWh) Demand Cost ($)Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Jan‐09 12/3/2008 1/2/20093041,4411,414126$6,371$0.15$1,403.04Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Feb‐09 1/2/2009 2/3/20093239,6611,354125$5,974$0.15$1,385.28Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Mar‐09 2/3/2009 3/5/20093038,4091,311117$5,695$0.15$1,296.48Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Apr‐09 3/5/2009 4/3/20092936,8321,257115$5,312$0.14$1,260.96Chugach Electric1‐93712469 May‐09 4/3/2009 5/5/20093232,4111,106115$4,945$0.15$1,278.72Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Jun‐09 5/5/2009 6/3/20092914,798505112$1,822$0.12$1,243.20Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Jul‐09 6/3/2009 7/2/20092914,64750050$1,925$0.13$230.88Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Aug‐09 7/2/2009 8/3/20093229,8561,019107$4,009$0.13$550.56Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Sep‐09 8/3/2009 9/1/20092939,9461,363112$4,760$0.12$1,189.92Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Oct‐09 9/1/2009 10/2/20093143,2971,478118$5,112$0.12$1,298.08Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Nov‐09 10/2/2009 11/3/20093242,3581,446123$5,170$0.12$1,372.26Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Dec‐09 11/3/2009 12/2/20092941,5601,418126$4,636$0.11$1,427.89Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Jan‐10 12/2/2009 1/3/20103239,1471,336126$4,378$0.11$1,464.88Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Feb‐10 1/3/2010 2/3/20103139,5041,348118$4,306$0.11$1,372.26Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Mar‐10 2/3/2010 3/4/20102938,8021,324115$4,497$0.12$1,335.17Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Apr‐10 3/4/2010 4/2/20102936,4841,245109$4,112$0.11$1,260.99Chugach Electric1‐93712469 May‐10 4/2/2010 5/4/20103228,003956104$2,782$0.10$1,205.36Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Jun‐10 5/4/2010 6/4/20103115,90854335$1,512$0.10$389.42Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Jul‐10 6/4/2010 7/6/20103217,63960251$1,944$0.11$407.97Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Aug‐10 7/6/2010 8/4/20102928,735981102$3,407$0.12$593.41Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Sep‐10035,5671,214112$3,953$0.11Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Oct‐10038,5101,314120$4,351$0.11Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Nov‐10035,5921,215120$4,090$0.11Chugach Electric1‐93712469 Dec‐10035,7711,221120$4,099$0.11Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total:415,21614,1711,346$55,731$13,937Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total:389,66213,2991,232$43,431$8,029$0.13$0.11Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 avg:Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 avg:APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYKLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT$0$1,000$2,000$3,000$4,000$5,000$6,000$7,00005,00010,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,00040,00045,00050,000Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Date (Mon ‐Yr)Klatt Elementary ‐Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Electric Cost ($)APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX B Appendix B Short AKWarm Report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Klatt Elementary School Page 1 APPENDIX B ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 1/26/2012 2:03 PM General Project Information PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION Building: Klatt Elementary School Auditor Company: Central Alaska Engineering Company Address: 11900 Juniper Dr. Auditor Name: Jerry P. Herring City: Anchorage Auditor Address: 32215 Lakefront Drive Soldotna AK, 99669 Client Name: Calvin Mundt Client Address: Anchorage, AK 99517 Auditor Phone: (907) 260-5311 Auditor FAX: Client Phone: ( ) - Auditor Comment: Client FAX: ( ) - Design Data Building Area: 50,160 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 2,301,648 Btu/hour with Distribution Losses: 2,557,387 Btu/hour Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and 25% Safety Margin: 3,898,455 Btu/hour Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load, if served. Typical Occupancy: 412 people Design Indoor Temperature: 75 deg F (building average) Actual City: Anchorage Design Outdoor Temperature: -18 deg F Weather/Fuel City: Anchorage Heating Degree Days: 10,816 deg F-days Utility Information Electric Utility: Chugach Electric - Commercial - Lg Natural Gas Provider: Enstar Natural Gas - Commercial - Lg Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.120/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.980/ccf Annual Energy Cost Estimate Description Space Heating Space Cooling Water Heating Lighting Refrige ration Other Electric al Cooking Clothes Drying Ventilatio n Fans Service Fees Total Cost Existing Building $55,445 $0 $4,570 $13,047 $360 $2,629 $0 $0 $11,593 $0 $87,644 With Proposed Retrofits $42,895 $0 $2,679 $5,703 $360 $2,629 $0 $0 $10,334 $0 $64,601 SAVINGS $12,550 $0 $1,891 $7,344 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,258 $0 $23,043 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Klatt Elementary School Page 2 APPENDIX B $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 Existing Retrofit Ventilation and Fans Space Heating Refrigeration Other Electrical Lighting Domestic Hot Water Annual Energy Costs by End Use Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Klatt Elementary School Page 3 APPENDIX B PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 1 Setback Thermostat: Gym Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gym space. $798 $2,340 4.34 2.9 2 HVAC And DHW Replace existing storage water heater with indirect- fired water heater (estimated $10,000). Install premium efficiency motors (9 @ $1,000 each = $9,000). Place DHW circulation pump on timer ($1,000). Refine operating schedule of heating distribution pumps. ($8,000) $6,482 $28,000 3.82 4.3 3 Setback Thermostat: School w/o Gym Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the School w/o Gym space. $5,575 $29,154 2.43 5.2 4 Ventilation Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (16 @ $850 = $13,600) Reduce outside air into AHUs. ($8,000) $2,843 $21,600 1.65 7.6 5 Lighting: Incandescent Hallway Replace with 14 LED 48W Module StdElectronic $490 $6,790 1.38 13.9 6 Lighting: Gym Lights Replace with 12 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F28T5 28W High Lumen (3050 L) HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch $578 $36,620 0.59 63.3 7 Lighting: Exterior Pole Lights Replace with 20 LED 150W Module (20) StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,583 $44,000 0.55 27.8 8 Lighting: Classrooms Replace with 336 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $2,859 $186,960 0.40 65.4 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Klatt Elementary School Page 4 APPENDIX B PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 9 Lighting: Fluorescent Hallway Replace with 36 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy- Saver Program HighEfficElectronic $176 $17,460 0.37 99.4 10 Lighting: Classroom Hung Lights Replace with 216 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,333 $116,760 0.36 87.6 11 Lighting: Entrance Lights Replace with 18 LED 34W Module StdElectronic $325 $13,500 0.32 41.5 TOTAL $23,043 $503,184 0.81 21.8 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – ENERGY EFFICIENT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Building Envelope Insulation Rank Location Existing Type/R9Value Recommendation Type/R9 Value Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Exterior Doors – Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Windows and Glass Doors – Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Air Leakage Rank Location Estimated Air Leakage Recommended Air Leakage Target Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 2. Mechanical Equipment Mechanical Rank Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Klatt Elementary School Page 5 APPENDIX B 2 Replace existing storage water heater with indirect-fired water heater (estimated $10,000). Install premium efficiency motors (9 @ $1,000 each = $9,000). Place DHW circulation pump on timer ($1,000). Refine operating schedule of heating distribution pumps. ($8,000) $28,000 $6,482 Setback Thermostat Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 1 Gym Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 68.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gym space. $2,340 $798 3 School w/o Gym Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 68.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the School w/o Gym space. $29,154 $5,575 Ventilation Rank Recommendation Cost Annual Energy Savings 4 Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (16 @ $850 = $13,600) Reduce outside air into AHUs. ($8,000) $21,600 $2,843 3. Appliances and Lighting Lighting Fixtures and Controls Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 5 Incandescent Hallway 14 INCAN Reflector, Std 250W R40 with Manual Switching Replace with 14 LED 48W Module StdElectronic $6,790 $490 6 Gym Lights 12 MV 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 12 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F28T5 28W High Lumen (3050 L) HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch $36,620 $578 7 Exterior Pole Lights 20 HPS 400 Watt (20) Magnetic with Manual Switching, Daylight Sensor Replace with 20 LED 150W Module (20) StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $44,000 $1,583 8 Classrooms 336 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 336 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy- Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $186,960 $2,859 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Klatt Elementary School Page 6 APPENDIX B 9 Fluorescent Hallway 36 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 36 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy- Saver Program HighEfficElectronic $17,460 $176 10 Classroom Hung Lights 216 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 216 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy- Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $116,760 $1,333 11 Entrance Lights 18 INCAN A Lamp, Std 100W with Manual Switching Replace with 18 LED 34W Module StdElectronic $13,500 $325 Refrigeration Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Other Electrical Equipment Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Cooking/Clothes Drying Rank Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX C Appendix C Major Equipment List CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYKLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORTTAG LOCATIONFUNCTIONMAKE MODELTYPECAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZEASHRAE SERVICE LIFEESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFENOTESB1 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT BENCHMARK BMK1.5LNNAT GAS/SHELL WATERTUBE1500MBH 88.80% 25 23B2 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT BENCHMARK BMK1.5LNNAT GAS/SHELL WATERTUBE1500MBH 88.80%2523HWH1 BOILER ROOMDHW SUPPLY NICKELSHIELD 54N250APGNAT GAS/SHELL WATERTUBE540MBH2523CP1 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT MARATHONAVJ213TTDW4028ABBASEMOUNTED 190GPM @ 75' 7.5HP157CP2 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT US MOTORS T560 BASEMOUNTED 190GPM @ 75' 7.5HP157CP3 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEATB&GHVB 56T17D5598DPINLINE PUMP 53GPM @ 48' 2HP100CP4 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEATB&GHVB 56T17D5598DPINLINE PUMP 56GPM @ 43' 2HP100CP5 EAST FAN ROOM BUILDING HEAT MARATHONCVE56T17D2108BPINLINE PUMP 12.46GPM @ 100' .75HP100CP6 EAST FAN ROOM BUILDING HEAT MARATHONCVE56T17D2108BPINLINE PUMP 12.48GPM @ 100' .75HP100CP7 WEST FAN ROOM BUILDING HEAT GRUNDFOS UP3963 INLINE PUMP 12.46GPM @ 100' .75HP100CP8 WEST FAN ROOM BUILDING HEAT MARATHONCVE56T17D2108BPINLINE PUMP 12.46GPM @ 100' .75HP100HWCP1 BOILER ROOMDHW CIRCGRUNDFOS UP 2564 SF INLINE PUMP 2GPM @ 6'.08HP108UH2 EAST FAN ROOM BUILDING HEATTRANE #70SHORIZONTAL 1100CFM.05HP200AHU1 EAST FAN ROOM AIR HANDLINGTRANE CCDB31CN0C HORIZONTAL 21000CFM @ 3.7" 30HP200AHU2 EAST FAN ROOM AIR HANDLINGTRANE CCDB12AN0C HORIZONTAL 7575CFM @ 2" 5HP200AHU3 WEST FAN ROOM AIR HANDLINGTRANE CCDB31BN0C HORIZONTAL 14700CFM @ 3.7" 20HP200AHU4 WEST FAN ROOM AIR HANDLINGTRANE CCDB12AW0C HORIZONTAL 6600CFM @ 2" 5HP200AHU5 WEST FAN ROOM AIR HANDLINGTRANEC8DB03A01CAR03BHORIZONTAL 1100CFM @ .5" .25HP200VF1 BOILER ROOM BOILER AIR SUPPLY PENN #P18Q HORIZONTAL 3400CFM @ .2" .5HP200VF2 BOILER ROOM BOILER AIR SUPPLY PENN #P18Q HORIZONTAL 3400CFM @ .2" .5HP200EF1 EAST FAN ROOMEXHAUSTTRANE #9 FCUPBLAST 740CFM @ 1" .3HP200EF2 WEST FAN ROOMEXHAUSTTRANE #9 FCUPBLAST 400CFM @ .5" .17HP200EF3 RESTROOMEXHAUSTPENN #Z8TDUPBLAST 150CFM @ .38" .14HP200EF4 RESTROOMEXHAUSTPENN #Z8TDUPBLAST 80CFM @ .38" .33HP200EF5 RESTROOMEXHAUSTPENN #Z12UPBLAST 500CFM @ .5" .17HP200EF6 RESTROOMEXHAUSTPENN #Z10UPBLAST 250CFM @ .25" .17HP200EF7 KITCHENEXHAUSTCOOK #12CVUPBLAST 2000CFM @ 1.5" 2HP200EF8 WEST FAN ROOMEXHAUSTTRANE #9 FCUPBLAST 1180CFM @ .9" .3HP200EF9 EAST FAN ROOMEXHAUSTPENN #Z10 TDUPBLAST 80CFM @ .5" .17HP200ACP1 BOILER ROOM AIR COMPRESSION BALDOR M3211T8 RECIPROCATING 100 GAL3HP150UH1 ROOM'S 126,127, 159 BUILDING HEAT ~TRANE #385HORIZONTAL 543 CFM.05 HP200UH2 ROOM'S 117, 145 BUILDING HEATTRANE #70SHORIZONTAL 1100CFM.05HP200CUH17 UNITS TOTAL LOCATIONS VARYBUILDING HEAT ~TRANE UNKHORIZONTAL 200CFM.05HP200MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORYAPPENDIX C CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D Appendix D Site Visit Photos CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 1. Typical School Windows. 2. Example of Window Thickness 3. Typical School Doors 4. School’s Portable Classroom Unit 5. Exterior Pole%Mounted Light Fixture Typical 6. Exterior Pole%Mounted Light Fixtures Surrounding Basketball Court CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 7. Typical Exterior Light Fixtures 8. Boiler Room Overall Featuring Natural Gas Fired Water%Tube Boilers 1 & 2 9. Close%Up of Boiler Controls 10. Boiler Room Condensate Drain System 11. Hot Water Expansion Tank (Left) & Natural Gas Fired Domestic Hot Water Heater (Right) 12. Circulation Pumps 1 & 2 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 13. Typical In%line Hot Water/Glycol Pumps 14. Hot Water/Glycol Heat Exchange System One of Two Located in School 15. Typical Air Handling Unit 16. Air handling Unit Control Panel 17. Centrifugal Exhaust Fan 18. Boiler Room Ventilation System CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 19. Typical Unit Heater 20. Air Compression Unit 21. Analog to Digital Converter Unit 22. Digital HVAC Control Panels 23. Entry Way Light Fixtures 24. Gymnasium Light Fixtures CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 25. Art Room Light Fixtures 26. Office Light Fixtures Typical 27. Typical Track Lighting 28. Library Light Fixtures 29. Library Light Fixtures (2) 30. Typical Hallway Light Fixtures CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 31. Multi%Purpose Room Light Fixtures 32. Incandescent Exit Sign 33. Monitor Typical to Classrooms 34. Domestic Refrigeration unit (Left) & Drink Vending Machine (Right 35. Example of Thermostat Set to 70° (F), 36. Unused Air Cleaning Unit CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E Appendix E Thermal Site Visit Photos CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 1. High Heat Loss With This Type Of Door 2. Doorway Typical of School, Heat Loss Surrounding Doors Expected 3. Windows Typical of School, Heat Loss Surrounding Windows Expected. Note Higher Heat Loss On The Right. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 4. Upper Window Frames Exhibiting Higher Heat Loss. 5. Rear Overview, Note Heat Loss Around The Roof Trim 6. East Wall Overview, Abnormal Heat Loss Exhibited Around Roof Trim CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 7. Close/Up of Anomalous Areas Of Heat Loss Along Roof Trim 8. Slab Edge Exhibiting Normal Heat Loss. 9. South/West Corner Overview Featuring, (A) Doorway, (B) Roof Overhang (C) and Soffit Exhibiting High Heat Loss. A B C CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY KLATT ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX E 10. School’s Portable Classroom Unit, (A) Typical Heat Loss Exhibited Thru The Windows. (B)Note Heat Loss At The Top Half Of The Wall. 11. Heat Loss Exhibited From Under Portable’s Skirting. 12. High Heat Loss Thru The Door. AB