The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCIRI-ANC-CAEC ASD Student Nutrition Center 2012-EEENERGY AUDIT FINAL REPORT Anchorage School District Student Nutrition Center 1307 Labar Street Anchorage, AK 99517 (907) 348-5132 AkWarm ID No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 800 F Street Anchorage, AK 99501 p (907) 276-6664 f (907) 276-5042 Contact: Walter K. Heins, P.E., CCP, CxA, CEA 32215 Lakefront Dr. Soldotna, Alaska 99669 p (907) 260-5311 Contact: Jerry P. Herring, PE, CEA ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 i AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Contents I. Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 1 II. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3 III. Energy Audit Process ............................................................................................................. 4 IV. Method of Analysis ................................................................................................................. 5 V. Building Description ................................................................................................................ 7 V.I Architectural Description .................................................................................................................... 7 V.II Mechanical Description ..................................................................................................................... 7 V.III Electrical Description ....................................................................................................................... 8 V.IV Food Preparation Equipment Description ........................................................................................ 9 V.V Walk-In Refrigeration and Freezer Rooms Description .................................................................... 9 VI. Historic Energy Consumption and Cost............................................................................. 10 VI.I Electrical Consumption Data ........................................................................................................... 10 VI.II Natural Gas Consumption Data ..................................................................................................... 10 VI.III Overall Energy Consumption Description .................................................................................... 10 VII. Equipment Inventory and Photo Survey .......................................................................... 12 VIII. Energy Conservation Measures ....................................................................................... 13 VIII.I Student Nutrition Energy Conservation Measures ....................................................................... 13 VIII.II Administrative Controls for Energy Conservation and Optimization ......................................... 16 Appendices Appendix A – Energy Benchmark Data Appendix B – AkWarm Commercial Reports Appendix C – Major Equipment List Appendix D – Energy Conservation Measures Appendix E – Site Visit Photos Appendix F – Thermographic Photos ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 ii AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 REPORT DISCLAIMER Privacy The information contained within this report, including any attachment(s), was produced under contract to Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). IGAs 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. Limitations of Study This energy audit is intended to identify and recommend potential areas of energy savings, estimate the value of the savings, and provide an opinion of the costs to implement the recommendations. This audit meets the criteria of a Level 2 Investment Grade Audit (IGA) per the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and the Association of Energy Engineers (AEE), and is valid for one year. The life of the IGA may be extended on a case-by-case basis, at the discretion of AHFC. In preparing this report, the preparers acted with the standard of care prevalent in this region for this type of work. All results are dependent on the quality of input data provided. Not all data could be verified and no destructive testing or investigations were undertaken. Some data may have been incomplete. This report is not intended to be a final design document. 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 upgrades should undergo a thorough lighting analysis to assure that the upgrades will comply with State of Alaska Statutes as well as Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) recommendations. All liabilities for upgrades, including but not limited to safety, design, and performance are incumbent upon the professional(s) who prepare the design. Coffman Engineers, Inc (CEI) and Central Alaska Engineering Company (CAEC) bear no responsibility for work performed as a result of this report. Financial ratios may vary from those forecasted due to the uncertainty of the final installed design, configuration, equipment selected, installation costs, related additional work, or the operating schedules and maintenance provided by the owner. Furthermore, many ECMs are interactive, so implementation of one ECM may impact the performance of another ECM. CEI and CAEC accept no liability for financial loss due to ECMs that fail to meet the forecasted financial ratios. The economic analyses for the ECMs relating to lighting improvements are based solely on energy savings. Additional benefits may be realized in reduced maintenance cost, deferred maintenance, and improved lighting quality. The new generation lighting systems have significantly longer life leading to long term labor savings, especially in high areas like Gyms and exterior parking lots. Lighting upgrades displace re-lamping costs for any fixtures whose lamps would otherwise be nearing the end of their lifecycle. This reduces maintenance costs for 3-7 years after the upgrade. An overall improvement in lighting quality, quantified by numerous studies, improves the performance of students and workers in the built environment. New lighting systems can be designed to address all of the above benefits. US Government Disclaimer: 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. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 1 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 I. Executive Summary This report presents the findings of an energy audit conducted at the Student Nutrition Center as part of a contract for: Alaska Housing Finance Corporation Contact: Rebekah Luhrs 4300 Boniface Parkway Anchorage, AK 99510 Email: rluhrs@ahfc.us Anchorage School District Contact: Calvin Mundt 1301 Labar Street Anchorage, AK 99515 Email: mundt_calvin@asdk12.org This audit was performed using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds to promote the use of innovation and technology to solve energy and environmental problems in a way that improves the State of Alaska’s economy. This can be achieved through the wiser and more efficient use of energy. The documented annual utility costs, averaged over January 2009-December 2010 at this facility are as follows: Electricity $117,770 Natural Gas $ 68,583 Total $186,353 January 2009-December 2010 Energy Utilization Index (EUI) = 228.3 kBtu/sf January 2009-December 2010 Energy Cost Index = 3.88 $/sf Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) calculated to be cost effective are shown below in the Executive Summary Table with the energy analyst’s best opinion of probable cost, savings, and investment returns. Be aware that the measures are not additive because of the interrelation of several of the measures. The cost of each measure for this level of auditing is ± 30% until detailed engineering, specifications, and hard proposals are obtained. See Section VIII for detailed descriptions of all cost effective ECMs. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 2 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) ECM-1a Refrigerators Replace Refrigerators older than 5 years old - - - <10 years ECM-2 Loading Dock Air Curtain Install an Air Curtain between the Loading Dock and the Warehouse to reduce infiltration & heating load and increase user comfort. Cost is approximate. - $5,000 - - ECM-3 Lighting: Exterior Perimeter Add new time clock control of HPS wall pack light fixtures $624 $1,600 6.00 2.6 ECM-4 Lighting: Restrooms Replace with 10 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W Electronic Ballast, Add new Occupancy Sensors, and Switch Nightlights with Local Lighting Circuit $344 $1,800 2.94 5.2 ECM-5 Lighting: Office Spaces Replace with 76 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W Electronic Ballast; and Add new Occupancy Sensors where applicable $1,614 $12,900 1.92 8.0 ECM-6 Lighting: Food Prep Areas and Adjacent Corridors Replace with 150 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W Electronic Ballast $1,959 $22,500 1.34 11.5 ECM-7 Lighting: Exterior Loading Dock Add new time clock control of HPS flood lights in loading dock area $112 $1,600 1.07 14.3 ECM-8 Air Tightening Perform air sealing to reduce air leakage by 20% $2,010 $18,000 1.01 9 Note: a Due to advances in refrigerators in the previous 5 years, new Energy Star refrigerators are much more efficient and result in viable energy savings. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 3 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 II. Introduction This energy audit was conducted for the Student Nutrition Center, a 48,075 square foot (sf) facility that includes dry, refrigerated, and frozen goods storage areas, food preparation areas, mechanical spaces, administrative spaces, etc. The energy audit was conducted in order to evaluate areas and equipment where utility savings relative to a baseline can be realized with reasonable project financial ratios and payback. Anchorage, Alaska – Google Maps Student Nutrition Facility – Google Maps ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 4 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 III. Energy Audit Process Prior to visiting the building, the first task was to collect and review two years of utility data for electricity and natural gas usage. 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. A spreadsheet was used to enter, sum, and calculate benchmarks and to graph energy use information (see Appendix A). The primary benchmark calculation used for comparison and baseline data is the Energy Utilization Index, or EUI (see Section VI). After gathering the utility data and calculating the EUI, the next step in the audit process was to review the architectural and engineering drawings to develop a building profile which documented building age, type, usage, and major energy consuming equipment or systems such as lighting, Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning, (HVAC), water heating, refrigeration, snow-melt, and 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 was the physical site investigation (site visit). The site visit was completed on July 22, 2011, and was spent inspecting the actual systems and answering specific questions from the preliminary review. Our on-site contact during the investigation was Mr. Bob Holben of the Anchorage School District Facilities Department1. Occupancy schedules, O&M practices, building energy management program, and other information that has an impact on energy consumption were obtained. After the site visit, the energy audit includes an evaluation of the information gathered, researching possible conservation opportunities, organizing the audit into a comprehensive report, and making energy conservation recommendations on mechanical, electrical and building envelope improvements. 1 Mr. Bob Holben, (907) 242-1153 (mobile), (907) 348-5221 (office) ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 5 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 IV. Method of Analysis Having completed the preliminary audit tasks noted in Section III Coffman Engineers (CEI) proceeded to the site survey. The site survey provides critical input in deciphering where energy opportunities exist within a facility. The audit team walked the entire site to inventory the building envelope (roof, windows, etc.), the major equipment including HVAC, water heating, lighting, and equipment in shops, kitchens, and offices. An understanding of how the equipment is used is determined during the audit. The Student Nutrition Center is an exceptionally complex building from an energy consumption standpoint. The industrial kichen includes high-powered cooking equipment whose duty cycle varies significantly day-to-day and through the seasons. Food service energy usage was accounted for in the energy model by using average utilization. An analysis of the food service processes are beyond the scope of this audit. The collected data was entered into AkWarm Commercial™ software, an energy calculating program for buildings. The data was processed by AkWarm to model a baseline from which energy conservation measures (ECMs) could be considered. The model was compared to actual utility costs to ensure the quality of baseline and proposed energy modeling performed by AkWarm. The recommended ECMs focus on building envelope, HVAC, lighting, water heating, and other electrical measures that will reduce annual energy consumption. ECMs are evaluated based on building use and processes, local climate conditions, building construction type, function, operational schedule, existing conditions, and foreseen future plans. When new equipment is proposed, energy consumption is calculated based on the manufacturer’s cataloged information where possible. Energy savings are calculated by AkWarm. Implementation of more than one ECM often affects the savings of other ECMs. The savings may in some cases be relatively higher for an ECM implemented individually than when that ECM is just one of multiple recommended ECMs. For example, implementing reduced operating schedules of inefficient lighting systems may result in a given savings. Also implementing a more efficient lighting system will add to the savings, but less than the efficient lighting would alone because there is less energy to be saved when the lights are on a reduced operating schedule. Thus, if multiple ECM’s are recommended, the combined savings must be calculated and identified appropriately in groups. In Appendix D, Energy Conservation Measures, the simple lifetime calculation is shown for each ECM, which is based on the typical life of the equipment being replaced or altered. The energy savings are extrapolated throughout the lifetime of the ECM. The total energy savings are calculated as the total lifetime multiplied by the yearly savings. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 6 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 The cost savings and installation costs are used to calculate simple payback2 and the Savings to Investment Ratio3 (SIR).These are listed in Appendix D and summarized in the Executive Summary Table of this report. The SIR is calculated as a ratio by dividing the break even cost by the initial installed cost. Cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy costs for the building. Installation costs include labor and equipment to evaluate the initial investment required to implement an ECM. These are applied to each recommendation with simple paybacks calculate. The energy analyst’s opinions of probable cost are garnered from RS Means Cost Data, other industry publications, and local contractors and suppliers. In addition, where applicable, maintenance cost savings are estimated and applied to the net savings. 2 The simple payback is based on the years that it takes for the net savings to payback the net installation cost (Cost divided by Savings). 3 Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR): Break Even Cost divided by initial installed cost, where Break-Even Cost is how much can be spent and still have the measure be cost effective; it equals the Present Value (PV) of Savings over the life of the measure minus PV of maintenance costs. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 7 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 V. Building Description The Student Nutrition Center is a single story facility with refrigerated, frozen, and dry storage areas, an industrial kitchen, a food test kitchen, and supporting administrative, mechanical, and electrical spaces. It was constructed in 1988, and no major building renovations have occurred since then. The facility is normally occupied from 7am to 4pm on weekdays during the Anchorage School District (ASD) school year and from 8am to 5pm on weekdays during times when the ASD school year is not in session. V.I Architectural Description Details of the wall floor and roof construction were taken from the architectural drawings. Exterior walls of the building are constructed of gypsum wall board, a vapor barrier, 8” metal studs on 16” centers, R-19 fiberglass batt insulation, plywood sheathing, gypsum sheathing, 2” of rigid insulation, and synthetic stucco. The exterior walls surrounding the warehouse are 32’ high, while the office and kitchen areas have 17’ high walls. There is 34,128 sf of wall area. The Student Nutrition Center has slab-on-grade floors with 3” rigid insulation along the slab edge, yielding an estimated R-Value of R-20. There is approximately 44,952 sf of slab-on-grade floor, which differs slightly from the total square footage due to some mechanical rooms occupying a dedicated second floor area. The total square footage of the building is 48,075 sf. The roof is constructed of corrugated metal decking, 1” perlite insulation, an EPDM membrane, 3” rigid insulation, and mortar-faced insulation board. Some areas of the roof are also covered with concrete pavers over the mortarboard. There is approximately 44,952 sf of roof area with a composite R-Value of 19.8. All of the windows in the facility are double-paned with an overall construction thickness of 1”. There is approximately 220 sf of south-facing window area that receive a high solar load, and approximately 311 sf of window area facing other directions. The facility also has features incorporated for disaster and emergency response. These features include a secondary fuel system for the boilers and a potable water storage and treatment system. These systems are not utilizied significantly during normal operations and were not modeled in this energy audit. V.II Mechanical Description The building’s heat is provided by three Bryan flextube steam boilers, series RV-350, that are rated for 3,500 MBH maximum input and equipped with a Power Flame CR3 burner. The boilers are connected to a common steam header serving the steam cooking kettles, a domestic hot water heat exchanger, and a glycol heat exchanger used to supply building heat. The facility is heated by hydronic unit heaters and heating coils located throughout the building. All ventilation units have hydronic coils fed from the hydronic system. No mechanical cooling is provided for any of the air handling units at this facility. There are two air handling units and two heat recovery units serving the facility. SF-1 is a two-supply-fan unit serving the kitchen areas that supply a maximum of 39,500 cubic feet per minute (CFM) of air using a total of 25 horsepower (HP). SF-2 is a constant volume unit providing the office and administrative areas with 6,300 CFM of air using a 5HP motor. HRU-1 exhausts air from the steam kettle room and recovers heat from the exhaust airstream to supply outside air to the same area. It uses a 6,250 CFM 5 HP exhaust fan and a 6,250 CFM 5 HP supply fan. The supply air reclaims heat from the exhaust airstream, and is further heated using a direct fired gas burner with a 675 MBH capacity. HRU-2 exhausts air from the kitchen range hoods and recovers heat to ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 8 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 supply air to the same area. It uses a 3,850 CFM 3 HP exhaust fan and a 3,850 CFM 3 HP supply fan. Heat reclaim is similar to HRU-1 using a 416 MBH direct-fired burner. The air handling units are manufactured by Pace, and the heat recovery units are manufactured by Gaylord. The ventilation units, while well-maintained and in good working condition, were installed in 1988 during original building construction and are near the end of their service life. The 2011 ASHRAE Handbook for HVAC Applications, Chapter 37, Table 4, lists the estimated service life of a centrifugal fan as 25 years, a water heating coil as 20 years, a steel water tube boiler at 24 years, a burner as 21 years, and base-mounted pumps as 20 years. The primary consequence of aging equipment is deterioration in reliability with commensurate increases in maintenance and repair costs. Domestic hot water is produced through two steam-to-water heat exchangers and is stored in a 400 gallon tank. The hot water system is equipped with a circulation pump to provide hot water on demand for plumbing fixtures throughout the building. The heat exchangers, pumps, and hot water storage tank were installed in 1988 during original building construction and are near the end of their service life. See Appendix C for ASHRAE service life details of the individual equipment. V.III Electrical Description The Student Nutrition building is served by a 480 Volt (V), 3-phase, 4-wire, underground service. The school has a standby, diesel generator that can be used to serve critical loads such as the fire pump, and certain kitchen loads in the event of a utility power outage. Inside the school, 277/480V power is used to serve large mechanical loads, lighting, a step-down dry-type transformer. The transformer converts the voltage to 120/208V, three phase for receptacle loads, and computers. Since the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, all general purpose transformers have been required to meet the efficiency requirements listed in the National Electrical Manufacturer's Association publication NEMA TP1-2002. There may be energy savings available by replacing these transformers with new models that meet or exceed this standard, however caution must be exercised because replacing transformers impacts available fault current and over-current protection device selective coordination. The replacement of these transformers could only be recommended after performing a power system analysis. That level of study is outside the scope of this project. The office spaces in the Student Nutrition building include break rooms, private and multiple occupant offices, conference rooms, copy areas, corridors and restrooms. These areas are primarily illuminated by fluorescent T8 and T12 light fixtures that are largely controlled by wall mounted rocker switches, however occupancy sensor controls were observed in a few areas. The restrooms lights are controlled by occupancy sensors, however there is one night light present in each restroom that is continuously illuminated. The lighting in the private offices, conference rooms, and copy areas are not currently controlled by occupancy sensors, and were observed to be illuminated even though the space was unoccupied. The food prep area, adjacent corridors, and smaller walk-in cold storage areas are illuminated primarily by two lamp T12 fluorescent light fixtures while the loading dock is lit by T5 high output (HO) light fixtures. While we were unable to positively identify the high bay cold storage light fixtures, they appeared to be T5HO light fixtures. The lights in the food prep areas are controlled by wall mounted light switches, while the light fixtures in the cold storage areas are controlled by door sensors that turn the lights on when the doors are opened; the lights remain on for approximately 30 minutes after the doors are opened. The warehouse section of the building has both high bay storage areas and office spaces. The high bay areas are illuminated with T5HO fluorescent light fixtures. The high bay fixtures are illuminated ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 9 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 continuously while building is occupied. The work stations in the warehouse are lit via 4' fluorescent T8 and T12 fluorescent light fixtures; these lights are all controlled locally with rocker switches. General exterior lighting is provided by several small wall pack high pressure sodium (HPS) light fixtures while additional HPS flood lights are provided at the loading dock. All of the exterior lights were observed to be controlled by a photocell that switches the lights off during the day. Other electricity-using equipment not previously described in the mechanical or electrical sections include various user equipment such as air compressors, computers, printers, and other office sundries. V.IV Food Preparation Equipment Description The Student Nutrition Center is an industrial food processing facility with a mixture of gas-burning and electrical food preparation equipment. Major gas-burning equipment includes two ovens, a donut fryer, and a braising pan. Major electrical food preparation equipment includes a variety of mixers, dough handling equipment, steam-fed cooking kettles (which use steam from the heating system), dishwashing equipment, a food disposal, and residential-style electric range. During the summer, the food preparation equipment is turned off. A test kitchen is also at the building. It includes a residential oven/stovetop range with a range hood, a residential refrigerator, and various residential/light commercial level cooking equipment, such as mixers and food processors. V.V Walk-In Refrigeration and Freezer Rooms Description Five walk-in refrigeration rooms and one freezer are located in the building. One refrigeration room has had its compressors shut off and is used for non-refrigerated dry storage. Waste heat is recovered from most of the refrigeration evaporators and is used in a subgrade heating system that prevents frost buildup underneath the main freezer warehouse. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 10 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 VI. Historic Energy Consumption and Cost 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 provides the electricity and Enstar provides the natural gas to the building. Both utilities bill on a monthly basis under their commercial rate schedules. The AkWarm model of the facility was built to match the facility’s average annual electric and heating oil consumption, so that a realistic model could be created. The monthly energy consumption of the AkWarm model matches the actual average monthly consumption of the facility within 25%, which is adequate for this level of modeling. Overall, the energy consumption trends of the AkWarm model and the actual facility match appropriately. Graphical representations of the monthly energy consumption are included in Appendix A. VI.I Electrical Consumption Data The electric utility costs consist of several components: a fixed monthly customer charge, an energy usage charge, fuel surcharge, taxes, and a demand charge. The energy usage and fuel surcharge are based on the customer's usage as measured in kilowatt-hours (kWh). The usage (kWh) is determined by load wattage divided by 1,000, times hours running. For example, a 1,000 watt load operating for one hour will use 1 kWh of electricity as would ten, 100 watt lamps operating for one hour or one, 100W lamp operating for 10 hours. One kWh is equivalent to 3,413 BTU. Utility data used in this report reflects the historical data provided for the building in a summarized format. VI.II Natural Gas Consumption Data The natural gas supplier bills for consumption in units of 100 cubic feet (CCF) of natural. Natural gas is delivered as needed through a utility service connection. The average heating value of natural gas is 100,000 BTUs per CCF, which is equal to 1 Therm of energy. VI.III Overall Energy Consumption Description 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 the table below. Energy Cost and Consumption Data 2009 2010 Average Electric 0.12 $/kWh 0.10 $/kWh 0.11 $/kWh Natural Gas 1.00 $/CCF 0.85 $/CCF 0.92 $/CCF Total Cost $200,580 $172,125 $186,353 ECI 4.17 $/sf 3.58 $/sf 3.88 $/sf Electric EUI 73.7 kBtu/sf 72.6 kBtu/sf 73.2 kBtu/sf Natural Gas EUI 148.0 kBtu/sf 162.2 kBtu/sf 155.1 kBtu/sf Building EUI 221.7 kBtu/sf 234.9 kBtu/sf 228.3 kBtu/sf The Energy Cost Index (ECI) is derived by dividing the annual cost by the building square footage. The building square footage was calculated to be approximately 48,075 sf. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 11 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 The Energy Utilization Index (EUI) is a measure of a building’s energy utilization per square foot of building. This calculation is completed by converting the building’s utility consumption (propane gas and electric) over a specified time period, typically one year, to British Thermal Units (BTU) 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 amongst buildings of similar type. The electric and natural gas EUI figures can be separated to analyze the comparative energy use. The EUI numbers for this facility are listed above. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 12 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 VII. Equipment Inventory and Photo Survey Following the completion of the field survey a detailed equipment list was created and is attached as Appendix C. The major equipment listed are considered to be the major energy consuming equipment in the building whose replacement could yield substantial energy savings. An approximate age was assigned to the equipment if a manufactures 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. Additionally, photos of various equipment and the building construction were taken during the site visit. Several photos are included in Appendix E. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 13 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 VIII. Energy Conservation Measures VIII.I Student Nutrition Energy Conservation Measures This section presents a list of recommended ECMs for the Student Nutrition Center, compiled from analyzing the building. Most ECMs were calculated using the AkWarm program; however several ECMs were compiled from separate research, or from multiple AkWarm files of the building. ECMs presented here generally have SIRs greater than 1 (see Section IV), unless the energy analyst’s opinion deemed a given ECM relevant or important to performance, usability or user comfort. ECM-1 – Replace Refrigerators older than 5 years old Due to advances in refrigerators in the previous 5 years, new Energy Star residential and light-commercial reach-in refrigerators are much more efficient and result in viable energy savings. ECM-2 – Install an Air Curtain at the Loading Dock An Air Curtain is currently installed at the transition from the Loading Dock to the Kitchen spaces at the Student Nutrition Center. Installing a similar Air Curtain at the transition from the Loading Dock to the Warehouse will reduce air infiltration from the Loading Dock, which frequently operates with one or more overhead doors open, even during the winter. Energy savings as a result of this ECM are extremely difficult to predict, since Air Curtains require heating and electricity; however, the reduction in infiltration also reduces the overall heating load and increases user comfort. ECM-3 – Add Time Clock Control of Exterior Perimeter Lighting Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (years) $624 $1,600 6.01 2.6 The exterior perimeter lighting consists of (11) 200W HPS wall pack fixtures with magnetic ballasts. They are controlled by a photocell and remain on all night. This ECM would add a time clock controller to turn the lights off between 12:00 am and 6:00 am during the work week and off during the weekends. The controller would have a manual on/off switch and have the ability for user adjustments of scheduling. CEI evaluated replacing the HPS lighting with LED fixtures. New LED fixtures are cost prohibitive at this time, although they would save about $300 per year in addition to additional maintenance savings over their longer fixture life. See measures 2 and 19 in Appendix D for details. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 14 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ECM-4 – Upgrade the Lighting in the Restrooms Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (years) $344 $1,800 2.94 5.2 There are two bathrooms in the warehouse building adjacent to the break room. Most of the light fixtures are controlled by a wall mounted occupancy sensor; however two light fixtures are currently wired as night lights. Energy savings can be realized if the approximately 10 fluorescent T12 light fixtures are upgraded with T8 lamps, lamp holders, and ballasts and the wiring to the two night lights is revised so they are switched with the local lighting circuits. This description compiles measures 1, 12, 15, and 20 which were individually modeled in AKWarm. SIR's for measures 16 and 20 were less than one, but were included since consistent upgrades should be done concurrently. See appendix D for details of individual measures. ECM-5 – Upgrade the Lighting and Control Systems in the Office Spaces Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (years) $1,614 $12,900 1.92 8.0 Upgrading the lighting in the office spaces and corridors includes replacing and retrofitting approximately 76 fluorescent T12 light fixtures with T8 light fixtures equipped with program start electronic ballasts. Occupancy sensors could be used to control the smaller office, conference, and copy areas. The larger, shared office areas should remain controlled by wall switches since it is difficult to provide adequate coverage of the space with occupancy sensors. This description compiles measures 3, 5, 6, 7, and 11 which were individually modeled in AKWarm. See appendix D for details of individual measures. ECM-6 – Upgrade the Lighting and in the Food Prep Spaces and Adjacent Corridors Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (years) $1,959 $22,500 1.34 11.5 Upgrading the lighting in the food prep areas and corridors includes replacing and retrofitting approximately 150 fluorescent T12 light fixtures with T8 light fixtures equipped with program start electronic ballasts. This description compiles measures 4, 8, 9, and 10 which were individually modeled in AKWarm. See appendix D for details of individual measures. ECM-6 – Add Time Clock Control of Exterior Loading Dock Lighting Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (years) $112 $1,600 1.07 14.3 The exterior loading dock lighting consists of (5) 70W HPS wall pack fixtures with magnetic ballasts. They are controlled by a photocell and remain on all night. This ECM would add a time clock controller to turn the lights off between 12:00 am and 6:00 am during the work week and off during the weekends. The controller would have a manual on/off switch and user definable scheduling. This measure may be combined with ECM-4 if both lighting zones can be controlled on the same schedule. This would reduce installation costs. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 15 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 CEI evaluated replacing the HPS lighting with LED fixtures. New LED fixtures are cost prohibitive at this time, although they would save about $60 per year in addition to additional maintenance savings over their longer fixture life. See measures 13 & 26 in Appendix D for details. ECM-8 – Air Tightening Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (years) $2,010 $18,000 1.01 9 By tightening the building envelope with air sealing improvements, infiltration into the building will be reduced. This in turn will reduce the heating load required by the building and reduce the amount of natural gas being burned by the boilers. While a blower door test was not completed, it is anticipated that air leakage is occurring through old weather stripping around doors, window frames, and wall and roof penetrations (louvers, dampers, fans, conduit, etc.). Methods to decrease the infiltration by 20% as calculated in AkWarm include: sealing around the windows and doors with caulking and insulation, adding new weather stripping to doors, providing gaskets to all exterior cover plates and sealing all roof and wall penetrations. This ECM’s costs, cost savings, and financial ratios do not include the addition of an Air Curtain as recommended in ECM-2. See measure 14 in Appendix D. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 16 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 VIII.II Administrative Controls for Energy Conservation and Optimization While the intent of many energy conservation measures is to increase the efficiency of fuel-burning and electrical equipment, an important factor of energy consumption lies in the operational profiles which control the equipment usage. Such profiles can be managed by administrative controls and departmental leadership. They determine how and when fuel-burning and electrical equipment are used, and therefore have a greater impact on energy savings potential than simply equipment upgrades alone. Significant energy cost savings can be realized when ECMs are combined with efficient-minded operational profiles. Operational profiles may be outlined by organization policy or developed naturally or historically. These profiles include, but are not limited to: operating schedules, equipment setpoints and control strategies, maintenance schedules, and site and equipment selection. Optimization of operational profiles can be accomplished by numerous methods so long as the intent is reduction in energy-using equipment runtime. Due to the numerous methods of optimization, energy cost savings solely as a result of operational optimization are difficult to predict. Quantification, however, is easy to accomplish by metering energy usage during and/or after implementation of energy-saving operational profiles and ECMs. Shown below are some examples which have proven successful for other organizations. Optimization of site selection includes scheduling and location of events. If several buildings in a given neighborhood are all lightly used after regularly occupied hours, energy savings can be found when after- hours events are consolidated and held within the most energy efficient buildings available for use. As a result, unoccupied buildings could be shut down to the greatest extent possible to reduce energy consumption. Two operational behaviors which can be combined with equipment upgrades are operating schedules and equipment control strategies including setpoints. Occupancy and daylight sensors can be programmed to automatically shut off or dim lighting when rooms are unoccupied or sufficiently lit from the sun. Operating schedules can be optimized to run equipment only during regular or high-occupancy periods. Also, through a central control system, or with digital programmable thermostats, temperature setpoints can be reduced during low-occupancy hours to maximize savings. In addition, sporadically used equipment can be shut down during unoccupied hours to further save energy. In general, having equipment operating in areas where no occupants are present is inefficient, and presents an opportunity for energy savings. Operational profiles can also be implemented to take advantage of no- or low-cost ECMs. Examples include heating plant optimizations (boiler section cleaning, boiler flush-through cleaning) and tighter controls of equipment setbacks and shutdowns (unoccupied zones equipment shutdown, easier access to and finer control of equipment for after-hours control). In a large facility management program, implementation of these measures across many or all sites will realize dramatic savings due to the quantity of equipment involved. Changes to building operational profiles can only be realized while simultaneously addressing health, safety, user comfort, and user requirements first. It is impractical to expect users to occupy a building or implement operational behaviors which do not meet such considerations. That said, it is quite practical for management groups to implement administrative controls which reduce losses brought about by excess and sub-optimum usage. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Appendix A Energy Benchmark Data ASD Student Nutrition Center Draft Energy Audit Report First Name Last Name Middle Name Phone Steven Golab 348-5132 State Zip AK Monday-Friday Saturday Sunday Holidays 08:00-5:00 Average # of Occupants During Renovations Date Facility Zip 261,500 99517 Email Golab_Steven@asdk12.org Details 1307 Labar Street Anchorage Primary Operating Hours Contact Person City Anchorage Mailing Address REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Owner MOA Facility Owned By Date 03/14/11Municipal Government/Subdivision Facility Address Building Type Mixed Community Population Facility City 1988 Student Nutrition Food Service and Drinking Places 48,075 Year Built Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage PART II – ENERGY SOURCES Heating Oil Electricity Natural Gas Propane Wood Coal $ /gallon $ / kWh $ / CCF $ / gal $ / cord $ / ton Other energy sources? Describe 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. Coffman Engineers, Inc.AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ASD Student Nutrition Center Draft Energy Audit Report Student Nutrition Buiding Size Input (sf) =48,075 2009 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)71,136.00 2009 Natural Gas Cost ($)70,830 2009 Electric Consumption (kWh)1,038,097 2009 Electric Cost ($)129,750 2009 Total Energy Use (kBtu)10,656,625 2009 Total Energy Cost ($)200,580 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2009 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 148.0 2009 Electricity (kBtu/sf)73.7 2009 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)221.7 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2009 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf)1.47 2009 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)2.70 2009 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)4.17 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)78,001.00 2010 Natural Gas Cost ($)66,335 2010 Electric Consumption (kWh)1,022,7572010 Electric Consumption (kWh)1,022,757 2010 Electric Cost ($)105,790 2010 Total Energy Use (kBtu)11,290,770 2010 Total Energy Cost ($)172,125 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf)162.2 2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf)72.6 2010 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)234.9 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf)1.38 2010 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)2.20 20010 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)3.58 Note: 1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's Coffman Engineers, Inc.AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ASD Student Nutrition CenterDraft Energy Audit ReportStudent NutritionNatural 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 NGC374 Jan-09 12/30/08 02/02/09349,1589,158$9,237$1.01Enstar NGC374 Feb-09 02/02/09 02/27/09256,7406,740$6,825$1.01Enstar NGC374 Mar-09 02/27/09 04/01/09336,7146,714$6,790$1.01Enstar NGC374 Apr-09 04/01/09 04/29/09285,7675,767$5,848$1.01Enstar NGC374 May-09 04/29/09 06/01/09336,0166,016$6,090$1.01Enstar NGC374 Jun-09 06/01/09 06/30/09294,5394,539$4,619$1.02Enstar NGC374 Jul-09 06/30/09 07/31/09313,3653,365$3,440$1.02Enstar NGC374 Aug-09 07/31/09 08/31/09313,8413,841$3,917$1.02Enstar NGC374 Sep-09 08/31/09 09/30/09304,5744,574$4,652$1.02Enstar NGC374 Oct-09 09/30/09 10/29/09295,9055,905$5,991$1.01Enstar NGC374 Nov-09 10/29/09 11/30/09327,3217,321$7,403$1.01Enstar NGC374 Dec-09 11/30/09 12/31/09317,1967,196$6,018$0.84Enstar NGC374 Jan-10 12/31/09 02/01/10327,8157,815$6,527$0.84Enstar NGC374 Feb-10 02/01/10 03/01/10287,8007,800$6,516$0.84Enstar NGC374 Mar-10 03/01/10 04/01/10318,2978,297$6,993$0.84Enstar NGC374 Apr-10 04/01/10 04/30/10298,5828,582$7,234$0.84Enstar NGC374 May-10 04/30/10 05/27/10277,3347,334$6,199$0.85Enstar NGC374Jun-1005/27/1006/29/10334,0794,079$3,467$0.85Enstar NGC374Jun-1005/27/1006/29/10334,0794,079$3,467$0.85Enstar NGC374 Jul-10 06/29/10 07/29/10 30 3,7753,775$3,230$0.86Enstar NGC374 Aug-10 07/29/10 08/30/10324,3394,339$3,821$0.88Enstar NGC374 Sep-10 08/30/10 10/01/10325,1065,106$4,423$0.87Enstar NGC374 Oct-10 10/01/10 10/28/10275,9005,900$5,126$0.87Enstar NGC374 Nov-10 10/28/10 11/29/10326,4796,479$5,526$0.85Enstar NGC374 Dec-10 11/29/10 12/29/10308,4958,495$7,273$0.86Jan - 09 to Dec - 09 total:71,13671,1360$70,830$0Jan - 10 to Dec - 10 total:78,00178,0010$66,335$0$1.00$0.85Jan - 09 to Dec - 09 avg:Jan - 10 to Dec - 10 avg:Coffman Engineers, Inc.AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ASD Student Nutrition CenterDraft Energy Audit Report$4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000 4,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,00010,000Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Student Nutrition - Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) vs. Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Natural Gas Cost ($)Coffman Engineers, Inc.AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02$0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 01,0002,0003,000Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon - Yr)ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ASD Student Nutrition CenterDraft Energy Audit ReportStudent NutritionElectricityBtus/kWh =3,413Provider Customer # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (kWh) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Electric Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/kWh) Demand Cost ($)CEA 2732-40300460 Jan-09 12/30/2008 1/30/20093193,8503,203216.00 $13,641$0.15$2,397.60CEA 2732-40300460 Feb-09 1/30/2009 3/3/20093285,0502,903207.20 $12,106$0.14$2,300.00CEA 2732-40300460 Mar-09 3/3/2009 4/1/20092990,9113,103208.00 $12,526$0.14$2,308.80CEA 2732-40300460 Apr-09 4/1/2009 4/30/20092988,7613,029212.00 $12,198$0.14$2,353.20CEA 2732-40300460 May-09 4/30/2009 6/1/20093293,7753,201224.80 $12,724$0.14$2,495.30CEA 2732-40300460 Jun-09 6/1/2009 7/1/20093077,4202,642152.80 $8,882$0.11$1,696.10CEA 2732-40300460 Jul-09 7/1/2009 7/31/20093078,1652,668147.20 $8,869$0.11$1,633.90CEA 2732-40300460 Aug-09 7/31/2009 8/31/20093183,2802,842216.00 $10,052$0.12$2,397.60CEA 2732-40300460 Sep-09 8/31/2009 9/30/20093086,4802,952209.60 $9,898$0.11$2,429.30CEA 2732-40300460 Oct-09 9/30/2009 10/30/20093086,8502,964205.60 $9,961$0.11$2,382.90CEA 2732-40300460 Nov-09 10/30/2009 12/1/20093285,5002,918208.80 $9,647$0.11$2,420.00CEA 2732-40300460 Dec-09 12/1/2009 12/30/20092988,0553,005209.60 $9,246$0.11$2,429.20 CEA 2732-40300460 Jan-10 12/30/2009 1/29/20103091,9453,138200.00 $9,302$0.10$2,318.00CEA 2732-40300460 Feb-10 1/29/2010 3/2/20103283,3002,843203.20 $8,320$0.10$2,355.10CEA 2732-40300460 Mar-10 3/2/2010 4/1/20103089,5473,056204.80 $9,583$0.11$2,373.60CEA 2732-40300460 Apr-10 4/1/2010 5/3/20103290,6803,095213.60 $9,575$0.11$2,475.60CEA 2732-40300460 May-10 5/3/2010 6/2/20103088,2293,011204.00 $9,505$0.11$2,364.40CEA2732-40300460Jun-106/2/20107/1/20102971,9262,455156.00$7,332$0.10$1,808.00CEA2732-40300460Jun-106/2/20107/1/20102971,9262,455156.00$7,332$0.10$1,808.00CEA 2732-40300460 Jul-10 7/1/2010 8/2/20103274,9672,559162.40 $7,446$0.10$1,882.20CEA 2732-40300460 Aug-10 88,3603,016220.00 $9,207$0.10CEA 2732-40300460 Sep-10 85,9362,933220.00 $9,003$0.10CEA 2732-40300460 Oct-10 87,2392,977224.00 $9,043$0.10CEA 2732-40300460 Nov-10 85,6682,924224.00 $8,794$0.10CEA 2732-40300460 Dec-10 84,9602,900206.00 $8,680$0.10Jan - 09 to Dec - 09 total:1,038,09735,4302417.6$129,750$27,244Jan - 10 to Dec - 10 total:1,022,75734,9072438$105,790$15,577$0.12$0.10Jan - 09 to Dec - 09 avg:Jan - 10 to Dec - 10 avg:Coffman Engineers, Inc.AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ASD Student Nutrition CenterDraft Energy Audit Report$6,000$8,000$10,000$12,000$14,000$16,00030,00040,00050,00060,00070,00080,00090,000100,000Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Student Nutrition - Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Electric Cost ($)Coffman Engineers, Inc.AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02$0$2,000$4,000010,00020,00030,000Date (Mon - Yr)ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Appendix B AkWarm Commercial Reports ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 1/26/2012 12:21 PM General Project Information PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION Building: Student Nutrition Center Auditor Company: Coffman Engineers, Inc. Address: 1307 Labar Street Auditor Name: Walter Heins, PE, CCP, CxA, CEA City: Anchorage Auditor Address: 800 F Street Anchorage, AK 99501 Client Name: Calvin Mundt Client Address: 1301 Labar Street Anchorage, AK 99515 Auditor Phone: (907) 276-6664 Auditor FAX: (907) 276-5042 Client Phone: (907) 742-5213 Auditor Comment: Client FAX: Design Data Building Area: 48,075 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 2,647,768 Btu/hour with Distribution Losses: 3,068,777 Btu/hour Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and 25% Safety Margin: 4,678,014 Btu/hour Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load, if served. Typical Occupancy: 75 people Design Indoor Temperature: 66 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 - Sm Natural Gas Provider: Enstar Natural Gas – Commercial - Lg Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.110/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.920/ccf ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Annual Energy Cost Estimate Description Space Heating Space Cooling Water Heating Lighting Refrigeration Other Electrical Cooking Clothes Drying Ventilation Fans Service Fees Total Cost Existing Building $71,552 $0 $1,944 $18,046 $1,192 $40,895 $16,477 $519 $16,982 $0 $167,606 With Proposed Retrofits $66,388 $0 $1,940 $12,616 $1,192 $40,895 $16,477 $519 $16,982 $0 $157,010 SAVINGS $5,163 $0 $4 $5,430 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,597 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 $0$50,000$100,000$150,000$200,000Existing RetrofitNatural GasElectricityAnnual Energy Costs by Fuel ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Modeled Annual Consumption (Blue) compared to Actual Annual Consumption (Orange) ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Modeled Monthly Electricity Consumption (Blue) compared to Actual Monthly Electricity Consumption (Orange) ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Modeled Monthly Natural Gas Consumption (Blue) compared to Actual Natural Gas Consumption (Orange) ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Appendix C Major Equipment List ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORY TAG LOCATION FUNCTION MAKE MODELTYPE CAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZE ASHRAE SERVICE LIFE ESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFE NOTESB‐1 Boiler Rm Building & Process Heating Bryan RV‐350‐S‐150‐FDG Steam Flextube 3,500 MBH ≈ 80% 24 1 B‐2 Boiler Rm Building & Process Heating Bryan RV‐350‐S‐150‐FDG Steam Flextube 3,500 MBH ≈ 80% 24 1 B‐3 Boiler Rm Building & Process Heating Bryan RV‐350‐S‐150‐FDG Steam Flextube 3,500 MBH ≈ 80% 24 1 PMP‐1A,B Boiler Rm Heating Glycol Circ Paco Base Mounted 360 GPM 53 FT HD NEMA STANDARD 7.5 20 0 PMP‐2A,B, C,D Boiler Rm Boiler Condensate Feed Bell & Gossett 3540 Inline 20 GPM 45 PSIG NEMA STANDARD 3 10 0 PMP‐3A,B Boiler Rm Condensate A.O. Smith Condensate 20 GPM 15 PSIG NEMA STANDARD 1/2 15 0 PMP‐4A,B Boiler Rm Primary DHW Bell & Gossett Circulation 125 GPM 20 FT HD NEMA STANDARD 1/3 15 0 PMP‐5A,B Boiler Rm Secondary DHW Grundfos UPS 32‐80FB Inline 25 GPM 15 FT HD NEMA STANDARD 1/2 10 0 PMP‐6 Boiler Rm Glycol Feed Bell & Gossett Inline 10 GPM 35 PSIG NEMA STANDARD 1/3 10 0 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORY TAG LOCATION FUNCTION MAKE MODELTYPE CAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZE ASHRAE SERVICE LIFE ESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFE NOTESPMP‐7 Fuel Oil Tank Fuel Oil Transfer ‐ ‐ Submersible 30 GPM 48 FT HD NEMA STANDARD 1/3 10 0 PMP‐8 Warehouse Fire Pump Aurora Fire Pump 1500 GPM 40 FT HD NEMA STANDARD 50 20 0 PMP‐9 Warehouse Jockey Pump Aurora Jockey Pump 2.3 GPM 150 FT HD ‐ 3/4 10 0 PMP‐10 Fan Rm Subsoil Htg Grundfos Inline 75 GPM 30 FT HD ‐ 2 10 0 SF‐1 Fan Rm Kitchen Ventilation Pace B30 Supply Fan 39500 CFM 1.75 IN. WC. ‐ 25 + 5 25 1 SF‐2 Fan Rm Admin Ventilation Pace A‐16 Supply Fan 6300 CFM ‐ 5 25 1 SF‐3 Warehouse Office Warehouse Office Pace SCF Supply Fan 250 CFM 0.5 IN. WC. ‐ 1/6 25 1 SF‐4 Boiler Rm Ventilation Trane Cabinet Fan 8200 CFM 0.75 IN. WC ‐ 3 25 1 SF‐5 Boiler Rm Comb. Air Penn FD24W2 Prop Fan 4000 CFM 0.25 IN. WC. ‐ 1/2 15 0 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORY TAG LOCATION FUNCTION MAKE MODELTYPE CAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZE ASHRAE SERVICE LIFE ESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFE NOTESSF‐6 Fan Rm Vent Penn FB243 Prop 3000 CFM 0.5 In. WC. ‐ 3/4 15 0 SF‐7 Comp. Rm. Vent Pace SCF Cabinet Fan 2600 CFM 0.75 IN. WC. ‐ 1.5 25 1 SF‐8 Cart Storage Fan Coil Htg Pace SCF Cabinet Fan 2860 CFM 0.63 IN. WC. ‐ 3/4 25 1 EF‐1 Biolab Hood Exhaust Pace CRE Vert Discharge 750 CFM NEMA STANDARD 3/4 25 1 EF‐2 Test Kitchen Hood Exhaust Pace CRE Vert Discharge 1375 CFM NEMA STANDARD 1 25 1 EF‐3 Warehouse Toilet Exhaust Penn Z7 In‐Line 100 CFM NEMA STANDARD 1/2 25 1 EF‐4 Break & T. Rooms Exhaust Pace SCF Cabinet Fan 1750 CFM NEMA STANDARD 1/2 25 1 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORY TAG LOCATION FUNCTION MAKE MODELTYPE CAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZE ASHRAE SERVICE LIFE ESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFE NOTESEF‐5A, 5B Fan Rm Return Air Penn FB483 Prop 19000 CFM (total) NEMA STANDARD 3/4 15 0 EF‐6 Fan Rm Exhaust Penn P16 Direct Drive Prop 2800 CFM NEMA STANDARD 3/4 15 0 EF‐7 Fan Rm Flour Dust Exhaust Pace U‐18 Centrifugal 2800 CFM ‐ 3/4 25 1 HRU‐1 Roof Steam Kettle Exhaust Gaylord 12500‐100 Heat Recovery Unit 6250 CFM 675 MBH Gas 100% 2 x 5HP 25 1 HRU‐2 Roof Food Prep Hood Gaylord 7700‐100 Heat Recovery Unit 3850 CFM 416 MBH Gas 100% 2 HP, 3 HP 25 1 Oven Kitchen Food Process Rainier 3613 Food Process 225 MBH ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Oven Kitchen Food Process Rainier 4039 Revolving, Food Process 275 MBH ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORY TAG LOCATION FUNCTION MAKE MODELTYPE CAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZE ASHRAE SERVICE LIFE ESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFE NOTESDonut Fryer Kitchen Food Process Frymaster FPH Food Process 80 MBH ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Braising Pan Kitchen Food Process Market Forge 1300‐4 Food Process 120 MBH ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Clothes Dryer ‐ ‐ Cissel ‐ Gas 100 MBH ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Appendix D Energy Conservation Measures ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 1 Lighting: Restroom Replace with 2 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor and Improve Manual Switching $263 $450 9.00 1.7 2 Lighting: Exterior Lighting Add new Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control and Improve On/Off Photoswitch $624 $1,600 6.01 2.6 3 Lighting: Offices Add new Occupancy Sensor $26 $150 2.71 5.7 4 Lighting: Corridors Replace with FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic $21 $150 2.17 7.1 5 Lighting: Offices Replace with 39 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $963 $7,050 2.10 7.3 6 Lighting: Large Volume Office Replace with 24 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic $458 $3,600 1.96 7.9 7 Lighting: Low Use Office Replace with 2 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $49 $450 1.69 9.1 8 Lighting: Corridors Replace with 4 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $52 $600 1.33 11.5 9 Lighting: Food Prep Replace with 136 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $1,769 $20,400 1.33 11.5 10 Lighting: Food Prep Replace with 9 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $117 $1,350 1.33 11.5 11 Lighting: Low Use Office Replace with 11 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic $121 $1,650 1.11 13.6 12 Lighting: Restroom Replace with 6 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic $64 $900 1.09 14.2 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 13 Lighting: Exterior Lighitng Add new Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control $112 $1,600 1.07 14.3 14 Air Tightening Perform air sealing to reduce air leakage by 20%. $2,010 $18,000 1.01 9 15 Lighting: Restroom Replace with 2 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $13 $300 0.67 23 16 Lighting: Pantry and Freezer Replace with 9 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $59 $1,350 0.67 23.1 17 Cathedral Ceiling: Student Nutrition Center Install R-10 rigid board insulation. No cost included for covering insulation. $2,393 $81,363 0.65 34 18 HVAC And DHW Boiler efficiencies. Tune and clean the boilers so that they gain 2-3% in combustion efficiencies. $415 $15,000 0.49 36.2 19 Lighting: Exterior Lighting Replace with 11 LED 100W Module StdElectronic $316 $11,000 0.44 34.8 20 Lighting: Restroom Add new Occupancy Sensor $4 $150 0.41 37.2 21 Lighting: Mechanical and Utility Replace with 34 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $103 $5,100 0.31 49.4 22 Exterior Door: Exterior doors - 1/4 window Remove existing door and install standard pre-hung U-0.16 insulated door, including hardware. $11 $898 0.28 78.4 23 Window/Skylight: Exterior Not South Facing Replace existing window with U-0.30 vinyl window $183 $14,362 0.20 78.4 24 Window/Skylight: Exterior South Facing Replace existing window with U-0.30 vinyl window $122 $10,160 0.19 83.4 25 Lighting: Pantry and Freezer Replace with 23 LED 40W Module StdElectronic $199 $16,100 0.19 80.9 26 Lighting: Exterior Lighitng Replace with 5 LED 35W Module StdElectronic $61 $5,000 0.19 81.6 27 Garage Door: Warehouse loading doors Replace existing garage door with R-7, 2" polyurethane core replacement door. $42 $5,990 0.15 144.1 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 28 Exterior Door: Exterior doors - solid metal door Remove existing door and install standard pre-hung U-0.16 insulated door, including hardware. $29 $6,481 0.10 227.1 TOTAL $10,597 $231,204 0.73 21.8 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – ENERGY EFFICIENT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Building Envelope Insulation Rank Location Existing Type/R-Value Recommendation Type/R- Value Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 17 Cathedral Ceiling: Student Nutrition Center Framing Type: I-Beam (TJI) Framing Spacing: 16 inches Insulated Sheathing: EPS (Beadboard), 3 inches Bottom Insulation Layer: Loose Vermiculite, 1 inches Top Insulation Layer: Mineral Fiberboard, 1 inches Modeled R-Value: 19.8 Install R-10 rigid board insulation. No cost included for covering insulation. $81,363 $2,393 Exterior Doors – Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 22 Exterior Door: Exterior doors - 1/4 window Door Type: Metal - EPS insulation; quarter lit Modeled R-Value: 3.6 Remove existing door and install standard pre-hung U- 0.16 insulated door, including hardware. $898 $11 27 Garage Door: Warehouse loading doors Door Type: 1-1/2" metal clad- polystyrene core Insulating Blanket: None Modeled R-Value: 5.6 Replace existing garage door with R-7, 2" polyurethane core replacement door. $5,990 $42 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Exterior Doors – Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 28 Exterior Door: Exterior doors - solid metal door Door Type: Metal; EPS insulation Modeled R-Value: 5 Remove existing door and install standard pre-hung U- 0.16 insulated door, including hardware. $6,481 $29 Windows and Glass Doors – Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 23 Window/Skylight: Exterior Not South Facing Glass: Double, glass Frame: Aluminum w/ Thermal Break Spacing Between Layers: Half Inch Gas Fill Type: Air Modeled U-Value: 0.62 Solar Heat Gain Coefficient including Window Coverings: 0.46 Replace existing window with U-0.30 vinyl window $14,362 $183 24 Window/Skylight: Exterior South Facing Glass: Double, glass Frame: Aluminum w/ Thermal Break Spacing Between Layers: Half Inch Gas Fill Type: Air Modeled U-Value: 0.62 Solar Heat Gain Coefficient including Window Coverings: 0.46 Replace existing window with U-0.30 vinyl window $10,160 $122 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Air Leakage Rank Location Estimated Air Leakage Recommended Air Leakage Target Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 14 Air Tightness estimated as: 75000 cfm at 50 Pascals Perform air sealing to reduce air leakage by 20%. $18,000 $2,010 2. Mechanical Equipment Mechanical Rank Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 18 Boiler efficiencies. Tune and clean the boilers so that they gain 2-3% in combustion efficiencies. $15,000 $415 Setback Thermostat Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Ventilation Rank Recommendation Cost Annual Energy Savings ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 3. Appliances and Lighting Lighting Fixtures and Controls Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 1 Restroom 2 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard (2) Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 2 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor and Improve Manual Switching $450 $263 2 Exterior Lighting 11 HPS 200 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Add new Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control and Improve On/Off Photoswitch $1,600 $624 3 Offices 3 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic with Manual Switching Add new Occupancy Sensor $150 $26 4 Corridors FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard (2) Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic $150 $21 5 Offices 39 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard (2) Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 39 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $7,050 $963 6 Large Volume Office 24 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard (2) Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 24 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic $3,600 $458 7 Low Use Office 2 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard (2) Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 2 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $450 $49 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 3. Appliances and Lighting Lighting Fixtures and Controls Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 8 Corridors 4 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 4 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $600 $52 9 Food Prep 136 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 136 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $20,400 $1,769 10 Food Prep 9 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 9 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $1,350 $117 11 Low Use Office 11 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard (2) Magnetic with Manual Switching, Occupancy Sensor Replace with 11 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic $1,650 $121 12 Restroom 6 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard (2) Magnetic with Manual Switching, Occupancy Sensor Replace with 6 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Program StdElectronic $900 $64 13 Exterior Lighitng 5 HPS 70 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Add new Clock Timer or Other Scheduling Control $1,600 $112 15 Restroom 2 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching, Occupancy Sensor Replace with 2 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $300 $13 16 Pantry and Freezer 9 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 9 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $1,350 $59 19 Exterior Lighting 11 HPS 200 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 11 LED 100W Module StdElectronic $11,000 $316 ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 3. Appliances and Lighting Lighting Fixtures and Controls Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 20 Restroom FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic with Manual Switching Add new Occupancy Sensor $150 $4 21 Mechanical and Utility 34 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 34 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Program StdElectronic $5,100 $103 25 Pantry and Freezer 23 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 23 LED 40W Module StdElectronic $16,100 $199 26 Exterior Lighitng 5 HPS 70 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 5 LED 35W Module StdElectronic $5,000 $61 Refrigeration Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Other Electrical Equipment Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Cooking/Clothes Drying Rank Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Appendix E Site Visit Photos ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 1. Front Entrance 2. Loading Dock 3. Rooftop Heat Recovery Units ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 4. SF-1 5. SF-2 6. B-1, B-2, & B-3 7. Circulation pumps, Hot Water Tank 8. Fuel Oil Tank 9. Potable Water Storage Tank ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 10. Walk-In Freezer 11. Warehouse Freezer ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 Appendix F Thermographic Photos ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ASD Student Nutrition Center Coffman Engineers made miscellaneous thermographic images of the building using a FLIR T300 Infrared Camera. This is not a thermographic study, but rather just a few snapshots to illustrate easy- to-identify heat losses. Front Entrance & Office Windows. High heat loss through glazed finishes, as expected. Northeast corner of builing. Truss structure visible in infrared but not in visual due to higher heat losses through structural components. South side of building. Note the high heat loss at a building seam. Southwest corner of building. Boiler room doors are showing high amount of heat loss. ASD Student Nutrition Center Final Energy Audit Report Coffman Engineers, Inc. 6/11/2012 AkWarm No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-02 ASD Student Nutrition Center Coffman Engineers made miscellaneous thermographic images of the building using a FLIR T300 Infrared Camera. This is not a thermographic study, but rather just a few snapshots to illustrate easy- to-identify heat losses. West side at Loading Dock. High heat loss through overhead doors.