Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CIRI-HOM-CAEC West Homer 2012-EE
West Homer Elementary School 995 Soundview Avenue Homer, Alaska 99603 AkWarm ID No. CIRI-HOM-CAEC-03 Submitted by: Central Alaska Engineering Company Contact: Jerry P. Herring, P.E., C.E.A. 32215 Lakefront Drive Soldotna, Alaska 99669 Phone (907) 260-5311 akengineer@starband.net June 30, 2012 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE i OF iv CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE ii OF iv CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE iii OF iv AEE ...................................................................................................................... Association of Energy Engineers AHFC ........................................................................................................... Alaska Housing Finance Corporation AHU .............................................................................................................................................. Air Handling Unit ARIS ............................................................................................................... Alaska Retrofit Information System ARRA .................................................................................................. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ASHRAE .................................. American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers BPO .................................................................................................................................... Building Plant Operator BTU ......................................................................................................................................... British Thermal Unit CAEC ......................................................................................................... Central Alaska Engineering Company CCF .................................................................................................................................... Hundreds of Cubic Feet CFL ......................................................................................................................................... Compact Fluorescent CFM ...................................................................................................................................... Cubic Feet per Minute DDC ........................................................................................................................................ Direct Digital Control deg F ........................................................................................................................................... Degrees Fahrenheit DHW ........................................................................................................................................ Domestic Hot Water ECI .............................................................................................................................................. Energy Cost Index EEM .............................................................................................................................. Energy Efficiency Measure EMCS ........................................................................................................... Energy Management Control System EPA ................................................................................................................... Environmental Protection Agency EUI .................................................................................................................................... Energy Utilization Index hr(s) ................................................................................................................................................................ Hour(s) HP ........................................................................................................................................................... Horsepower HPS ........................................................................................................................................ High Pressure Sodium HVAC ................................................................................................. Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning IES ....................................................................................................................... Illuminating Engineering Society IGA ..................................................................................................................................... Investment Grade Audit kBtu ................................................................................................................ Thousands of British Thermal Units KPBSD .................................................................................................. Kenai Peninsula Borough School District kWh .................................................................................................................................................... Kilowatt Hour LED ......................................................................................................................................... Light Emitting Diode ORNL .................................................................................................................... Oak Ridge National Laboratory sf ............................................................................................................................................................... Square Feet SIR ............................................................................................................................... Savings to Investment Ratio SP ...................................................................................................................................................... Simple Payback W ....................................................................................................................................................................... Watts CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE iv OF iv This Investment Grade Audit (IGA) was performed using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds, managed by Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). IGA’s are the property of the State of Alaska, and may be incorporated into AkWarm-C, the Alaska Retrofit Information System (ARIS), or other state and/or public information systems. AkWarm-C is a building energy modeling software developed under contract by AHFC. This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE- EE0000095. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. This energy audit is intended to identify and recommend potential areas of energy savings, estimate the value of the savings and approximate the costs to implement the recommendations. Any modifications or changes made to a building to realize the savings must be designed and implemented by licensed, experienced professionals in their fields. Lighting recommendations should all be first analyzed through a thorough lighting analysis to assure that the recommended lighting upgrades will comply with State of Alaska Statute as well as Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) recommendations. Central Alaska Engineering Company bears no responsibility for work performed as a result of this report. Payback periods may vary from those forecasted due to the uncertainty of the final installed design, configuration, equipment selected, and installation costs of recommended Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs), or the operating schedules and maintenance provided by the owner. Furthermore, EEMs are typically interactive, so implementation of one EEM may impact the cost savings from another EEM. Neither the auditor, Central Alaska Engineering Company, AHFC, nor any other party involved in preparation of this report accepts liability for financial loss due to EEMs that fail to meet the forecasted payback periods. This energy audit meets the criteria of a Level 2 IGA per the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). The life of the IGA may be extended on a case- by-case basis, at the discretion of AHFC. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 1 OF 25 This report presents the findings of an investment grade energy audit conducted for: Kenai Peninsula Borough Contact: Kevin Lyon 47140 East Poppy Lane Soldotna, AK 99669 Email: klyon@borough.kenai.ak.us Alaska Housing Finance Corporation Contact: Rebekah Luhrs 4300 Boniface Parkway Anchorage, AK 99510 Email: rluhrs@ahfc.us This audit was performed using ARRA funds to promote the use of innovation and technology to solve energy and environmental problems in a way that improves the State’s economy. This can be achieved through the wiser and more efficient use of energy. The purpose of the energy audit is to identify cost-effective system and facility modifications, adjustments, alterations, additions and retrofits. Systems investigated during the audit included heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), interior and exterior lighting, motors, building envelope, and energy management control systems (EMCS). The July 2008 – June 2010 average annual utility costs at this facility are as follows: Electricity $ 66,722 Fuel Oil $ 76,972 Total $ 143,694 Energy Utilization Index: 110.8 kBtu/sf Energy Cost Index: 2.74 $/sf Energy Use per Occupant: 22.8 MMBtu per Occupant Energy Cost per Occupant: $564 per Occupant The potential annual energy savings are shown on the following page in Table 1.1 which summarizes the Energy Efficiency Measures (EEM’s) analyzed for West Homer Elementary School. Listed are the estimates of the annual savings, installed cost, and two different financial measures of return on investment. Be aware that the measures are not cumulative because of the interrelation of several of the measures. The cost of each measure for this level of auditing is considered to be + 30% until further detailed engineering, specifications, and hard proposals are obtained. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 2 OF 25 Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost1 Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR2 Simple Payback (w/Maint. Savings)3 1 Refrigeration: Large Walk- in Freezer Add new Seasonal Shutdown $518 $1 9960.00 0.0 (N/A) 2 Refrigeration: Large Walk- in Refrigerator Add new Seasonal Shutdown $384 $1 7378.00 0.0 (N/A) 3 Refrigeration: Vending Machine Add new Seasonal Shutdown $211 $300 13.53 1.4 (N/A) 4 Setback Thermostat: Mechanical Room Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Mechanical Room space. $375 $4,131 1.23 11.0 (N/A) 5 Setback Thermostat: Gymnasium Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gymnasium space. $858 $9,473 1.23 11.0 (N/A) 6 Setback Thermostat: Front Classrooms and Offices Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Front Classrooms and Offices space. $881 $9,761 1.23 11.1 (N/A) 7 Setback Thermostat: Classrooms & Offices Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Classrooms & Offices space. $3,320 $51,132 0.88 15.4 (N/A) 8 Lighting: Gym Replace with 18 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F28T5 28W High Lumen (3050 L) HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch $1,745 $69,080 0.61 39.6 (19.5) 9 Ventilation Add variable speed DDC System to ventilation system. Assumed that 25% of total cost is attributed to ventilation with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC for all ventilation systems ($124,163). Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (16 @ $850 = $13,600) $14,915 $311,590 0.60 20.9 (N/A) 10 HVAC And DHW Replace burners on boilers with modern, more efficient models (2 @ $10,000). Add variable speed DDC System to heating system. Assumed that 60% of total cost is attributed to heating with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC ($297,990). Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (11 @ $850 = $9,350) $3,596 $153,513 0.56 42.7 (27.4) 11 Lighting: Recessed Downlight Replace with 26 LED 34W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $900 $31,200 0.54 34.7 (22.0) CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 3 OF 25 Rank Feature Improvement Description Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost1 Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR2 Simple Payback (w/Maint. Savings)3 12 Lighting: Parking Lot Lights Replace with 23 LED (2) 150W Module (2) StdElectronic and Remove Manual Switching and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,397 $50,600 0.43 36.2 (27.2) 13 Lighting: Exterior Lights Replace with 12 LED 50W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $684 $26,400 0.41 38.6 (28.6) 14 Lighting: 4- bulb Replace with 19 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver (2) Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $250 $14,385 0.36 57.4 (32.7) 15 Lighting: Classroom/Of fice Lights Replace with 443 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $4,333 $336,745 0.31 77.7 (38.4) 16 Lighting: Hallway/Kitc hen Lights Replace with 163 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,074 $122,545 0.26 114.1 (45.3) 17 Cathedral Ceiling: Typical Ceiling Construction Install R-14 rigid board insulation. No cost included for covering insulation. $1,433 $1,515,286 0.02 1,057.6 (N/A) TOTAL, all measures $36,874 $2,706,143 0.23 73.4 Table Notes: 1. Cost estimates were generated using the Program Demand Cost Model for Alaskan Schools, 12th Edition, Updated 2011, developed for the State of Alaska DOE, Education Support Services/Facilities. Renovations Projects Manual provides information on school renovation costs. Upon developing a final scope of work for an upgrade with detailed engineering completed, detailed savings and benefits can then be better determined. Some of the EEM’s should be completed when equipment meets the burn-out phase and is required to be replaced and in some cases will take significant investment to achieve. 2. 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. 3. 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. This column includes the SP considering energy savings only as well as the SP with maintenance and energy savings combined. The combined SP is distinguished with brackets and italicized text. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 4 OF 25 With all of these energy efficiency measures in place, the annual utility cost can be reduced by $36,874 per year, or 28.2% of the buildings’ total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $2,706,143, for an overall simple payback period of 73.4 years. If only the cost-effective measures are implemented (i.e. SIR > 1.0), the annual utility cost can be reduced by $3,228 per year, or 2.5% of the buildings’ total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $23,667, for an overall simple payback period of 7.3 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. Description Space Heating Water Heating Lighting Refrigeration Other Electrical Cooking Clothes Drying Ventilation Fans Total Cost Existing Building $65,912 $3,775 $25,598 $5,696 $9,447 $1,197 $90 $19,114 $130,830 With All Proposed Retrofits $50,587 $3,001 $15,215 $4,582 $9,447 $1,197 $90 $9,837 $93,956 SAVINGS $15,325 $774 $10,384 $1,114 $0 $0 $0 $9,278 $36,874 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 5 OF 25 While the intent of many Energy Efficiency Measures is to increase the efficiency of fuel-burning and electrical equipment, an important factor of energy consumption lies in the operational profiles which control the equipment usage. Such profiles can be managed by administrative controls and departmental leadership. They determine how and when equipment is used, and therefore have a greater impact on energy savings potential than simple equipment upgrades alone. Significant energy cost savings can be realized when EEMs are combined with efficient minded operational profiles. Operational profiles may be outlined by organization policy or developed naturally or historically. These profiles include, but are not limited to; operating schedules, equipment set-points and control strategies, maintenance schedules, and site and equipment selection. Optimization of operational profiles can be accomplished by numerous methods so long as the intent is reduction in energy-using equipment runtime. Due to the numerous methods of optimization, energy cost savings solely as a result of operational optimization are difficult to predict. Quantification, however, is easy to accomplish by metering energy usage during and/or after implementation of energy saving operational profiles and EEMs. Optimization of site selection includes scheduling and location of events. If several buildings in a given area are all lightly used after regularly occupied hours, energy savings can be found when after-hour events are consolidated and held within the most energy efficient buildings available for use. As a result, unoccupied buildings could be shut-down to the greatest extent possible to reduce energy consumption. Operational behaviors which can be combined with equipment upgrades are operating schedules and equipment control strategies including set-points. Occupancy and daylight sensors can be programmed to automatically shut-off or dim lighting when rooms are unoccupied or sufficiently lit from the sun. Operating schedules can be optimized to run equipment only during regular or high-occupancy periods. Also, through a central control system, or with digital programmable thermostats, temperature set-points can be reduced during low-occupancy hours to maximize savings. In addition, domestic hot water circulation systems and sporadically used equipment can be shut-down during unoccupied hours to further save energy. In general, having equipment operating in areas where no occupants are present is inefficient, and presents an opportunity for energy savings. Operational profiles can also be implemented to take advantage of no or low cost EEMs. Examples include heating system optimizations (boiler section cleaning, boiler flush-through cleaning, and completing preventative maintenance on outside air damper and temperature reset systems) and tighter controls of equipment set-backs and shut-downs (unoccupied zones equipment shut-down, easier access to and finer control of equipment for after-hours control). In a large facility management program, implementation of these measures across many or all sites will realize dramatic savings due to the quantity of equipment involved. Changes to building operational profiles can only be realized while simultaneously addressing health, safety, user comfort, and user requirements first. It is impractical to expect users to occupy a building or implement operational behaviors which do not meet such considerations. That said, it is quite practical for management groups to implement administrative controls which reduce losses brought about by excess and sub-optimum usage. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 6 OF 25 This comprehensive energy audit covers the 52,500 square foot West Homer Elementary School, depicted below in Figure 2.1, including classrooms, restrooms, administrative offices, and a gymnasium. Utility information was collected and analyzed for two years of energy use by the building. This information was used to analyze operational characteristics, calculate energy benchmarks for comparison to industry averages, estimate savings potential and establish a baseline to monitor the effectiveness of implemented measures. An excel spreadsheet was used to enter, sum, and calculate benchmarks and to graph energy use information (refer to Appendix A for the Benchmark Report). The Annual Energy Utilization Index (EUI) is expressed in Thousands of British Thermal Units/Square Foot (kBtu/sf) and can be used to compare energy consumption to similar building types or to track consumption from year to year in the same building. The EUI is calculated by converting annual consumption of all fuels used to Btu’s then dividing by the area (gross conditioned square footage) of the building. EUI is a good indicator of the relative potential for energy savings. A comparatively low EUI indicates less potential for large energy savings. Building architectural, mechanical and electrical drawings were utilized to calculate and verify the gross area of the facility. The gross area was confirmed on the physical site investigation. Refer to Section 6.0 of this report for additional details on EUI issues. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 7 OF 25 After gathering the utility data and calculating the EUI, the next step in the audit process was to review the drawings to develop a building profile which documented the building age, type, usage, and major energy consuming equipment or systems such as lighting, heating, ventilation and air condition (HVAC), domestic hot water heating, refrigeration, snow-melt, etc. The building profile is utilized to generate, and answer, possible questions regarding the facility’s energy usage. These questions were then compared to the energy usage profiles developed during the utility data gathering step. After this information is gathered, the next step in the process is the physical site investigation (site visit). The site visit was completed on August 10, 2011 and was spent inspecting the actual systems and answering specific questions from the preliminary review. Occupancy schedules, O&M practices, building energy management program, and other information that has an impact on energy consumption were obtained. Photos of the major equipment and building construction were taken during the site visit. Several of the site photos are included in this report as Appendix D. An additional site visit was completed on November 18, 2011 where thermal images of the building’s exterior were taken. These thermal images illustrate heat loss exhibited by the school. Several of the thermal images are included in this report as Appendix E. The post-site work includes evaluation of the information gathered during the site visits, developing the AkWarm-C Energy Model for the building, researching possible conservation opportunities, organizing the audit into a comprehensive report, and making recommendations on mechanical, electrical and building envelope improvements. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 8 OF 25 Central Alaska Engineering Company (CAEC) began the site survey after completing the preliminary audit tasks noted in Section 2.0. The site survey provided critical input in deciphering where energy opportunities exist within the facility. The audit team walked the entire site to inventory the building envelope (roof, walls, windows and doors, etc.), the major equipment including HVAC, water heating, lighting, and equipment in kitchens, offices, gymnasium, and classrooms. The site survey was used to determine an understanding of how the equipment is used. The collected data was entered into the AkWarm-C Commercial© Software (AkWarm-C), a building energy modeling program developed for Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). The data was processed by AkWarm-C to model a baseline from which energy efficiency measures (EEMs) could be considered. The model was compared to actual utility costs to ensure the quality of baseline and proposed energy modeling performed by AkWarm-C. The recommended EEMs focus on the building envelope, HVAC systems, water heating, lighting, and other electrical improvements that will reduce annual energy consumption. EEMs are evaluated based on building use and processes, local climate conditions, building construction type, function, operational schedule, existing conditions, and foreseen future plans. Energy savings are calculated based on industry standard methods and engineering estimations. When new equipment is proposed, energy consumption is calculated based on the manufacturer’s information where possible. Energy savings are calculated by AkWarm-C. Implementation of more than one EEM often affects the savings of other EEMs. The savings may in some cases be relatively higher if an individual EEM is implemented in lieu of multiple recommended EEMs. For example, implementing reduced operating schedule for specific inefficient lighting systems will result in a greater relative savings than merely replacing fixtures and bulbs. Implementing reduced operating schedules for newly installed efficient lighting will result in a lower relative savings, because there is less energy to be saved. If multiple EEM’s are recommended to be implemented, the combined savings is calculated and identified appropriately. Cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy costs for the building. Cost estimates were generated using the Program Demand Cost Model for Alaskan Schools, 12th Edition, Updated 2011, developed for the State of Alaska DOE, Education Support Services/Facilities. Renovations Projects Manual provides information on school renovation costs. The Geographic Area Cost Factor dated April 2011 for Homer has an index of 105.5 and was used in this report. Installation costs include design, labor, equipment, overhead and profit for school renovation projects and used to evaluate the initial investment required to implement an EEM. These are applied to each recommendation with simple paybacks calculated. In addition, where applicable, maintenance cost savings are estimated and applied to the net savings. The costs and savings are applied and a Simple Payback (SP) and Savings to Investment Ration (SIR) are calculated. These are listed in Section 7.0 and summarized in Table 1.1 of this report. The SP is based on the years that it takes for the net savings to payback the net installation cost (Cost divided by Savings). The SIR is calculated as a ratio by dividing the break even cost by the initial installed cost. The lifetime for each EEM is estimated based on the typical life of the equipment being replaced or altered. The energy savings is extrapolated throughout the lifetime of the EEM. The total energy savings is calculated as the total lifetime multiplied by the yearly savings. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 9 OF 25 The analysis provides a number of tools for assessing the cost effectiveness of various improvement options. These tools utilize Life-Cycle Costing, which is defined in this context as a method of cost analysis that estimates the total cost of a project over the period of time that includes both the construction cost and ongoing maintenance and operating costs. Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) = Savings divided by Investment Savings includes the total discounted dollar savings considered over the life of the improvement. When these savings are added up, changes in future fuel prices (usually inflationary) as projected by the Alaska Department of Energy are included in the model. Future savings are discounted to the present to account for the time-value of money (i.e. money’s ability to earn interest over time). The Investment in the SIR calculation includes the labor and materials required to install the measure. An SIR value of at least 1.0 indicates that the project is cost-effective - total savings exceed the investment costs. Simple payback is a cost analysis method whereby the investment cost of a project is divided by the first year’s savings of the project to give the number of years required to recover the cost of the investment. This may be compared to the expected time before replacement of the system or component will be required. For example, if a boiler costs $50,000 and results in a savings of $5,000 a year, the payback time is 10 years. If the boiler has an expected life to replacement of 20 years, it would be financially viable to make the investment since the payback period of 10 years is less than the project life. The Simple Payback calculation does not consider likely increases in future annual savings due to energy price increases. As an offsetting simplification, Simple Payback does not consider the need to earn interest on the investment (i.e. it does not consider the time-value of money). Because of these simplifications, the SIR figure is considered to be a better financial investment indicator than the Simple Payback measure. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 10 OF 25 All results are dependent on the quality of input data provided. In this case the site investigation was limited to observable conditions. No testing or destructive investigations were undertaken. Although energy-conserving methods are described in the EEMs, in some instances several methods may also achieve the identified savings. Detailed engineering is required in order to develop the EEMs to a realizable project. This audit and report are thus intended to offer approximations of the results achievable by the listed improvements. This report is not intended to be a final design document. The design professional or other persons following the recommendations shall accept responsibility and liability for the results. 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, West Homer Elementary School was modeled using AkWarm-C energy use software to establish a baseline space heating and cooling energy usage. Climate data from Homer, Alaska was used for analysis. From this, the model was be calibrated to predict the impact of theoretical energy savings measures. Once annual energy savings from a particular measure were predicted and the initial capital cost was estimated, payback scenarios were approximated. Project cost estimates are provided in the Section 7.0 of this report reviewing the Energy Efficiency Measures. Limitations of the AkWarm-C Commercial© Software are reviewed in this section. The AkWarm-C model is based on typical mean year weather data for Homer, Alaska. This data represents the average ambient weather profile as observed over approximately 30 years. As such, the natural gas and electric profiles generated will not likely compare perfectly with actual energy billing information from any single year. This is especially true for years with extreme warm or cold periods, or even years with unexpectedly moderate weather. The heating and cooling load model is a simple two-zone model consisting of the building’s core interior spaces and the building’s perimeter spaces. This simplified approach loses accuracy for buildings that have large variations in cooling/heating loads across different parts of the building. AkWarm-C 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 were derived from the output generated by the AkWarm-C simulations. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 11 OF 25 The original structure of West Homer Elementary School is a single story facility that was built in 1997. This building has had no additions made to it. The school has no relocatable (portable) classrooms located on the campus. The school typically has faculty and student occupancy from 7AM to 5PM during the weekdays. Additional occupancy (rental) time keeping the school open includes an after school program. Other rental activities occur in the evenings and weekends in the gymnasium and classroom areas which require the school to remain open as late as 9PM at times. There are an estimated 255 full time student, faculty, and staff occupants using the building. As architectural drawings were provided for this audit, shell insulation values were assumed using the provided information. No destructive testing was completed for the audit. The insulation values and conditions were modeled using the data provided in the architectural drawings. The following are the assumptions made for the AkWarm-C building model: Exterior walls of the building are double paned and metal framed. The windows have an estimated U- factor ranging from 0.50 – 0.83 Btu/hr-sf-F. Most of these windows appear to be weathered but are in good condition and were not found to be economically beneficial to change out at this time. The exterior walls of the elementary school consist of 2-core concrete blocks that are furred out with 2x6 studs and insulated with R-19 fiberglass batt. The roof of the school uses an Inverted Roof Membrane Assembly (IRMA) with 3-inches of rigid board supported by structural decking. The foam on this section of the school is covered with a 1-inch thick layer of concrete squares over the entirety of the roof, forming the IRMA protective layer. The roof insulation has an estimated R-20 value. The roof is under insulated but re-roofing does not appear to be justified on energy savings alone. When needed, the school roof is recommended to be upgraded to a minimum of R-50 EPDM when possible to meet current school building standards as listed in Table 6 of the Program Demand Cost Model for Alaskan Schools, 12th Edition, Updated 2011, developed for the State of Alaska DOE, Education Support Services/Facilities. EEM number 17 evaluate re-roofing the building. The floor/foundation of the building is a concrete slab-on-grade configuration. The slab edge does not appear to be insulated on the outside and there is no indication there is insulation installed under the concrete slab from the architectural drawings reviewed for the audit. All doors on this building are commercial grade, metal framed and insulated doors that are half- windowed or solid. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 12 OF 25 Heat is provided to the main school building by two (2) sectional oil-fired boilers. The boilers are located in the second floor mechanical room. The relocatable classrooms are heated with electrical baseboard. The hydronic heating system is circulated throughout the building by circulation pumps located in the boiler room and provides heat to the air handling units, unit heaters and baseboards located throughout the building. There is an antiquated Barber Colman pneumatic control system in place with pneumatic controlled end devices. The heating plants used in the building are summarized as follows: Boiler 1 Fuel Type: Fuel Oil Maximum Input Rating: 1,703,000 Btu/hr Rated Efficiency: 83.0 % Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic Boiler Operation: All Year Boiler 2 Fuel Type: Fuel Oil Maximum Input Rating: 1,703,000 Btu/hr Rated Efficiency: 83.0 % Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic Boiler Operation: All Year Domestic hot water is supplied by a side-arm hot water maker using hydronic heat from the boilers. DHW is circulated 24/7 around the building and supplies the kitchen, restrooms, teacher’s lounge, and the classroom sinks. The hot water maker is located in the mechanical room. Outside air is drawn into the building primarily through four (4) Roof Top Units (RTUs). There are also two (2) Air Handling Units (AHUs) located inside of the building providing ventilation to the school. Excess air is removed from the building with the use of roof mounted exhaust fans and relief air fans attached to the RTUs. The ventilation system is pneumatically controlled with the Barber Colman system. The International Mechanical Code for this application requires the building to bring in 13,125 CFM of outdoor air (minimum design specifies 25 occupants/1,000 sf @ 10 CFM/occupant for the 55,500 sf school = 13,125 CFM). Adding up all of the exhaust capacity equals 20,550 CFM, indicating the school appears to be over ventilated at 81 CFM/occupant when all exhaust systems are operated per design capacity. This is where installation of variable speed controllers on the major exhaust fans and only operate while the school is occupied can provide significant energy savings. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 13 OF 25 There are several types of light systems throughout the building. The entirety of the building has been upgraded to more modern T8 lights. The gym lighting system in place uses 250-Watt metal-halide bulbs. The high pressure sodium lights (HPS) mounted on the outside of the building are good candidates for replacement. There have been recent advances in LED technology making it a viable option to replace the HPS systems. There are several large plug loads throughout the building. This includes the kitchen equipment, computers with monitors, copy machines, vending machines, clothing dryer, washing machine, refrigerators, microwave ovens and coffee pots. These building plug loads are estimated in the AkWarm-C modeling program at 0.4 watts/sf. Following the completion of the field survey a detailed building major equipment inventory was created and is attached as Appendix C. The equipment listed is considered to be the major energy consuming items in the building whose replacement or upgrade could yield substantial energy savings. An approximate age was assigned to the equipment if a manufactured date was not shown on the equipment’s nameplate. As listed in the 2011 ASHRAE Handbook for HVAC Applications, Chapter 37, Table 4, the service life for the equipment along with the remaining useful life in accordance to the ASHRAE standard are also noted in the equipment list. Where there are zero (0) years remaining in the estimated useful life of a piece of equipment, this is an indication that maintenance costs are likely on the rise and more efficient replacement equipment is available which will lower the operating costs of the unit. Maintenance costs should also fall with the replacement. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 14 OF 25 Tables provided in Appendix A, Energy Benchmark Data Report, represent the electric and fuel oil usage for the surveyed facility from July 2008 to June 2010. Homer Electric Association Inc. provides the electricity under their large commercial rate schedules. Fuel oil is delivered under contract with the KPBSD. The electric utility bills for consumption in kilowatt-hours (kWh) and for maximum demand in kilowatts (kW). One kilowatt-hour is equivalent to 3,413 Btu’s. The consumption (kWh) is determined as the wattage times the hours it is running. For example, 1,000 watts running for one hour, or 500 watts running for two hours is a kWh. The maximum demand is simply the sum of all electrical devices on simultaneously. For example, ten, 100 watt lights running simultaneously would create a demand of 1,000 watts (1 kW). Demand is averaged over a rolling window, usually 15 minutes. Thus, the facility must be concerned not only with basic electricity usage (consumption) but also the rate at which it gets used. The basic usage charges are shown as generation service and delivery charges along with several non-utility generation charges. Identify your school’s major equipment, know when it is used and work with staff to adjust time and duration of use. Also, consider using smart thermostats, relays, timers, on/off switches, and circuit breakers to shut down non-essential equipment and lights before starting equipment which draws a large amount of power. Relays or timers can prevent two large loads from being on at the same time. Peak demand can be best managed if first understood when it occurs. Know your school’s peak months, days and hours. Billing information can be used to acquire your benchmark data on the demand load and cost for the school building. Demand costs can be managed by scheduling times of the day when your electric usage is lowest to run equipment that uses the most power. You may want to pay special attention to equipment such as pumps, electric water heaters, 5-horsepower and larger motors, electric heat and commercial appliances. Most equipment has an identification tag or nameplate that lists the kW, or demand. Some tags may only list the amperage (amps and voltage the equipment uses). You can still use this information to figure the approximate usage rate in kilowatts. Multiply amps by volts and divide by 1,000 to get kilowatts. To help manage demand load and cost, install a special meter that records 15 minute load profile information, allowing you to view the electric power consumption over time. This data can help in determining when the peak loads occur. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 15 OF 25 The fuel oil usage profile shows the predicted fuel oil energy usage for the building. As actual oil usage records were available, the model used to predict usage was calibrated to approximately match actual usage. Fuel oil is sold to the customer in units of gallons, which contains approximately 140,000 BTUs of energy per gallon. The average billing rates for energy use are calculated by dividing the total cost by the total usage. Based on the electric and fuel oil data provided, the 2009 and 2010 costs for the energy and consumption at the surveyed facility are summarized in Table 6.1 below. 2008-2009 2009-2010 Average Electric 0.17 $/kWh 0.15 $/kWh 0.16 $/kWh Fuel Oil 1.95 $/Gallon 1.85 $/Gallon 1.80 $/Gallon Total Cost $145,091 $142,295 $143,693 ECI 2.76 $/sf 2.71 $/sf 2.74 $/sf Electric EUI 26.6 kBtu/sf 27.0 kBtu/sf 26.8 kBtu/sf Fuel Oil EUI 84.4 kBtu/sf 83.5 kBtu/sf 84.0 kBtu/sf Building EUI 111.0 kBtu/sf 110.5 kBtu/sf 110.8 kBtu/sf Data from the U.S.A. Energy Information Administration provides information for U.S.A. Commercial Buildings Energy Intensity Using Site Energy by Census Region. In 2003, the U.S.A. average energy usage for Education building activity is shown to be 83 kBtu/sf. Data from the ARRA funded utility benchmark survey for the subject fiscal years completed on 32 schools in the KPBSD computed an average EUI of 113.4 kBtu/sf, and ECI of 2.71 $/sf, with an average building size of 57,216 square feet. Over the analyzed period, the surveyed facility was calculated to have an average EUI of 110.8 kBtu/sf. This means the surveyed facility uses a total of 33.5% more energy than the US average and 2.3% less energy than the KPBSD average on a per square foot basis. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 16 OF 25 At current utility rates, the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District is modeled to pay approximately $130,830 annually for electricity and other fuel costs for West Homer Elementary. Figure 6.1 below reflects the estimated distribution of costs across the primary end uses of energy based on the AkWarm-C computer simulation. Comparing the “Retrofit” bar in the figure to the “Existing” bar shows the potential savings from implementing all of the energy efficiency measures shown in this report. Figure 6.2 below shows how the annual energy cost of the building splits between the different fuels used by the building. The “Existing” bar shows the breakdown for the building as it is now; the “Retrofit” bar shows the predicted costs if all of the energy efficiency measures in this report are implemented. $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 Existing Retrofit #2 Oil Electricity Annual Energy Costs by Fuel CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 17 OF 25 Figure 6.3 below addresses only Space Heating costs. The figure shows how each heat loss component contributes to those costs; for example, the figure shows how much annual space heating cost is caused by the heat loss through the Walls/Doors. For each component, the space heating cost for the Existing building is shown (blue bar) and the space heating cost assuming all retrofits are implemented (yellow bar) are shown. The tables below show AkWarm-C estimates 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. Electrical Consumption (kWh) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Lighting 15249 13896 15249 14757 14993 7091 7327 11416 14757 15249 14757 15249 Refrigeration 3021 2753 3021 2924 3021 2924 3021 3021 2924 3021 2924 3021 Other Electrical 5648 5147 5648 5466 5551 2543 2627 4186 5466 5648 5466 5648 Cooking 635 579 635 614 635 614 635 635 614 635 614 635 Clothes Drying 48 44 48 46 48 46 48 48 46 48 46 48 Ventilation Fans 11575 10548 11575 11201 11355 4612 4766 8280 11201 11575 11201 11575 DHW 83 75 83 80 83 80 83 83 80 83 80 83 Space Heating 3421 3118 3421 3311 3421 3310 3420 3421 3311 3421 3311 3421 Fuel Oil #2 Consumption (Gallons) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec DHW 147 135 149 148 159 174 198 187 159 153 144 147 Space Heating 4540 3729 3676 2654 1975 968 715 871 1511 2650 3506 4419 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 18 OF 25 Energy Utilization Index (EUI) is a measure of a building’s annual energy utilization per square foot of building. This calculation is completed by converting all utility usage consumed by a building for one year, to British Thermal Units (Btu) or kBtu’s, and dividing this number by the building square footage. EUI is a good measure of a building’s energy use and is utilized regularly for comparison of energy performance for similar building types. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Buildings Technology Center under a contract with the U.S. Department of Energy maintains a Benchmarking Building Energy Performance Program. The ORNL website determines how a building’s energy use compares with similar facilities throughout the U.S. and in a specific region or state. Source use differs from site usage when comparing a building’s energy consumption with the national average. Site energy use is the energy consumed by the building at the building site only. Source energy use includes the site energy use as well as all of the losses to create and distribute the energy to the building. Source energy represents the total amount of raw fuel that is required to operate the building. It incorporates all transmission, delivery, and production losses, which allows for a complete assessment of energy efficiency in a building. The type of utility purchased has a substantial impact on the source energy use of a building. The EPA has determined that source energy is the most comparable unit for evaluation purposes and overall global impact. Both the site and source EUI ratings for the building are provided to understand and compare the differences in energy use. The site and source EUIs for this building are calculated as follows. (See Table 6.4 for details): Building Site EUI = (Electric Usage in kBtu + Fuel Oil Usage in kBtu) Building Square Footage Building Source EUI = (Electric Usage in kBtu X SS Ratio + Fuel Oil Usage in kBtu X SS Ratio) Building Square Footage where “SS Ratio” is the Source Energy to Site Energy ratio for the particular fuel. Energy Type Building Fuel Use per Year Site Energy Use per Year, kBTU Source/Site Ratio Source Energy Use per Year, kBTU Electricity 423,422 kWh 1,445,141 3.340 4,826,770 #2 Oil 33,114 gallons 4,569,771 1.010 4,615,468 Total 6,014,911 9,442,238 BUILDING AREA 52,456 Square Feet BUILDING SITE EUI 111 kBTU/Ft²/Yr BUILDING SOURCE EUI 180 kBTU/Ft²/Yr * Site - Source Ratio data is provided by the Energy Star Performance Rating Methodology for Incorporating Source Energy Use document issued March 2011. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 19 OF 25 The Energy Efficiency Measures are summarized below: Lighting Measures The goal of this section is to present lighting energy efficiency measures that may be cost beneficial. It should be noted that replacing current bulbs with more energy-efficient equivalents will have a small effect on the building heating and cooling loads. The building cooling load will see a small decrease from an upgrade to more efficient bulbs and the heating load will see a small increase, as the more energy efficient bulbs give off less heat. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 8 Gym 18 MH 250 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 18 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F28T5 28W High Lumen (3050 L) HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch Installation Cost $69,080 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $1,745 Breakeven Cost $41,985 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.6 Simple Payback (yrs) 40 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends replacement of the gym lights with a modern efficient T5 High Output system. Installation of the more efficient lights and installation of a lighting control package with occupancy sensors and multi-level switching can reduce the gym lighting energy consumption. Below is an example picture of a recently re-lamped gym with the T5 HO system. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 11 Recessed Downlight 26 MH 100 Watt StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 26 LED 34W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $31,200 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $900 Breakeven Cost $16,777 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.5 Simple Payback (yrs) 35 Auditors Notes: All of the metal-halide and high pressure sodium lights mounted in the building are considered to be good candidates for replacement as the heat they emit is wasted to the outdoors. There have been recent advances in LED technology and are recommended to replace the HPS systems. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 20 OF 25 Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 12 Parking Lot Lights 23 HPS 400 Watt StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 23 LED (2) 150W Module (2) StdElectronic and Remove Manual Switching and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $50,600 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $1,397 Breakeven Cost $21,904 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback (yrs) 36 Auditors Notes: See EEM #11 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 13 Exterior Lights 12 HPS 150 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 12 LED 50W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $26,400 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $684 Breakeven Cost $10,898 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback (yrs) 39 Auditors Notes: See EEM #11 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 14 4-bulb 19 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 19 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver (2) Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $14,385 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $250 Breakeven Cost $5,210 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback (yrs) 57 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 32-Watt T8 lights in the building be replaced with 28-Watt Energy Saver T8 bulbs and programmable start ballasts. Additionally, these lights should be installed with occupancy sensors. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 15 Classroom/Office Lights 443 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 443 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $336,745 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $4,333 Breakeven Cost $103,786 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback (yrs) 78 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 32-Watt T8 lights in the building be replaced with 28-Watt Energy Saver T8 bulbs and programmable start ballasts. Additionally, these lights should be installed with occupancy sensors. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 16 Hallway/Kitchen Lights 163 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 163 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $122,545 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs)15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $1,074 Breakeven Cost $32,076 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback (yrs) 114 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 32-Watt T8 lights in the building be replaced with 28-Watt Energy Saver T8 bulbs and programmable start ballasts. Additionally, these lights should be installed with occupancy sensors. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 21 OF 25 Refrigeration Measures Rank Location Description of Existing Efficiency Recommendation 1 Large Walk-in Freezer Walk-in Freezer Add new Seasonal Shutdown Installation Cost $1 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 30 Energy Savings ($/yr) $518 Breakeven Cost $9,960 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 9,960.0 Simple Payback (yrs) 0 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends using the practice of seasonal shutdown procedures for the large walk-in freezer in the school. Rank Location Description of Existing Efficiency Recommendation 2 Large Walk-in Refrigerator Commercial Refrigerator Add new Seasonal Shutdown Installation Cost $1 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 30 Energy Savings ($/yr) $384 Breakeven Cost $7,378 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 7,378.0 Simple Payback (yrs) 0 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends using the practice of seasonal shutdown procedures for the large walk-in refrigerator in the school. Rank Location Description of Existing Efficiency Recommendation 3 Vending Machine Vending Machine Add new Seasonal Shutdown Installation Cost $300 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 30 Energy Savings ($/yr) $211 Breakeven Cost $4,058 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 13.5 Simple Payback (yrs) 1 Auditors Notes: There are many no and low cost ways to cut the energy use of a refrigerated vending machine. Vending machines generate good savings in buildings that are not occupied around the clock. Installation of a Vending Miser Control System (or equivalent) is estimated to save 20% on electric energy costs. A refrigerated vending machine operates 24 hours, seven days per week. It was noted that during the summer months, the refrigerated vending machines were not unplugged thereby consuming energy year round. This case study evaluated the use of seasonal shutdown during the summer break months. If the vending machine is leased, then the cost of installation of a control system is recommended to be installed by the owner of the vending machine. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 22 OF 25 Building Shell Measures Mechanical Equipment Measures Rank Location Existing Type/R-Value Recommendation Type/R-Value 17 Cathedral Ceiling: Typical Ceiling Construction Framing Type: I-Beam (TJI) Framing Spacing: 24 inches Insulated Sheathing: None Bottom Insulation Layer: Polyisocyanurate (PISO), 6 inches Top Insulation Layer: None Modeled R-Value: 37.6 Install R-14 rigid board insulation. No cost included for covering insulation. Installation Cost $1,515,286 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 30 Energy Savings ($/yr) $1,433 Breakeven Cost $33,984 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.0 Simple Payback (yrs) 1058 Auditors Notes: This recommendation evaluates the roof of the elementary school being upgraded to incorporate an average insulating R-value of R-50. This EEM has a poor simple payback period, and is therefore a difficult upgrade to justify. However, the implementation of a more insulating roof will reduce the amount of unwanted heat loss while helping to make the school feel more comfortable. A new roof will also require less maintenance than an older roof and will add to the value of the school. Rank Recommendation 10 Replace burners on boilers with modern, more efficient models (2 @ $10,000). Add variable speed DDC System to heating system. Assumed that 60% of total cost is attributed to heating with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC ($297,990). Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (11 @ $850 = $9,350) Installation Cost $153,513 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings ($/yr) $3,596 Breakeven Cost $85,771 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.6 Simple Payback (yrs) 43 Auditors Notes: * The combination of these energy efficiency measures are bundled in the AkWarm-C program calculations. The recommendations of this EEM include several retrofit options. Individual retrofit considerations are discussed below. AkWarm-C considers all upgrades to the heating system as one item and therefore predicts a combined savings. Because of this, the savings of individual upgrades do not directly compare to the predicted overall savings of a complete upgrade of the heating system. A. Installing an outdoor temperature reset control to the boiler output temperature and installing a Direct Digital Control (DDC) system as a replacement for the current pneumatic control system has been evaluated as a separate EEM cost. This upgrade will also affect the ventilation and heating temperature set point(s) of the building through refined controls and sensors. Assuming 60% of the DDC system cost is attributed to the heating system, this upgrade is expected to cost $297,990 for an annual energy savings of $1,107. B. Replacing the electric motors throughout the building with premium efficiency motors will produce an energy savings based on the reduced amount of power used. With this EEM, a refined schedule from a DDC system will reduce the savings from more efficient motors, as mentioned earlier in the first paragraph of this EEM. With motor replacement, the total cost is estimated to be $9,350 for an annual energy savings of $464. C. Installation of new burners was in progress during the site visit. These new burners will allow the school to use natural gas as the primary fuel for heating. With the addition of new burners and changing the fuel type used, the school will see significant savings in energy bills as well as an increased performance from the boilers. Replacement of the burners is modeled to cost $20,000 for an annual energy savings of $2,616. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 23 OF 25 Ventilation System Measures Rank Description Recommendation 9 Add variable speed DDC System to ventilation system. Assumed that 25% of total cost is attributed to ventilation with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC for all ventilation systems ($124,163). Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (16 @ $850 = $13,600) Installation Cost $311,590 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $14,915 Breakeven Cost $185,520 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.6 Simple Payback (yrs) 21 Auditors Notes: * The cost of upgrading the pneumatic system was allocated across several of the mechanical energy efficiency measures. The recommendations of this EEM include several retrofit options. Individual retrofit considerations are discussed below. AkWarm-C considers all upgrades to the ventilation system as one item and therefore predicts a combined savings. Because of this, the savings of individual upgrades do not directly compare to the predicted overall savings of a complete upgrade of the building ventilation system. A. The programming of ventilation equipment to cycle on and off during low use periods has the potential to save a portion of the total electric power cost. This can be done with no noticeable difference to the occupants of the building, which is vacant or near vacant during low use periods. There is no need for fresh air when the building is vacant. Improved control of the ventilation system is within the capacity of a DDC controller, but the existing pneumatic control scheme is antiquated and is recommended to be upgraded to a new operating system. The ventilation equipment may be slowed down to near the surge point on the blower wheels with the installation of VFD controllers. Installation of demand control on the gym air handling unit by installing a carbon dioxide controller can be used to optimize run time. Upgrading the control system will allow optimizing the “On-Off” run timing for the ventilation system. There is energy to be saved by the automation system including tuning the variable frequency speed controllers of the fans. The entire DDC system will be spread across the heating and setback temperature controls and has some of the overall cost partitioned within these areas. For the ventilation system, this upgrade is expected to cost $124,163 for an annual energy savings of $14,646. B. Replacing the motors throughout the building with premium efficiency motors, combined with installing variable frequency drives, will produce an energy savings based on the reduced amount of power used. With this EEM, a refined schedule from a DDC system will reduce the savings from more efficient pumps, as mentioned earlier in the first paragraph of this EEM. With pump replacement, the total cost is estimated to be $13,600 for an annual energy savings of $1,833. C. There is peak electric demand costs which can be reduced by operating the equipment strategically to minimize all building lights and electric fan motors from being brought on line at once causing a large demand charge from the electric utility. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 24 OF 25 Night Setback Thermostat Measures Rank Building Space Recommendation 4 Mechanical Room Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Mechanical Room space. Installation Cost $4,131 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $375 Breakeven Cost $5,092 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.2 Simple Payback (yrs) 11 Auditors Notes: There are economic reasons why the thermostatic controller set points should be setback during off peak use hours. However one important control data input concerns the water dew point of the air. The water dew point of the inside air varies with the seasons. Currently, there is no humidity measuring instruments normally available to or monitored by the control system or staff and this data is needed before choosing the ideal “setback” temperatures which varies with the season. As outside air temperatures rise, the inside air dew point also rises. The staff is likely to complain about mildew and mold smells if the temperature is dropped below the dew point and condensation occurs. In keeping with this mildew and mold concern, it is recommended that the control system monitor the water dew point within the building to select how far back the temperature can be set during low use periods. If the water dew point is above 70 oF, then set up the temperature not back. If the water dew point is 50 oF or below then reduce the setback temperature control toward 60oF. Other parameters relating to the building setback temperature include warm-up time required to reheat the building and preventing any water pipes near the building perimeter from freezing. During extreme cold periods, reducing the setback temperature limit and time appropriately is required to prevent possible problems. Rank Building Space Recommendation 5 Gymnasium Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gymnasium space. Installation Cost $9,473 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $858 Breakeven Cost $11,651 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.2 Simple Payback (yrs) 11 Auditors Notes: See EEM #4 for similar notes. Rank Building Space Recommendation 6 Front Classrooms and Offices Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Front Classrooms and Offices space. Installation Cost $9,761 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $881 Breakeven Cost $11,968 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.2 Simple Payback (yrs) 11 Auditors Notes: See EEM #4 for similar notes. Rank Building Space Recommendation 7 Classrooms & Offices Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Classrooms & Offices space. Installation Cost $51,132 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings ($/yr) $3,320 Breakeven Cost $45,071 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.9 Simple Payback (yrs) 15 Auditors Notes: See EEM #4 for similar notes. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT AkWarm ID No. CIRI‐HOM‐CAEC‐03 PAGE 25 OF 25 Through inspection of the energy-using equipment on-site and discussions with site facilities personnel, this energy audit has identified several energy-saving measures. The measures will reduce the amount of fuel burned and electricity used at the site. The projects will not degrade the performance of the building and, in some cases, will improve it. Several types of EEMs can be implemented immediately by building staff, and others will require various amounts of lead time for engineering and equipment acquisition. In some cases, there are logical advantages to implementing EEMs concurrently. For example, if the same electrical contractor is used to install both lighting equipment and motors, implementation of these measures should be scheduled to occur simultaneously. The Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) Alaska Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund (AEERLF) is a State of Alaska program enacted by the Alaska Sustainable Energy Act (Senate Bill 220, A.S. 18.56.855, “Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund”). The AEERLF will provide loans for energy efficiency retrofits to public facilities via the Retrofit Energy Assessment for Loan System (REAL). As defined in 15 AAC 155.605, the program may finance energy efficiency improvements to buildings owned by: a. Regional educational attendance areas; b. Municipal governments, including political subdivisions for municipal governments; c. The University of Alaska; d. Political subdivisions of the State of Alaska, or e. The State of Alaska Refer to the Retrofit Energy Assessment for Loans manual which can be obtained from AHFC for more information on this program. CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX A Appendix A Benchmark Reports CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT First Name Last Name Middle Name Phone Paul Brenner 907‐714‐8825 State Zip AK 99669 Monday‐ Friday Saturday Sunday Holidays 7 to 50 0 0 Average # of Occupants During 255 0 0 0 Renovations / Notes Date None Note: PART II – ENERGY SOURCES Heating Oil Electricity Natural Gas Propane Wood Coal $ /gallon $ / kWh $ / CCF $ / gal $ / cord $ / ton Other energy sources? KPBSD Municipal 03/15/11 REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form PART I – FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage West Homer Elementary Education 52,500 Building Type Community Population Year Built School 5,364 1997 148 N. Binkley St Soldotna Facility Address Facility City Facility Zip 995 Soundview Ave. Homer 99603 Contact Person Email pbrenner@kpbsd.k12.ak.us Mailing Address City Drawings are maintained at district maintenance office in Soldotna. Primary Operating Hours 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. 2. Provide utilities bills for the most recent two‐year period for each energy source you use. APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT West Homer Elementary Buiding Size Input (sf) =52,500 2009 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 2009 Natural Gas Cost ($) 2009 Electric Consumption (kWh)409,520 2009 Electric Cost ($)72,273 2009 Oil Consumption (Therms)44,295 2009 Oil Cost ($)72,818 2009 Propane Consumption (Therms) 2009 Propane Cost ($) 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)5,827,216 2009 Total Energy Cost ($)145,091 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2009 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 2009 Electricity (kBtu/sf)26.6 2009 Oil (kBtu/sf) 84.4 2009 Propane (kBtu/sf) 2009 Coal (kBtu/sf) 2009 Wood (kBtu/sf) 2009 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 2009 Steam (kBtu/sf) 2009 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)111.0 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2009 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) 2009 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)1.38 2009 Oil Cost Index ($/sf)1.39 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)2.76 APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 2010 Natural Gas Cost ($) 2010 Electric Consumption (kWh)415,040 2010 Electric Cost ($)61,170 2010 Oil Consumption (Therms)43,853 2010 Oil Cost ($)81,125 2010 Propane Consumption (Therms) 2010 Propane Cost ($) 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)5,801,836 2010 Total Energy Cost ($)142,295 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kBtu/sf) 2010 Electricity (kBtu/sf)27.0 2010 Oil (kBtu/sf)83.5 2010 Propane (kBtu/sf) 2010 Coal (kBtu/sf) 2010 Wood (kBtu/sf) 2010 Thermal (kBtu/sf) 2010 Steam (kBtu/sf) 2010 Energy Utilization Index (kBtu/sf)110.5 Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Electric Cost Index ($/sf)1.17 2010 Oil Cost Index ($/sf)1.55 2010 Propane Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Coal Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Wood Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Steam Cost Index ($/sf) 2010 Energy Cost Index ($/sf)2.71 Note: 1 kWh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF ≈ 1,000 Btu's APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYWEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORTWest Homer ElementaryElectricityBtus/kWh =3,413Provider Customer # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (kWh) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Electric Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/kWh) Demand Cost ($)Homer Electric 285037 Jul‐08 7/10/2008 8/7/20082913,120448471847$0.14Homer Electric 285037 Aug‐08 8/8/2008 9/9/20083335,2801,2041264937$0.14Homer Electric 285037 Sep‐08 9/10/2008 10/7/20082836,6401,2511376247$0.17Homer Electric 285037 Oct‐08 10/8/2008 11/5/20082940,3201,3761346759$0.17Homer Electric 285037 Nov‐08 11/6/2008 12/9/20083447,4401,6191347782$0.16Homer Electric 285037 Dec‐08 12/10/2008 1/7/20092939,0401,3321428154$0.21Homer Electric 285037 Jan‐09 1/8/2009 2/9/20093346,3201,5811339422$0.20Homer Electric 285037 Feb‐09 2/10/2009 3/9/20092838,8001,3241318035$0.21Homer Electric 285037 Mar‐09 3/10/2009 4/7/20092934,1601,1661265799$0.17Homer Electric 285037 Apr‐09 4/8/2009 5/6/20092937,6001,2831306321$0.17Homer Electric 285037 May‐09 5/7/2009 6/8/20093330,1601,0291065087$0.17Homer Electric 285037 Jun‐09 6/9/2009 7/7/20092910,640363461883$0.18Homer Electric 285037 Jul‐09 7/8/2009 8/6/20093013,840472612452$0.18Homer Electric 285037 Aug‐09 8/7/2009 9/8/20093333,1201,1301245716$0.17Homer Electric 285037 Sep‐099/9/2009 10/7/20092937,2001,2701265495$0.15Homer Electric 285037 Oct‐09 10/8/2009 11/5/20092939,9201,3621345883$0.15Homer Electric 285037 Nov‐09 11/6/2009 12/8/20093344,0001,5021356398$0.15Homer Electric 285037 Dec‐09 12/9/2009 1/7/20103034,5601,1801304582$0.13Homer Electric 285037 Jan‐10 1/8/2010 2/7/20103140,6401,3871365263$0.13Homer Electric 285037 Feb‐10 2/8/2010 3/7/20102837,6801,2861334928$0.13Homer Electric 285037 Mar‐10 3/8/2010 4/6/20103036,4001,2421295576$0.15Homer Electric 285037 Apr‐10 4/7/2010 5/9/20103341,2801,4091286186$0.15Homer Electric 285037 May‐10 5/10/2010 6/7/20102830,7201,0481234816$0.16Homer Electric 285037 Jun‐10 6/8/2010 7/9/20103125,680876783875$0.15Jul ‐ 08 to Jun ‐ 09 tota409,52013,9771,392$72,273$0Jul ‐ 09 to Jun ‐ 10 tota415,04014,1651,437$61,170$0Jul ‐ 08 to Jun ‐ 09 avg:$0.17Jul ‐ 09 to Jun ‐ 10 avg:$0.15APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYWEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT01000200030004000500060007000800090001000005,00010,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,00040,00045,00050,000Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Date (Mon ‐Yr)West Homer Elementary ‐Electric Consumption (kWh) vs. Electric Cost ($)Electric Consumption (kWh)Electric Cost ($)APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYWEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORTWest Homer ElementaryOilBtus/Gal =132,000Provider Customer # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (Gal) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Oil Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/Therm) Demand Cost ($)Harbor16243 Jul‐08 7/1/2008 7/31/2008309671,27642853.36Harbor16243 Aug‐08 8/1/2008 8/31/20083050266321253.21Harbor16243 Sep‐08 9/1/2008 9/30/2008292,7833,674110353.00Harbor16243 Oct‐08 10/1/2008 10/31/2008304,1765,512125672.28Harbor16243 Nov‐08 11/1/2008 11/30/2008293,1634,17570651.69Harbor16243 Dec‐08 12/1/2008 12/31/2008303,2074,23359761.41Harbor16243 Jan‐09 1/1/2009 1/31/2009305,0726,695100861.51Harbor16243 Feb‐09 2/1/2009 2/28/2009273,8475,07866681.31Harbor16243 Mar‐09 3/1/2009 3/31/2009300000.00Harbor16243 Apr‐09 4/1/2009 4/30/2009295,3457,05538080.54Harbor16243 May‐09 5/1/2009 5/31/2009303,2194,24962451.47Harbor16243 Jun‐09 6/1/2009 6/30/2009291,2761,68429581.76Harbor16243 Jul‐09 7/1/2009 7/31/2009300000.00Harbor16243 Aug‐09 8/1/2009 8/31/2009309691,27923441.83Harbor16243 Sep‐09 9/1/2009 9/30/2009292,5253,33355001.65Harbor16243 Oct‐09 10/1/2009 10/31/2009304,6316,113102891.68Harbor16243 Nov‐09 11/1/2009 11/30/2009291,7502,31041101.78Harbor16243 Dec‐09 12/1/2009 12/31/2009305,4197,153124201.74Harbor16243 Jan‐101/1/2010 1/31/2010301,5182,00436861.84Harbor16243 Feb‐10 2/1/2010 2/28/2010274,7876,319117221.86Harbor16243 Mar‐10 3/1/2010 3/31/2010304,6216,100119151.95Harbor16243 Apr‐10 4/1/2010 4/30/2010294,0405,333111002.08Harbor16243 May‐10 5/1/2010 5/31/2010302,9623,91080392.06Harbor16243 Jun‐10 6/1/2010 6/30/2010290000.00Jul ‐ 08 to Jun ‐ 09 total:33,55744,2950$72,818$0Jul ‐ 09 to Jun ‐ 10 total:33,22243,8530$81,125$0Jul ‐ 08 to Jun ‐ 09 avg:1.96Jul ‐ 09 to Jun ‐ 10 avg:1.85APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYWEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT$0.00$2,000.00$4,000.00$6,000.00$8,000.00$10,000.00$12,000.00$14,000.0001,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,000Oil Cost ($)Oil Consumption (Therms)Date (Mon ‐Yr)West Homer Elementary‐Oil Consumption (Therms) vs. Oil Cost ($)Oil Consumption (Therms)Oil Cost ($)APPENDIX A CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX B Appendix B Short AkWarm Report Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software West Homer Elementary School Page 2 APPENDIX B ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – PROJECT SUMMARY – Created 3/12/2012 4:06 PM General Project Information PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION Building: West Homer Elementary Auditor Company: Central Alaska Engineering Co. Address: 955 Soundview Avenue Auditor Name: Jerry P. Herring, PE, CEA City: Homer Auditor Address: 32215 Lakefront Drive Soldotna, AK 99669 Client Name: Kevin Lyon Client Address: 47140 East Poppy Lane Soldotna, AK 99669 Auditor Phone: (907) 260-5311 Auditor FAX: Client Phone: (907) 262-2035 Auditor Comment: Client FAX: Design Data Building Area: 52,456 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 1,148,945 Btu/hour with Distribution Losses: 1,229,135 Btu/hour Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and 25% Safety Margin: 1,873,681 Btu/hour Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load, if served. Typical Occupancy: 255 people Design Indoor Temperature: 72 deg F (building average) Actual City: Homer Design Outdoor Temperature: -2 deg F Weather/Fuel City: Homer Heating Degree Days: 10,349 deg F-days Utility Information Electric Utility: Homer Electric Assn - Commercial - Lg Natural Gas Provider: None Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.160/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.000/ccf Annual Energy Cost Estimate Description Space Heating Space Cooling Water Heating Lighting Refrige ration Other Electri cal Cooking Clothes Drying Ventilatio n Fans Service Fees Total Cost Existing Building $65,912 $0 $3,775 $25,598 $5,696 $9,447 $1,197 $90 $19,114 $0 $130,830 With Proposed Retrofits $50,587 $0 $3,001 $15,215 $4,582 $9,447 $1,197 $90 $9,837 $0 $93,956 SAVING S $15,325 $0 $774 $10,384 $1,114 $0 $0 $0 $9,278 $0 $36,874 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software West Homer Elementary School Page 3 APPENDIX B $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 Existing Retrofit Ventilation and Fans Space Heating Refrigeration Other Electrical Lighting Domestic Hot Water Cooking Clothes Drying Annual Energy Costs by End Use Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software West Homer Elementary School Page 4 APPENDIX B PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 1 Refrigeration: Large Walk-in Freezer Add new Seasonal Shutdown $518 $1 9960.00 0 2 Refrigeration: Large Walk-in Refrigerator Add new Seasonal Shutdown $384 $1 7378.00 0 3 Refrigeration: Vending Machine Add new Seasonal Shutdown $211 $300 13.53 1.4 4 Setback Thermostat: Mechanical Room Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Mechanical Room space. $375 $4,131 1.23 11 5 Setback Thermostat: Gymnasium Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gymnasium space. $858 $9,473 1.23 11 6 Setback Thermostat: Front Classrooms and Offices Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Front Classrooms and Offices space. $881 $9,761 1.23 11.1 7 Setback Thermostat: Classrooms & Offices Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Classrooms & Offices space. $3,320 $51,132 0.88 15.4 8 Lighting: Gym Replace with 18 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F28T5 28W High Lumen (3050 L) HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch $1,745 $69,080 0.61 39.6 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software West Homer Elementary School Page 5 APPENDIX B PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 9 Ventilation Add variable speed DDC System to ventilation system. Assumed that 25% of total cost is attributed to ventilation with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC for all ventilation systems ($124,163). Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (16 @ $850 = $13,600) $14,915 $311,590 0.60 20.9 10 HVAC And DHW Replace burners on boilers with modern, more efficient models (2 @ $10,000). Add variable speed DDC System to heating system. Assumed that 60% of total cost is attributed to heating with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC ($297,990). Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (11 @ $850 = $9,350) $3,596 $153,513 0.56 42.7 11 Lighting: Recessed Downlight Replace with 26 LED 34W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $900 $31,200 0.54 34.7 12 Lighting: Parking Lot Lights Replace with 23 LED (2) 150W Module (2) StdElectronic and Remove Manual Switching and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,397 $50,600 0.43 36.2 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software West Homer Elementary School Page 6 APPENDIX B PRIORITY LIST – RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) 13 Lighting: Exterior Lights Replace with 12 LED 50W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $684 $26,400 0.41 38.6 14 Lighting: 4-bulb Replace with 19 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver (2) Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $250 $14,385 0.36 57.4 15 Lighting: Classroom/Office Lights Replace with 443 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $4,333 $336,745 0.31 77.7 16 Lighting: Hallway/Kitchen Lights Replace with 163 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $1,074 $122,545 0.26 114.1 17 Cathedral Ceiling: Typical Ceiling Construction Install R-14 rigid board insulation. No cost included for covering insulation. $1,433 $1,515,2 86 0.02 1057.6 TOTAL $36,874 $2,706,1 43 0.23 73.4 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT – ENERGY EFFICIENT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Building Envelope Insulation Rank Location Existing Type/R-Value Recommendation Type/R- Value Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software West Homer Elementary School Page 7 APPENDIX B 17 Cathedral Ceiling: Typical Ceiling Construction Framing Type: I-Beam (TJI) Framing Spacing: 24 inches Insulated Sheathing: None Bottom Insulation Layer: Polyisocyanurate (PISO), 6 inches Top Insulation Layer: None Modeled R-Value: 37.6 Install R-14 rigid board insulation. No cost included for covering insulation. $1,515,28 6 $1,433 Exterior Doors – Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Windows and Glass Doors – Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Air Leakage Rank Location Estimated Air Leakage Recommended Air Leakage Target Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 2. Mechanical Equipment Mechanical Rank Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 10 Replace burners on boilers with modern, more efficient models (2 @ $10,000). Add variable speed DDC System to heating system. Assumed that 60% of total cost is attributed to heating with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC ($297,990). Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (11 @ $850 = $9,350) $153,513 $3,596 Setback Thermostat Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 4 Mechanical Room Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Mechanical Room space. $4,131 $375 5 Gymnasium Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Gymnasium space. $9,473 $858 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software West Homer Elementary School Page 8 APPENDIX B 6 Front Classrooms and Offices Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Front Classrooms and Offices space. $9,761 $881 7 Classrooms & Offices Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Classrooms & Offices space. $51,132 $3,320 Ventilation Rank Recommendation Cost Annual Energy Savings 9 Add variable speed DDC System to ventilation system. Assumed that 25% of total cost is attributed to ventilation with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC for all ventilation systems ($124,163). Replace motors with premium efficiency motors @ $850 each. (16 @ $850 = $13,600) $311,590 $14,915 3. Appliances and Lighting Lighting Fixtures and Controls Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 8 Gym 18 MH 250 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 18 FLUOR (5) T5 45.2" F28T5 28W High Lumen (3050 L) HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch $69,080 $1,745 11 Recessed Downlight 26 MH 100 Watt StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 26 LED 34W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $31,200 $900 12 Parking Lot Lights 23 HPS 400 Watt StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 23 LED (2) 150W Module (2) StdElectronic and Remove Manual Switching and Add new Occupancy Sensor $50,600 $1,397 13 Exterior Lights 12 HPS 150 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 12 LED 50W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $26,400 $684 Energy Audit – Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software West Homer Elementary School Page 9 APPENDIX B 14 4-bulb 19 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 19 FLUOR (4) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver (2) Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $14,385 $250 15 Classroom/Office Lights 443 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 443 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $336,745 $4,333 16 Hallway/Kitchen Lights 163 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 163 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $122,545 $1,074 Refrigeration Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 1 Large Walk-in Freezer Walk-in Freezer Add new Seasonal Shutdown $1 $518 2 Large Walk-in Refrigerator Commercial Refrigerator Add new Seasonal Shutdown $1 $384 3 Vending Machine Vending Machine Add new Seasonal Shutdown $300 $211 ------------------------------------------ AkWarmCalc Ver 2.1.4.2, Energy Lib 3/1/2012 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX C Appendix C Major Equipment List CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYWEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORTTAG LOCATIONFUNCTIONMAKE MODELTYPECAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZEASHRAE SERVICE LIFEESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFENOTESB1 MECH ROOM BUILDING HEAT WEIL MCLAIN 688 OIL / CAST IRON 1,703 MBH 85%3016B2 MECH ROOM BUILDING HEAT WEIL MCLAIN 688 OIL / CAST IRON 1,703 MBH85%3016WH1 MECH ROOM DOMESTIC HOT WATER BOILERMATE CU TUBETWO PASS 450 MBH90%2410T1 MECH ROOM SNOWMELT BOILERMATE CU TUBETWO PASS 620 MBH90%2410CP1A, 1B MECH ROOM BUILDING HEAT GRUNDFOS UPC80160 INLINE172 GPM @ 25'2 HP100CP2A, 2B MECH ROOM BUILDING HEAT GRUNDFOS UPC80160 INLINE160 GPM @ 37'2 HP100CP3 MECH ROOMDHW CIRCGRUNDFOS UP1542SF INLINE4 GPM @ 9'1 HP100CP4 MECH ROOM SNOWMELT GRUNDFOS UPC65160 INLINE47 GPM @ 41'1.5 HP100CP5 MECH ROOMDHW CIRCGRUNDFOS UP2564SF INLINE8 GPM @ 12'0.08 HP100CP6 AHU1COIL CIRCGRUNDFOS UMC5080 INLINE33.2 GPM @ 12' 0.33 HP100CP7AHU2COIL CIRCGRUNDFOSUP2664FINLINE15.6 GPM @ 12'0.08 HP100CP8 RTU1COIL CIRCGRUNDFOS UP2664F INLINE15.7 GPM @ 12' 0.08 HP100CP9 RTU2COIL CIRCGRUNDFOS UP2664F INLINE15.7 GPM @ 12' 0.08 HP100CP10 RTU3COIL CIRCGRUNDFOS UP2664F INLINE15.5 GPM @ 12' 0.08 HP100CP11 RTU4COIL CIRCGRUNDFOS UP2664F INLINE15.5 GPM @ 12' 0.08 HP100P1 FUEL TANK1 FUEL OIL S/R F.E. PETRO PMA 33 SUBMERSIBLE 33.2 GPH @ 25'0.33 HP100P2 FUEL TANK1 FUEL OIL S/R F.E. PETRO PMA 33 SUBMERSIBLE 18 GPH @ 25'0.33 HP100RTU1 N WING ROOF NORTH WING S/R PACE P30/A24 HORIZONTAL 8,550 CFM / 7,500 CFM NEMA 4.03 HP / 1.27 HP 2511RTU2 N WING ROOF NORTH WING S/R PACE P30/A24 HORIZONTAL 8,550 CFM / 7,500 CFM NEMA 4.03 HP / 1.27 HP 2511RTU3 S WING ROOF SOUTH WING S/R PACE P30/A24 HORIZONTAL 8,700 CFM / 7,500 CFM NEMA 4.1 HP / 1.27 HP 2511RTU4 S WING ROOF SOUTH WING S/R PACE P30/A24 HORIZONTAL 8,700 CFM / 7,500 CFM NEMA 4.1 HP / 1.27 HP 2511AHU1 MECH ROOMCORE S/RPACEA30 HORIZONTAL 18,650 CFM NEMA 10 HP2511AHU2 MECH ROOMCORE S/RPACEA18 HORIZONTAL 6,840 CFM NEMA 5 HP2511SF1 MECH ROOM SUPPLY AIRPACE SCF63A CENTRIFUGAL 550 CFMNEMA 0.33 HP2511SF2 MECH ROOM RETURN AIRPACE SCF63A CENTRIFUGAL 550 CFMNEMA 0.33 HP2511RF1 MECH ROOM EXHAUST AIRPACEA30 CENTRIFUGAL 15,350 CFM NEMA 3 HP2511EF1 111 ROOFEXHAUST AIR GREENHECK GB804 UPBLAST450 CFMNEMA 0.25 HP2511EF2 113 ROOFEXHAUST AIR GREENHECK GB804 UPBLAST450 CFMNEMA 0.25 HP2511EF3 305 ROOFEXHAUST AIR GREENHECK GB804 UPBLAST500 CFMNEMA 0.25 HP2511EF4 307 ROOFEXHAUST AIR GREENHECK GB804 UPBLAST450 CFMNEMA 0.25 HP2511EF5 207 ROOFEXHAUST AIR GREENHECK GB1004 UPBLAST950 CFMNEMA 0.25 HP2511EF6 227 ROOFEXHAUST AIR GREENHECK GB804 UPBLAST525 CFMNEMA 0.25 HP2511EF7 401 ROOF KITCHEN EXHAUST AIR GREENHECK CUBE160HP7 UPBLAST1,875 CFM NEMA 0.75 HP2511COMP 1 BOILERROOM PNEUMATIC CONTROL QUINCYRECIPRACATING UNKNEMA5HP206COMP 2 BOILERROOM FOOD STORAGE KOLPAK M228670 CENTRIFUGALUNKNEMA 1.46HP206COMP3 BOILERROOM FOOD STORAGE KOLPAC M228660 CENTRIFUGALUNKNEMA 1.84HP206MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORYMAJOR EQUIPMENT LISTAPPENDIX C CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANYWEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORTTAG LOCATIONFUNCTIONMAKE MODELTYPECAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZEASHRAE SERVICE LIFEESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFENOTESUH1 VARIES BUILDING HEAT VULCAN HV118A HYDRONIC330 CFMNEMA 0.02HP206UH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VULCAN HV118A HYDRONIC330 CFMNEMA 0.02HP206UH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VULCAN HV118A HYDRONIC330 CFMNEMA 0.02HP206UH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VULCAN HV118A HYDRONIC330 CFMNEMA 0.02HP206CUH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VIULCAN CR3HYDRONIC195 CFMNEMA .033 HP206CUH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VIULCAN CR3HYDRONIC195 CFMNEMA .033 HP206CUH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VIULCAN CR3HYDRONIC195 CFMNEMA .033 HP206CUH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VIULCAN CR3HYDRONIC195 CFMNEMA .033 HP206CUH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VIULCAN CR3HYDRONIC195 CFMNEMA .033 HP206CUH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VIULCAN CR3HYDRONIC195 CFMNEMA .033 HP206CUH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VIULCAN CR3HYDRONIC195 CFMNEMA .033 HP206CUH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VIULCAN CR3HYDRONIC195 CFMNEMA .033 HP206CUH1 VARIESBUILDING HEAT VIULCAN CR3HYDRONIC195 CFMNEMA .033 HP206APPENDIX C CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D Appendix D Site Visit Photos CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 1. Windows Typical Of School 2. Example Of Window Width 3. Doors Typical Of School 4. Fuel Supply Tank (Diesel) & Storage Outbuilding CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 5. Roof Overview 6. Roof Overview (2) 7. Roof Overview (3) 8. Typical School Exterior Light Fixture CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 9. Typical Pole0Mounted Exterior Light Fixture 10. Exterior Recessed Down light Typical 11. Boiler 1 12. Boiler 2 CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 13. Boiler Room Overview 14. Side0Arm Domestic Hot Water Heater 15. Hot Water Circulation Pump Typical Of School 16. Hot Water Control Valve (Upper Left) & Snowmelt System Heat Exchanger CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 17. Boiler Room Chilling Units 18. Roof Top Air Handling Unit Typical of School 19. Roof Mounted Exhaust Fan Typical to School 20. Air Handling Unit Typical Of School CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 21. Unit heater Typical of School 22. HVAC Digital Time Switch Control Panel 23. HVAC Alarm & Manual Switch Panel 24. Air Compressor & Air Dryer (Upper Right) CENTRAL ALASKA ENGINEERING COMPANY WEST HOMER ELEMENTARY ENERGY AUDIT REPORT APPENDIX D 25. Gymnasium Light Fixtures 26. Commercial Freezer Unit 27. Commercial Refrigeration Unit 28. Back0Up Generator Central Alaska Engineering Company West Homer Elementary Energy Audit Report APPENDIX E Appendix E Thermal Site Visit Photos Central Alaska Engineering Company West Homer Elementary Energy Audit Report APPENDIX E 1. West facing school enterance, this wall type showes a consistant temperature. Note expected heat loss around the window frames. Central Alaska Engineering Company West Homer Elementary Energy Audit Report APPENDIX E 2. South West corner of school. Central Alaska Engineering Company West Homer Elementary Energy Audit Report APPENDIX E 3. North faceing wall of school. Central Alaska Engineering Company West Homer Elementary Energy Audit Report APPENDIX E 4. Northwest corner of school. Central Alaska Engineering Company West Homer Elementary Energy Audit Report APPENDIX E 5. Southeastern wall of school. Higher heat loss from window frames. Central Alaska Engineering Company West Homer Elementary Energy Audit Report APPENDIX E 6. Close‐up of southeastern windows closest to gymnasium. Higher heat loss shown below windows. Possibly from water damage to the insulation. Central Alaska Engineering Company West Homer Elementary Energy Audit Report APPENDIX E 7. Close‐up of other windows on southeastern side. (B) Similar results to those discussed earlier. Central Alaska Engineering Company West Homer Elementary Energy Audit Report APPENDIX E 8. (A) Visible evidence of water shown on the top of the window No abnormalities are seen on the masonry wall in the thermal image. (B) Heat loss from window frame is expected, as is heat reflected by bricks. B A Central Alaska Engineering Company West Homer Elementary Energy Audit Report APPENDIX E 9. Images of northeastern wall of building. Heat loss is shown at bottom of windows, similar to that seen on the southeastern portion of the building. (A) Warmer lines on the wall seen in the thermal image correlate to the position of northeastern restroom walls, according to the building schematic.