HomeMy WebLinkAboutCIRI-ANC-CAEC MOA Service High School 2012-EE
I
S
O
C
J
P
Investm
Service H
Owner: The M
Client: Alaska
June 7, 2012
Project # CIR
ment Gra
High Schoo
Municipality of
a Housing Fin
RI-ANC-CAEC
ade Ene
ol Pool
f Anchorage
nance Corpora
C-41
ergy Au
ation
udit
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 2 of 59
Project # CIRI-ANC-CAEC-41
Prepared for:
The Municipality of Anchorage
Service High School Pool
4477 Abbott Road
Anchorage, AK 99517
Audit performed by:
Energy Audits of Alaska
P.O. Box 220215
Anchorage, AK 98522
Contact: Jim Fowler, PE, CEA#1705
Jim@jim-fowler.com
206.954.3614
Prime Contractor:
Central Alaska Engineering Company
32215 Lakefront Drive
Soldotna, AK 99699
Contact: Jerry Herring, PE, CEA #1484
AKEngineers@starband.net
907.260.5311
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 3 of 59
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Executive Summary 5
2. Audit and Analysis Background 13
3. Acknowledgements 15
4. Building Description & Function 16
5. Historic Energy Consumption 19
6. Interactive Effects of Projects 19
7. Loan Program 19
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Photos 21
Appendix B: AkWarm-C Report 25
Appendix C: Equipment Schedules 30
Appendix D: Additional, Building-Specific EEM detail 34
Appendix E: Specifications supporting EEM’s 44
Appendix F: Benchmark Data 52
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 4 of 59
REPORT DISCLAIMERS
This audit was performed using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
funds, managed by the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC).
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. Energy Audits of Alaska, LLC and Central Alaska Engineering
Company bear 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, or 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 audit meets the criteria of an Investment Grade Audit (IGA) per the Association of
Energy Engineers definition, and is valid for one year. The life of the IGA may be
extended on a case-by-case basis, at the discretion of the AHFC.
IGA’s are the property of the State, and may be incorporated into AkWarm-C, the
Alaska Energy Data Inventory (ARIS), or other state and/or public information system.
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.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 5 of 59
1. Executive Summary
Building Owner:
Municipality of Anchorage
3640 East Tudor
Anchorage, AK 99507
Building contact:
Jeff Matthis
Pool Manager
907-343-4163
Alaska Housing Finance Corporation
P.O. Box 10120
Anchorage, AK 99510-1020
Contact: Rebekah Luhrs
Energy Specialist
907-330-8141
rluhrs@ahfc.us
Guidance to the reader:
The Executive Summary is designed to contain all the information the building
owner/operator should need to determine how the subject building’s energy
efficiency compares with other similar use buildings, which energy
improvements should be implemented, approximately how much they will cost
and their estimated annual savings. Sections 2 through 7 of this report, and the
Appendices, are back-up and provide much more detailed information, should
the owner/operator, or their staff, desire to investigate further.
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’s economy. The
audit and this report are pre-requisites to access AHFC’s Retrofit Energy
Assessment Loans (REAL) program, which is available to the building’s owner.
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 site visit to subject building occurred on March 10th, 2012.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 6 of 59
This building houses the Service High School pool, constructed adjacent to the
Service High School in 1982. In 1998 the roof was renovated, modifying the
cold roof to a cold attic on the sloped portions, in an attempt to correct
condensation and corrosion issues. In 2001 energy metering was added in
anticipation of pool management transfer to the Municipality of Anchorage
(MOA), and in 2009 the building was closed and a pool upgrade was
implemented including a new roof and lighting upgrade to T5 fixtures in the
natatorium.
The interior and exterior of this building are in very good condition.
Energy Consumption and Benchmark Data
This building, unlike the other MOA pools, has its own boilers. It is sub-metered
from the adjacent school for natural gas and electricity consumption and the
MOA is billed for monthly consumption. This monthly consumption and billing
history was provided to the auditor and was used as benchmark data; it can be
found in Appendix F. Benchmark utility data for 2009 and 2010 is summarized
in Tables 1 and 2 below.
Table 1
2009 2010
Consumption Cost Consumption Cost
Electricity ‐ kWh 449,347 $ 44,945 601,730 $ 44,493
Natural Gas ‐ CCF 43,406 $ 44,287 42,252 $ 36,322
Totals $ 89,232 $ 80,815
A benchmark measure of energy use relative to other similar function buildings
in the area is the Energy Use Index (EUI), which takes the total annual energy
used by the facility divided by the square footage area of the building, for a value
expressed in terms of kBTU/SF. This number can then be compared to other
buildings to see if it is average, higher or lower than similar buildings in the area.
Likewise, the Energy Cost Index (ECI) is the cost of all energy used by the
building expressed in $/SF of building area. Comparative values are shown in
Table 2 below.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 7 of 59
Table 2 – 2009 & 2010 Average EUI and ECI
Subject
Building
Bartlett
Pool
West High
Pool
Continental US
Average**
Energy Use Index (EUI) ‐
kBTU/SF 348 310 378 89‐102
Energy Cost Index (ECI) ‐
$/SF $4.87 $4.84 $4.44 ‐
** Pools are not tracked in the US Energy Administration database, these figures are for “Places
of Public Assembly”, which is the most relevant category tracked by the USEA.
As observed in Table 1 above, electricity usage between 2009 and 2010
increased by 33%, while the natural gas consumption was relatively unchanged.
This increased electrical consumption in 2010 (also observed in the monthly
consumption graphs found in Appendix F) is presumed to be a result of the
building closure during the summer months of 2009 while the pool, lighting and
roof upgrades were implemented.
Chart 1 below shows the subject building’s gas and electrical EUI compared to
similar use buildings in the area. Both the subject building and the Bartlett Pool
are standalone buildings, while the West High Pool is a part of the high school
(with only one exterior wall), hence the lower Gas (heating) EUI. Electrical
consumption is on par with the Bartlett pool and both are substantially lower
than the West High pool. This is attributed primarily to West High’s larger pool,
water slide and exterior lighting (Service Pool building has only three small
soffits lights on its exterior).
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Subject Building
Bartlett Pool
West High Pool
Natural Gas EUI
Electrical EUI
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 8 of 59
Various Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs) have been analyzed for this
building to determine if they would provide energy savings with reasonably good
payback periods. EEMs are recommended for reasons including:
1.) they have a reasonably good payback period
2.) for code compliance
3.) end of life (EOL) replacement
4.) reasons pertaining to efficient building management
strategy, operations, maintenance and/or safety
All the EEMs considered for this facility are detailed in the attached AkWarm-C
Energy Audit Report in Appendix B and in Appendix D. Each EEM includes
payback times, estimated installation costs and estimated energy savings.
The summary EEM’s that follow are the only EEM’s that are recommended
for this building. Others may have been considered but are not justified or
cost effective. The recommended EEM’s were selected based on consideration
from three perspectives: overall efficiency of building management, reduction in
energy consumption and return on investment (ROI).
Efficient building management dictates, as an example: that all lights be
upgraded, that lamp inventory variations be minimized and that all appropriate
rooms have similar occupancy controls and setback thermometers - despite the
fact that a single or several rooms may have an unjustifiably long payback on
their individual lighting or controls upgrade.
Some of the summary EEM’s below contain individual EEM’s that are grouped
by type (i.e. all relevant lighting upgrades are summed and listed as a single
upgrade, all thermostat setback retrofits are grouped together and listed as a
single upgrade, etc.) and are prioritized with the highest ROI (shortest payback)
listed first. Table 3 at the end of this section summarizes these EEM’s and
Appendix B (the AkWarm-C detailed report) and Appendix D provide additional
detail pertaining to each individual recommendation.
A.) SETBACK THERMOSTATS
The 24 volt, electronic HVAC control system in this building was
originally set up with a 7-day timer to reduce night time
temperatures in rooms other than the natatorium, from 80F to 60F.
It does not appear that the natatorium was programmed with, or is
currently using night time setbacks.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 9 of 59
It is recommended in item D below to add a DDC controls system.
This EEM further recommends programming the DDC system (or
the current system, if it has this capability) to utilize night time
setbacks of 55F for all rooms including the natatorium. It is also
recommended to replace the wall thermostats controlling the unit
heaters (UH’s) and cabinet unit heaters (CUH’s) in the stairwells
and vestibules with programmable thermostats with a 55F night
time setback temperature.
See Appendix D-5 for additional detail and discussion regarding
humidity control during night time setbacks. Appendix B-1 & B-3
are summed in this EEM.
Combined Setback Thermostat EEM’s:
Estimated cost (after DDC controls installed) $ 1,200
Annual Savings $ 2,406
Payback 6 months
B.) DE-STRATIFICATION FANS
In the natatorium, there was a measured temperature differential
between the thermostat sensors and the ceiling of 5F. Although
de-stratification fans will increase pool evaporation when
uncovered, it is still recommended to add them to the pool area.
See Appendix D-2 for more detail. The interaction of de-
stratification fans, humidity, space heating and pool heating are
discussed in Appendix D-5.
De-Stratification Fan EEM:
Estimated cost $ 4,800
Annual Savings $ 1,902
Payback 2.5 years
C.) REFRIGERATION AND REFRIGERATED VENDING
MACHINES
There is one full size, residential type refrigerator in this building, it
appears to be 10-15 years old, which means an Energy Star model
will be 30-50% more efficient. It is recommended to replace this
refrigerator at EOL with an Energy Star version.
Vending machines typically run regardless of usage and
occupancy. There is a device which, when retro-fitted to an
existing vending machine, cycles the compressor and machine
lights based on usage patterns and proximity sensors. This
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 10 of 59
“Vending Miser” typically saves 46% in energy consumption while
still maintaining cold beverages. See Appendix E and Appendix B-
4 and B-10.
Estimated incremental cost difference $ 475
Annual Savings $ 164
Payback 2.9 years
D.) POOL COVER
Evaporating water from a pool’s surface and the pool deck robs
heat from the pool water and deck, creating a heat load on the
boiler dedicated to pool heating in this building. It is recommended
to cover the pool during the 108 hrs/wk when it is not in use.
Manually operated, floating or vinyl pool covers are estimated to
cost $30,000 and provide a payback of 3.3 years. See Appendix
B-6 and D-4 for additional detail. The interaction of pool covers,
humidity, space heating and pool heating are discussed in
Appendix D-5.
Pool Cover EEM:
Estimated cost $36,000
Annual Savings $ 9,041
Payback 4 years
E.) HVAC SYSTEM
It is recommended to perform a systems level engineering
evaluation of the HVAC, HVAC controls, pool heating and
humidity aspects of this building and add a retrofitted DDC
control system to the building, as well as add variable
frequency drives (VFD’s) to the 25 HP supply and the 15 HP
return air motors in the large, east air handler unit (AHU-1). Some
engineering evaluation may have already been performed as part
of the 2008 renovation, but there are greater savings to be
obtained through more refined HVAC management. The longer
term recommendations resulting from the engineering would be
folded into MOA’s 5-10 year facility strategy, presumed to already
exist and the shorter term recommendations incorporated using
the REALS loan fund.
Integration and optimization of the HVAC systems addressing
space heating, pool water heating, humidity, temperature and
required air changes for occupant health is the objective of this
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 11 of 59
engineering evaluation. See Appendix D-5, D-6 and B-6 for
additional detail.
HVAC System combined EEM’s:
Estimated cost $62,083
Annual savings $14,132
Payback 4.4 years
F.) LIGHTING AND LIGHTING CONTROLS
The 2009 lighting upgrade only included the natatorium. It is
recommended to complete the upgrade in all rooms and spaces –
even though the paybacks on certain individual spaces are
unjustifiably long.
This EEM summarizes Appendix B-2, B-7 through 9 and B11
through 13. See Appendix E for more information on occupancy
sensors.
Combined Lighting Control EEM’s:
Estimated cost $ 37,124
Annual Savings $ 8,713
Payback 5.7 years
G.) MOTOR REPLACEMENTS
There are three motors in this building that are not premium
efficiency and are operating a sufficient number of hours to justify
immediate replacement with premium efficiency models. All
motors in this building, 5 HP and greater, are listed in Appendix D-
3. There is one additional motor that should be replaced with a
premium efficiency version at it’s EOL.
Motor replacement EEM:
Estimated cost to replace 3 motors $ 3,100
Annual Savings $ 534
Payback 5.8 years
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 12 of 59
A summary of the estimated cost totals and estimated annual savings
totals of the eight (A. through H.) summary EEM’s listed above, is found
in Table 3 below, and again at the end of Appendix B.
Table 3
Combined total of recommended EEM’s
summarized above:
Estimated total cost $ 144,782
Annual Savings $ 36,892
Simple payback 3.9 years
Does not include design or construction management costs
In addition to EEM’s, various Energy Conservation Measures (ECM’s) are
recommended. ECM’s are policies or procedures to be followed by
management and employees that require no capital outlay. Examples of
recommended ECMs for this facility include:
1. Turning lights off when leaving a room that is not controlled by an
occupancy sensor.
2. All man-doors, roll-up doors and windows should be properly
maintained and adjusted to close and function properly.
3. Turn off computers, printers, faxes, etc. when leaving the office.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 13 of 59
2. Audit and Analysis Background
Program Description: This audit included services to identify, develop, and
evaluate energy efficiency measures for the subject building. The scope of this
project included evaluating the building shell, lighting, hot water generation and
HVAC equipment. The auditor may or may not identify system deficiencies if
they exist. The auditor’s role is to identify areas of potential savings, many of
which may require more detailed investigation and analysis by other qualified
professionals.
a. Audit Description and Methodology: Preliminary audit information was
gathered in preparation for the site survey, including benchmark utility
consumption data, floor and lighting plans, and equipment schedules where
available. A site visit is then performed to inventory and evaluate the actual
building condition, including:
i. Building envelope (walls, doors, windows, etc)
ii. Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning
iii. Lighting systems and controls
iv. Building specific equipment
v. Plumbing Systems
b. Benchmark Utility Data Validation: Benchmark utility data provided
through AHFC’s initial phase of their REAL program is validated, confirming
that meter numbers on the subject building match the meters from which the
energy consumption and cost data were collected. If the data is inaccurate
or missing, new benchmark data is obtained. In the event that there are
inconsistencies or gaps in the data, the existing data is evaluated and
missing data points are interpolated.
c. Method of Analysis: The information gathered prior to the site visit and
during the site visit is entered into AkWarm-C, an energy modeling software
program developed specifically for AHFC to identify forecasted energy
consumption. The forecasts can then be compared to actual energy
consumption. AkWarm-C also has some pre-programmed EEM retrofit
options that can be analyzed with projected energy savings based on
occupancy schedules, utility rates, building construction type, building
function, existing conditions, and climatic data uploaded to the program
based on the zip code of the building. When new equipment is proposed,
energy consumption is calculated based on manufacturer’s cataloged
information.
Energy cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy costs for
the building. Installation costs include the labor and equipment required to
implement an EEM retrofit, but design and construction management costs
are excluded. Cost estimates are +/- 30% for this level of audit, and are
derived from one or more of the following: Means Cost Data, industry
publications, experience of the auditor, local contractors and/or equipment
suppliers. Brown Electric, Haakensen Electric, Proctor Sales, Pioneer Door,
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 14 of 59
and J.P. Sheldon, all in Anchorage, were consulted for some of the lighting,
boiler, overhead door and air handling (respectively) retrofit and/or
replacement costs. Maintenance savings are calculated, where applicable,
and are added to the energy savings for each EEM.
The costs and savings are considered and a simple payback period and ROI
is calculated. The simple payback period is based on the number of years
that it takes for the savings to pay back the net installation cost (Net
Installation costs divided by Net Savings.) In cases where the EEM
recommends replacement at EOL, the incremental cost difference between
the standard equipment in place, and the higher efficiency equipment being
recommended is used as the cost basis for payback calculation. The SIR
found in the AkWarm-C report is the Savings to Investment Ratio, defined as
the annual savings multiplied by the lifetime of the improvement, divided by
the initial installed cost. SIR’s greater than 1.0 indicate a positive lifetime
ROI.
The life-time for each EEM is entered into AkWarm-C; it is estimated based
on the typical life of the equipment being replaced or altered.
d. Limitations of the Study: All results are dependent on the quality of input
data provided, and may only act as an approximation. Most input data such
as building and equipment usage, occupancy hours and numbers, building
and HVAC operating hours, etc. was provided to the auditor by on site
personnel.
In some instances, several methods may achieve the identified savings.
This report is not a design document. A design professional, licensed to
practice in Alaska and in the appropriate discipline, who is following the
recommendations, shall accept full responsibility and liability for the results.
Budgetary estimates for engineering and design of these projects in not
included in the cost estimate for each EEM recommendation, but these costs
can be approximated at 15% of the cost of the work.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 15 of 59
3. Acknowledgements: We wish to acknowledge the help of numerous individuals
who have contributed information that was used to prepare this report, including:
a. Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (Grantor): AHFC provided the grant
funds, contracting agreements, guidelines, and technical direction for
providing the audits. AHFC reviewed and approved the final short list of
buildings to be audited based on the recommendation of the Technical
Service Provider (TSP).
b. The Municipality of Anchorage (Owner): MOA provided a review and brief
history of the benchmarked buildings, building selection criteria, building
plans, equipment specifications, building entry and coordination with on-site
personnel.
c. Central Alaska Engineering Company (Benchmark TSP): CAEC oversaw
the compilation of electrical and natural gas consumption data through their
subcontractor, Energy Audits of Alaska, LLC. CAEC also entered that data
into the statewide building database, called the Alaska Retrofit Information
System (ARIS). CAEC was awarded the auditing contract for this MOA
building.
d. Energy Audits of Alaska (energy auditor): This firm has been selected to
provide audits under this contract. The firm has two mechanical engineers,
certified as energy auditors and/or professional engineers and has also
received additional training from CAEC and other TSP’s to acquire further
specific information regarding audit requirements and potential EEM
applications.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 16 of 59
4. Building Description and Function:
The site visit and survey of subject building occurred on March 10th, 2012, the
ambient outside temperature was 27F.
The building’s first floor consists of the main pool or “deck” level which includes
the high bay natatorium, locker rooms, a reception office, several staff offices,
storage and the pool filter room. There are two small second floor rooms, one
contains the (3) boilers and a small AHU (SF-2), the other contains the large
AHU (AHU-1) and dehumidifier (DH).
The natatorium has approximately 11,120 square feet, while the offices, lockers
and other rooms add 4765 square feet and the second floor rooms add 1584
square feet, for a total building size of 17,469 square feet. These figures were
calculated from plans.
This building is constructed on a 4” reinforced concrete slab poured on grade.
The building structure consists of 8” concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls
supporting steel roof trusses and metal roof decking with 6” of rigid foam
insulation covered with 2” “lightguard” insulated ballast. Interior walls are painted
CMU. Exterior walls have 6” metal stud furring on the outside, filled with rigid
foam insulation, most of which (excepting a small “belt band”) is are finished with
a 2” decorative, structural insulated panel. Composite insulation values, as
calculated by AkWarm-C are: R-43 roof, R-27 walls R-6.7 floor perimeter and R-
35 floor center.
The only windows in this building are in the main entry and they are in very good
condition, aluminum frame and double pane.
Building details are as follows:
a. Heating System: Room heat is provided by (2) gas fired
Burnham cast iron sectional boilers, and pool water heating is
provided by a third, similar, smaller boiler. Heat is delivered
by hydronic finned tube baseboard radiators, cabinet and unit
heaters, the (2) air handlers and a heating ventilator in the
main lobby. Rooms with hydronic baseboards and heated
ventilation air have sensors providing temperature feedback
to the control system which is controlling zone valves for the
hydronics and/or air flow via dampers. End effectors are
pneumatic actuators. Fans are not variable speed, and there
does not appear to be variable air volume units in any rooms.
Spaces with cabinet or unit heaters have integral wall
mounted thermostats controlling the fan, the glycol is running
wild (i.e. no fluid control valve).
Energy Recovery and de-Humidification: There is a heat
recovery coil (HRC) in AHU-1, there does not appear to be
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 17 of 59
any other heat recovery. A small, desiccant type
dehumidifier (6.6 lbs/hr) with an electric re-activation heater is
located in the second floor fan room. It appears to be
controlled by a humidistat and its process outflow is ducted to
the RA duct of AHU-1.
The sequence of operations listed in building plans have
AHU-1 set to a minimum 10% OSA when running and SF-2 at
47% OSA when running. OSA is increased if inside relative
humidity exceeds 60%. It is not clear how this sequence was
altered when the dehumidifier was added in 2008.
b. Ventilation: Ventilation and make up air is provided by two
AHU’s, 5 exhaust fans and one ventilator.
c. Appliances: There is one residential type refrigerator in this
building. There are also a microwave and coffee maker on
the premises.
This building has 2 PC’s in use; it is generally recommended
to replace desktop PC’s with laptops (and secondary
monitors as desired) at EOL.
d. Plumbing Fixtures: This building contains a total of (6)
toilets, (3) urinals, (5) lavatory sinks with proximity sensing
valves and (1) with a manual valve, and (12) showers all with
manual valves. The toilets and urinals are manually operated
and appear to be post-1992, so consume 1.6 gpf (toilets) and
1 gpf (urinals) and 2.6 gpm (shower heads). See Appendix
D-1 for EEM recommendations.
e. Domestic Hot Water: Hot water for sinks and showers is
provided by two indirect, 80 gallon hot water generators
supplied with heat from boiler hydronics.
f. Interior Lighting & Controls: The natatorium lighting in this
building was upgraded to T5, high output, high bay fixtures in
2009. No other building lighting appears to have been
upgraded. There are no occupancy sensors in use.
Appendix B details completion of a full lighting upgrade. See
Appendix E for additional information on occupancy sensors.
All exit signs in the building are either LED, unlit or self
luminous
g. Exterior Lighting: There are three soffit lights on the exterior
of this building; they appear to use 50 watt high pressure
sodium bulbs.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 18 of 59
h. Building Shell: The building shell is described earlier; it
appears to be in good condition, inside and out.
i. Motors: There are 7 large (5 HP or larger) motors in use in
this building. They are listed and considered for replacement
with premium efficiency motors in Appendix D-3.
j. Pool water filtering: This pool uses Diatomaceous Earth as
a filter medium, utilizing a 20 HP filter pump and 7.5 HP
“trash” pump (used to backwash the filter periodically).
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 19 of 59
5. Historic Energy Consumption: Energy consumption is modeled within the
AkWarm-C program. The program typically analyzes twelve months of data.
Two year’s worth of natural gas and electricity consumption were averaged then
input into AKWarm-C. This monthly data is found in Appendix F.
Energy consumption was analyzed using two factors: the Energy Cost Index
(ECI) and the Energy Use Index (EUI). The energy cost index takes the annual
costs of natural gas and electrical energy over the surveyed period of time (two
years) divided by the square footage of the building. The ECI for this building is
$4.87/SF, the ECI for two similar buildings, the Bartlett High and West High
pools, are $4.84 and $4.44 respectively.
The energy use index (EUI) is the total annual average electrical and heating
energy consumption expressed in thousands of BTU/SF. The average of the
2009 and 2010 EUI for this building is 348 kBTU/SF; the average 2009/2010
EUI for the Bartlett High School pool is 310 kBTU/SF and 378 kBTU/SF for the
West High School pool. The average for Schools (pools are not tracked) across
the US varies from 89 to 102 kBTU/SF as logged by the US Energy Information
Administration. This source data can be viewed at:
www.eia.gov/emeu/efficiency/cbecstrends/cbecs_tables_list.htm.
6. Interactive Effects of Projects: The AkWarm-C program calculates savings
assuming that all recommended EEM are implemented in the order shown in
Appendix B. Appendix D EEM’s are not included in the AkWarm-C model. If
some EEMs are not implemented, savings for the remaining EEMs will be
affected, in some cases positively, and in others, negatively.
In general, all projects were evaluated sequentially so that energy savings
associated with one EEM would not be attributed to another EEM as well. By
modeling the recommended projects sequentially, the analysis accounts for
interactive effects between the EEMs and does not “double count” savings.
Interior lighting, plug loads, facility equipment, and occupants generate heat
within the building. When the building is in cooling mode, these contribute to the
overall cooling demands of the building; therefore lighting efficiency
improvements will reduce cooling requirements on air conditioned buildings.
Conversely, lighting efficiency improvements are anticipated to increase heating
requirements slightly. Heating penalties resulting from reductions in building
electrical consumption are included in the lighting analysis that is performed by
AkWarm-C.
7. Loan Program: The Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) Alaska
Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund (AEERLF) is a State of Alaska program
enacted by the Alaska Sustainable Energy Act (senate Bill 220, A.S. 18.56.855,
“Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund). The AEERLF will provide loans for
energy efficiency retrofits to public facilities via the Retrofit Energy Assessment
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 20 of 59
for Loan System (REAL). As defined in 15 AAC 155.605, the program may
finance energy efficiency improvements to buildings owned by:
a. Regional educational attendance areas;
b. Municipal governments, including political subdivisions of municipal
governments;
c. The University of Alaska;
d. Political subdivisions of the State of Alaska, or
e. The State of Alaska
Native corporations, tribal entities, and subsidiaries of the federal government
are not eligible for loans under this program.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 21 of 59
Appendix A - Photos
Main pool area, looking north
Diatomaceous Earth Filters
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 22 of 59
Dehumidifier in east fan room
Boiler room; 2 boilers shown are building heat, 2 hot water generators also
shown
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 23 of 59
Retrofitted (2009) HVAC controls
Lobby entry/reception
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 24 of 59
Aerial View of the subject building
Service Pool
(Subject Building)
Service High School
NORTH
Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Service High School Pool
Page 25
ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 6/7/2012 6:23 PM
General Project Information
PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION
Building: Service High School Pool Auditor Company: Energy Audits of Alaska
Address: 4477 Abbott Rd Auditor Name: James Fowler
City: Anchorage Auditor Address: 5935 Pioneer Park Pl
Langley, WA 98260
Client Name: Jeff Matthis
Client Address: 4477 Abbott Rd
Anchorage, AK 99517
Auditor Phone: (206) 954‐3614
Auditor FAX: ( ) ‐
Client Phone: (907) 343‐4163 Auditor Comment:
Client FAX:
Design Data
Building Area: 17,469 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 944,706
Btu/hour
with Distribution Losses: 1,049,674 Btu/hour
Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and
25% Safety Margin: 1,600,112 Btu/hour
Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load,
if served.
Typical Occupancy: 5 people Design Indoor Temperature: 80.6 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: $0.159/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.817/ccf
Annual Energy Cost Estimate
Description Space
Heating
Space
Cooling
Water
Heating Lighting Refrige
ration
Other
Electrical
Cooki
ng
Clothes
Drying
Ventilatio
n Fans
Service
Fees Total Cost
Existing
Building
$18,384 $0 $20,376 $14,169 $324 $46,666 $0 $0 $16,821 $1,973 $118,713
With
Proposed
Retrofits
$9,710 $0 $11,324 $6,178 $170 $46,098 $0 $0 $7,419 $1,973 $82,872
SAVINGS $8,674 $0 $9,052 $7,991 $155 $568 $0 $0 $9,401 $0 $35,841
Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Service High School Pool
Page 26
Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Service High School Pool
Page 27
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
1 Setback
Thermostat:
Natatorium
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 55.0 deg F for
the Natatorium space.
$2,070 $600 44.50 0.3
2 Lighting ‐ Controls
Retrofit:
Natatorium
lighting T5‐6‐HO,
add zone OS
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$2,209 $1,800 7.58 0.8
3 Setback
Thermostat:
Offices, lockers,
corridors,
mechanical and
storage rooms
Implement a Heating
Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 55.0 deg F for
the Offices, lockers,
corridors, mechanical and
storage rooms space.
$336 $600 7.23 1.8
4 Refrigeration ‐
Power Retrofit:
Full size
refrigerator
At EOL, Replace with
Energy Saver Model
$67 $75 5.50 1.1
5 (see
also
Appen
dix D‐
4)
Pool Cover Install manual pool cover
to reduce evaporative heat
losses during the 12
hrs/day pool is not in use,
estimated cost $36,000,
saves 50% evaporation
$9,041 $36,000 4.17 4
6
(see
also
Appen
dix D‐5
& D‐6)
HVAC and HVAC
Controls
Perform engineering
evaluation of HVAC system
@ $15,000; add DDC
controls @ $36,000;
reduce OSA to 15%;
replace humidistat with
dew point sensors @
$1500. Also included are
VFD's for AHU‐1 supply
and return air motors;
Yaskawa software
predicted 68% savings and
$9,583 cost.
$14,132 $62,083 2.76 4.4
Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Service High School Pool
Page 28
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
7 Lighting ‐
Combined Retrofit:
T8‐2lamp
At next building re‐lamp,
replace (4) T8‐32 watt
lamps with 4 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 28W Energy‐
Saver Instant StdElectronic
and Remove Manual
Switching and Add new
Occupancy Sensor
$94 $224 2.60 2.4
8 Lighting ‐
Combined Retrofit:
T12‐3lamp add OS
Replace with 17 FLUOR (3)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐
Saver lamps and Leviton
“Zipline” kit with Instant
start StdElectronic ballast
and Remove Manual
Switching and Add new
Occupancy Sensor
$1,088
+ $170 Maint.
Savings
$5,110 1.90 4.7
9 Lighting ‐
Combined Retrofit:
T12‐2lamp, add OS
Replace with 87 FLUOR (2)
T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy‐
Saver lamps and Leviton
“Zipline” kit with Instant
start StdElectronic ballast
and Remove Manual
Switching and Add new
Occupancy Sensor
$3,892
+ $870 Maint.
Savings
$23,140 1.59 5.9
10 Refrigeration ‐
Controls Retrofit:
Beverage vending
machine
Add VendingMiser;
www.vendingmiser.com
$90 $400 1.39 4.4
11 Lighting ‐ Power
Retrofit: Exterior
Lighting
Replace with 3 LED 72W
Module StdElectronic
$363
+ $1 Maint.
Savings
$6,000 0.71 16.5
12 Lighting ‐ Power
Retrofit: T12‐
2lamp x 24"
Replace with FLUOR T8 4'
F32T8 28W Energy‐Saver
Saver lamps and Leviton
“Zipline” kit with Instant
start StdElectronic ballast
$18
+ $10 Maint.
Savings
$650 0.36 36.9
13 Lighting ‐ Controls
Retrofit: CFL's, add
OS
Remove Manual Switching
and Add new Occupancy
Sensor
$5 $200 0.14 43.6
THE FOLLOWING EEM’S WERE CALCULATED OUTSIDE OF AkWARM-C. Savings will affect and
be affected by the EEM’s listed above, depending on their order of implementation.
Appendix B – AkWarm-C detailed report
Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison
AkWarm Commercial Audit Software
Service High School Pool
Page 29
PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Rank Feature Recommendation Annual Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
SIR Payback
(Years)
See
Appen
dix D‐1
Plumbing Fixtures:
(6) W.C., (6)
lavatories, (3)
urinals, (12)
showers
Replace urinal valves with
proximity sensing on/off
controls, replace urinals
with ultra‐low flow and
proximity sensing controls;
retrofit toilet valves with
2‐stage valves
See
Appen
dix D‐2
De‐Stratification
Fans
Install (4) de‐stratification
fans in pool area.
$1,902 $4,800 3.9 2.5
See
Appen
dix D‐3
Motor
replacements
Replace 3 motors with
premium efficiency motors
now, replace 3 motors
with premium efficiency
motors at EOL; see Table 4
in Appendix D‐3 for details.
$534 $3,100 3.4 5.8
TOTAL $35,841
+ $1,051 Maint.
Savings
$144,782 3.06 3.9
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
AkWarmCalc Ver 2.2.0.3, Energy Lib 3/1/2012
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 30 of 59
Appendix C – Equipment Schedules
ALL SCHEDULES COMPILED FROM ON‐SITE NAMEPLATE OBSERVATION, WHERE
ACCESSIBLE OTHERWISE PER PLANS e = ESTIMATED
AIR HANDLER SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL FAN CFM
MOTOR DATA
HP/VOLTS/PH/E
FFICIENCY REMARKS
AHU‐1 Scott Springfield model HQ‐280‐AHU‐
25000‐HR‐11
25,000 25/460/3
supply air fan
motor; AHU added
in 2003; serves
natatorium; located
in fan room
25,000 15/460/3 return air fan motor
SF‐2 Trane Torrivent TVDB‐17A or equivalent 9,800 5/460/3, 87.5% Fan room
RF‐2 Trane CBD‐10A 5,650 1.5/460/3
locker room return
air fan
VF‐1 Greenheck MSCF‐25‐B1‐4 800 .25/115/1
located in fan room
(per print)
DE‐HUMIDIFICATION SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MOTOR MFGR/MODEL CFM
MOTOR DATA
HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS
DH‐1 Innovative Air Technologies IAT‐300
300
process,
90
reactivati
on
6.9Kw/480/3
Located in fan room,
desiccant type,
electric reactivation
heater 19.5 MBH;
6.6 Lbs/hr water
removal @ 70F 50%
RH; dry process air
ducted to RA of SF‐1
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 31 of 59
EXHAUST FAN SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MOTOR MFGR/MODEL CFM
MOTOR DATA
HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS
EF‐1 Trane 16‐BI 1500 1/460/3
serves boys locker
room
EF‐2 Trane 16‐BI 1300 1/460/3
serves girls locker
room
EF‐3 New York Blower RFE‐160 300 .5/120/3
Chlorine room,
controlled by chlorine
detection system
EF‐4 Greenheck CE‐8‐A 300 .03/120/1 Electrical room
EF‐5 Greenheck CE‐12‐A 1500 .33/120/1 Filter room
PUMP SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL GPM
MOTOR DATA
HP/VOLTS/PH/E
FFICIENCY REMARKS
CP‐1 B&G Series 80, unknown motor 160 5/460/3
Glycol circ pump;
boiler room; running
continuously
CP‐2 B&G Series 80, Baldor motor 160 5/460/3; 82%
standby glycol circ
pump; boiler room
CP‐3 B&G Series 60; A.O. Smith motor 115 2/460/3
Pool water heating
circ pump; boiler
room; running
continuously
CP‐4 Grundfos UPS‐15‐55 20 58w/115/1 DHW circ pump
CP‐5 Baldor motor 720 20/460/3; 91%
Pool filter pump;
located in pool filter
room
CP‐6 Baldor motor 275
7.5/460/3;
88.5%
"trash pump" cleans
out pool filters
P‐7 Advantage Mfg 20 1.5/230/1 Chlorinator pump
P‐8 Paco SM 2011‐0 80 3/460/3 Sump pump
P‐9 Jacuzzi model 3JM 40 3/460/3 Pool vacuum pump
P‐10 B&G HV Booster 10 .17/115/3
glycol expansion tank
pump; located in
mechanical room
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 32 of 59
BOILER SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL CONTROLS
MOTOR DATA
HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS
B‐1 Burnham PF‐509 .5/115/1 1/115/1
1446 MBH input, 1257
MBH output, 87%
efficient, dual fuel;
PowerFlame burner
B‐2 Burnham PF‐509 .5/115/1 1/115/1
1446 MBH input, 1257
MBH output, 87%
efficient, dual fuel;
PowerFlame burner
B‐3 Burnham PF‐508 .5/115/1 1/115/1
1282 MBH input, 1114
MBH output, 87%
efficient, dual fuel;
PowerFlame burner;
used for pool water
heating
UNIT HEATER SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL CFM
MOTOR DATA
HP/VOLTS/PH REMARKS
UH‐1 Airtherm HRW‐27A; 15 MBH 591 .1/120/1e
Pool equipment
storage room
UH‐12 Sterling QUF‐75; gas fired, 75MBH 1000e .33/115/1
Gas fired , 81%
efficient, located in
boiler room
CUH‐1 Airtherm C12L‐2L‐41RC; 80.4 MBH 1200 .5/120/1 Main entry vestibule
CUH‐2 Airtherm ; 31.7 MBH 400 .1/115/1 North vestibule
CUH‐3 Airtherm ; 19 MBH 200 .1/115/1 chlorine room
CUH‐4 Airtherm ; 31.7 MBH 400 .1/115/1 West vestibule
CUH‐5 Airtherm ; 31.7 MBH 400 .1/115/1 East vestibule
HOT WATER GENERATOR SCHEDULE
SYMBOL MFGR/MODEL GALLONS SIZE REMARKS
HWG‐1 State Industries SBF80‐500 80 500 MBH
Indirect water
generator, located in
Boiler room
HWG‐2 State Industries SBF80‐500 80 500 MBH
Indirect water
generator, located in
Boiler room
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 33 of 59
PLUMBING FIXTURES
SYMBOL FIXTURE GPF QUANTITY REMARKS
W.C. 1.6 6 manually operated
Urinal 1 3 manually operated
Lavatory ‐ 1 manually operated
Lavatory ‐ 5 Proximity Sensor valve
Shower 2.6e 12 manually operated
LIGHTING SCHEDULE
FIXTURE TYPE DESCRIPTION LAMPS MOUNTING
NUMBER WATTS TYPE HEIGHT
Recess Can HPS ‐ Exterior, magnetic ballast 1 50e recess under soffit
T12‐2 Florescent, T12 lamps, magnetic ballast 2 40
surface
& recess ceiling
T12‐3 Florescent, T12 lamps, magnetic ballast 3 40 recess ceiling
T12‐2, 24"x24" Florescent, T12 lamps, magnetic ballast 2 40 surface ceiling
T8‐2 Florescent, T8 lamps, electronic ballast 2 32 surface ceiling
T5‐6
Florescent, T5 lamps, high output,
electronic ballast 6 54 surface ceiling
Recess Can Florescent, 2 tube plug‐in 1 32 recess ceiling
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 34 of 59
Appendix D
Additional, Building-Specific EEM details
Appendix D-1: Plumbing fixtures: All urinals should be retrofitted or be replaced
with ultra low flow models. Urinals and faucets should have proximity sensing on/off
controls. Manually flushed toilets should be retrofitted with dual flush valves (see
below). This audit does not include water usage and AkWarm-C does not allow for the
modeling of it, but a typical faucet retrofit will result in 30% water savings and will
payback in less than 3 years. Ultra low flow urinals (1 pint to ½ gallon per flush) can
save up to 66% of water used, and typically pay back within 3 years. Dual flush toilet
valves will typically pay back within 1-3 years, depending on usage. These payback
periods are reduced by 66% or more if the fixture is replaced at its EOL rather than
while it’s still functioning. For an EOL replacement, the cost used is the incremental
difference in cost between an ultra-low-flow fixture and a straight across replacement
with the same fixture.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 35 of 59
Appendix D-2: De-Stratification Fans: The high bay, natatorium (30’ ceilings) in this
building makes up approximately 65% of the total square footage and is estimated to
consume approximately 65% of the total heating costs, after pool heating is
subtracted. This is $11,889/year. The measured temperature differential between the
thermostats and the ceiling was 5F. Per the chart below, anticipated savings by
adding de-stratification fans should be 16%. This results in an annual savings of
$1,902. There will be some reduction in this savings due to the slightly higher
evaporation rate resulting from added air movement. Estimated cost to install a de-
strat fan over the pool is $1200 each; assuming 4 fans are appropriate (number,
location and size of fans must be determined by an engineer or fan vendor), total
costs are $4,800 and payback is 2.5 years.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 36 of 59
Appendix D-3: Motor replacements: It is generally recommended that all motors,
5HP or larger, operating for 1500 hrs or longer at continuous speed, be replaced at
EOL with premium efficiency motors. Motors operating for 5000 hours or more can
usually be replaced with premium efficiency motors prior to burn out, with a justifiable
payback of less than 7 years. Motors in this building, 5HP and larger, are listed below,
along with recommendations for cost effective replacement at burn-out and for
immediate replacement. There are three instances in this building of cost effective
motor replacement with premium efficiency motors, prior to burn out and one more that
should be replaced with a premium efficiency motor at EOL.
Table 4
Motor use
& location
(5 HP or
larger) HP/Volts/Ph
Existing
Efficiency
Premium
Efficiency
Estimated
annual
usage
(hrs)
Annual
Savings
Burn‐out
payback (yrs)
Replacemen
t payback
(yrs)
RECOMMENDED TO BE REPLACED NOW
CP‐1 5/460/3 e82% 88.50% 4380 $ 129.79 $200/1.2 $600/4.6
CP‐2 5/460/3 82.00% 88.50% 4380 $ 129.79 $200/1.2 $600/4.6
CP‐5 20/460/3 91.00% 93.00% 8760 $ 275.20 $500/1.8 $1900/6.9
RECOMMENDED TO BE REPLACED WITH PREMIUM EFFICIENCY MOTOR AT EOL
SF‐2
supply 5/460/3 87.5% 88.50% 4380 $ 18.80 $200/8 $600/31.9
CP‐6 7.5/460/3 88.50% 91.70% 120 $ 2.36 ‐ ‐
AHU‐1
Supply 25/460/3 e93% assumed to be premium efficiency
AHU‐1
Return 15/460/3 e93% assumed to be premium efficiency
Efficiency ratings at Full Load, per nameplate
e = estimated because nameplate not accessible or information not on nameplate
Payback figures based on power consumption at 66% of full load
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 37 of 59
Appendix D-4: Pool Evaporative Heat Load & Pool Covers: When water changes
state from a liquid to a gas during evaporation, it requires heat. The pool water
provides this heat, so it cools as water evaporates from the water surface and the pool
deck. Calculations estimate that 7040 gallons/day will evaporate from this pool,
creating an evaporative heat load (to maintain pool water temperature) of 228,000
BTU/hr or 2,004 MMBTU per year. This translates to $17,236/year in heating costs. If
a pool cover were installed during pool non-occupancy, it would save $9,041/year (per
AkWarm-C calculations, Appendix B-5, using a 50% reduction in evaporative heat
load). Estimated cost for a vinyl or floating pool cover is $30,000 and payback is 3.5
years. There are also powered pool covers that are closed or opened using motors
and cables or tracks. Estimated cost of purchase and installation of a powered pool
cover is $120,000, payback is 14 years and therefore not recommended. See
Appendix E for additional detail on pool covers.
Evaporated water also increases the moisture content of the air in the natatorium,
forcing the dehumidifier to work, and/or the HVAC system to continuously exhaust
moisture laden air, and heat fresh air. See D-5 below for further discussion regarding
the interaction between evaporation and humidification.
See Appendix B-6 for savings and cost estimates.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 38 of 59
Appendix D-5: Dehumidification, ventilation and space heating: Space heating,
ventilation, pool heating and humidity management are four HVAC factors tightly tied
together in a natatorium. Ideally, they are managed in an integrated fashion, so as to
maximize energy efficiency. In this building this does not appear to be the case. In
order to manage these factors in an integrated manner, it is recommended to add a
DDC control system.
Humidity management: Condensation seems to have been a recurring problem in this
building, and a leading contributor to two roof’s in less than 20 years. Condensation
occurs when the air temperature decreases sufficiently that it can no longer hold its
moisture in suspension. The moisture then deposits on surfaces, like “dew” on the
ground in evenings. The term “dew point” refers to the temperature at which the air
can no longer hold, and therefore deposits its moisture.
Direct condensation factors: Dew point depends primarily on the moisture content of
the air, called “relative humidity” (RH) and the air temperature. When the original
building HVAC was designed, engineers utilized OSA to manage inside RH by
modulating RA and OSA dampers to increase OSA when humidity was >60%. In 2008
a dehumidifier was added, allowing the building operator to control humidity directly,
rather than by managing OSA.
It is recommended to monitor dew point rather than humidity by using a dew point
sensor (see Appendix E for sample). When the natatorium inside temperature is 80F,
the dew point temperature can be allowed as high as 75F with no condensation, this is
an RH of 85%. The RH is being held at 60%, per current HVAC controls, this results in
a dew point is 60F. If the dew point was allowed to rise to 75F, the RH would be 85%
with no condensation. It is estimated that the outside RH in Anchorage is >60% for
most of the year (see Chart 2 below) and rarely above 85%, therefore there is a large
potential savings by managing to dew point rather than RH.
Chart 2
Source: NOAA National Data Center website
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Average Humidity Anchorage, AK ‐morning
Average Humidity…
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 39 of 59
By managing the natatorium’s air moisture content via a dew point sensor, the
dehumidifier’s use would probably be limited to removing moisture during the night time
setback.
Indirect condensation factors: Pool covers (see Appendix D-4) inhibit condensation by
reducing the amount of moisture evaporating into the air from the water’s surface.
They further reduce condensation indirectly by reducing the water cooling action
resulting from evaporation, maintaining a higher room temperature with less heating,
and thereby allowing a higher dew point without condensation.
In the AkWarm-C model for this building, OSA settings of 25% for AHU-1 and 50% for
SF-2 were used based on the sequence of operations found in plans, and in order to
reconcile the model’s predicted consumption with actual consumption. Code
requirements for ventilation in a pool translate to an approximate 10-15% OSA setting.
It is recommended to reduce OSA to a figure closer to code minimums,
estimated to be 10-15% OSA.
It is recommended to implement night time temperature setbacks of 55F in all
rooms including the natatorium. The DDC system will have to monitor day time inside
and outside humidity levels and temperatures, calculate dew points, and consider the 6
lb/hr maximum water removal capacity of the dehumidifier, and the pool cover per D-4
above should be implemented. If there is too much moisture in the day time air to allow
a night time setback of 55F in the natatorium (due to the DH’s limited capacity), the
DDC system may have to run the DH during the day, or increase the night time setback
higher than 55F.
The calculated savings from this EEM assumes D-4 (Pool cover) above has been
implemented.
Estimated cost and annual savings to implement these four EEM’s are all included in
Appendix B-7.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 40 of 59
Appendix D-6: Variable Frequency Drives (VFD’s) on AHU fan motors (included
in Appendix B-7): If outfitted with a VFD with a programmable input device (PID)
which responds to a process parameter such as duct pressure for an AHU or suction or
discharge pressure on a compressor, a motor has the capability to only produce
enough power to meet the demand. There is tremendous savings potential resulting
from the relationship between motor load required and resulting fluid or air flow (Affinity
Laws). As an example, if 100% of the air flow requires 100% motor’s horsepower, the
Affinity laws state that 70% of air (or fluid) flow requires only 34% of the horsepower.
By necessity, fan motors and pumps have to be sized for the worst case load scenario,
but under normal operating conditions (80-90% of the time), need only be operating at
30%-70% of their full load. VFD’s are recommended for larger, 3-phase motors that
are under varying load and duty cycles, such as air handlers and reciprocating
compressor motors.
The 25 HP supply fan and 15 HP return air fan motors in AHU-1 in this building
are recommended to be retro-fitted with VFD’s.
These motor loads and consumption were evaluated using software called, “Energy
Predictor”, provided by Yaskawa, a manufacturer of VFD’s; excerpts from the detailed
software reports are found below.
A 68% reduction in electrical consumption is predicted by the Yaskawa software; this
figure was input into AkWarm-C as a reduction in power consumption and is included in
Appendix B-7.
It is important to note that if other EEM’s are also incorporated, these savings will be
over-stated because they are based solely on the reduction in electrical consumption
resulting from the motor speed reduction. When a fan or compressor motor speed is
reduced, GPM or CFM is also reduced, so the motor will have to operate at slightly
higher load and speed to maintain building parameters, which will erode a small
percentage of the electrical savings. Neither the Yaskawa software or the AkWarm-C
software has the capability to calculate this iterative condition.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 41 of 59
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 42 of 59
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 43 of 59
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 44 of 59
Appendix E – Specifications supporting EEM’s
Lighting Controls
Occupancy sensors sense the presence of occupants, turn the lights on at a pre-
determined level, and then turn the lights off after a programmed time period of no
occupancy. Line of sight, motion sensing occupancy sensors can be installed in
existing duplex switch boxes, as well as on ceilings. Dual technology sensors are
typically ceiling mounted in rooms, lavatories, corridors, vehicle bays and storage areas
where obstacles may interfere with line-of-sight sensors. The second technology in
these sensors activates lighting based on sound or changes in position, and work even
when a person is fully obscured by an obstacle. Zoned occupancy controls are
typically recommended for long corridors, large vehicle bays and large storage areas
with multiple switches and lighting zones. Zoned controls are designed to activate and
de-activate lighting by zone, by row, or even by fixture, based on the location of the
occupant. Occupancy sensors can reduce power consumption by 25-60%. Paybacks
on occupancy sensors range from 1 to 5 years, depending on the light fixture
consumption and occupancy of the room.
Lighting Management Systems (LMS) today have the capability to manage lighting
based on a wide variety of parameters including building usage, daylight conditions and
occupancy. They are retro-fittable, and can be stand alone or integrated into a
building’s HVAC DDC control system. Additionally, they can be easily re-configured
as a building’s usage or occupancy pattern changes.
Sample LMS systems and a sample high bay occupancy sensor (which could be used
for zone lighting control) follow.
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 45 of 59
Appendix E – Lighting Controls
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 46 of 59
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 47 of 59
Appendix E
Dew Point Sensor
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 48 of 59
Appendix E
Dew Point Sensor
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 49 of 59
Appendix E – Pool Covers, manual and automatic
www.poolcovers.com
Other manual, floating or vinyl covers, with our without power drive storage
systems.
www.lincolnaquatics.com
www.poolcovers.com
www.theaquamatic.com
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 50 of 59
Appendix E – Vendingmiser
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 51 of 59
Appendix E – T12 to T8 retrofit kit with integral electronic ballast – Leviton
“Zipline”
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 52 of 59
Appendix F – Benchmark Data
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
0.000
10000.000
20000.000
30000.000
40000.000
50000.000
60000.000
Jan‐09Mar‐09May‐09Jul‐09Sep‐09Nov‐09Jan‐10Mar‐10May‐10Jul‐10Sep‐10Nov‐10Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Date (Mon ‐Yr)
Service High School Pool ‐Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($)
Electric Consumption (kWh)
Electric Cost ($)
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
$8,000
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
Jan‐09Mar‐09May‐09Jul‐09Sep‐09Nov‐09Jan‐10Mar‐10May‐10Jul‐10Sep‐10Nov‐10Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr)
Service High School Pool ‐Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) vs. Cost ($)
Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)
Natural Gas Cost ($)
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 53 of 59
REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form
PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION
Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date (mm/dd/yyyy)
MOA Municipal
Government/Subdivision
03/10/12
Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage
Service High School Pool 17,469
Building Type Community Population Year Built
261,500
Facility Address Facility City Facility Zip
4477 Abbott Rd Anchorage 99517
Contact Person
First Name Last Name Middle Name Email Phone
Cindy Liggett liggettck@muni.org
907‐343‐4599
Mailing Address City State Zip
PO Box 196650
Primary
Operating
Hours
Monday‐
Friday
Saturday Sunday Holidays
Average # of
Occupants
During
Operating
Hours
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 54 of 59
Service High School Pool
Buiding Size Input (sf) = 17,469
2009 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 43,406.00
2009 Natural Gas Cost ($) 44,287
2009 Electric Consumption (kWh) 449,347
2009 Electric Cost ($) 44,945
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 ($) 0.00
2009 Total Energy Use (kBtu) 5,874,221
2009 Total Energy Cost ($) 89,232
Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI)
2009 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 248.5
2009 Electricity (kBtu/sf) 87.8
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
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 55 of 59
2009 Energy Utilization Index
(kBtu/sf) 336.3
Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI)
2009 Natural Gas Cost Index
($/sf) 2.54
2009 Electric Cost Index
($/sf) 2.57
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
($/sf) 0.00
2009 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)5.11
2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 42,252.00
2010 Natural Gas Cost ($) 36,322
2010 Electric Consumption (kWh) 601,730
2010 Electric Cost ($) 44,493
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 ($) 0
2010 Total Energy Use (kBtu) 6,278,905
2010 Total Energy Cost ($) 80,815
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 56 of 59
Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI)
2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 241.9
2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf) 117.6
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 Energy Utilization Index
(kBtu/sf) 359.4
Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI)
2010 Natural Gas Cost Index
($/sf) 2.08
2010 Electric Cost Index
($/sf) 2.55
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
($/sf) 0.00
20010 Energy Cost Index
($/sf) 4.63
Note:
1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's
1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's
1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 57 of 59
Natural Gas
Btus/CC
F =100,000
Provider Customer #
Mont
h
Start
Date End Date
Billi
ng
Day
s
Consumpt
ion (CCF)
Consumpt
ion
(Therms)
Natural
Gas
Cost ($)
Unit
Cost
($/Ther
m)
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Jan‐
09
12/15/2
008
1/15/20
09 31 5761 5761 $5,838 $1.01
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Feb‐
09
1/15/20
09
2/18/20
09 34 6860 6860 $6,940 $1.01
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Mar‐
09
2/18/20
09
3/18/20
09 28 5768 5768 $5,845 $1.01
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Apr‐
09
3/18/20
09
4/21/20
09 34 5485 5485 $5,562 $1.01
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
May‐
09
4/21/20
09
5/18/20
09 27 1839 1839 $1,907 $1.04
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Jun‐
09
5/18/20
09
6/18/20
09 31 66 66 $130 $1.97
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG Jul‐09 6/18/20
09
7/21/20
09 33 12 12 $76 $6.33
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Aug‐
09
7/21/20
09
8/19/20
09 29 284 284 $349 $1.23
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Sep‐
09
8/19/20
09
9/18/20
09 30 4338 4338 $4,415 $1.02
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Oct‐
09
9/18/20
09
10/19/2
009 31 4050 4050 $4,127 $1.02
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Nov‐
09
10/19/2
009
11/17/2
009 29 4498 4498 $4,575 $1.02
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Dec‐
09
11/17/2
009
12/15/2
009 28 4445 4445 $4,523 $1.02
Enstar
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Jan‐
10
12/15/2
009
1/19/20
10 35 6068 6068 $5,084 $0.84
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Feb‐
10
1/19/20
10
2/17/20
10 29 4525 4525 $3,807 $0.84
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Mar‐
10
2/17/20
10
3/17/20
10 28 3589 3589 $3,033 $0.85
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Apr‐
10
3/17/20
10
4/20/20
10 34 3947 3947 $3,363 $0.85
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
May‐
10
4/20/20
10
5/17/20
10 27 2908 2908 $2,495 $0.86
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Jun‐
10
5/17/20
10
6/17/20
10 31 2714 2714 $2,334 $0.86
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG Jul‐10 6/17/20
10
7/16/20
10 29 1447 1447 $2,110 $1.46
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Aug‐
10
7/16/20
10
8/19/20
10 34 2386 2386 $2,020 $0.85
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Sep‐
10
8/19/20
10
9/20/20
10 32 2748 2748 $2,310 $0.84
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 58 of 59
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Oct‐
10
9/20/20
10
10/15/2
010 25 3000 3000 $2,451 $0.82
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Nov‐
10
10/15/2
010
11/15/2
010 31 3675 3675 $3,005 $0.82
Enstar
Pool_Metering.
SR_WG
Dec‐
10
11/15/2
010
12/14/2
010 29 5245 5245 $4,310 $0.82
Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total: 43,406 43,406 $44,28
7
Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total: 42,252 42,252 $36,32
2
Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09
avg: $1.56
Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10
avg: $0.89
Electric
ity
Btus/kW
h =3,413
Provider Customer #
Mont
h
Start
Date
End
Date
Billi
ng
Days
Consumpt
ion (kWh)
Consumpt
ion
(Therms)
Electri
c Cost
($)
Unit
Cost
($/kW
h)
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Jan‐
09 1/109
2/1/200
9 31 56305.750
1921.7152
48
$6,29
7 $0.11
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Feb‐
09
2/1/200
9
3/1/200
9 28 50399.500
1720.1349
35
$5,63
7 $0.11
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Mar‐
09
3/1/200
9
4/1/200
9 31 55205.000
1884.1466
5
$6,17
4 $0.11
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Apr‐
09
4/1/200
9
5/1/200
9 30 45424.250
1550.3296
53
$5,08
0 $0.11
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
May‐
09
5/1/200
9
6/1/200
9 31 14888.250
508.13597
25
$1,66
5 $0.11
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Jun‐
09
6/1/200
9
7/1/200
9 30 7682.500
262.20372
5 $859 $0.11
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG Jul‐09
7/1/200
9
8/1/200
9 31 6743.500
230.15565
5 $591 $0.09
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Aug‐
09
8/1/200
9
9/1/200
9 31 22978.250
784.24767
25
$2,01
4 $0.09
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Sep‐
09
9/1/200
9
10/1/20
09 30 45778.750
1562.4287
38
$4,01
2 $0.09
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Oct‐
09
10/1/20
09
11/1/20
09 31 51137.750
1745.3314
08
$4,48
2 $0.09
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Nov‐
09
11/1/20
09
12/1/20
09 30 46875.500
1599.8608
15
$4,10
8 $0.09
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Dec‐
09
12/1/20
09
1/1/201
0 31 45928.000
1567.5226
4
$4,02
5 $0.09
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Jan‐
10
1/1/201
0
2/1/201
0 31 48827.250
1666.4740
43
$3,55
6 $0.07
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Feb‐
10
2/1/201
0
3/1/201
0 28 45200.750
1542.7015
98
$3,29
2 $0.07
ENERGY AUDITS OF ALASKA SERVICE HIGH SCHOOL POOL
June 7, 2012 Page 59 of 59
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Mar‐
10
3/1/201
0
4/1/201
0 31 52878.500
1804.7432
05
$3,85
1 $0.07
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Apr‐
10
4/1/201
0
5/1/201
0 30 51785.500
1767.4391
15
$4,01
5 $0.08
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
May‐
10
5/1/201
0
6/1/201
0 31 52135.750
1779.3931
48
$4,04
2 $0.08
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Jun‐
10
6/1/201
0
7/1/201
0 30 48671.000
1661.1412
3
$3,77
4 $0.08
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG Jul‐10
7/1/201
0
8/1/201
0 31 49296.000
1682.4724
8
$3,57
6 $0.07
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Aug‐
10
8/1/201
0
9/1/201
0 31 51238.500
1748.7700
05
$3,71
6 $0.07
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Sep‐
10
9/1/201
0
10/1/20
10 30 48322.000
1649.2298
6
$3,50
5 $0.07
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Oct‐
10
10/1/20
10
11/1/20
10 31 50045.000
1708.0358
5
$3,64
3 $0.07
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Nov‐
10
11/1/20
10
12/1/20
10 30 50615.000
1727.4899
5
$3,68
5 $0.07
Chugach
Pool_Metering.SR
_WG
Dec‐
10
12/1/20
10
1/1/201
1 31 52715.000
1799.1629
5
$3,83
8 $0.07
Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09 total: 449347 15336.213
11
$44,9
45
Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10 total: 601730.25 20537.053
43
$44,4
93
Jan ‐ 09 to Dec ‐ 09
avg: $0.10
Jan ‐ 10 to Dec ‐ 10
avg: $0.07