HomeMy WebLinkAboutGAL GILA Headquarters 2012-EEManaging Office
2400 College Road 3105 Lakeshore Dr. Suite 106A 4402 Thane Road
Fairbanks, Alaska 99709 Anchorage, Alaska 99517 Juneau, Alaska 99801
p. 907.452.5688 p. 907.222.2445 p: 907.586.6813
f. 907.452.5694 f. 907.222.0915 f: 907.586.6819
www.nortechengr.com
ENERGY AUDIT – FINAL REPORT
GILA HEADQUARTERS
1845 Challenger Road
Galena, Alaska
Prepared for:
Mr. Chris Reitan
PO Box 266
Galena, Alaska
Prepared by:
David Lanning PE, CEA
Jeremy Spargur EIT, CEA-IT
July 12, 2012
Acknowledgment: “This material is based upon work supported by the Department of
Energy under Award Number DE-EE0000095”
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, HEALTH & SAFETY
Anch: 3105 Lakeshore Dr. Ste 106A, 99517 907.222.2445 Fax: 222.0915
Fairbanks: 2400 College Road, 99709 907.452.5688 Fax: 452.5694
Juneau: 4402 Thane Road, 99801 907.586.6813 Fax: 586.6819
info@nortechengr.com www.nortechengr.com
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final
AHFC Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 1
2.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Building Use .......................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Building Occupancy and Schedules ...................................................................... 3
2.3 Building Description ............................................................................................... 3
3.0 BENCHMARKING 2010 UTILITY DATA .......................................................................... 5
3.1 Total Energy Use and Cost of 2010 ...................................................................... 6
3.2 Energy Utilization Index of 2010 ............................................................................ 7
3.3 Cost Utilization Index of 2010 ................................................................................ 8
3.4 Seasonal Energy Use Patterns ............................................................................. 9
3.5 Future Energy Monitoring .................................................................................... 10
4.0 MODELING ENERGY CONSUMPTION ......................................................................... 11
4.1 Understanding How AkWarm Models Energy Consumption ............................... 12
4.2 AkWarm Calculated Savings for the GILA Headquarters .................................... 13
4.3 Additional Modeling Methods .............................................................................. 14
5.0 BUILDING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M) .............................................. 15
5.1 Operations and Maintenance .............................................................................. 15
5.2 Commissioning .................................................................................................... 15
5.3 Building Specific Recommendations ................................................................... 15
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final
AHFC Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
ii
APPENDICES
Appendix A Recommended Energy Efficiency Measures ........................................... 17
Appendix B Energy Efficiency Measures that are NOT Recommended ..................... 26
Appendix C Significant Equipment List ....................................................................... 27
Appendix D Local Utility Rate Structure ...................................................................... 29
Appendix E Analysis Methodology .............................................................................. 30
Appendix F Audit Limitations ...................................................................................... 31
Appendix G References .............................................................................................. 32
Appendix H Typical Energy Use and Cost – Fairbanks and Anchorage ..................... 33
Appendix I Typical Energy Use and Cost – Continental U.S. .................................... 34
Appendix J List of Conversion Factors and Energy Units .......................................... 35
Appendix K List of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Definitions .................................... 36
Appendix L Building Floor Plan .................................................................................. 37
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
1
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NORTECH has completed an ASHRAE Level II Energy Audit of the GILA Headquarters, a
12,536 square foot facility. The audit began with benchmarking which resulted in a calculation
of the energy consumption per square foot. A site inspection was completed on January 10,
2012 to obtain information about the lighting, heating, ventilation, cooling and other building
energy uses. The existing usage data and current systems were then used to develop a
building energy consumption model using AkWarm.
Once the model was calibrated, a number of Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs) were
developed from review of the data and observations. EEMs were evaluated and ranked on the
basis of both energy savings and cost using a Savings/Investment Ratio (SIR). While these
modeling techniques were successful in verifying that many of the EEMs would save energy,
not all of the identified EEMs were considered cost effective based on the hardware, installation,
and energy costs at the time of this audit.
While the need for a major retrofit can typically be identified by an energy audit, upgrading
specific systems often requires collecting additional data and engineering and design efforts that
are beyond the scope of the Level II energy audit. The necessity and amount of design effort
and cost will vary depending on the scope of the specific EEMs planned and the sophistication
and capability of the entire design team, including the building owners and operators. During
the budgeting process for any major retrofit identified in this report, the building owner should
add administrative and supplemental design costs to cover the individual needs of their own
organization and the overall retrofit project.
The following table, from AkWarm, is a summary of the recommended EEMs for the GILA
Headquarters. Additional discussion of the modeling process can be found in Section 3.
Details of each individual EEM can be found in Appendix A of this report. A summary of EEMs
that were evaluated but are not currently recommended is located in Appendix B.
PRIORITY LIST –ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES (EEMs)
Rank Feature/
Location Improvement Description
Estimated
Annual
Energy
Savings
Estimated
Installed
Cost
Savings to
Investment
Ratio, SIR
Simple
Payback
(Years)
1 Ventilation Repair ventilation controls and reduce
outside air intake $3,112 $5000 8.0 1.6
2 Lighting Upgrade Lighting System $11,896 $10,974 7.0 0.9
3 Refrigeration:
Chest Freezer Replace with energy efficient freezer $459 $1200 3.2 2.6
4 Setback
thermostats
Install approximately 22 setback
thermostats and implement an
unoccupied setback to 62°F
$1,309 $16,000 1.1 12
TOTAL, cost-effective measures $16,774 $23,174 4.0 2.0
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
2
Modeled Building Energy Cost Breakdown
These charts are a graphical representation of the modeled energy usage for the GILA
Headquarters. The greatest portions of energy cost for the building are lighting and envelope air
losses. This indicates that the greatest savings can be found in reducing the amount of outside
air provided to the building mechanically or through air leakage and upgrading lighting. Detailed
improvements for ventilation, lighting, and other cost effective measures can be found in
Appendix A.
The chart breaks down energy usage by cost into the following categories:
Envelope Air Losses—the cost to provide heated fresh air to occupants, air leakage, heat lost in
air through the chimneys and exhaust fans, heat lost to wind and other similar losses.
Envelope
o Ceiling—quantified heat loss transferred through the ceiling portion of the envelope.
o Window—quantified heat loss through the window portion of the envelope.
o Wall/Door—quantified heat loss through the wall and door portions of the envelope.
o Floor—quantified heat loss through the floor portion of the envelope.
Water Heating—energy cost to provide domestic hot water.
Fans—energy cost to run ventilation, and exhaust fans.
Lighting—energy cost to light the building.
Refrigeration—energy costs to provide refrigerated goods for the occupants.
Other Electrical—includes energy costs not listed above including cooking loads, laundry loads,
other plug loads and electronics.
The energy cost by end use breakdown was provided by AkWarm based on the field inspection
and does not indicate that all individual fixtures and appliances were directly measured. The
current energy costs are shown below on the left hand pie graph and the projected energy
costs, assuming use of the recommended EEMs, are shown on the right.
Envelope
Air Losses
$19,174
30%
Ceiling
$1,866
3%
Window
$725
1%
Wall/Door
$3,627
6%
Floor
$2,073
3%
Water
Heating
$428
1%
Fans
$6,917
11%
Lighting
$23,245
36%
Refriger-
ation
$1,008
2%
Other
Electrical
$4,597
7%
Existing Building Energy Cost
Breakdown $63,659
Envelope
Air Losses
$14,911
23%
Ceiling
$1,981
3%
Window
$834
1%
Wall/Door
$3,650
6%
Floor
$2,190
4%
Water
Heating
$428
1%
Fans
$6,917
11%
Lighting
$10,873
17%
Refriger-
ation
$504
1%
Other
Electrical
$4,597
7%
EEM
Savings
$16,774
26%
Retrofit Building Energy Cost Breakdown
$46,885
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
3
2.0 INTRODUCTION
NORTECH contracted with the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation to perform ASHRAE
Level II Energy Audits for publically owned buildings in Alaska. This report presents the findings
of the utility benchmarking, modeling analysis, and the recommended building modifications,
and building use changes that are expected to save energy and money.
The report is organized into sections covering:
description of the facility,
the building’s historic energy usage (benchmarking),
estimating energy use through energy use modeling,
evaluation of potential energy efficiency or efficiency improvements, and
recommendations for energy efficiency with estimates of the costs and savings.
2.1 Building Use
This building is used primarily as offices and classrooms. Portions of the building are used as
offices for the Alaska State Troopers, offices for school district personnel, and classrooms for
students.
2.2 Building Occupancy and Schedules
The building is occupied primarily from 9 am – 5 pm Monday through Friday.
2.3 Building Description
This building is two-story, insulated wood-framed building that sits on an insulated slab on
grade. The exterior doors are metal with foam insulation and the windows are typically triple
pane aluminum.
Building Envelope
Building Envelope: Walls
Wall Type Description Insulation Notes
Above-grade walls Wood-framed with 2x10 studs
spaced 16-inches on center. R-30 fiberglass batt. No signs of insulation
damage.
Mechanical room wall 8” poured concrete, 2x4 frame,
metal siding R-13 fiberglass batt No signs of insulation
damage
Building Envelope: Floors
Floor Type Description Insulation Notes
On grade floor Insulated slab 4’ of 2” rigid board
insulation on perimeter -
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
4
Heating and Ventilation Systems
District steam provided by the local utility company is used to heat the building. Heat is
transferred through steam to a glycol heat exchanger and then to the following zones:
first floor baseboards and cabinet heaters
second floor baseboards
two air handling units (AHUs)
The temperature is controlled throughout the building with pneumatic thermostats. The AHUs
are controlled manually and provide air continuously to the building during the months of the
school year.
Air Conditioning System
The building is no longer equipped with an air conditioning system.
Energy Management
The building is not equipped with an energy management system.
Lighting Systems
The lighting is the building is provided primarily by ceiling mounted fluorescent fixtures
containing T12 (1.5” diameter, 4’ long) lamps.
Domestic Hot Water
Domestic hot water is heated and provided to the building through a steam to water heat
exchanger. The system does not have any storage capacity.
Building Envelope: Roof
Roof Type Description Insulation Notes
All Roofs Hot roof framed with wood
trusses. R-30 fiberglass batt. No signs of insulation
damage.
Building Envelope: Doors and Windows
Door and Window
Type Description Estimated
R-Value Notes
Door 1 Full lite metal door 1.7
Extremely leaky and in
need of weather
stripping repair
Door 2 Flush metal door 2.7
Extremely leaky and in
need of weather
stripping repair
Window 1
Triple pane aluminum with no
thermal break, not south, >3/8”
air gap
1.5 96 SF
Window 2
Triple pane aluminum with no
thermal break, south. >3/8” air
gap
1.5 116 SF
Window 3
Triple pane aluminum with
thermal break, not south, >3/8”
air gap
2.0 12 SF
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
5
3.0 BENCHMARKING 2010 UTILITY DATA
Benchmarking building energy use consists of obtaining and then analyzing two years of energy
bills. The original utility bills are necessary to determine the raw usage, and charges as well as
to evaluate the utility’s rate structure. The metered usage of electrical and natural gas
consumption is measured monthly, but heating oil, propane, wood, and other energy sources
are normally billed upon delivery and provide similar information. During benchmarking,
information is compiled in a way that standardizes the units of energy and creates energy use
and billing rate information statistics for the building on a square foot basis. The objectives of
benchmarking are:
to understand patterns of use,
to understand building operational characteristics,
for comparison with other similar facilities in Alaska and across the country, and
to offer insight in to potential energy savings.
The results of the benchmarking, including the energy use statistics and comparisons to other
areas, are discussed in the following sections.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
6
3.1 Total Energy Use and Cost of 2010
The energy use profiles below show the energy and cost breakdowns for the GILA
Headquarters. The total annual energy usage for the building in 2010 was 2,703 mmBTUs and
the cost was $44,785. These charts show the portion of use for a fuel type and the portion of its
cost.
The above charts indicate that the highest portion of energy use is for steam and the highest
portion of cost is for electricity. Steam consumption correlates directly to space heating and
domestic hot water while electrical use can correlate to lighting systems, plug loads, and HVAC
equipment. The energy type with the highest cost often provides the most opportunity for
savings.
Electric
310
25%
Steam
2393
84%
Energy Use Total (mmBTU)
Electric
$33,455
75%
Steam
$11,330
25%
Energy Cost Total ($)
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
7
3.2 Energy Utilization Index of 2010
The primary benchmarking statistic is the Energy Utilization Index (EUI). The EUI is calculated
from the utility bills and provides a simple snapshot of the quantity of energy actually used by
the building on a square foot and annual basis. The calculation converts the total energy use
for the year from all sources in the building, such as heating fuel and electrical usage, into
British Thermal Units (BTUs). This total annual usage is then divided by the number of square
feet of the building. The EUI units are BTUs per square foot per year.
The benchmark analysis found that the GILA Headquarters has an EUI of 98,000 BTUs per
square foot per year.
The EUI is useful in comparing this building’s energy use to that of other similar buildings in
Alaska and in the Continental United States. The EUI can be compared to average energy use
in 2003 found in a study by the U.S. Energy Information Administration of commercial buildings
(abbreviated CBECS, 2006). That report found an overall average energy use of about 90,000
BTUs per square foot per year while studying about 6,000 commercial buildings of all sizes,
types, and uses that were located all over the Continental U.S. (see Table C3 in Appendix I).
In a recent and unpublished state-wide benchmarking study sponsored by the Alaska Housing
Finance Corporation, schools in Fairbanks averaged 62,000 BTUs per square foot and schools
in Anchorage averaged 123,000 BTUs per square foot annual energy use. The chart below
shows the GILA Headquarters relative to these values. These findings are discussed further in
Appendix H.
98,000
62,000
123,000
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
Btu/ Sq. FtAnnual Energy Utilization Index (Total Energy / SF)
GILA Headquarters Fairbanks Schools Anchorage Schools
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
8
3.3 Cost Utilization Index of 2010
Another benchmarking statistic that is useful is the Cost Utilization Index (CUI), which is the cost
for energy used in the building on a square foot basis per year. The CUI is calculated from the
cost for utilities for a year period. The CUI permits comparison of buildings on total energy cost
even though they may be located in areas with differing energy costs and differing heating
and/or cooling climates. The cost of energy, including heating oil, natural gas, and electricity,
can vary greatly over time and geographic location and can be higher in Alaska than other parts
of the country.
The CUI for GILA Headquarters is about $3.57. This is based on utility costs from 2010 and
the following rates:
Electricity at $0.34 / kWh or $10.79 / Therm
Steam at $12.26 / thousand pounds or $ 1.23 / Therm
Compare #1 Fuel Oil at $ 5.43 / gallon or $ 4.11 / Therm
The CUI in the future will be higher due to the rising cost of electricity. Implementing all of the
recommended EEMs becomes more beneficial with the rising cost.
The Department of Energy Administration study, mentioned in the previous section (CBECS,
2006) found an average cost of $2.52 per square foot in 2003 for 4,400 buildings in the
Continental U.S (Tables C4 and C13 of CBDES, 2006). Schools in Fairbanks have an average
cost for energy of $2.42 per square foot while Anchorage schools average $2.11 per square
foot. The chart below shows the GILA Headquarters relative to these values. More details are
included in Appendix H.
$3.57
$2.42
$2.11
$0.00
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.50
$4.00
Annual Energy Cost Utilization Index (Total Cost/ SF)
GILA Headquarters Fairbanks Schools Anchorage Schools
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
9
3.4 Seasonal Energy Use Patterns
Energy consumption is often highly correlated with seasonal climate and usage variations. The
graphs below show the electric and fuel consumption of this building over the course of two
years. The lowest monthly use is called the baseline use. The electric baseline often reflects
year round lighting consumption while the heating fuel baseline often reflects year round hot
water usage. The clear relation of increased energy usage during periods of cold weather can
be seen in the months with higher usage.
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Oct-09Dec-09Feb-10Apr-10Jun-10Aug-10Oct-10Dec-10Feb-11Apr-11KWHElectrical Consumption
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Oct-09Dec-09Feb-10Apr-10Jun-10Aug-10Oct-10Dec-10Feb-11Apr-11ThermsThousand Pounds of Steam,Steam Consumption
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
10
3.5 Future Energy Monitoring
Energy accounting is the process of tracking energy consumption and costs. It is important for
the building owner or manager to monitor and record both the energy usage and cost each
month. Comparing trends over time can assist in pinpointing major sources of energy usage and
aid in finding effective energy efficiency measures. There are two basic methods of energy
accounting: manual and automatic. Manual tracking of energy usage may already be performed
by an administrative assistant: however if the records are not scrutinized for energy use, then
the data is merely a financial accounting. Digital energy tracking systems can be installed. They
display and record real-time energy usage and accumulated energy use and cost. There are
several types which have all of the information accessible via Ethernet browser.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
11
4.0 MODELING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
After benchmarking of a building is complete and the site visit has identified the specific systems
in the building, a number of different methods are available for quantifying the overall energy
consumption and to model the energy use. These range from relatively simple spreadsheets to
commercially available modeling software capable of handling complex building systems.
NORTECH has used several of these programs and uses the worksheets and software that
best matches the complexity of the building and specific energy use that is being evaluated.
Modeling of an energy efficiency measure (EEM) requires an estimate of the current energy
used by the specific feature, the estimated energy use of the proposed EEM and its installed
cost. EEMs can range from a single simple upgrade, such as light bulb type or type of motor, to
reprogramming of the controls on more complex systems. While the need for a major retrofit
can typically be identified by an energy audit, the specific system upgrades often require
collecting additional data and engineering and design efforts that are beyond the scope of the
Level II energy audit.
Based on the field inspection results and discussions with the building owners/operators,
auditors developed potential EEMs for the facility. Common EEMs that could apply to almost
every older building include:
Reduce the envelope heat losses through:
o increased building insulation, and
o better windows and doors
Reduce temperature difference between inside and outside using setback thermostats
Upgrade inefficient:
o lights,
o motors,
o refrigeration units, and
o other appliances
Reduce running time of lights/appliances through:
o motion sensors,
o on/off timers,
o light sensors, and
o other automatic/programmable systems
The objective of the following sections is to describe how the overall energy use of the building
was modeled and the potential for energy savings. The specific EEMs that provide these overall
energy savings are detailed in Appendix A of this report. While the energy savings of an EEM is
unlikely to change significantly over time, the cost savings of an EEM is highly dependent on the
current energy price and can vary significantly over time. An EEM that is not currently
recommended based on price may be more attractive at a later date or with higher energy
prices.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
12
4.1 Understanding How AkWarm Models Energy Consumption
NORTECH used the AkWarm model for evaluating the overall energy consumption at the GILA
Headquarters. The AkWarm program was developed by the Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation (AHFC) to model residential energy use. The original AkWarm is the modeling
engine behind the successful residential energy upgrade program that AHFC has operated for a
number of years. In the past few years, AHFC has developed a version of this model for
commercial buildings.
Energy use in buildings is modeled by calculating energy losses and consumption, such as:
• Heat lost through the building envelope components, including windows, doors,
walls, ceilings, crawlspaces, and foundations. These heat losses are computed for
each component based on the area, heat resistance (R-value), and the difference
between the inside temperature and the outside temperature. AkWarm has a library
of temperature profiles for villages and cities in Alaska.
• Window orientation, such as the fact that south facing windows can add heat in the
winter but north-facing windows do not.
• Inefficiencies of the heating system, including the imperfect conversion of fuel oil or
natural gas due to heat loss in exhaust gases, incomplete combustion, excess air,
etc. Some electricity is also consumed in moving the heat around a building through
pumping.
• Inefficiencies of the cooling system, if one exists, due to various imperfections in a
mechanical system and the required energy to move the heat around.
• Lighting requirements and inefficiencies in the conversion of electricity to light;
ultimately all of the power used for lighting is converted to heat. While the heat may
be useful in the winter, it often isn’t useful in the summer when cooling may be
required to remove the excess heat. Lights are modeled by wattage and operational
hours.
• Use and inefficiencies in refrigeration, compressor cooling, and heat pumps. Some
units are more efficient than others. Electricity is required to move the heat from
inside a compartment to outside it. Again, this is a function of the R-Value and the
temperature difference between the inside and outside of the unit.
• Plug loads such as computers, printers, mini-fridges, microwaves, portable heaters,
monitors, etc. These can be a significant part of the overall electricity consumption
of the building, as well as contributing to heat production.
• The schedule of operation for lights, plug loads, motors, etc. is a critical component
of how much energy is used.
AkWarm adds up these heat losses and the internal heat gains based on individual unit usage
schedules. These estimated heat and electrical usages are compared to actual use on both a
yearly and seasonal basis. If the AkWarm model is within 5 % to 10% of the most recent 12
months usage identified during benchmarking, the model is considered accurate enough to
make predictions of energy savings for possible EEMs.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
13
4.2 AkWarm Calculated Savings for the GILA Headquarters
Based on the field inspection results and discussions with the building owners/operators,
auditors developed potential EEMs for the facility. These EEMs are then entered into AkWarm
to determine if the EEM saves energy and is cost effective (i.e. will pay for itself). AkWarm
calculates the energy and money saved by each EEM and calculates the length of time for the
savings in reduced energy consumption to pay for the installation of the EEM. AkWarm makes
recommendations based on the Savings/Investment Ratio (SIR), which is defined as ratio of the
savings generated over the life of the EEM divided by the installed cost. Higher SIR values are
better and any SIR above one is considered acceptable. If the SIR of an EEM is below one, the
energy savings will not pay for the cost of the EEM and the EEM is not recommended.
Preferred EEMs are listed by AkWarm in order of the highest SIR.
A summary of the savings from the recommended EEMs are listed in this table.
Description Space
Heating
Water
Heating Lighting Refrigeration Other
Electrical
Ventilation
Fans Total
Existing
Building $27,464 $428 $23,245 $1,008 $4,597 $6,917 $63,659
With All
Proposed
Retrofits
$23,566 $428 $10,873 $504 $4,597 $6,917 $46,885
Savings $3,898 $0 $12,372 $504 $0 $0 $16,774
Savings in these categories do not reflect interaction with other categories. So, for example, the
savings in lighting does not affect the added space heating cost to make up for the heat saved
in replacing less-efficient lights with more-efficient lights that waste less heat.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
14
4.3 Additional Modeling Methods
The AkWarm program effectively models wood-framed and other buildings with standard
heating systems and relatively simple HVAC systems. AkWarm models of more complicated
mechanical systems are sometimes poor due to a number of simplifying assumptions and
limited input of some variables. Furthermore, AKWarm is unable to model complex HVAC
systems such as variable frequency motors, variable air volume (VAV) systems, those with
significant digital or pneumatic controls or significant heat recovery capacity. In addition, some
other building methods and occupancies are outside AkWarm capabilities.
This report section is included in order to identify benefits from modifications to those more
complex systems or changes in occupant behavior that cannot be addressed in AkWarm.
The GILA Headquarters could be modeled well in AKWarm. Retrofits for the HVAC system were
adequately modeled in AkWarm and did not require additional calculations.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
15
5.0 BUILDING OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M)
5.1 Operations and Maintenance
A well-implemented operation and maintenance (O & M) plan is often the driving force behind
energy savings. Such a plan includes preserving institutional knowledge, directing preventative
maintenance, and scheduling regular inspections of each piece of HVAC equipment within the
building Routine maintenance includes the timely replacement of filters, belts and pulleys, the
proper greasing of bearings and other details such as topping off the glycol tanks. Additional
benefits to a maintenance plan are decreased down time for malfunctioning equipment, early
indications of problems, prevention of exacerbated maintenance issues, and early detection of
overloading/overheating issues. A good maintenance person knows the building’s equipment
well enough to spot and repair minor malfunctions before they become major retrofits.
Operations and Maintenance staff implementing a properly designed O & M plan will:
Track and document
o Renovations and repairs,
o Utility bills and fuel consumption, and
o System performance.
Keep available for reference
o A current Building Operating Plan including an inventory of installed systems,
o The most recent available as-built drawings,
o Reference manuals for all installed parts and systems, and
o An up-to-date inventory of on-hand replacement parts.
Provide training and continuing education for maintenance personnel.
Plan for commissioning and re-commissioning at appropriate intervals.
5.2 Commissioning
Commissioning of a building is the verification that the HVAC systems perform within the design
or usage ranges of the Building Operating Plan. This process ideally, though seldom, occurs as
the last phase in construction. HVAC system operation parameters degrade from ideal over time
due to incorrect maintenance, improper replacement pumps, changes in facility tenants or
usage, changes in schedules, and changes in energy costs or loads. Ideally, re-commissioning
of a building should occur every five to ten years. This ensures that the HVAC system meets
the potentially variable use with the most efficient means.
5.3 Building Specific Recommendations
Several issues need be addressed for the GILA headquarters that will make it a more energy
efficient building including:
Repairing or replacing weather stripping around exterior doors
Keeping arctic entry doors closed
Cleaning and maintaining AHUs
Repairing controls for AHUs so that dampers operate properly.
Repairing zone valves and thermostats
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
16
APPENDICES
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
17
Appendix A Recommended Energy Efficiency Measures
A number of Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs) are available to reduce the energy use and
overall operating cost for the facility. The EEMs listed below are those recommended by
AkWarm based on the calculated savings/investment ration (SIR) as described in Appendix E.
AkWarm also provides a breakeven cost, which is the maximum initial cost of the EEM that will
still return a SIR of one or greater.
This section describes each recommended EEM and identifies the potential energy savings and
installation costs. This also details the calculation of breakeven costs, simple payback, and the
SIR for each recommendation. The recommended EEMs are grouped together generally by the
overall end use that will be impacted.
A.1 Temperature Control
Approximately 22 programmable pneumatic thermostats should be installed and programmed in
the entire building. Programmable thermostats allow for automatic temperature setback, which
reduce usage more reliably than manual setbacks. Reduction of the nighttime temperature set
point in the GILA Headquarters will decrease the energy usage.
Several thermostats in the building are inoperative and there is an uneven heat distribution
throughout the building. Replacing these thermostats and repairing any faulty zone valves in
order to setback the temperature during unoccupied periods will significantly save energy.
Pneumatic set back thermostats use two different air pressures requiring two air tubes to each
thermostat and an air system that is clean and free of air leaks.
Rank Building Space Recommendation
4 Entire Building
Install approximately 22 setback
pneumatic thermostats and Implement a
Heating Temperature Unoccupied
Setback to 62 deg F for the building.
Installation Cost $11,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 15 Energy Savings (/yr.) $1,309
Breakeven Cost $16,736 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.5 Simple Payback (yr.) 8
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
18
A.2 Electrical Loads
A.2.1 Lighting
The electricity used by lighting eventually ends up as heat in the building. In areas where
electricity is more expensive than other forms of energy, or in areas where the summer
temperatures require cooling; this additional heat can be both wasteful and costly. Converting
to more efficient lighting reduces cooling loads in the summer and allows the user to control
heat input in the winter. The conversion from T12 (one and a half inch fluorescent bulbs) to T8
(one inch), T5 (5/8 inch), Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFL), or LED bulbs provides a significant
increase in efficiency. LED bulbs can be directly placed in existing fixtures. The LED bulb
bypasses the ballast altogether, which removes the often irritating, “buzzing” noise that
magnetic ballasts tend to make.
The majority of the energy savings associated with lighting can be found in replacing the current
T12 lamps with energy efficient T8 lamps. Due to the high price of electricity in Galena,
switching to 17 watt LED tubes would save the most money. However, during the visit lighting
levels were measured and rooms had lighting levels much lower than that of recommended
levels. Due to the insufficient lighting, a retrofit to 17 watt LED tubes would most likely not
produce desirable lighting levels. Replacing the lamps in the exterior wall packs with LEDs is a
cost effective way to save energy.
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 118 2 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 2 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $34 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $468
Breakeven Cost $2,886 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 85 Simple Payback (yr.) 0
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 H1 103 5 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 5 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $225 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $1,284
Breakeven Cost $7,946 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 35 Simple Payback (yr.) 0
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 105 2 FLUOR (4) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-
Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 2 FLUOR (4) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $120 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $593
Breakeven Cost $3,672 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 31 Simple Payback (yr.) 0
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
19
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 123, 124 FLUOR (4) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
(2) Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with FLUOR (4) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $120 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $479
Breakeven Cost $2,954 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 25 Simple Payback (yr.) 0
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 211 6 FLUOR (4) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
(2) Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 6 FLUOR (4) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $360 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $718
Breakeven Cost $4,444 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 12 Simple Payback (yr.) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 120, 121, 122, 123,
124, 222, 224
15 FLUOR (4) T12 4' F40T12 40W
Standard (2) Magnetic with Manual
Switching
Replace with 15 FLUOR (4) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $900 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $1,643
Breakeven Cost $10,132 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 11 Simple Payback (yr.) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 105 12 FLUOR (4) T12 4' F40T12 40W
Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 12 FLUOR (4) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $720 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $1,272
Breakeven Cost $7,876 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 11 Simple Payback (yr.) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 H1 103, 202, 211,
215
30 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W
Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 30 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $1,350 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $1,754
Breakeven Cost $10,855 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 8 Simple Payback (yr.) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 101, 119 2 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 2 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $90 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $117
Breakeven Cost $724 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 8 Simple Payback (yr.) 1
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
20
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 212, 225 14 FLUOR (4) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-
Saver (2) Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 14 FLUOR (4) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $840 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $1,044
Breakeven Cost $6,442 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 7.7 Simple Payback (yr.) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 105 5 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 5 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $225 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $268
Breakeven Cost $1,655 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 7.4 Simple Payback (yr.) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 EXIT Light 7 INCAN [Unknown Lamp] with Manual
Switching
Replace with 7 LED 4W Module
StdElectronic
Installation Cost $700 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $813
Breakeven Cost $5,031 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 7.2 Simple Payback (yr.) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 213 3 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-
Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 3 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $135 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $118
Breakeven Cost $728 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 5.4 Simple Payback (yr.) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 Exterior Wall Packs 4 MH 100 Watt StdElectronic with Manual
Switching
Replace with 4 LED 25W
Module StdElectronic
Installation Cost $800 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $666
Breakeven Cost $4,109 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 5.1 Simple Payback (yr.) 1
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 115, Mech. Room 26 FLUOR (4) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-
Saver (2) Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 26 FLUOR (4) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $1,430 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $505
Breakeven Cost $3,117 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.2 Simple Payback (yr.) 3
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
21
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 223, 226 6 FLUOR (4) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
(2) Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 6 FLUOR (4) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $360 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $43
Breakeven Cost $267 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.7 Simple Payback (yr.) 8
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 214 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $45 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $4
Breakeven Cost $24 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.5 Simple Payback (yr.) 12
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 Evidence, 111, 112,
201
9 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 9 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $405 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $34
Breakeven Cost $213 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.5 Simple Payback (yr.) 12
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 117 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $45 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $4
Breakeven Cost $22 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.5 Simple Payback (yr.) 13
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 117, 206 7 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-
Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 7 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $315 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $17
Breakeven Cost $102 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback (yr.) 19
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
22
Replacing lamps in locations with an SIR below one will be beneficial in this case because the
occupancy schedule is projected to increase in the future. Also, retrofitting all the lamps in the
building at one time is cost effective with the current schedule.
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 217, 220, 219, 221 8 FLUOR (4) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard
(2) Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 8 FLUOR (4) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $480 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $25
Breakeven Cost $155 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback (yr.) 19
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 106, 107, 108, 109,
110, 116
23 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-
Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 23 FLUOR (2) T8
4' F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $1,035 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $24
Breakeven Cost $146 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.1 Simple Payback (yr.) 44
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 113, 205 2 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-
Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 2 FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $90 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $2
Breakeven Cost $13 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.1 Simple Payback (yr.) 44
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 114 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard
Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching
Replace with FLUOR (2) T8 4'
F32T8 25W Energy-Saver
Instant StdElectronic
Installation Cost $30 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $0.25
Breakeven Cost $2 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.1 Simple Payback (yr.) 85
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
2 203, 204 2 FLUOR (4) T12 4' F40T12 34W Energy-
Saver (2) Magnetic with Manual Switching
Replace with 2 FLUOR (4) T12
4' F40T12 34W Energy-Saver
Magnetic
Installation Cost $120 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 7 Energy Savings (/yr.) $1
Breakeven Cost $4 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.0 Simple Payback (yr.) 180
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
23
A.2.2 Other Electrical Loads
Replacing the chest freezer in this building with an energy star rated model will decrease energy
usage.
Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation
3 123, 124 Chest Freezer Replace with energy star Chest
Freezer
Installation Cost $1,200 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 10 Energy Savings (/yr.) $459
Breakeven Cost $3,485 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 3.2 Simple Payback (yr.) 3
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
24
A.3 Building Envelope: Recommendations for change
A.3.1 Exterior Walls
Increasing the insulation value of the wall is not cost effective at this time.
A.3.2 Foundation and/or Crawlspace
Increasing the insulation value of the foundation is not cost effective at this time.
A.3.3 Roofing and Ceiling
Increasing the insulation value of the roof is not cost effective at this time.
A.3.4 Windows
Replacing the windows with more energy efficient windows is not cost effective at this time.
A.3.5 Doors
Replacing the doors with more energy efficient doors is not cost effective at this time. Weather
stripping should be repaired or replaced as needed to create a better seal.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
25
A.4 Building Heating System / Air Conditioning
A.4.1 Heating and Heat Distribution
It is not cost effective at this time to make any significant retrofits other than installing setback
thermostats throughout the building and making the necessary repairs to the air system so that
it works properly.
A.4.2 Air Conditioning
The building is not equipped with an air conditioning system.
A.4.3 Ventilation
The controls on each of the air handling units are inoperative and require repair. Currently, the
dampers do not open and close pneumatically as designed and the proper amount of outside
are is not always being brought into the building. The only way to ensure that more air is not
being heated than necessary is to repair the damper controls.
A.4.4 Air Changes and Air Tightening
No EEMs are recommended in this area because of the difficulty of quantifying the amount of
leaking air and the savings. However, by using a blower door to depressurize the building and
an infra-red camera, the location of significant air leaks can be determined so they can be
repaired.
Rank Description Recommendation
1 Broken air handler controls Repair controls and reduce outside
air
Installation Cost $5,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yr.) 15 Energy Savings (/yr.) $3,112
Breakeven Cost $39,791 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 8.0 Simple Payback (yr.) 2
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
26
Appendix B Energy Efficiency Measures that are NOT Recommended
As indicated in other sections of the report, a number of potential EEMs were identified that
were determined to be NOT cost effective by the AkWarm model. These EEMs are not
currently recommended on the basis of energy savings alone because each may only save a
small amount of energy, have a high capital cost, or be expensive to install. While each of
these EEMs is not cost effective at this time, future changes in building use such as longer
operating hours, higher energy prices, new fixtures or hardware on the market, and decreases
in installation effort may make any of these EEMs cost effective in the future. These potential
EEMs should be reviewed periodically to identify any changes to these factors that would
warrant re-evaluation.
Although these upgrades are not currently cost effective on an energy cost basis, the fixtures,
hardware, controls, or operational changes described in these EEMs should be considered
when replacing an existing fixture or unit for other reasons. For example, replacing an existing
window with a triple-pane window may not be cost effective based only on energy use, but if a
window is going to be replaced for some other reason, then the basis for a decision is only the
incremental cost of upgrading from a less efficient replacement window to a more efficient
replacement window. That incremental cost difference will have a significantly shorter payback,
especially since the installation costs are likely to be the same for both units.
The following measures were not found to be cost-effective:
Rank Feature/Location Improvement Description
Annual
Energy
Savings
Installed
Cost
Savings to
Investment
Ratio, SIR
Simple
Payback
(Years)
5
Below- (part or all)
Grade Wall:
Mechanical Room
Install R-21batt insulation on
basement wall $122 $3,029 0.88 25
6 Exterior Door: Metal
Full Lite
Remove existing door and
install standard pre-hung U-
0.16 insulated door, including
hardware.
$64 $2,215 0.63 35
7 HVAC And DHW replace pumps with variable
speed grundfos pumps $104 $3,100 0.49 30
8 Exterior Door: Flush
Metal
Remove existing door and
install standard pre-hung U-
0.16 insulated door, including
hardware.
$34 $2,244 0.34 65
9
Window/Skylight:
Triple Alum No Therm
Break Other
Replace existing window with
triple pane, low-E, argon
window.
$113 $11,150 0.16 99
10
Window/Skylight:
Triple Alum No Therm
Break South
Replace existing window with
triple pane, low-E, argon
window.
$134 $13,529 0.16 100
11 Above-Grade Wall:
AG Wall
Install R-30 rigid foam board
to exterior and cover with T1-
11 siding or equivalent.
$868 $224,267 0.08 260
12
Window/Skylight:
Triple Alum Therm
Brk Other
Replace existing window with
triple pane, low-E, argon
window.
$7 $1,361 0.09 190
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
27
Appendix C Significant Equipment List
HVAC Equipment
Equipment Manufacturer Model No. Fuel Type Notes
Heat Exchanger - - Steam Provides the
building heat
Pump Grundfos UP 26-64F Electric Provides AHUs
Pump Grundfos UP 26-64F Electric Provides 1st floor
Pump Grundfos UP 26-64F Electric Provides 2nd floor
Unit Heater Dunham Bush U63 Electric 1/10 HP
Cabinet Heater Trane 185 Electric 1/25 HP
Cabinet Heater Trane E46 Electric 1/60 HP
AHU 1 supply motor Marathon RVF-184TTDR Electric 5 HP
AHU 1 return motor Century 8-349927-2 Electric 1 1/2 HP
AHU 2 supply motor - - Electric 5 HP
AHU 2 return motor - - Electric 1 1/2 HP
Restroom Exhaust Fan Pace U-9F Electric 1/4 HP
Hot water heat exchanger - - Steam Provides domestic
hot water
Circulation pump Grundfos UP 26-64F Electric -
Plug Loads
Equipment Location Manufacturer KWH/YR Cost/YR
Space heaters offices/classrooms Varies 3,260 $ 1,826
Chest freezer 123 Hotpoint 1,400 784
IT Equipment 115 n/a 1,315 736
Computer towers offices/classrooms Varies 835 468
Printers offices/classrooms Varies 751 421
Large copier office HP 501 281
Air compressor motor Mechanical room Century 481 269
Mini Fridge office n/a 400 224
Computer monitors offices/classrooms Varies 313 175
Laptops offices/classrooms Varies 271 152
Head bolt heater exterior n/a 259 145
Energy Consumption calculated by AkWarm based on wattage, schedule, and electric rate of $0.56/kWh
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
28
Lighting
Location Lighting Type Bulb Type Quantity KWH/YR Cost/YR
H1 103, 202, 211, 215 Fluorescent 40 W T12 60 5,855 $ 3,279
120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 222, 224 Fluorescent 40 W T12 60 5,855 3,279
212, 225 Fluorescent 34 W T12 56 4,502 2,521
105 Fluorescent 40 W T12 48 4,392 2,460
H1 103 Fluorescent 40 W T12 10 4,286 2,400
105 Fluorescent 34 W T12 8 2,611 1,462
211 Fluorescent 40 W T12 24 2,342 1,312
115, Mech. Room Fluorescent 34 W T12 104 2,186 1,224
EXIT Light Incandescent 30 W 7 1,841 1,031
Exterior Wall Pack Metal Halide 100 W 4 1,787 1,001
123, 124 Fluorescent 40 W T12 4 1,714 960
118 Fluorescent 40 W T12 4 1,714 960
105 Fluorescent 40 W T12 10 976 547
213 Fluorescent 34 W T12 6 482 270
101, 119 Fluorescent 40 W T12 4 390 218
223, 226 Fluorescent 40 W T12 24 153 86
Evidence, 111, 112, 201 Fluorescent 40 W T12 18 115 64
106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 116 Fluorescent 34 W T12 46 97 54
217, 220, 219, 221 Fluorescent 40 W T12 32 82 46
117, 206 Fluorescent 34 W T12 14 74 41
203, 204 Fluorescent 34 W T12 8 17 10
117 Fluorescent 40 W T12 2 13 7
214 Fluorescent 40 W T12 2 13 7
113, 205 Fluorescent 34 W T12 4 8 5
114 Fluorescent 32 W T8 2 3 2
Energy Consumption calculated by AkWarm based on wattage, schedule, and electric rate of $0.56/kWh
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
29
Appendix D Local Utility Rate Structure
The information in this section was provided directly from the local utility or gathered from the
local utility’s publicly available information at the time of the audit. All language used in this
section was provided by the local utility and believed to be current at the time of the audit.
Energy use terms, specific fees, and other specific information are subject to change. Updated
rate structure information should be gathered from the utility during future discussion of rates,
rate structures and utility pricing agreements.
Galena Electric Rate:
Electric Minimum Charge $22.53
Fuel Charge $0.3213 / kWh
Energy Charge $0.242 / kWh
Base Rate $0.5633 / kWh
Electric Minimum Charge (Customer Charge)
The customer charge is the minimum amount charged regardless of whether the customer uses
electricity during a month or not. The customer charge recovers some of the cost of reading the
meter and costs incurred from installing a transformer, meter, and service extension.
Fuel Charge
Fuel charge covers the cost of fuel and generating efficiency.
Energy Charge (Non fuel charge)
The non-fuel charge is established to recover all revenue requirements of the utility not related
to fuel
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
30
Appendix E Analysis Methodology
Data collected was processed using AkWarm energy use software to estimate current energy
consumption by end usage and calculate energy savings for each of the proposed energy
efficiency measures (EEMs). In addition, separate analysis may have been conducted to
evaluate EEMs that AkWarm cannot effectively model to evaluate potential reductions in annual
energy consumption. Analyses were conducted under the direct supervision of a Certified
Energy Auditor, Certified Energy Manager, or a Professional Engineer.
EEMs are evaluated based on building use, maintenance and processes, local climate
conditions, building construction type, function, operational schedule and existing conditions.
Energy savings are calculated based on industry standard methods and engineering
estimations. Each model created in AkWarm is carefully compared to existing utility usage
obtained from utility bills. The AkWarm analysis provides a number of tools for assessing the
cost effectiveness of various improvement options. The primary assessment value used in this
audit report is the Savings/Investment Ratio (SIR). The SIR is a method of cost analysis that
compares the total cost savings through reduced energy consumption to the total cost of a
project over its assumed lifespan, including both the construction cost and ongoing maintenance
and operating costs. Other measurement methods include Simple Payback, which is defined as
the length of time it takes for the savings to equal the total installed cost and Breakeven Cost,
which is defined as the highest cost that would yield a Savings/Investment Ratio of one.
EEMs are recommended by AkWarm in order of cost-effectiveness. AkWarm first calculates
individual SIRs for each EEM, and then ranks the EEMs by SIR, with higher SIRs at the top of
the list. An individual EEM must have a SIR greater than or equal to one in order to be
recommended by AkWarm. Next AkWarm modifies the building model to include the installation
of the first EEM and then re-simulates the energy use. Then the remaining EEMs are re-
evaluated and ranked again. AkWarm goes through this iterative process until all suggested
EEMs have been evaluated.
Under this iterative review process, the savings for each recommended EEM is calculated
based on the implementation of the other, more cost effective EEMs first. Therefore, the
implementation of one EEM affects the savings of other EEMs that are recommended later.
The savings from any one individual EEM may be relatively higher if the individual EEM is
implemented without the other recommended EEMs. For example, implementing a reduced
operating schedule for inefficient lighting may result in relatively higher savings than
implementing the same reduced operating schedule for newly installed lighting that is more
efficient. If multiple EEMs are recommended, AkWarm calculates a combined savings.
Inclusion of recommendations for energy savings outside the capability of AkWarm will impact
the actual savings from the AkWarm projections. This will almost certainly result in lower
energy savings and monetary savings from AkWarm recommendations. The reality is that only
so much energy is consumed in a building. Energy savings from one EEM reduces the amount
of energy that can be saved from additional EEMs. For example, installation of a lower wattage
light bulb does not save energy or money if the bulb is never turned on because of a schedule
or operational change at the facility.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
31
Appendix F Audit Limitations
The results of this audit are dependent on the input data provided and can only act as an
approximation. In some instances, several EEMs or installation methods may achieve the
identified potential savings. Actual savings will depend on the EEM selected, the price of
energy, and the final installation and implementation methodology. Competent tradesmen and
professional engineers may be required to design, install, or otherwise implement some of the
recommended EEMs. This document is an energy use audit report and is not intended as a
final design document, operation, and maintenance manual, or to take the place of any
document provided by a manufacturer or installer of any device described in this report.
Cost savings are calculated based on estimated initial costs for each EEM. Estimated costs
include labor and equipment for the full up-front investment required to implement the EEM.
The listed installation costs within the report are conceptual budgetary estimates and should not
be used as design estimates. The estimated costs are derived from Means Cost Data, industry
publications, local contractors and equipment suppliers, and the professional judgment of the
CEA writing the report and based on the conditions at the time of the audit.
Cost and energy savings are approximations and are not guaranteed.
Additional significant energy savings can usually be found with more detailed auditing
techniques that include actual measurements of electrical use, temperatures in the building and
HVAC ductwork, intake and exhaust temperatures, motor runtime and scheduling, and infrared,
air leakage to name just a few. Implementation of these techniques is the difference between a
Level III Energy Audit and the Level II Audit that has been conducted.
Disclaimer: "This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the
United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor
any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability
or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus,
product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned
rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name,
trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,
recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The
views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the
United States Government or any agency thereof."
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
32
Appendix G References
Although not all documents listed below are specifically referenced in this report, each contains
information and insights considered valuable to most buildings.
Alaska Department of Education and Early Development; Education Support Services/Facilities.
(1999). Alaska School Facilities Preventative Maintenance Handbook. Juneau, AK:
Alaska Department of Education and Early Development.
Alaska Housing Finance Corportation. (2010). Retrofit Energy Assessment for Loans. AHFC.
ASHRAE. (1997). 1997 ASHRAE Handbook: Fundamentals. Atlanta, GA: ASHRAE.
ASHRAE. (2007). ASHRAE Standard 105-2007 Expressing and Comparing Building Energy
Performance. Retrieved from ASHRAE: www.ashrae.org
ASHRAE. (2007). ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2007 Energy Standards for buildings Except Low-
Rise Residential Buildings. Retrieved from ASHRAE: www.ashrae.org
ASHRAE. (2010). ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2010 Ventilaton for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality.
Retrieved from ASHRAE: www.ashrae.org
ASHRAE. (2010). ASHRAE Standard 62.2-2010 Ventilation and Acceptable Indoor Air Quality in
Low Rise Residential Buildings. Retrieved from ASHRAE: www.ashrae.org
ASHRAE RP-669 and SP-56. (2004). Procedures for Commercial Building Energy Audits.
Atlanta, GA: ASHRAE.
Coad, W. J. (1982). Energy Engineering and Management for Building Systems. Scarborough,
Ontario, Canada: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.
Daley, D. T. (2008). The Little Black Book of Reliability Management. New York, NY: Industrial
Press, Inc.
Federal Energy Management Program. (2004, March 3). Demand Controlled Ventilation Using
CO2 Sensors. Retrieved 2011, from US DOE Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/fta_co2.pdf
Federal Energy Management Program. (2006, April 26). Low-Energy Building Design
Guidelines. Retrieved 2011, from Department of Energy; Federal Energy Management
Program: http://www.eren.doe.gov/femp/
Institute, E. a. (2004). Variable Speed Pumping: A Guide to Successful Applications. Oxford,
UK: Elsevier Advanced Technology.
International Code Council. (2009). International Energy Conservation Code. Country Club Hills,
IL: International Code Council, Inc.
Leach, M., Lobato, C., Hirsch, A., Pless, S., & Torcellini, P. (2010, September). Technical
Support Document: Strategies for 50% Energy Savings in Large Office Buildings.
Retrieved 2011, from National Renewable Energy Laboratory:
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy10osti/49213.pdf
Thumann, P.E., C.E.M., A., Younger, C.E.M., W. J., & Niehus, P.E., C.E.M., T. (2010).
Handbook of Energy Audits Eighth Edition. Lilburn, GA: The Fairmont Press, Inc.
U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2006). Commercial Building Energy Consumption
Survey (CBECS). Retrieved 2011, from Energy Information Administration:
http://www.eia.gov/emeu/cbecs/
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
33
Appendix H Typical Energy Use and Cost – Fairbanks and Anchorage
This report provides data on typical energy costs and use on selected building in Fairbanks and
Anchorage, Alaska for comparative purposes only. The values provided by the US Energy
Information Administration CBECS study included a broader range of building types for the
Continental U.S. are not necessarily good comparatives for buildings and conditions in Alaska.
An assortment of values from CBECS may be found in Appendix I.
The Alaska data described in this report came from a benchmarking study NORTECH and other
Technical Services Providers (TSPs) completed on publicly owned buildings in Alaska under
contract with AHFC. This study acquired actual utility data for municipal buildings and schools
in Alaska for the two recent full years. The utility data included costs and quantities including
fuel oil, electricity, propane, wood, steam, and all other energy source usage. This resulted in a
database of approximately 900 buildings. During the course of the benchmarking study, the
comparisons made to the CBECS data appeared to be inappropriate for various reasons.
Therefore, this energy use audit report references the average energy use and energy cost of
Anchorage and Fairbanks buildings as described below.
The Alaska benchmarking data was evaluated in order to find valid comparison data. Buildings
with major energy use information missing were eliminated from the data pool. After detailed
scrutiny of the data, the most complete information was provided to NORTECH by the
Fairbanks North Star Borough School District (FNSBSD) and the Anchorage School District
(ASD). The data sets from these two sources included both the actual educational facilities as
well as the district administrative buildings and these are grouped together in this report as
Fairbanks and Anchorage schools. These two sources of information, being the most complete
and reasonable in-state information, have been used to identify an average annual energy
usage for Fairbanks and for Anchorage in order to provide a comparison for other facilities in
Alaska.
Several factors may limit the comparison of a specific facility to these regional indicators. In
Fairbanks, the FNSBSD generally uses number two fuel oil for heating needs and electricity is
provided by Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA). GVEA produces electricity from a coal
fired generation plant with additional oil generation upon demand. A few of the FNSBSD
buildings in this selection utilize district steam and hot water. The FNSBSD has recently (the
last ten years) invested significantly in envelope and other efficiency upgrades to reduce their
operating costs. Therefore a reader should be aware that this selection of Fairbanks buildings
has energy use at or below average for the entire Alaska benchmarking database.
Heating in Anchorage is through natural gas from the nearby natural gas fields. Electricity is
also provided using natural gas. As the source is nearby and the infrastructure for delivery is in
place, energy costs are relatively low in the area. As a result, the ASD buildings have lower
energy costs, but higher energy use, than the average for the entire benchmarking database.
These special circumstances should be considered when comparing the typical annual energy
use for particular buildings.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
34
Appendix I Typical Energy Use and Cost – Continental U.S.
Released: Dec 2006
Next CBECS will be conducted in 2007
Table C3. Consumption and Gross Energy Intensity for Sum of Major Fuels for Non-Mall Buildings, 2003
All Buildings* Sum of Major Fuel Consumption
Number of
Buildings
(thousand)
Floor
space
(million
square
feet)
Floor space
per Building
(thousand
square feet)
Total
(trillion
BTU)
per
Building
(million
BTU)
per
Square Foot
(thousand
BTU)
per
Worker
(million
BTU)
All Buildings* 4,645 64,783 13.9 5,820 1,253 89.8 79.9
Building Floor space (Square Feet)
1,001 to 5,000 2,552 6,789 2.7 672 263 98.9 67.6
5,001 to 10,000 889 6,585 7.4 516 580 78.3 68.7
10,001 to 25,000 738 11,535 15.6 776 1,052 67.3 72.0
25,001 to 50,000 241 8,668 35.9 673 2,790 77.6 75.8
50,001 to 100,000 129 9,057 70.4 759 5,901 83.8 90.0
100,001 to 200,000 65 9,064 138.8 934 14,300 103.0 80.3
200,001 to 500,000 25 7,176 289.0 725 29,189 101.0 105.3
Over 500,000 7 5,908 896.1 766 116,216 129.7 87.6
Principal Building Activity
Education 386 9,874 25.6 820 2,125 83.1 65.7
Food Sales 226 1,255 5.6 251 1,110 199.7 175.2
Food Service 297 1,654 5.6 427 1,436 258.3 136.5
Health Care 129 3,163 24.6 594 4,612 187.7 94.0
Inpatient 8 1,905 241.4 475 60,152 249.2 127.7
Outpatient 121 1,258 10.4 119 985 94.6 45.8
Lodging 142 5,096 35.8 510 3,578 100.0 207.5
Retail (Other Than Mall) 443 4,317 9.7 319 720 73.9 92.1
Office 824 12,208 14.8 1,134 1,376 92.9 40.3
Public Assembly 277 3,939 14.2 370 1,338 93.9 154.5
Public Order and Safety 71 1,090 15.5 126 1,791 115.8 93.7
Religious Worship 370 3,754 10.1 163 440 43.5 95.6
Service 622 4,050 6.5 312 501 77.0 85.0
Warehouse and Storage 597 10,078 16.9 456 764 45.2 104.3
Other 79 1,738 21.9 286 3,600 164.4 157.1
Vacant 182 2,567 14.1 54 294 20.9 832.1
This report references the Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), published by the U.S.
Energy Information Administration in 2006. Initially this report was expected to compare the annual energy
consumption of the building to average national energy usage as documented below. However, a direct comparison
between one specific building and the groups of buildings outlined below yielded confusing results. Instead, this
report uses a comparative analysis on Fairbanks and Anchorage data as described in Appendix F. An abbreviated
excerpt from CBECS on commercial buildings in the Continental U.S. is below.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
35
Appendix J List of Conversion Factors and Energy Units
1 British Thermal Unit is the energy required to raise one pound of water one degree F°
1 Watt is approximately 3.412 BTU/hr.
1 horsepower is approximately 2,544 BTU/hr.
1 horsepower is approximately 746 Watts
1 "ton of cooling” is approximately 12,000 BTU/hr., the amount of power required
to melt one short ton of ice in 24 hours
1 Therm = 100,000 BTU
1 KBTU = 1,000 BTU
1 KWH = 3413 BTU
1 KW = 3413 BTU/Hr.
1 Boiler HP = 33,400 BTU/Hr.
1 Pound Steam = approximately 1000 BTU
1 CCF of natural gas = approximately 1 Therm
1 inch H2O = 250 Pascal (Pa) = 0.443 pounds/square inch (psi)
1 atmosphere (atm) = 10,1000 Pascal (Pa)
BTU British Thermal Unit
CCF 100 Cubic Feet
CFM Cubic Feet per Minute
GPM Gallons per minute
HP Horsepower
Hz Hertz
kg Kilogram (1,000 grams)
kV Kilovolt (1,000 volts)
kVA Kilovolt-Amp
kVAR Kilovolt-Amp Reactive
KW Kilowatt (1,000 watts)
KWH Kilowatt Hour
V Volt
W Watt
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
36
Appendix K List of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Definitions
ACH Air Changes per Hour
AFUE Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency
Air Economizer A duct, damper, and automatic control system that
allows a cooling system to supply outside air to reduce
or eliminate the need for mechanical cooling.
Ambient Temperature Average temperature of the surrounding air
Ballast A device used with an electric discharge lamp to cause
the lamp to start and operate under the proper circuit
conditions of voltage, current, electrode heat, etc.
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CUI Cost Utilization Index
CDD Cooling Degree Days
DDC Direct Digital Control
EEM Energy Efficiency Measure
EER Energy Efficient Ratio
EUI Energy Utilization Index
FLUOR Fluorescent
Grade The finished ground level adjoining a building at the
exterior walls
HDD Heating Degree Days
HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning
INCAN Incandescent
NPV Net Present Value
R-value Thermal resistance measured in BTU/Hr.-SF-̊F (Higher
value means better insulation)
SCFM Standard Cubic Feet per Minute
Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) Savings over the life of the EEM divided by Investment
capital cost. Savings includes the total discounted dollar
savings considered over the life of the improvement.
Investment in the SIR calculation includes the labor and
materials required to install the measure.
Set Point Target temperature that a control system operates the
heating and cooling system
Simple payback A cost analysis method whereby the investment cost of
an EEM is divided by the first year’s savings of the EEM
to give the number of years required to recover the cost
of the investment.
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
37
Appendix L Building Floor Plan
98’ 6” 61’ 9” N First floor drawing from on-site fire escape plans
Energy Audit – Final Report
GILA Headquarters
Galena, Alaska
F:\00-Jobs\2011\2602 F - AHFC Grade Audits\50-300 Doyon Other Region\50-370 Galena City SD\50-376 GILA Headquarters\Reports\Final\2012.07.12 Final AHFC
Report GAL GILA Headquarters.Docx
38
Second floor drawing from on-site fire escape plans 61’ 9” 98’ 6” N