Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CIRI-ENA-CAEC Kenai City Hall 2012-EE
ENERGY AUDIT REPORT City of Kenai – City Hall 210 Fidalgo Avenue Kenai, Alaska 99611 CAEC Project No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 May 2012 SUBMITTED BY: PRIMARY CONTACT: 22010 SE 51st Street 32266 Lakefront Drive Issaquah, WA 98029 Soldotna, Alaska 99669 Phone (425)281‐4706 Fax (425)507‐4350 Phone (907) 260‐5311 Fax (907) 260‐5312 Email: andrew.waymire@siemens.com Email: akengineer@starband.net CONTACT: Andrew Waymire, C.E.M. CONTACT: Jerry P. Herring, P.E., C.E.A. 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. 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. 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. Siemens Industry, Inc (SII) 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. SII 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 3-10 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. Table of Contents REPORT DISCLAIMER.....................................................................................................................................2 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................................................4 2. AUDIT AND ANALYSIS BACKGROUND.......................................................................................................6 3. City Hall‐Overview.....................................................................................................................................9 4. ENERGY COST SAVING MEASURES..........................................................................................................17 Appendix A – Major Equipment List ...........................................................................................................24 Appendix B – Partial Lighting Inventory......................................................................................................24 Appendix C – Utility Data............................................................................................................................25 Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 4 of 32 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report was prepared for the City of Kenai using ARRA funds as part of a contract for: City of Kenai Alaska Housing Finance Corporation Contact: Rick R. Koch Contact: Rebekah Luhrs 210 Fidalgo Avenue P.O. Box 10120 Kenai, Alaska 99611 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Phone (907) 283‐8222 Phone (907)330‐8141 Email: rkoch@ci.kenai.ak.us Email: rluhrs@ahfc.us The scope of the audit focused on City Hall. The scope of this report is a comprehensive energy study, which included an analysis of building shell, interior and exterior lighting systems, HVAC systems, and plug loads. Based on electricity and fuel oil prices in effect at the time of the audit, the annual predicted energy costs for the buildings analyzed are as follows: $18,778 for Electricity $9,008 for Natural Gas The total energy costs are $27,785 per year. Table 1.1 below summarizes the energy efficiency measures analyzed for the City Hall. Listed are the estimates of the annual savings, installed costs, and two different financial measures of investment return. Table 1.1 PRIORITY LIST – ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR1 Simple Payback (Years)2 1 Lighting: Exterior Replace with 8 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W $90 $416 1.38 4.6 TOTAL, cost-effective measures $90 $416 1.38 4.6 The following measures were not found to be cost-effective: 2 Above-Grade Wall: Part of ground & 1st floor minus windows/doors Install R-10 rigid foam board to exterior. Costs do not include siding. $81 $2,098 0.85 25.9 3 Lighting: 1st Floor Replace with 19 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 20W $129 $988 0.83 7.7 4 Exterior Door: Other Exterior Doors Remove existing door and install standard pre-hung U- 0.16 insulated door, including hardware. $89 $3,162 0.62 35.5 Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 5 of 32 Table 1.1 PRIORITY LIST – ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR1 Simple Payback (Years)2 5 Cathedral Ceiling: Roof Install R-10 rigid board insulation. No cost included for covering insulation. $271 $10,245 0.59 37.8 6 Lighting: 2nd floor Replace with 7 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W $43 $520 0.53 12.0 7 Lighting: Exterior Replace with 3 LED 60W Module StdElectronic $94 $1,170 0.52 12.4 8 Exterior Door: 2 Main Glass Doors Remove existing door and install standard pre-hung U- 0.16 insulated door, including hardware. $39 $2,108 0.40 54.7 9 Below- (part or all) Grade Wall: Ground Floor Wall Install R-10 rigid foam board to interior or exterior side of wall. Does not include cost of coverings. $77 $4,226 0.40 55.1 10 Lighting: 1st Floor Replace with 2 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W $6 $104 0.38 16.9 11 On- or Below-Grade Floor, Center: Ground Floor Install R-5 insulation on center of basement floor $71 $4,641 0.34 65.5 12 Window/Skylight: Windows Around Building Install single pane storm window on exterior $914 $50,040 0.29 54.7 13 Lighting: 1st Floor Replace with 25 FLUOR (3) Circline 6.5" FC6T9 20W StdElectronic $171 $4,550 0.24 26.7 14 HVAC And DHW Condensing gas boilers, hydronic flush $1,404 $90,862 0.24 64.7 15 Lighting: 2nd floor Replace with 42 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W High Lumen (3100 lum) (2) Instant StdElectronic $237 $10,551 0.14 44.5 16 Setback Thermostat: Office Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 65.0 deg F for the Office space. $550 $91,778 0.08 166.7 TOTAL, all measures $4,266 $277,459 0.22 65.0 Table Notes: 1 Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) is a life‐cycle cost measure calculated by dividing the total savings over the life of a project (expressed in today’s dollars) by its investment costs. The SIR is an indication of the profitability of a measure; the higher the SIR, the more profitable the project. An SIR greater than 1.0 indicates a cost‐effective project (i.e. more savings than cost). Remember that this profitability is based on the position of that Energy Efficiency Measure (EEM) in the overall list and assumes that the measures above it are implemented first. 2 Simple Payback (SP) is a measure of the length of time required for the savings from an EEM to payback the investment cost, not counting interest on the investment and any future changes in energy prices. It is calculated by dividing the investment cost by the expected first‐year savings of the EEM. Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 6 of 32 With all of these energy efficiency measures in place, the annual utility cost can be reduced by $4,266 per year, or 15.4% of the buildings’ total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $277,459, for an overall simple payback period of 65.0 years. If only the cost‐effective measures are implemented, the annual utility cost can be reduced by $90 per year, or 0.3% of the buildings’ total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $416, for an overall simple payback period of 4.6 years. Table 1.2 below is a breakdown of the annual energy cost across various energy end use types, such as Space Heating and Water Heating. The first row in the table shows the breakdown for the building as it is now. The second row shows the expected breakdown of energy cost for the building assuming all of the retrofits in this report are implemented. Finally, the last row shows the annual energy savings that will be achieved from the retrofits. Table 1.2 Annual Energy Cost Estimate Description Space Heating Space Cooling Water Heating Lighting Refrigera tion Other Electrical Cooking Clothes Drying Ventilatio n Fans Service Fees Total Cost Existing Building $17,60 0 $0 $1,521 $1,756 $0 $1,042 $0 $0 $5,229 $637 $27,785 With All Proposed Retrofits $15,21 7 $0 $606 $787 $0 $1,042 $0 $0 $5,229 $637 $23,519 SAVINGS $2,383 $0 $915 $968 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,266 2. AUDIT AND ANALYSIS BACKGROUND 2.1 Program Description This audit included services to identify, develop, and evaluate energy efficiency measures at the City Hall. The scope of this project included evaluating building shell, lighting and other electrical systems, and HVAC equipment, motors and pumps. Measures were analyzed based on life‐cycle‐cost techniques, which include the initial cost of the equipment, life of the equipment, annual energy cost, annual maintenance cost, and a discount rate of 3.0%/year in excess of general inflation. 2.2 Audit Description Preliminary audit information was gathered in preparation for the site survey. The site survey provides critical information in deciphering where energy is used and what opportunities exist within a building. The entire site was surveyed to inventory the following to gain an understanding of how each building operates: • Building envelope (roof, windows, etc.) • Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment (HVAC) • Lighting systems and controls Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 7 of 32 • Building‐specific equipment • Water consumption, treatment (optional) & disposal The building site visit was performed to survey all major building components and systems. The site visit included detailed inspection of energy consuming components. Summary of building occupancy schedules, operating and maintenance practices, and energy management programs provided by the building manager were collected along with the system and components to determine a more accurate impact on energy consumption. Details collected from City Hall enable a model of the building’s energy usage to be developed, highlighting the building’s total energy consumption, energy consumption by specific building component, and equivalent energy cost. The analysis involves distinguishing the different fuels used on site, and analyzing their consumption in different activity areas of the building. City Hall is classified as being made up of the following activity areas: 1) Office: 12,464 square feet In addition, the methodology involves taking into account a wide range of factors specific to the building. These factors are used in the construction of the model of energy used. The factors include: • Occupancy hours • Local climate conditions • Prices paid for energy 2.3. Method of Analysis Data collected was processed using AkWarm© Energy Use Software to estimate energy savings for each of the proposed energy efficiency measures (EEMs). The recommendations focus on the building envelope; HVAC; lighting, plug load, and other electrical improvements; and motor and pump systems that will reduce annual energy consumption. EEMs are evaluated based on building use and processes, local climate conditions, building construction type, function, operational schedule, existing conditions, and foreseen future plans. Energy savings are calculated based on industry standard methods and engineering estimations. Our analysis provides a number of tools for assessing the cost effectiveness of various improvement options. These tools utilize Life‐Cycle Costing, which is defined in this context as a method of cost analysis that estimates the total cost of a project over the period of time that includes both the construction cost and ongoing maintenance and operating costs. Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) = Savings divided by Investment Savings includes the total discounted dollar savings considered over the life of the improvement. When these savings are added up, changes in future fuel prices as projected by the Department of Energy are included. Future savings are discounted to the present to account for the time‐value of money (i.e. money’s ability to earn interest over time). The Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 8 of 32 Investment in the SIR calculation includes the labor and materials required to install the measure. An SIR value of at least 1.0 indicates that the project is cost‐effective—total savings exceed the investment costs. Simple payback is a cost analysis method whereby the investment cost of a project is divided by the first year’s savings of the project to give the number of years required to recover the cost of the investment. This may be compared to the expected time before replacement of the system or component will be required. For example, if a boiler costs $12,000 and results in a savings of $1,000 in the first year, the payback time is 12 years. If the boiler has an expected life to replacement of 10 years, it would not be financially viable to make the investment since the payback period of 12 years is greater than the project life. The Simple Payback calculation does not consider likely increases in future annual savings due to energy price increases. As an offsetting simplification, simple payback does not consider the need to earn interest on the investment (i.e. it does not consider the time‐value of money). Because of these simplifications, the SIR figure is considered to be a better financial investment indicator than the Simple Payback measure. Measures are implemented in order of cost‐effectiveness. The program first calculates individual SIRs, and ranks all measures by SIR, higher SIRs at the top of the list. An individual measure must have an individual SIR>=1 to make the cut. Next the building is modified and re‐ simulated with the highest ranked measure included. Now all remaining measures are re‐ evaluated and ranked, and the next most cost‐effective measure is implemented. AkWarm goes through this iterative process until all appropriate measures have been evaluated and installed. It is important to note that the savings for each recommendation is calculated based on implementing the most cost effective measure first, and then cycling through the list to find the next most cost effective measure. Implementation of more than one EEM often affects the savings of other EEMs. The savings may in some cases be relatively higher if an individual EEM is implemented in lieu of multiple recommended EEMs. For example implementing a reduced operating schedule for inefficient lighting will result in relatively high savings. Implementing a reduced operating schedule for newly installed efficient lighting will result in lower relative savings, because the efficient lighting system uses less energy during each hour of operation. If multiple EEM’s are recommended to be implemented, AkWarm calculates the combined savings appropriately. Cost savings are calculated based on estimated initial costs for each measure. Installation costs include labor and equipment to estimate the full up‐front investment required to implement a change. Costs are derived from Means Cost Data, industry publications, and local contractors and equipment suppliers. 2.4 Limitations of Study All results are dependent on the quality of input data provided, and can only act as an approximation. In some instances, several methods may achieve the identified savings. This report is not intended as a final design document. The design professional or other persons following the recommendations shall accept responsibility and liability for the results. Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 9 of 32 3. City HallOverview (Photo From Google Maps) 3.1. Building Description The 12,464 square foot City Hall was constructed in 1968, with a normal occupancy of 100 people. The number of hours of operation for this building average 6.4 hours per day, considering all seven days of the week. Description of Heating and Cooling Plants The Heating Plants used in the building are: Burnham Corporation K‐5010 Nameplate Information: Burnham Corporation Boiler No. K‐5010 SN 7684801 Fuel Type: Natural Gas Input Rating: 488,700 BTU/hr Steady State Efficiency: 85 % Idle Loss: 1.5 % Heat Distribution Type: Water Boiler Operation: All Year Cab Unit Heater Fuel Type: Natural Gas Input Rating: 28,000 BTU/hr Steady State Efficiency: 85 % Idle Loss: 1.5 % Heat Distribution Type: Air Hw heater Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 10 of 32 Fuel Type: Electricity Input Rating: 0 BTU/hr Steady State Efficiency: 90 % Idle Loss: 5 % Heat Distribution Type: Water Boiler Operation: All Year Space Heating and Cooling Distribution Systems The boiler supplies hot water to the convector, and H&V unit through a circulating pump. The Cabinet Unit Heater has its own dedicated heat. The building does not have cooling, but utilizes ventilation from the H&V unit. Domestic Hot Water System Domestic hot water is created by the main heating boilers via a heat exchanger located in the domestic water tank. A dedicated fractional horsepower circulating pump moves water from the primary heating loop into the domestic water heat exchanger. Description of Building Ventilation System The building utilizes a large H&V unit as well as smaller exhaust fans for building exhaust and ventilation. Lighting A majority of the building is lit using T12 lamps and incandescent. Exterior lighting consists of high wattage high pressure sodium’s and incandescent bulbs. This provides good retrofit opportunity. Plug Loads Plug loads consist primarily of computer usage. Major Equipment The equipment list, available in Appendix A, is composed of major energy consuming equipment which through energy conservation measures could yield substantial energy savings. The list shows the major equipment in the building and pertinent information utilized in energy savings calculations. Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 11 of 32 3.2 Predicted Energy Use 3.2.1 Energy Usage / Tariffs The electric usage profile charts (below) represents the predicted electrical usage for the building. If actual electricity usage records were available, the model used to predict usage was calibrated to approximately match actual usage. The electric utility measures consumption in kilowatt‐hours (kWh) and maximum demand in kilowatts (kW). One kWh usage is equivalent to 1,000 watts running for one hour. One KW of electric demand is equivalent to 1,000 watts running at a particular moment. The basic usage charges are shown as generation service and delivery charges along with several non‐utility generation charges. The natural gas usage profile shows the predicted natural gas energy usage for the building. If actual gas usage records were available, the model used to predict usage was calibrated to approximately match actual usage. Natural gas is sold to the customer in units of 100 cubic feet (CCF), which contains approximately 100,000 BTUs of energy. The propane usage profile shows the propane usage for the building. Propane is sold by the gallon or by the pound, and its energy value is approximately 91,800 BTUs per gallon. The fuel oil usage profile shows the fuel oil usage for the building. Fuel oil consumption is measured in gallons. One gallon of #1 Fuel Oil provides approximately 132,000 BTUs of energy. The following is a list of the utility companies providing energy to the building and the class of service provided: Electricity: Homer Electric Assn (Homer) ‐ Commercial ‐ Sm Natural Gas: Enstar Natural Gas ‐ Commercial ‐ Sm The average cost for each type of fuel used in this building is shown below in Table 3.1. This figure includes all surcharges, subsidies, and utility customer charges: Table 3.1 – Average Energy Cost Description Average Energy Cost Electricity $ 0.1384/kWh Natural Gas $ 0.71/ccf 3.2.1.1 Total Energy Use and Cost Breakdown At current rates, City of Kenai pays approximately $27,785 annually for electricity and other fuel costs for the City Hall. Figure 3.1 below reflects the estimated distribution of costs across the primary end uses of energy based on the AkWarm© computer simulation. Comparing the “Retrofit” bar in the Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 12 of 32 figure to the “Existing” bar shows the potential savings from implementing all of the energy efficiency measures shown in this report. Figure 3.1 Annual Energy Costs by End Use $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 Existing Retrofit Service Fees Ventilation and Fans Space Heating Other Electrical Lighting Domestic Hot Water Annual Energy Costs by End Use Figure 3.2 below shows how the annual energy cost of the building splits between the different fuels used by the building. The “Existing” bar shows the breakdown for the building as it is now; the “Retrofit” bar shows the predicted costs if all of the energy efficiency measures in this report are implemented. Figure 3.2 Annual Energy Costs by Fuel Type $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 Existing Retrofit Natural Gas Electricity Annual Energy Costs by Fuel Figure 3.3 below addresses only Space Heating costs. The figure shows how each heat loss component contributes to those costs; for example, the figure shows how much annual space heating cost is caused by the heat loss through the Walls/Doors. For each component, the space heating cost for the Existing building is shown (blue bar) and the space heating cost assuming all retrofits are implemented (yellow bar) are shown. Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 13 of 32 Figure 3.3 Annual Space Heating Cost by Component The tables below show AkWarm’s estimate of the monthly fuel use for each of the fuels used in the building. For each fuel, the fuel use is broken down across the energy end uses. Note, in the tables below “DHW” refers to Domestic Hot Water heating. Electrical Consumption (kWh) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Other_Electrical 1863 1698 1863 1803 1863 1803 1863 1863 1803 1863 1803 1863 Lighting 1927 1756 1927 1865 1927 1865 1927 1927 1865 1927 1865 1927 Ventilation_Fans 883 805 883 854 883 854 883 883 854 883 854 883 DHW 1655 1508 1655 1602 1655 1602 1655 1655 1602 1655 1602 1655 Space_Heating 5566 5072 5566 5387 5566 5387 5566 5566 5387 5566 5387 5566 Space_Cooling 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Natural Gas Consumption (ccf) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec DHW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Space_Heating 1928 1534 1429 929 614 284 211 240 491 1051 1463 1897 Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 14 of 32 3.2.2 Energy Use Index (EUI) Energy Use Index (EUI) is a measure of a building’s annual energy utilization per square foot of building. This calculation is completed by converting all utility usage consumed by a building for one year, to British Thermal Units (Btu) or kBtu, and dividing this number by the building square footage. EUI is a good measure of a building’s energy use and is utilized regularly for comparison of energy performance for similar building types. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Buildings Technology Center under a contract with the U.S. Department of Energy maintains a Benchmarking Building Energy Performance Program. The ORNL website determines how a building’s energy use compares with similar facilities throughout the U.S. and in a specific region or state. Source use differs from site usage when comparing a building’s energy consumption with the national average. Site energy use is the energy consumed by the building at the building site only. Source energy use includes the site energy use as well as all of the losses to create and distribute the energy to the building. Source energy represents the total amount of raw fuel that is required to operate the building. It incorporates all transmission, delivery, and production losses, which allows for a complete assessment of energy efficiency in a building. The type of utility purchased has a substantial impact on the source energy use of a building. The EPA has determined that source energy is the most comparable unit for evaluation purposes and overall global impact. Both the site and source EUI ratings for the building are provided to understand and compare the differences in energy use. The site and source EUIs for this building are calculated as follows. (See Table 3.4 for details): Building Site EUI = (Electric Usage in kBtu + Gas Usage in kBtu + similar for other fuels) Building Square Footage Building Source EUI = (Electric Usage in kBtu X SS Ratio + Gas Usage in kBtu X SS Ratio + similar for other fuels) Building Square Footage where “SS Ratio” is the Source Energy to Site Energy ratio for the particular fuel. Table 3.4 City Hall EUI Calculations Energy Type Building Fuel Use per Year Site Energy Use per Year, kBTU Source/Site Ratio Source Energy Use per Year, kBTU Electricity 135,613 kWh 462,847 3.340 1,545,910 Natural Gas 12,637 ccf 1,263,673 1.047 1,323,066 Total 1,726,521 2,868,976 BUILDING AREA 12,464 Square Feet BUILDING SITE EUI 139 kBTU/Ft²/Yr BUILDING SOURCE EUI 230 kBTU/Ft²/Yr * Site ‐ Source Ratio data is provided by the Energy Star Performance Rating Methodology for Incorporating Source Energy Use document issued March 2011. Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 15 of 32 3.3 AkWarm© Building Simulation An accurate model of the building performance can be created by simulating the thermal performance of the walls, roof, windows and floors of the building. The HVAC system and central plant are modeled as well, accounting for the outside air ventilation required by the building and the heat recovery equipment in place. The model uses local weather data and is trued up to historical energy use to ensure its accuracy. The model can be used now and in the future to measure the utility bill impact of all types of energy projects, including improving building insulation, modifying glazing, changing air handler schedules, increasing heat recovery, installing high efficiency boilers, using variable air volume air handlers, adjusting outside air ventilation and adding cogeneration systems. For the purposes of this study, the City Hall was modeled using AkWarm© energy use software to establish a baseline space heating and cooling energy usage. Climate data from Kenai was used for analysis. From this, the model was be calibrated to predict the impact of theoretical energy savings measures. Once annual energy savings from a particular measure were predicted and the initial capital cost was estimated, payback scenarios were approximated. Equipment cost estimate calculations are provided in Appendix C. Limitations of AkWarm© Models • The model is based on typical mean year weather data for Kenai. This data represents the average ambient weather profile as observed over approximately 30 years. As such, the gas and electric profiles generated will not likely compare perfectly with actual energy billing information from any single year. This is especially true for years with extreme warm or cold periods, or even years with unexpectedly moderate weather. Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 16 of 32 Figure 3.4 Difference in Weather Data Kenai, AK Weather Data -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 8/25/2009 10/14/2009 12/3/2009 1/22/2010 3/13/2010 5/2/2010 6/21/2010 8/10/2010 9/29/2010 11/18/2010 1/7/2011 DateDry Bulb Temperature (F)Actual Dry Bulb (F)TMY3 Dry Bulb (F) • The heating and cooling load model is a simple two‐zone model consisting of the building’s core interior spaces and the building’s perimeter spaces. This simplified approach loses accuracy for buildings that have large variations in cooling/heating loads across different parts of the building. • The model does not model HVAC systems that simultaneously provide both heating and cooling to the same building space (typically done as a means of providing temperature control in the space). The energy balances shown in Section 3.1 were derived from the output generated by the AkWarm© simulations. Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 17 of 32 4. ENERGY COST SAVING MEASURES 4.1 Summary of Results The energy saving measures are summarized in Table 4.1. Please refer to the individual measure descriptions later in this report for more detail. Calculations and cost estimates for analyzed measures are provided in Appendix C. Table 4.1 City Hall, Kenai, Alaska PRIORITY LIST – ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR Simple Payback (Years) 1 Lighting: Exterior Replace with 8 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W $90 $416 1.38 4.6 TOTAL, cost-effective measures $90 $416 1.38 4.6 The following measures were not found to be cost-effective: 2 Above-Grade Wall: Part of ground & 1st floor minus windows/doors Install R-10 rigid foam board to exterior. Costs do not include siding. $81 $2,098 0.85 25.9 3 Lighting: 1st Floor Replace with 19 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 20W $129 $988 0.83 7.7 4 Exterior Door: Other Exterior Doors Remove existing door and install standard pre-hung U- 0.16 insulated door, including hardware. $89 $3,162 0.62 35.5 5 Cathedral Ceiling: Roof Install R-10 rigid board insulation. No cost included for covering insulation. $271 $10,245 0.59 37.8 6 Lighting: 2nd floor Replace with 7 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W $43 $520 0.53 12.0 7 Lighting: Exterior Replace with 3 LED 60W Module StdElectronic $94 $1,170 0.52 12.4 8 Exterior Door: 2 Main Glass Doors Remove existing door and install standard pre-hung U- 0.16 insulated door, including hardware. $39 $2,108 0.40 54.7 9 Below- (part or all) Grade Wall: Ground Floor Wall Install R-10 rigid foam board to interior or exterior side of wall. Does not include cost of coverings. $77 $4,226 0.40 55.1 10 Lighting: 1st Floor Replace with 2 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W $6 $104 0.38 16.9 11 On- or Below-Grade Floor, Center: Ground Floor Install R-5 insulation on center of basement floor $71 $4,641 0.34 65.5 12 Window/Skylight: Windows Around Building Install single pane storm window on exterior $914 $50,040 0.29 54.7 13 Lighting: 1st Floor Replace with 25 FLUOR (3) Circline 6.5" FC6T9 20W StdElectronic $171 $4,550 0.24 26.7 14 HVAC And DHW Condensing gas boilers, hydronic flush $1,404 $90,862 0.24 64.7 Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 18 of 32 Table 4.1 City Hall, Kenai, Alaska PRIORITY LIST – ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR Simple Payback (Years) 15 Lighting: 2nd floor Replace with 42 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W High Lumen (3100 lum) (2) Instant StdElectronic $237 $10,551 0.14 44.5 16 Setback Thermostat: Office Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 65.0 deg F for the Office space. $550 $91,778 0.08 166.7 TOTAL, all measures $4,266 $277,459 0.22 65.0 4.2 Interactive Effects of Projects The savings for a particular measure are calculated assuming all recommended EEMs coming before that measure in the list are implemented. If some EEMs are not implemented, savings for the remaining EEMs will be affected. For example, if ceiling insulation is not added, then savings from a project to replace the heating system will be increased, because the heating system for the building supplies a larger load. In general, all projects are evaluated sequentially so energy savings associated with one EEM would not also be attributed to another EEM. By modeling the recommended project sequentially, the analysis accounts for interactive affects among 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 items contribute to the overall cooling demands of the building; therefore, lighting efficiency improvements will reduce cooling requirements in air‐conditioned buildings. Conversely, lighting‐efficiency improvements are anticipated to slightly increase heating requirements. Heating penalties and cooling benefits were included in the lighting project analysis. Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 19 of 32 4.3 Building Shell Measures 4.3.1 Insulation Measures Rank Location Existing Type/R‐Value Recommendation Type/R‐Value 11 On‐ or Below‐Grade Floor, Center: Ground Floor Center Insulation: None Modeled R‐Value: 35.5 Install R‐5 insulation on center of basement floor Installation Cost $4,641 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)30 Energy Savings (/yr) $71 Breakeven Cost $1,566 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback yrs 66 Auditors Notes: Rank Location Existing Type/R‐Value Recommendation Type/R‐Value 9 Below‐ (part or all) Grade Wall: Ground Floor Wall Wall Type: Strapped Masonry Insul. Sheathing: R‐8 Batt:FG or RW, 2.5 inches Masonry Wall: 8" Poured Concrete Framed Wall: 2 x 2, 16" on center R‐4 Batt:FG or RW, 1.25 inches Modeled R‐Value: 17.4 Install R‐10 rigid foam board to interior or exterior side of wall. Does not include cost of coverings. Installation Cost $4,226 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)30 Energy Savings (/yr) $77 Breakeven Cost $1,695 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 55 Auditors Notes: Rank Location Existing Type/R‐Value Recommendation Type/R‐Value 5 Cathedral Ceiling: Roof Framing Type: Standard Framing Spacing: 24 inches Insulated Sheathing: Polyurethane (PLUR), 2.25 inches Bottom Insulation Layer: Mineral Fiberboard, 2 inches Top Insulation Layer: None Modeled R‐Value: 22.1 Install R‐10 rigid board insulation. No cost included for covering insulation. Installation Cost $10,245 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)30 Energy Savings (/yr) $271 Breakeven Cost $5,996 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.6 Simple Payback yrs 38 Auditors Notes: Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 20 of 32 4.3.2 Window Measures 4.3.3 Door Measures Rank Location Existing Type/R‐Value Recommendation Type/R‐Value 2 Above‐Grade Wall: Part of ground & 1st floor minus windows/doors Wall Type: Single Stud Siding Configuration: Siding and Sheathing Insul. Sheathing: R‐4 Batt:FG or RW, 2.5 inches Structural Wall: 2 x 8, 24 inches on center Polyurethane (PLUR), 0.25 inches Window and door headers: Insulated Modeled R‐Value: 10 Install R‐10 rigid foam board to exterior. Costs do not include siding. Installation Cost $2,098 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)30 Energy Savings (/yr) $81 Breakeven Cost $1,794 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.9 Simple Payback yrs 26 Auditors Notes: Rank Location Size/Type, Condition Recommendation 12 Window/Skylight: Windows Around Building Glass: Double, glass Frame: Aluminum w/ Thermal Break Spacing Between Layers: Quarter Inch Gas Fill Type: Air Modeled U‐Value: 0.67 Solar Heat Gain Coefficient including Window Coverings: 0.46 Install single pane storm window on exterior Installation Cost $50,040 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)20 Energy Savings (/yr) $914 Breakeven Cost $14,693 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback yrs 55 Auditors Notes: Rank Location Size/Type, Condition Recommendation 8 Exterior Door: 2 Main Glass Doors Door Type: Fiberglass/PU half lite Modeled R‐Value: 3.2 Remove existing door and install standard pre‐hung U‐0.16 insulated door, including hardware. Installation Cost $2,108 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)30 Energy Savings (/yr) $39 Breakeven Cost $852 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 55 Auditors Notes: Rank Location Size/Type, Condition Recommendation 4 Exterior Door: Other Exterior Doors Door Type: Metal ‐ urethane, no therm. break Modeled R‐Value: 2.5 Remove existing door and install standard pre‐hung U‐0.16 insulated door, including hardware. Installation Cost $3,162 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)30 Energy Savings (/yr) $89 Breakeven Cost $1,969 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.6 Simple Payback yrs 36 Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 21 of 32 4.4 Mechanical Equipment Measures 4.4.1 Heating/Cooling/Domestic Hot Water Measure 4.4.2 Ventilation System Measures (There were no improvements in this category) 4.4.3 Night Setback Thermostat Measures Auditors Notes: Rank Recommendation 14 Condensing gas boilers, hydronic flush Installation Cost $90,862 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)20 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,404 Breakeven Cost $21,621 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.2 Simple Payback yrs 65 Auditors Notes: Rank Building Space Recommendation 16 Office Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 65.0 deg F for the Office space. Installation Cost $91,778 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)15 Energy Savings (/yr) $550 Breakeven Cost $7,005 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.1 Simple Payback yrs 167 Auditors Notes: Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 22 of 32 4.5 Electrical & Appliance Measures 4.5.1 Lighting Measures The goal of this section is to present any lighting energy conservation measures that may also be cost beneficial. It should be noted that replacing current bulbs with more energy‐efficient equivalents will have a small effect on the building heating and cooling loads. The building cooling load will see a small decrease from an upgrade to more efficient bulbs and the heating load will see a small increase, as the more energy efficient bulbs give off less heat. 4.5.1a Lighting Measures – Replace Existing Fixtures/Bulbs4.5.1a Lighting Measures – Replace Existing Fixtures/Bulbs Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 15 2nd floor 42 FLUOR T12 4' F48T12/HO 55W Energy‐Saver (2) StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 42 FLUOR T8 4' F32T8 32W High Lumen (3100 lum) (2) Instant StdElectronic Installation Cost $10,551 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)7 Energy Savings (/yr) $237 Breakeven Cost $1,504 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.1 Simple Payback yrs 44 Auditors Notes: Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 13 1st Floor 25 FLUOR (3) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 25 FLUOR (3) Circline 6.5" FC6T9 20W StdElectronic Installation Cost $4,550 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)7 Energy Savings (/yr) $171 Breakeven Cost $1,082 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.2 Simple Payback yrs 27 Auditors Notes: Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 10 1st Floor 2 INCAN A Lamp, Std 40W with Manual Switching Replace with 2 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W Installation Cost $104 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)7 Energy Savings (/yr) $6 Breakeven Cost $39 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 17 Auditors Notes: Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 23 of 32 Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 7 Exterior 3 HPS 150 Watt StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 3 LED 60W Module StdElectronic Installation Cost $1,170 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)7 Energy Savings (/yr) $94 Breakeven Cost $603 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.5 Simple Payback yrs 12 Auditors Notes: Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 6 2nd floor 7 INCAN Reflector, Std 65W BR30 with Manual Switching Replace with 7 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W Installation Cost $520 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)7 Energy Savings (/yr) $43 Breakeven Cost $274 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.5 Simple Payback yrs 12 Auditors Notes: Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 3 1st Floor 19 INCAN A Lamp, Halogen 75W with Manual Switching Replace with 19 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 20W Installation Cost $988 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)7 Energy Savings (/yr) $129 Breakeven Cost $817 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 0.8 Simple Payback yrs 8 Auditors Notes: Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 1 Exterior 8 INCAN Reflector, Halogen 50W PAR20 with Manual Switching Replace with 8 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W Installation Cost $416 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)7 Energy Savings (/yr) $90 Breakeven Cost $573 Savings‐to‐Investment Ratio 1.4 Simple Payback yrs 5 Auditors Notes: Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 24 of 32 Appendix A – Major Equipment List MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORYTag Location Function Make Model Type Capacity (input) EfficiencyMotorAshrae Service LifeEstimated Remaining Life NotesBoiler Mech Room Bldg Heat Burnham K-5010Nat Gas/ Water 488,700 Btuh 80% est n/a 20Convector Bldg Heat Vulcan Hot Water 720 Btuh 75% est n/a 20Cab Unit Heater Bldg Heat Airtherm Hot Water 28,000Btuh 75% est .16hp 20Circ Pump Bldg Heat B&G Centrifugal 25gpm 85% est .16hp 20Circ Pump Bldg Heat B&G Centrifugal 35gpm 85% est .25hp 20Ventl Unit Roof Ventilation Pace A-15 inline 5200cfm 85% est 5hp 20EF-1 Ventilation Pace U-30F inline 5060cfm 85% est 3hp 20EF-2 Roof Ventilation Pace inline 400cfm 85% est .25hp 20EF-3 Toilet Ventilation Pace inline 120cfm 85% est .166hp 20 Appendix B – Partial Lighting Inventory LIGHTING INVENTORYLocation T12 55W Incan 65W CFL 15W Incan 75 T8 28W T12 40W Incan 40W Incan 50W HPS 150W Total1st Floor19 9 25 2 552nd Floor58 7 267Exterior8311Grand Total58 7 2 19 9 25 2 8 3 133 Siemens Industry, Inc. Energy Audit Draft Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 25 of 32 Appendix C – Utility Data First Name Last Name Middle Name Phone Rick Koch State Zip AK 99611 Monday‐ Friday Saturday Sunday Holidays 8:00 ‐ 5:00 Average # of Occupants During 11 Renovations Date None PART II – ENERGY SOURCES Heating Oil Electricity Natural Gas Propane Wood Coal $ /gallon $ / kWh $ / CCF $ / gal $ / cord $ / ton Other energy sources? City of Kenai Municipal 03/07/11 REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage City Hall Office 12,464 Facility Address Year Built Mixed Facility City Facility Zip 7,200 1980 Building Type Community Population 210 Fidalgo Ave Kenai 99611 210 Fidalgo Ave Kenai Contact Person Email Mailing Address City 2. Provide utilities bills for the most recent two‐year period for each energy source you use. None Details 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. Primary Operating Hours Siemens Industry, Inc. Energy Audit Draft Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 26 of 32 Kenai City Hall Buiding Size Input (sf) =12,464 2009 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)12,855 2009 Natural Gas Cost ($)13,134 2009 Electric Consumption (kWh)136,160 2009 Electric Cost ($)25,859 2009 Oil Consumption (Therms) 2009 Oil Cost ($) 2009 Propane Consumption (Therms ) 2009 Propane Cost ($) 2009 Coal Consumption (Therms) 2009 Coal Cost ($) 2009 Wood Consumption (Therms) 2009 Wood Cost ($) 2009 Thermal Consumption (Therms) 2009 Thermal Cost ($) 2009 Steam Consumption (Therms) 2009 Steam Cost ($) 2009 Total Energy Use (kBtu)1,750,214 2009 Total Energy Cost ($)38,993 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2009 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 103.1 2009 Electricity (kBtu/sf)37.3 2009 Oil (kBtu/sf) 2009 Propane (kBtu/sf) 2009 Coal (kBtu/sf) 2009 Wood (kBtu/sf) 2009 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 2009 Steam (kBtu/sf) 2009 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)140.4 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2009 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf)1.05 2009 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)2.07 2009 Oil Cost Index ($/sf) 2009 Propane Cost Index ($/sf) 2009 Coal Cost Index ($/sf) 2009 Wood Cost Index ($/sf) 2009 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) 2009 Steam Cost Index ($/sf) 2009 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)3.13 Siemens Industry, Inc. Energy Audit Draft Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 27 of 32 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)13,497 2010 Natural Gas Cost ($)11,360 2010 Electric Consumption (kWh)138,720 2010 Electric Cost ($)21,214 2010 Oil Consumption (Therms) 2010 Oil Cost ($) 2010 Propane Consumption (Therms) 2010 Propane Cost ($) 2010 Coal Consumption (Therms) 2010 Coal Cost ($) 2010 Wood Consumption (Therms) 2010 Wood Cost ($) 2010 Thermal Consumption (Therms) 2010 Thermal Cost ($) 2010 Steam Consumption (Therms) 2010 Steam Cost ($) 2010 Total Energy Use (kBtu)1,800,051 2010 Total Energy Cost ($)32,574 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf)138.4 2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf)38.0 2010 Oil (kBtu/sf) 2010 Propane (kBtu/sf) 2010 Coal (kBtu/sf) 2010 Wood (kBtu/sf) 2010 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 2010 Steam (kBtu/sf) 2010 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)144.4 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf)0.91 2010 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)1.70 2010 Oil Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Propane Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Coal Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Wood Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Steam Cost Index ($/sf) 20010 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)2.61 Note: 1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 28 of 32 Kenai City HallNatural GasBtus/CCF =100,000Provider Customer #Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (CCF) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Natural Gas Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/Therm) Demand Cost ($)Enstar NGC77319 Nov‐08 11/6/2008 12/4/2008 28 1513 1,513 $1,290 $0.85Enstar NGC77319 Dec‐08 12/4/2008 1/5/2009 31 1942 1,942 $2,017 $1.04Enstar NGC77319 Jan‐09 1/6/2009 2/5/2009 29 2037 2,037 $2,115 $1.04Enstar NGC77319 Feb‐09 2/6/2009 3/5/2009 29 1810 1,810 $1,881 $1.04Enstar NGC77319 Mar‐09 3/6/2009 4/2/2009 26 1353 1,353 $1,409 $1.04Enstar NGC77319 Apr‐09 4/3/2009 5/7/2009 34 774 774 $811 $1.05Enstar NGC77319 May‐09 5/8/2009 6/11/2009 33 783 783 $820 $1.05Enstar NGC77319 Jun‐09 6/12/2009 7/6/2009 24 513 513 $542 $1.06Enstar NGC77319 Jul‐09 7/7/2009 8/6/2009 29 409 409 $435 $1.06Enstar NGC77319 Aug‐09 8/7/2009 9/4/2009 27 326 326 $349 $1.07Enstar NGC77319 Sep‐09 9/5/2009 10/8/2009 33 576 576 $607 $1.05Enstar NGC77319 Oct‐09 10/9/2009 11/5/2009 26 819 819 $858 $1.05Enstar NGC77319 Nov‐09 11/6/2009 12/3/2009 27 1412 1,412 $1,471 $1.04Enstar NGC77319 Dec‐09 12/4/2009 1/7/2010 33 1621 1,852 $1,402 $0.76Enstar NGC77319 Jan‐10 1/8/2010 2/4/2010 26 1677 1,677 $1,450 $0.86Enstar NGC77319 Feb‐10 2/5/2010 3/4/2010 29 1507 1,507 $1,304 $0.87Enstar NGC77319 Mar‐10 3/5/2010 4/8/2010 33 1328 1,328 $1,164 $0.88Enstar NGC77319 Apr‐10 4/9/2010 5/6/2010 27 1213 1,213 $1,064 $0.88Enstar NGC77319 May‐10 5/7/2010 6/3/2010 26 616 616 $196 $0.32Enstar NGC77319 Jun‐10 6/4/2010 7/8/2010 34 874 874 $770 $0.88Enstar NGC77319 Jul‐10 7/9/2010 8/5/2010 26 859 859 $757 $0.88Enstar NGC77319 Aug‐10 8/6/2010 9/2/2010 26 455 455 $474 $1.04Enstar NGC77319 Sep‐10 9/3/2010 10/7/2010 34 671 671 $647 $0.96Enstar NGC77319 Oct‐10 10/8/2010 11/4/2010 26 1033 1,033 $661 $0.64Nov ‐ 08 to Oct ‐ 09 total:12,855 12,855 0$13,134 $0.00Nov ‐ 09 to Oct ‐ 10 total:13,266 13,497 0$11,360 $0.00$1.03$0.83Nov ‐ 08 to Oct ‐ 09 avg:Nov ‐ 09 to Oct ‐ 10 avg: Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 29 of 32 Kenai City Hall ‐ Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) vs. Natural Gas Cost ($)05001,0001,5002,0002,500Nov‐08Dec‐08Jan‐09Feb‐09Mar‐09Apr‐09May‐09Jun‐09Jul‐09Aug‐09Sep‐09Oct‐09Nov‐09Dec‐09Jan‐10Feb‐10Mar‐10Apr‐10May‐10Jun‐10Jul‐10Aug‐10Sep‐10Oct‐10Date (Mon ‐ Yr)Natural Gas Consumption (Therms)$0$500$1,000$1,500$2,000$2,500Natural Gas Cost ($)Natural Gas Consumption(Therms)Natural Gas Cost ($) Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 30 of 32 Kenai City HallElectricityBtus/kWh =3,413Provider Customer #Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (kWh) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Electric Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/kWh) Demand Cost ($)HEA 2002350 Nov‐08 10/17/2008 11/19/2008 33 11920 407 $2,089 $0.18HEA 2002350 Dec‐08 11/19/2008 12/18/2008 29 11040 377 $1,964 $0.21HEA 2002350 Jan‐09 12/18/2008 1/20/2009 33 17680 603 $3,763 $0.21HEA 2002350 Feb‐09 1/20/2009 2/20/2009 31 16240 554 $3,415 $0.21HEA 2002350 Mar‐09 2/20/2009 3/20/2009 28 12480 426 $2,703 $0.22HEA 2002350 Apr‐09 3/20/2009 4/17/2009 28 7600 259 $1,427 $0.19HEA 2002350 May‐09 4/17/2009 5/20/2009 32 9440 322 $1,712 $0.18HEA 2002350 Jun‐09 5/19/2009 6/18/2009 30 9920 339 $1,786 $0.18HEA 2002350 Jul‐09 6/18/2009 7/21/2009 33 10160 347 $1,833 $0.18HEA 2002350 Aug‐09 7/21/2009 8/19/2009 29 9200 314 $1,700 $0.18HEA 2002350 Sep‐09 8/19/2009 9/18/2009 30 10160 347 $1,842 $0.18HEA 2002350 Oct‐09 9/18/2009 10/20/2009 32 10320 352 $1,625 $0.16HEA 2002747 Nov‐09 10/20/2009 11/18/2009 28 10240 349 $1,719 $0.17HEA 2002747 Dec‐09 11/18/2009 12/18/2009 30 15280 522 $2,321 $0.15HEA 2002747 Jan‐10 12/18/2009 1/20/2010 32 15120 516 $1,984 $0.13HEA 2002747 Feb‐10 1/20/2010 2/19/2010 29 14480 494 $1,946 $0.13HEA 2002747 Mar‐10 2/19/2010 3/19/2010 30 11600 396 $1,641 $0.14HEA 2002747 Apr‐10 3/19/2010 4/19/2010 30 12160 415 $1,915 $0.16HEA 2002747 May‐10 4/19/2010 5/19/2010 30 12240 418 $1,923 $0.16HEA 2002747 Jun‐10 5/19/2010 6/17/2010 28 9040 309 $1,504 $0.17HEA 2002747 Jul‐10 6/17/2010 7/20/2010 33 10240 349 $1,644 $0.16HEA 2002747 Aug‐10 7/20/2010 8/17/2010 27 8560 292 $1,426 $0.17HEA 2002747 Sep‐10 8/17/2010 9/20/2010 33 10240 349 $1,666 $0.16HEA 2002747 Oct‐10 9/20/2010 10/19/2010 29 9520 325 $1,525 $0.16Nov ‐ 08 to Oct ‐ 09 total:136,160 4,647 0.00 $25,859 $0Nov ‐ 09 to Oct ‐ 10 total:138,720 4,735 0.00 $21,214 $0$0.19$0.16Nov ‐ 09 to Oct ‐ 10 avg:Nov ‐ 08 to Oct ‐09 avg: Siemens Industry, Inc. Kenai City Hall Energy Audit Report AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐ENA‐CAEC‐06 Page 31 of 32 Kenai City Hall ‐ Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($)02000400060008000100001200014000160001800020000Nov‐08Dec‐08Jan‐09Feb‐09Mar‐09Apr‐09May‐09Jun‐09Jul‐09Aug‐09Sep‐09Oct‐09Nov‐09Dec‐09Jan‐10Feb‐10Mar‐10Apr‐10May‐10Jun‐10Jul‐10Aug‐10Sep‐10Oct‐10Nov‐10Dec‐10Date (Mon ‐ Yr)Electric Consumption (kWh)$0$500$1,000$1,500$2,000$2,500$3,000$3,500$4,000Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Electric Cost ($)