HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEA-AEE-Ketchikan High School 2012-EE
Ketchikan High School
Ketchikan Gateway Borough School District
Funded by:
Final Report
October 2011
Prepared by:
Energy Audit
Table of Contents
Section 1: Executive Summary 2
Section 2: Introduction 8
Section 3: Energy Efficiency Measures 10
Section 4: Description of Systems 20
Section 5: Methodology 24
Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis 27 Appendix A:
Energy and Utility Data 38 Appendix B:
Equipment Data 44 Appendix C:
Abbreviations 50 Appendix D:
Audit Team
The energy audit is performed by Alaska Energy Engineering LLC of Juneau, Alaska. The audit team
consists of:
Jim Rehfeldt, P.E., Energy Engineer
Jack Christiansen, Energy Consultant
Brad Campbell, Energy Auditor
Loras O’Toole P.E., Mechanical Engineer
Will Van Dyken P.E., Electrical Engineer
Curt Smit, P.E., Mechanical Engineer
Philip Iverson, Construction Estimator
Karla Hart, Technical Publications Specialist
Jill Carlile, Data Analyst
Grayson Carlile, Energy Modeler
Ketchikan High School 1 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Section 1
Executive Summary
An energy audit of the Ketchikan High School was performed by Alaska Energy Engineering LLC.
The investment grade audit was funded by Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) to identify
opportunities to improve the energy performance of public buildings throughout Alaska.
Ketchikan High School is a 180,614 square foot building that contains offices, classrooms, commons,
a library, a gym and auxiliary gym, an auditorium, shop and art spaces, and mechanical support
spaces.
Building Assessment
The following summarizes our assessment of the building.
Envelope
The exterior of the building appears to have been well maintained and should provide many more
years of service. Of particular interest was the newly completed re-roofing project that covered the
majority of the building. The project showed good attention to detail, to include a reduction in the
number of roof penetrations that often lead to integrity failures. The audit team was also informed
that the roofing contractor had uncovered, identified, and successfully repaired a significant air
leakage path around the perimeter of every one of the newly roofed spaces. In addition to this
improvement to the building envelop integrity, additional insulation was added to the roof to increase
the average insulation value of the tapered roof system to R-34. While this was an improvement over
the previous roof insulation value, it is recommended that future roofing projects target the high
performance building standard for roofing insulation of R-46 based on an optimization for life cycle
cost.
The Humanity Wing roof was also recently replaced using an Inverted Roof Membrane Assembly
(IRMA). This style roof typically has an initial waterproof layer such as EPDM, then a layer of foam
insulation, then a fabric cloth cover then an LG board – a thinner layer of foam adhered to a roofing
paver. The Humanity Wing utilized a base layer of foam that was approximately 4” thick at the
inspected roof drain with 2” layer of foam on the underside of the LG board. The 6” total thickness at
the inspected location would normally produce an insulation value of R-24 with the use of the
expanded polystyrene foam, however it has been determined that the IRMA is a flawed system that is
particularly ineffective and inefficient in Southeast Alaska. This is because the IRMA allows water
to flow between the layers of insulation to the waterproof membrane below before it flows to the roof
drains. This presents a two-fold problem. First, the expanded foam eventually becomes waterlogged
and loses some of its insulating properties. Secondly, any outdoor temperature water moving through
the foam against the warm roof surface below will remove heat as it travels to the roof drain. In a
climate such as Ketchikan’s, imagine the number of days/year that the roof and underside of the
ceiling is being cooled to the temperature of the rain water. That number is simply the number of
rainy days/year. A similar roof is also used on the 2nd floor south facing balcony at the building
entrance. A life cycle cost analysis for replacement of the Humanity Wing roof with a tapered roof
system buildup to optimum insulation levels is outlined in Section 3, Energy Efficiency Measure 25.
Ketchikan High School 2 Energy Audit (October 2011)
The exterior tile wall surface appears to be problematic due to a lack of backer-board to provide
additional support to the tile when it is impacted by an object. Without the backer board, impact
results in a broken tile.
The main entry double door system appears to be serving the facility well. The middle column
provides two opportunities for weather stripping to properly seal the door, a design that is far superior
to that used on similar applications.
The windows of the school are failing at an unacceptable rate. Maintenance staff believes that the
original window glazing is failing due to flexing of the internal and external panes. This may be due
to an excessive gap between the panes or the glazing being too thin for the applied external forces.
Solar gain and wind are two such forces. The larger the air gap between the panes, the greater the
amount of potential expansion and contraction. An additional potential cause for failure is the
expansion and contraction of the aluminum frames themselves.
The failed windows were replaced by windows manufactured locally with a smaller air gap between
the internal and external panes. The audit team was informed by maintenance staff that the new
windows were also routinely failing. Maintenance staff replaced 51 windows last year alone and it
appeared at the time of the audit that there were 10 more that had failed since.
While aluminum is the material of choice by many architects for window wall curtains such as in the
lobby and library, it has one of the poorest performances from the perspective of energy conservation
due to high thermal conductivity of the aluminum and its ability to transfer heat from the interior
spaces to the outside through the window frames. The insulation value for these large window
curtains could be as low as R-1. If a simple solution to this reoccurring problem is not found, such as
a window replacement with slightly smaller window dimensions, then an excellent opportunity exists
to replace the windows with smaller, more energy efficient units.
The exterior doors are not thermally broken. Future exterior door replacement selection should
include this feature. Weather-stripping on a high percentage of the exterior doors is in need of
replacement.
Heating System
The building is heated by three fuel oil boilers that provide heat to thirteen air handling unit systems,
fan coil units, perimeter hydronic systems, and cabinet unit heaters in the humanity wing.
At the time of the audit Boiler #1 was running and the remaining two boilers were on-line and not
isolated. Circulating heating water through a non-necessary boiler results in a significant amount of
heat loss.
The boilers are reported to be significantly oversized—one boiler is capable of heating the building
on all but the coldest days. All boilers have jacket losses and cycling losses from turning on and off;
oversized boilers have greater losses with no benefit.
Electric heating is less expensive when surplus hydroelectric power exists. Adding an electric boiler
will utilize the cost advantage and provide a more efficient heating plant for warm days when loads
are small.
The pumping system does not utilize variable speed pumping to reduce energy costs. There is no
incentive to convert due to the large number of three-way valves in the systems.
The remainder of the fuel oil boiler heating system appears to be in good condition; however fairly
simple improvements can be made to improve its effectiveness and efficiency. These are outlined in
Section 3, Energy Efficiency Measures.
Ketchikan High School 3 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Ventilation System
The building ventilation systems consist of thirteen large air handling units located in four fan rooms.
In addition to the large air handling units there are five return fans and thirty four exhaust fans
mounted throughout the building and on the roof top for the purposes of cooling spaces, improving
building air quality, and kitchen operations. The overall condition of the systems is good, however
issues include:
HVAC systems could be optimized to reduce ventilation and fan power through control
sequence modifications. Once optimization is achieved then a retro-commissioning should be
performed on all HVAC systems to integrate operations and further increase efficiencies.
AHU-1 supply fan is improperly aligned. Short-circuiting of supply air flow due to an
approximately 3” gap between the fan and housing is reducing the air flow supplied by the
unit while maintaining full electrical demand of the 60 HP motor
The cooling system for the building was removed, but all of the cooling coils still remain in
the AHU systems. Removal of these unnecessary cooling coils will decrease the pressure that
the supply fans are operating against.
The fan schedules were found to be inconsistent with the occupancy and use of the building.
This is true of both the school-year and the summer season. There is opportunity to fine-tune
the schedules and reduce energy consumption.
AHU-1 operates whenever functions occur in the gymnasium and auditorium. This system
supplies the lobby and several school wings with a high rate of outside air flow. Reducing the
operating hours of the system and the volume of outside air flow when it is operating will
significantly reduce energy costs.
The Humanity Wing does not recirculate building air, but instead heats full outside air
whenever it operates. A significant amount of energy would be saved if a large portion of
conditioned air was re-circulated.
The fan belt guard had been removed and had not been replaced on AHU-11.
Ventilation system capacity is determined by the amount of air flow needed to cool the building on
the hottest day. The ventilation systems are oversized for a school building with no summer operation
and located in a temperate rain forest climate. The existing peak air flow rate of 1.25 cfm/sqft is much
higher than a more appropriate rate of 0.75 to 1.0 cfm/sqft.
The existing continuous exhaust air requirement for the building is 29,000 cfm, which the ventilation
systems must makeup with outside air. For the current population of 600 students and staff, the
building ventilation rate is 48 cfm/person, more than 3 times the required rate of approximately 15
cfm/person. Typically, the heating of ventilation air is 60% to 80% of the building heating load, so
there is substantial incentive to scrutinize and reduce exhaust air flows, which would allow a
reduction in the ventilation air requirement, and save energy.
To reduce energy consumption, it is recommended that the ventilation systems be tailored to the
actual use, function, and occupancy, optimal control sequences be implemented, and the systems
retro-commissioned. Opportunities include:
Modify AHUs where applicable to operate as variable air systems with the addition of variable
frequency drives
Verify CO2 sensor controls and sequences to the associated space AHUs so that air flow can be
reduced to save energy while maintaining healthy air quality within those spaces. CO2 sensors
have been added to AHU-1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, and 13.
Ketchikan High School 4 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Reduce the continuous exhaust air requirement for the school by reducing exhaust air flow from
toilet rooms and other exhaust areas. Consider variable exhaust flow for toilet rooms to increase
air flow when a room is in use.
Optimize schedules. The current schedules appear to have unneeded operating hours and are not
tailored to the current building use.
Perform an integrated building-wide retro-commissioning upon implementation of optimization
of control sequences.
Cooling Systems
There are two computer IT rooms that are cooled by mechanical cooling systems that reject the heat
outdoors. The heat is generated continuously; recovering the heat will reduce the heating load on the
boilers.
Control System
The building control system is a combination of pneumatic and electric components. Many of the
original pneumatic system components are being replaced by outside contractors and maintenance
staff. Upon completion of pneumatic component replacement, optimal control sequences should be
implemented and the systems retro-commissioned to ensure proper operation.
Lighting
Interior lighting consists primarily of T5, T8, and compact fluorescent fixtures. Exterior lighting
consists primarily of compact fluorescent and metal halide lighting. The maintenance staff have done
an outstanding job of reducing energy consumption through lighting modifications. The interior
lighting and all exterior lighting is controlled by staff and by photocells in a manner that minimizes
lighting operational hours. Opportunities to further reduce lighting loads include the replacement of
the metal halide lighting in the automotive bay and woodshop, the perimeter wall pack units, and the
parking lot lighting. An excellent selection for replacement is the induction lighting systems that
Dale Reed has already used on other applications. These fixtures will reduce energy consumption by
approximately 50%.
Summary
It is the assessment of the energy audit team that the greatest potential for reducing energy
consumption is through proper scheduling and right-sizing of the heating and ventilation systems. A
building optimization analysis is recommended in which the building systems are reconfigured and
optimized for the actual use. The analysis should evaluate if there is incentive to install electric
boilers to take advantage of favorable electric rates when there is low-cost hydroelectric power.
Integrating the four phases of construction through a building-wide commissioning effort is a
necessary step towards improving the indoor air quality, thermal comfort, and energy efficiency of
the building. While a complete optimization analysis is beyond the scope of this energy audit, several
EEMs show that there is considerable financial incentive to tailor the systems to the actual building
use.
Ketchikan High School 5 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs)
All buildings have opportunities to improve their energy efficiency. The energy audit revealed
numerous opportunities in which an efficiency investment will result in a net reduction in long-term
operating costs at the Ketchikan High School.
Behavioral and Operational EEMs
The following EEMs require behavioral and operational changes in the building use. The savings are
not readily quantifiable but these EEMs are highly recommended as low-cost opportunities that are a
standard of high performance buildings.
EEM-1: Weather-strip Doors
EEM-2: Replace Failed Window Glazing
EEM-3: Align AHU-1 Supply Fan
EEM-4: Evaluate Electric Heating
The summary table of high and
medium Priority Energy Efficiency
Measures recommended for the
Ketchikan High School follows on the
next page.
Ketchikan High School 6 Energy Audit (October 2011)
High and Medium Priority EEMs
The following EEMs are recommended for investment. They are ranked by life cycle savings to
investment ratio (SIR). This ranking method places a priority on low cost EEMs which can be
immediately funded, generating energy savings to fund higher cost EEMs in the following years.
Negative values, in parenthesis, represent savings.
25-Year Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
High Priority
EEM-5: Reduce HVAC System Operating Hours $8,900 $0 ($1,652,000) ($1,643,100) 185.6
EEM-6: Isolate Lag/Standby Boilers $5,000 $16,300 ($375,600) ($354,300) 71.9
EEM-7: Perform Boiler Combustion Test $1,000 $6,100 ($70,300) ($63,200) 64.2
EEM-8: Optimize AHU-1 System $8,900 $0 ($516,500) ($507,600) 58.0
EEM-9: Modify Boiler Burner Controls $5,000 $0 ($105,500) ($100,500) 21.1
EEM-10: Optimize AHU-13 System $29,300 $0 ($535,500) ($506,200) 18.3
EEM-11: Optimize AHU-12 System $12,400 $0 ($181,100) ($168,700) 14.6
EEM-12: Electrical Room 8 Heat Recovery $9,800 $900 ($134,700) ($124,000) 13.7
EEM-13: Replace Aerators and Showerheads $3,000 $0 ($34,300) ($31,300) 11.4
EEM-14: Optimize AHU-8 System $41,700 $0 ($422,400) ($380,700) 10.1
EEM-15: Install Flue Dampers $6,400 $5,100 ($56,600) ($45,100) 8.0
EEM-16: Electric Room 208 Heat Recovery $13,500 $5,100 ($86,900) ($68,300) 6.1
EEM-17: Optimize AHU-7 System $29,300 $0 ($142,000) ($112,700) 4.8
EEM-18: Optimize AHU-3 and AHU-4 $126,800 $3,400 ($516,000) ($385,800) 4.0
EEM-19: Remove Chilled Water AHU Coils $2,000 ($3,100) ($4,600) ($5,700) 3.9
EEM-20: Install Boiler Room Heat Recovery $87,000 $4,300 ($336,800) ($245,500) 3.8
EEM-21: Rooms 151 & 131 Heat Recovery $86,100 $5,100 ($253,300) ($162,100) 2.9
Medium Priority
EEM-22: Install Auto Valves on Unit Heaters $7,100 $0 ($19,300) ($12,200) 2.7
EEM-23: Upgrade Transformers $140,400 $0 ($171,700) ($31,300) 1.2
EEM-24: Upgrade Motors $22,000 $0 ($22,700) ($700) 1.0
Totals* $645,600 $43,200 ($5,637,800) ($4,949,000) 8.7
*The analysis is based on each EEM being independent of the others. While it is likely that some
EEMs are interrelated, an isolated analysis is used to demonstrate the economics because the audit
team is not able to predict which EEMs an Owner may choose to implement. If several EEMs are
implemented, the resulting energy savings is likely to differ from the sum of each EEM projection.
Summary
The energy audit revealed numerous opportunities for improving the energy performance of the
building. It is recommended that the behavioral and high priority EEMs be implemented now to
generate energy savings from which to fund the medium priority EEMs.
Another avenue to consider is to borrow money from AHFCs revolving loan fund for public
buildings. AHFC will loan money for energy improvements under terms that allow for paying back
the money from the energy savings. More information on this option can be found online at
http://www.ahfc.us/loans/akeerlf_loan.cfm.
Ketchikan High School 7 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Section 2
Introduction
This report presents the findings of an energy audit of Ketchikan High School located in Ketchikan,
Alaska. The purpose of this investment grade energy audit is to evaluate the infrastructure and its
subsequent energy performance to identify applicable energy efficiencies measures (EEMs).
The energy audit report contains the following sections:
Introduction: Building use and energy consumption.
Energy Efficiency Measures: Priority ranking of the EEMs with a description, energy analysis,
and life cycle cost analysis.
Description of Systems: Background description of the building energy systems.
Methodology: Basis for how construction and maintenance cost estimates are derived and the
economic and energy factors used for the analysis.
BUILDING USE
The Ketchikan High School is a 180,614 square foot building that contains offices, classrooms,
commons, a library, a gym and auxiliary gym, an auditorium, shop and art spaces, and mechanical
support spaces. The building is occupied by 560 students and 40 staff members. It is occupied in the
following manner:
Offices & Commons: 6:00 am – 9:00 pm (M-F)
Kitchen 6:00 am – 12:00 pm (M-F)
Classrooms: 7:30 am - 3:30 pm (M-F) - lighting controlled by teachers
Main Gym 6:00 am – 9:00 pm (M-F) 30-40 people
Auxiliary Gym 3:00 pm – 9:00 pm
Auditorium 12:00 pm – 10:30 pm (Mon and Thur) 600 people – 8x per year
Building History
The building was fully renovated in four phases from 1994 to 1996. Subsequent improvements from
an energy perspective included complete mechanical and electric system replacements, in-house
interior lighting upgrades, roof replacement to the Humanity’s Wing in 2005, and a roof renovation of
the remainder of the building in 2011.
Ketchikan High School 8 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Energy Consumption
The building energy sources include an electric service and a fuel oil tank. Fuel oil is used for the
majority of the heating loads and domestic hot water while electricity serves all other loads and a
limited amount of space heating. The following table shows annual energy use and cost.
Annual Energy Consumption and Cost
Source Consumption Cost Energy,
MMBtu
Electricity 1,979,000 kWh $192,100 6,800 27%
Fuel Oil 134,900 Gallons $461,400 18,300 73%
Totals $653,500 25,100 100%
Electricity
This chart shows electrical energy use
from 2007 to 2010. The staff was unable
to offer insight into the reason for the
monthly fluctuations in energy use.
The effective cost—energy costs plus
demand charges—is 9.7¢ per kWh.
Fuel Oil
This chart shows heating energy use from 2007 to
2010. The chart compares annual use with the heating
degree days which is a measurement of the demand
for energy to heat a building. A year with a higher
number of degree days reflects colder outside
temperatures and a higher heating requirement.
The current cost of fuel oil in Ketchikan is $3.47 per gallon.
Assuming a fuel oil conversion efficiency of 70% and an
electric boiler conversion efficiency of 95%, oil heat at $3.47
per gallon equates to $35.79 per MMBtu. Since the current
cost of electricity at 9.7¢ per kWh equates to $29.95 per
MMBtu, electric heat is less expensive than fuel oil heat.
Ketchikan High School 9 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Section 3
Energy Efficiency Measures
The following energy efficiency measures (EEMs) were identified during the energy audit. The
EEMs are priority ranked and, where applicable, subjected to energy and life cycle cost analysis.
Appendix A contains the energy and life cycle cost analysis spreadsheets.
The EEMs are grouped into the following prioritized categories:
Behavioral or Operational: EEMs that require minimal capital investment but require
operational or behavioral changes. The EEMs provide a life cycle savings but an analysis is not
performed because the guaranteed energy savings is difficult quantify.
High Priority: EEMs that require a small capital investment and offer a life cycle savings. Also
included in this category are higher cost EEMs that offer significant life cycle savings.
Medium Priority: EEMs that require a significant capital investment to provide a life cycle
savings. Many medium priority EEMs provide a high life cycle savings and offer substantial
incentive to increase investment in building energy efficiency.
Low Priority: EEMs that will save energy but do not provide a life cycle savings.
BEHAVIORAL OR OPERATIONAL
The following EEMs are recommended for implementation. They require behavioral or operational
changes that can occur with minimal investment to achieve immediate savings. These EEMs are not
easily quantified by analysis because they cannot be accurately predicted. They are recommended
because they offer a life cycle savings, represent good practice, and are accepted features of high
performance buildings.
EEM-1: Weather-strip Doors
Purpose: The weather stripping on many of the single-wide exterior doors is in poor condition.
Energy will be saved if doors are properly weather-stripped to reduce infiltration.
Scope: Replace weather stripping on exterior doors.
EEM-2: Replace Failed Window Glazing
Purpose: An unacceptably high number of window glazing units have failed at the high school.
Although 51 glazing units were replaced last year, an additional 10 window glazing
assemblies have since failed. Energy will be saved if the failed units are replaced.
Scope: Replace failed glazing sections.
Ketchikan High School 10 Energy Audit (October 2011)
EEM-3: Align AHU-1 Supply Fan
Purpose: The AHU-1 supply fan is improperly aligned. The supply air flow is short-circuiting
through an approximately 3” gap between the fan and housing — recirculating air back
to the fan cabinet while maintaining full electrical demand of the 60 HP motor.
Scope: Properly align AHU-1 supply fan on the shaft.
EEM-4: Evaluate Electric Heating
Purpose: Energy will be saved if an electric boiler is installed to shift the heating load from oil to
electricity when there is surplus hydroelectric power.
Scope: Perform an analysis to determine if there is sufficient hydroelectric resource to invest in
an electric boiler to heat the building. Electric heat is currently less expensive than fuel
oil heat. With fuel oil inflation also predicted to be higher than electricity inflation,
shifting 75% of the current fuel oil consumption to electric could have a life cycle
savings of $4.9 million dollars.
HIGH PRIORITY
The following EEMs are recommended for implementation because they are low cost measures that
have a high savings to investment ratio. The EEMs are listed from highest to lowest priority. Negative
values, in parenthesis, represent savings.
EEM-5: Reduce HVAC System Operating Hours
Purpose: The HVAC systems average 3,000 occupied mode operating hours per year. While
operating hours are rightly determined based on school and community use of the
building, this is significantly higher than the average of 1,600-2,400 hours for high
school. Energy will be saved if the operating schedules are reviewed and adjusted to
minimize the operating hours for the systems.
Scope: Optimize operating schedules. The following analysis is based on reducing fan system
occupied mode operation to 2,200 hours per year.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($67,010) ($67,010) $8,900 $0 ($1,652,000) ($1,643,100) 185.6
Ketchikan High School 11 Energy Audit (October 2011)
EEM-6: Isolate Lag/Standby Boilers
Purpose: Only one boiler is needed to heat the building; however the other two remain on-line
and hot. In addition, the boilers are not turned off during the summer months when
heating requirements are very low. Circulating hot water through an isolated boiler in a
multiple boiler system can result in efficiency loss due to the isolated boilers acting as
heat sinks. Energy will be saved by turning off the boilers in the summer and isolating
the lag/standby boilers during the shoulder seasons.
Scope: Isolate the lag/standby boilers during the shoulder seasons and turn off the boilers
during the summer months.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$960 ($13,250) ($12,290) $5,000 $16,300 ($375,600) ($354,300) 71.9
EEM-7: Perform a Boiler Combustion Test
Purpose: Operating the boiler with an optimum amount of excess air will improve combustion
efficiency. Annual cleaning followed by a combustion test is recommended.
Scope: Annually clean and perform a combustion test on the boiler.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$360 ($2,480) ($2,120) $1,000 $6,100 ($70,300) ($63,200) 64.2
EEM-8: Optimize AHU-1 System (Lobby, Classrooms)
Purpose: The AHU-1 system has excessive outside air and exhaust air flows. Energy will be
saved if AHU-1 control sequences and air flows are optimized to ensure the system is
operating as efficiently as possible.
Scope: Optimize AHU-1 as follows:
- Reduce the minimum outside air volume by reducing the minimum outside air
requirement for the science fume hoods and the exhaust fan make-up. The analysis
is based on reducing the fume hood makeup from all fans to two fans operating
concurrently. The toilets rooms have sporadic heavy use between classes but are
lightly used much of the time. The analysis reduces the air exchange from 7.5
minutes per change to 10 minutes per change.
- Reduce Operating Hours: The system operates with the auditorium and gym
during non-school hours. We recommend not operating the system during these
periods unless the commons is heavily used.
- Modify the RF-1 pressure controls to preclude unnecessary exhaust of return air
from the building.
- Optimize the night setback.
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($18,220) ($18,220) $8,900 $0 ($516,500) ($507,600) 58.0
Ketchikan High School 12 Energy Audit (October 2011)
EEM-9: Modify Boiler Burner Controls
Purpose: The existing boiler burners do not properly modulate to increase the cycle time and
decrease the number of cycles. The DDC system starts the burners on low fire, quickly
modulates them up to high fire, and then overshoots the setpoint. Adjusting the DDC
response rate using a rate-of-rise control is necessary to keep from ramping up the
burner when the boiler is gaining on loop temperature. Energy will be saved if the DDC
burner control is set up to monitor the rate of rise so it does not overshoot its setpoint.
Scope: Modify the DDC control sequence to increase cycle run time.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($3,720) ($3,720) $5,000 $0 ($105,500) ($100,500) 21.1
EEM-10: Optimize AHU-13 System (Vocational Education)
Purpose: The mixed air temperature control on AHU-13 is set at 50°F, which is bringing in more
outside air than required. Energy will be saved if a direct-measure outside air damper is
installed and the outside air flow reduced to match the exhaust air requirement.
Scope: Optimize AHU-13 as follows:
- Install direct-measure outside air damper.
- Modulate the exhaust air damper with building pressure.
- Optimize the schedules.
- Optimize the night setback.
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($18,890) ($18,890) $29,300 $0 ($535,500) ($506,200) 18.3
EEM-11: Optimize AHU-12 System (Gym Lockers)
Purpose: The lockers exhaust air flow rate is excessive due to minimal use of showers by the
students. Energy will be saved if the exhaust air flow is reduced and a direct-measure
outside air damper is installed so the outside air flow is constant.
Scope: Optimize AHU-12 as follows:
- Reduce locker room exhaust air flow.
- Reduce outside air by installing a direct measure outside air damper.
- Modulate the exhaust air damper with building pressure.
- Optimize the schedules.
- Optimize the night setback.
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($6,390) ($6,390) $12,400 $0 ($181,100) ($168,700) 14.6
Ketchikan High School 13 Energy Audit (October 2011)
EEM-12: Electrical Room 8 Heat Recovery
Purpose: The electrical room has a 225 kVA transformer in the space. The room has a 1,500 cfm
exhaust grille which highly over-exhausts the room, transferring more heat from the
building than the transformer produces. Energy will be saved if the heat generated from
these transformers is transferred to the AHU-1 return air plenum.
Scope: Cap the existing exhaust grille and rebalance the exhaust fan. Install a transfer fan to
supply the warm air from the electric room to the AHU-1 return air plenum.
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$50 ($4,750) ($4,700) $9,800 $900 ($134,700) ($124,000) 13.7
EEM-13: Replace Aerators and Showerheads
Purpose: Energy and water will be saved by replacing the lavatory aerators and showerheads
with low-flow models.
Scope: Replace lavatory aerators and showerheads with water-conserving fixtures.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($1,960) ($1,960) $3,000 $0 ($34,300) ($31,300) 11.4
EEM-14: Optimize AHU-8 System (Auxiliary Gym)
Purpose: AHU-8 is controlling to a 55°F mixed air temperature which is over-ventilating the
building. Energy will be saved by using a direct measure outside air damper to
maintain a constant outside air rate that matches the exhaust requirements.
Scope: Optimize AHU-8 as follows:
- Reduce outside air by installing a direct measure outside air damper.
- Modulate the exhaust air damper with building pressure.
- Optimize the schedules.
- Optimize the night setback.
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($14,900) ($14,900) $41,700 $0 ($422,400) ($380,700) 10.1
EEM-15: Install Flue Dampers
Purpose: Currently, two of the boilers are kept hot but do not operate to supply heat. Air flow
through an idle boiler carries heat up the chimney. Energy will be saved if flue dampers
are installed on the boilers to reduce the air flow through the boiler when it is not firing.
Scope: Install a flue damper on each boiler.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$300 ($2,000) ($1,700) $6,400 $5,100 ($56,600) ($45,100) 8.0
Ketchikan High School 14 Energy Audit (October 2011)
EEM-16: Electrical Room 208 Heat Recovery
Purpose: The electrical room in the mezzanine has a 150 kVA and a 250 kVA transformer in the
space. The heat from the transformers is exhausted to the outdoors via EF-34. Energy
will be saved if the heat generated from these transformers is used within the building
envelope.
Scope: Modify the EF-34 ductwork to supply the heated exhaust air to the gym.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$300 ($2,630) ($2,330) $13,500 $5,100 ($86,900) ($68,300) 6.1
EEM-17: Optimize AHU-7 (Music, Art, Kitchen)
Purpose: AHU-7 is over-ventilating the building by providing makeup air for the kitchen hood
which only operates 2 hours per week. Energy will be saved if the minimum outside air
rate is reduced to ensure the system is operating as efficiently as possible.
Scope: Optimize AHU-7 as follows:
- Install a direct-measure minimum outside air damper.
- Modulate the relief damper with building pressure.
- Optimize the fan schedules.
- Optimize the night setback.
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($5,010) ($5,010) $29,300 $0 ($142,000) ($112,700) 4.8
EEM-18: Optimize AHU-3 and AHU-4 (North Wing)
Purpose: AHU-3 and AHU-4 are configured as full outside air systems. They are over-
ventilating the spaces, resulting in excessive energy consumption. Energy will be saved
if AHU-3 and AHU-4 controls and equipment are optimized to ensure the systems are
operating as efficiently as possible.
Scope: Optimize the AHU-3 and AHU-4 system by converting to mixed air systems.
Additional optimization recommendations include:
- Modulate the exhaust air damper with building pressure
- Optimize the fan schedules
- Optimize night setback sequence
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$200 ($18,210) ($18,010) $126,800 $3,400 ($516,000) ($385,800) 4.0
Ketchikan High School 15 Energy Audit (October 2011)
EEM-19: Remove Chilled Water AHU Coils
Purpose: The cooling system for the school building was recently removed; however, cooling
coils still remain in the AHU systems. Energy will be saved if these unnecessary
cooling coils are removed to decrease the pressure that the supply fans are operating
against.
Scope: Remove the AHU-5 cooling coil and AHU-6 zone cooling coils.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
($180) ($260) ($440) $2,000 ($3,100) ($4,600) ($5,700) 3.9
EEM-20: Install Boiler Room Heat Recovery
Purpose: The boiler room utilizes a combustion air fan to cool the room when it gets too hot. The
audit team found the room to be 65°F due to nearly continuous cooling fan operation.
The boiler efficiency is lower if the combustion air is at a lower temperature. Energy
will be saved if the boiler room is kept warmer and the heat generated in the boiler
room is utilized within the building envelope rather than discharged outdoors.
Scope: Install a heat pump in the boiler room and transfer the heat a fan coil unit installed in
the gym.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$250 ($10,730) ($10,480) $87,000 $4,300 ($336,800) ($245,500) 3.8
EEM-21: Heat Recovery from Server Room 131 and Electrical Room 151
Purpose: Server Room 131 and Electrical Room 151 contains switches, servers, a 75 kVA
transformer, and some additional heat generating electrical equipment. The spaces are
cooled by three A/C units, which reject the heat outdoors. Energy will be saved if heat
generated in the server spaces is transferred to Corridor 128.
Scope: Install a split A/C unit to cool the server room and electrical room. Circulate air from
the server and electrical rooms through the A/C unit evaporator to maintain the rooms
at 65°F. Transfer the heat to corridor 128/100 by circulating it through the A/C unit
condenser.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$300 ($8,080) ($7,780) $86,100 $5,100 ($253,300) ($162,100) 2.9
Ketchikan High School 16 Energy Audit (October 2011)
MEDIUM PRIORITY
Medium priority EEMs will require planning and a higher level of investment. They are
recommended because they offer a life cycle savings. The EEMs are listed from highest to lowest
priority. Negative values, in parenthesis, represent savings.
EEM-22: Install Automatic Valves on Unit Heaters
Purpose: Energy will be saved if the ten unit heaters each have an automatic valve that shuts off
the heating flow when heat is not needed. Currently the coils in the unit heaters are
continuously hot and the thermostat turns on the fan to supply the heat to the room.
When heat is not needed, convective heat loss from the coil occurs; some of the heat
loss may be useful, but a large percentage is not.
Scope: Install automatic valves in the heating supply to each unit heater and control them from
the fan thermostat.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($680) ($680) $7,100 $0 ($19,300) ($12,200) 2.7
EEM-23: Upgrade Transformers
Purpose: Existing transformers are not TP-1 rated. Energy will be saved if these less-efficient
transformers are replaced with energy efficient models that comply with NEMA
Standard TP 1-2001.
Scope: Replace less-efficient transformers with NEMA Standard TP 1-2001 compliant models.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($9,790) ($9,790) $140,400 $0 ($171,700) ($31,300) 1.2
Ketchikan High School 17 Energy Audit (October 2011)
EEM-24: Upgrade Motors to Premium Efficiency
Purpose: Although many motor labels were not accessible or had been painted during
preservation efforts, the equipment inspection identified thirteen motors that could be
upgraded with premium efficiency models to save energy. They are:
AHU-3 5 HP
AHU-5 20 HP
AHU-6 15 HP
AHU-11 3 HP
AHU-12 7-½ HP
AHU-13 15 HP
RF-12 1-½ HP
RF-13 7-½ HP
EF-1 5 HP
P-9A 3 HP
P-9B 3 HP
P-11A 7-½ HP
P-11B 7-½ HP
Scope: Replace identified motors with premium efficiency motors.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($1,300) ($1,300) $22,000 $0 ($22,700) ($700) 1.0
Ketchikan High School 18 Energy Audit (October 2011)
LOW PRIORITY
Low priority EEMs do not offer a life cycle energy savings and are not recommended.
EEM-25: Replace Humanity’s Wing Roof Insulation
Purpose: A 112’ x 120’ section of the Humanity’s Wing roof uses an IRMA roof system with a
base layer of foam that is approximately 4” thick at the inspected roof drain with a 2”
layer of foam on the underside of the LG board. The 6” total thickness at the inspected
location would normally produce an insulation value of R-24 with the use of the
expanded polystyrene foam; however the IRMA roof system is de-rated by
approximately 50% as outlined in the executive summary. This results in an overall
roof insulation value of only R-12 for over 13,000 square feet of roofing. Replacing
the Humanity’s Wing roof with a tapered roof system similar to that used in the school
re-roofing project, with an optimum insulation value of R-46, will save energy;
however, our analysis shows it will not produce a life cycle cost savings.
Scope: Replace Humanity’s wing IRMA roof system with R-46 tapered roof system.
Annual Costs Life Cycle Costs
Operating Energy Total Investment Operating Energy Total SIR
$0 ($8,050) ($8,050) $357,000 $0 ($228,100) $128,900 0.6
EEM-26: Install Toilet Room Lighting Control
Purpose: Toilet room lighting is currently controlled with the corridor lights. Electric energy
would be saved if the corridor lighting hours were reduced by installing a separate
circuit to control the toilet room lighting with an occupancy sensor within the toilet
rooms.
Scope: Install separate circuit for toilet lights and control with occupancy sensors.
A preliminary analysis determined that this EEM will not realize a savings over a 25-
year life cycle because the lighting produces beneficial heat for the building. This heat
would otherwise be provided by the fuel oil boilers. Fuel oil heat has much higher
inflation than electric heat so over time the cost of the fuel oil heat is much higher than
the cost of keeping the corridor lighting on.
Ketchikan High School 19 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Section 4
Description of Systems
ENERGY SYSTEMS
This section provides a general description of the building systems. Energy conservation
opportunities are addressed in Section 3, Energy Efficiency Measures.
Building Envelope
R-value
Component Description (inside to outside) Existing Optimal
Exterior Wall Tile panel, studs, R-19 batt, 1” foil faced insulation, 5/8” gyp bd R-20 R-24
Main Roof Metal roof deck, 6” rigid insulation, ½” OSB, Membrane R-34 R-46
Humanity’s Roof Metal roof deck, EPDM, 4” EPS, 2” EPS w/ 1/2” aggregate R-12 R-46
Floor Slab 4” Concrete slab-on-grade R-10 R-10
Foundation 8” concrete with 1-1/2” rigid insulation on interior surface R-8 R-15
Windows Aluminum double pane R-1.5 R-4
Doors Aluminum (main entries) and steel (all others) w/o thermal break,
glazing where used is double pane R-1.5 R-4
Domestic Hot Water System
Three indirect hot water heaters and an auxiliary storage tank supply domestic hot water to the
fixtures. The water conservation efficiency of the lavatory aerators and the showerheads can be
improved.
Cooling Systems
The building has three space cooling systems for temperature control of the two IT rooms.
Automatic Control System
The building has a DDC system to control the operation of the heating and ventilation systems.
Lighting
Interior lighting consists primarily of T5, T8, and compact fluorescent fixtures. Exterior lighting
consists primarily of compact fluorescent and metal halide lighting. The maintenance staff has done
an outstanding job of reducing energy consumption within the building envelope through lighting
modifications. The interior lighting schedule and all exterior lighting is controlled by staff and by
photocells in an effort to minimize lighting operational hours.
Ketchikan High School 20 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Electric Equipment
Commercial kitchen equipment for food preparation at Ketchikan High School is located in the food
prep area.
Heating System
The building is heated by three fuel oil boilers that provide heat to thirteen air handling unit systems,
10 fan coil unit heaters, perimeter hydronic systems, and cabinet unit heaters located in the
Humanity’s wing. The heating system has the following pumps:
P-1A and P-1B are the building circulation pumps
P-2A and P-2B are secondary building circulation pumps
P-3A and P-3B are secondary building circulation pumps
P-4A is a boiler circulation pump for boilers 1, 2, and 3
P-5 is a glycol make-up pump
P-6A and P-6B are utilidoor sump pumps
P-7A and P-7B are domestic hot water circulation pumps
P-8A and P-8B are secondary building circulation pumps
P-9A and P-9B are secondary building circulation pumps
P-11A and P-11B are secondary building circulation pumps
P-12A and P-12B are secondary building circulation pumps
P-13 is a secondary building circulation pump
P-14A and P-14B are domestic hot water circulation pumps
P-15A and P-15B are domestic hot water circulation pumps
Ketchikan High School 21 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Ventilation Systems
Area
Fan
System Description
Phase 1 Wing AHU-1 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a mixing
box, filter section, supply fans, and heating coil
East ½ Gymnasium AHU-2 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a mixing
box, filter section, supply fans, and heating coil
North Wing 1st Floor AHU-3 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a heating
coil, mixing box, filter section, and a supply fan
North Wing 2nd Floor AHU-4 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a heating
coil, mixing box, filter section, and a supply fan
Auditorium AHU-5 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a heating
coil, mixing box, filter section, supply fan, and return fan
Stage Area and Green
Room
AHU-6 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a heating
coil, mixing box, filter section, supply fan, and return fan
Music, Kitchen, and Art AHU-7 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a heating
coil, mixing box, filter section, supply fan, and return fan
Auxiliary Gym AHU-8 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a heating
coil, mixing box, filter section, supply fan, and return fan
Arts Room AHU-9 Not in service
Auditorium AHU-11 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a heating
coil, mixing box, filter section, and a supply fan
Gym Lockers AHU-12 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a heating
coil, mixing box, filter section, supply fan, and return fan
Technology Complex AHU-13 Constant volume air handling unit consisting of a heating
coil, mixing box, filter section, supply fan, and return fan
Phase 1 Wing RF-1 35,500 cfm return fan with (2) 10 HP motors
Auditorium RF-2 21,900 cfm 10 HP return fan
Gym RF-3 13,500 cfm 7.5 HP return fan
Classrooms RF-4 20,115 cfm 7.5 HP return fan
Auxiliary Gym RF-5 11,800 cfm 5 HP return fan
Toilet Rooms by
Commons
EF-1 739 cfm 5 HP
Science Room EF-2 190 cfm for animal dissections
Science Room EF-3 720 cfm ½ HP fume hood
Science Room EF-4 720 cfm ½ HP fume hood
Science Room EF-5 1495 cfm ½ HP fume hood
Science Room EF-6 720 cfm ½ HP fume hood
Ketchikan High School 22 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Ventilation Systems, continued.
Area
Fan
System Description
Science Rooms EF-7 2060 cfm ½ HP general science exhaust
Science Rooms EF-8 2180 cfm ½ HP general science exhaust
Science Rooms EF-9 2180 cfm ½ HP general science exhaust
Science Rooms EF-10 2440 cfm ½ HP general science exhaust
Utilidor EF-11 2200 cfm ¾ HP ventilation
AHU-3 Mechanical EF-13 9300 cfm 5 HP AHU-3 relief
AHU-4 Mechanical EF-14 1200 cfm ¾ HP AHU-4 relief
Auditorium EF-15 1000 cfm ½ HP spotlight exhaust air
Stage Craft EF-16 2000 cfm ½ HP
Stage Craft EF-17 500 cfm 1/6 HP bathroom exhaust
Kitchen EF-18 4400 cfm 3 HP roof top mounted kitchen hood exhaust fan
Kitchen EF-19 600 cfm ¼ HP roof top mounted dishwasher exhaust fan
Art/Music Restrooms EF-20 1200 cfm ½ HP rooftop mounted exhaust fan
Art Room EF-21 532 cfm ¼ HP art room main exhaust
Kiln Room EF-22 880 cfm ¼ HP kiln exhaust fan
Aux Gym Restrooms EF-23 2325 cfm ¾ HP exhaust fan
Training Room EF-24 725 cfm general exhaust fan
Locker Rooms EF-26 5,155 cfm 3 HP exhaust fan
Applied Technology EF-27 810 cfm ½ HP exhaust fan
Wood Shop EF-28 1,650 cfm 5 HP sawdust collection fan
Auto Shop EF-29 2,000 cfm 1 ½ HP solvent collection tank exhaust fan
Auto Shop EF-30 1,000 cfm 2 HP grinding table exhaust fan
Auto Shop EF-31 2,000 cfm 5 HP automotive exhaust fan
Hot Water Tank Room EF-32 1,500 cfm ½ HP general exhaust
Auto Shop EF-33 2,250 cfm 2 HP outboard engine exhaust
Electric Room EF-34 2,370 cfm ½ HP general exhaust
Ketchikan High School 23 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Section 5
Methodology
Information for the energy audit was gathered through on-site observations, review of construction
documents, and interviews with operation and maintenance personnel. The EEMs are evaluated using
energy and life cycle cost analyses and are priority ranked for implementation.
Energy Efficiency Measures
Energy efficiency measures are identified by evaluating the building’s energy systems and comparing
them to systems in modern, high performance buildings. The process for identifying the EEMs
acknowledges the realities of an existing building that was constructed when energy costs were much
lower. Many of the opportunities used in modern high performance buildings—highly insulated
envelopes, variable capacity mechanical systems, heat pumps, daylighting, lighting controls, etc.—
simply cannot be economically incorporated into an existing building.
The EEMs represent practical measures to improve the energy efficiency of the buildings, taking into
account the realities of limited budgets. If a future major renovation project occurs, additional EEMs
common to high performance buildings should be incorporated.
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
The EEMs are evaluated using life cycle cost analysis which determines if an energy efficiency
investment will provide a savings over a 25-year life. The analysis incorporates construction,
replacement, maintenance, repair, and energy costs to determine the total cost over the life of the
EEM. Future maintenance and energy cash flows are discounted to present worth using escalation
factors for general inflation, energy inflation, and the value of money. The methodology is based on
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Handbook 135 – Life Cycle Cost
Analysis.
Life cycle cost analysis is preferred to simple payback for facilities that have long—often perpetual—
service lives. Simple payback, which compares construction cost and present energy cost, is
reasonable for short time periods of 2-4 years, but yields below optimal results over longer periods
because it does not properly account for the time value of money or inflationary effects on operating
budgets. Accounting for energy inflation and the time value of money properly sums the true cost of
facility ownership and seeks to minimize the life cycle cost.
Construction Costs
The cost estimates are derived based on a preliminary understanding of the scope of each EEM as
gathered during the walk-through audit. The construction costs for in-house labor are $60 per hour for
work typically performed by maintenance staff and $110 per hour for contract labor.
The cost estimate assumes the work will be performed as part of a larger renovation or energy
efficiency upgrade project. When implementing EEMs, the cost estimate should be revisited once the
scope and preferred method of performing the work has been determined. It is possible some EEMs
will not provide a life cycle savings when the scope is finalized.
Ketchikan High School 24 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Maintenance Costs
Maintenance costs are based on in-house or contract labor using historical maintenance efforts and
industry standards. Maintenance costs over the 25-year life of each EEM are included in the life cycle
cost calculation spreadsheets and represent the level of effort to maintain the systems.
Energy Analysis
The energy performance of an EEM is evaluated within the operating parameters of the building. A
comprehensive energy audit would rely on a computer model of the building to integrate building
energy systems and evaluate the energy savings of each EEM. This investment grade audit does not
utilize a computer model, so energy savings are calculated with factors that account for the dynamic
operation of the building. Energy savings and costs are estimated for the 25-year life of the EEM
using appropriate factors for energy inflation.
Prioritization
Each EEM is prioritized based on the life cycle savings to investment ratio (SIR) using the following
formula:
Prioritization Factor = Life Cycle Savings / Capital Costs
This approach factor puts significant weight on the capital cost of an EEM, making lower cost EEMs
more favorable.
Economic Factors
The following economic factors are significant to the findings.
Nominal Interest Rate: This is the nominal rate of return on an investment without regard to
inflation. The analysis uses a rate of 5%.
Inflation Rate: This is the average inflationary change in prices over time. The analysis uses an
inflation rate of 2%.
Economic Period: The analysis is based on a 25-year economic period with construction
beginning in 2010.
Fuel Oil
Fuel oil currently costs $3.47 per gallon for a seasonally adjusted blend of #1 and #2 fuel oil. The
analysis is based on 6% fuel oil inflation which has been the average for the past 20-years.
Electricity
Electricity is supplied by Ketchikan Public Utilities. The building is billed for electricity under their
commercial service rate. This rate charges for both electrical consumption (kWh) and peak electric
demand (kW). Electrical consumption is the amount of energy consumed and electric demand is the
rate of consumption.
Ketchikan High School 25 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Summary
The following table summarizes the energy and economic factors used in the analysis.
Ketchikan Public Utilities Commercial Service Rate
Electricity ($ / kWh ) $0.0897
Demand ( $ / kW ) $2.91
Customer Charge ( $ / mo ) $36.30
Summary of Economic and Energy Factors
Factor Rate or Cost Factor Rate or Cost
Nominal Discount Rate 5% Electricity $0.099/kwh
General Inflation Rate 2% Electricity Inflation 2%
Fuel Oil Cost (2012) $3.68/gal Fuel Oil Inflation 6%
Ketchikan High School 26 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Appendix A
Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
Ketchikan High School 27 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907.789.1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
Basis
Economic
Study Period (years) 25 Nominal Discount Rate 5%General Inflation 2%
Energy
2011 $/gal Fuel Inflation 2012 $/gal
Fuel Oil $3.47 6% $3.68
Electricity $/kWh (2011)$/kW (2011)Inflation $/kWh (2012)$/kW (2012)
w/ Demand Charges $0.090 $2.91 2% $0.091 $2.97
w/o Demand Charges $0.097 -2% $0.099 -
EEM-5: Reduce HVAC System Operating Hours
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Reprogram operating schedules 0 1 LS $5,000 $5,000
Estimating contingency 0 15%$750
Overhead & profit 0 30%$1,725
Design fees 0 10%$748
Project management 0 8%$658
Energy Costs
Electric Energy 1 - 25 -250,000 kWh $0.091 ($400,923)
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -12,000 gal $3.68 ($1,251,083)
Net Present Worth ($1,643,100)
EEM-6: Isolate Lag/Standby Boilers
Energy Analysis
Boiler Input MBH Loss %Loss MBH Hours, exist Hours, new kBtu η boiler Gallons
B-1 4,488 0.50% 22 8,760 6,840 -43,086 68%-457
B-2 4,488 0.50% 22 8,760 2,160 -148,107 68%-1,573
B-3 4,488 0.50% 22 8,760 2,160 -148,107 68%-1,573
67 -339,300 -3,603
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Implement boiler operating procedure, DDC controls 0 1 LS $5,000 $5,000
Annual Costs
Boiler shutdown and restart 1 - 25 16 hrs $60.00 $16,346
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -3,603 gal $3.68 ($375,604)
Net Present Worth ($354,300)
Ketchikan High School 28 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907.789.1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
EEM-7: Perform Boiler Combustion Test
Energy Analysis
Annual Gal % Savings Savings, Gal
134,900 -0.5% -675
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Purchase combustion analyzer 0 1 LS $1,000 $1,000
Annual Costs
Combustion test 1 - 25 6 hrs $60.00 $6,130
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -675 gal $3.68 ($70,321)
Net Present Worth ($63,200)
EEM-8: Optimize AHU-1 System
Energy Analysis
Ventilation SA CFM MAT T,room MBH Hours kBtu η boiler Gallons
AHU-1 Existing -60,000 58 65 -454 1,800 -816,480 68%-8,669
Optimized 60,000 62 65 194 1,800 349,920 68%3,715
-466,560 -4,954
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Rebalance air systems 0 1 LS $4,000 $4,000
Control modifications 0 1 LS $1,000 $1,000
Estimating contingency 0 15%$750
Overhead & profit 0 30%$1,725
Design fees 0 10%$748
Project management 0 8%$658
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -4,954 gal $3.68 ($516,480)
Net Present Worth ($507,600)
EEM-9: Modify Boiler Burner Controls
Energy Analysis
Annual Gal % Savings Savings, Gal
134,900 -0.75% -1,012
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Modify and commisison DDC burner controls 0 1 LS $5,000 $5,000
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -1,012 gal $3.68 ($105,482)
Net Present Worth ($100,500)
Ketchikan High School 29 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907.789.1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
EEM-10: Optimize AHU-13 System
Energy Analysis
Ventilation SA CFM MAT T,room MBH Hours kBtu η boiler Gallons
AHU-13 Existing -14,930 50 66 -258 3,000 -773,971 68%-8,218
Optimized 14,930 60 66 97 3,000 290,239 68%3,082
.-483,732 -5,136
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
IAQ OSA damper 0 1 LS $14,000 $14,000
Control modifications 0 1 LS $2,500 $2,500
Estimating contingency 0 15%$2,475
Overhead & profit 0 30% $5,692.50
Design fees 0 10% $2,466.75
Project management 0 8% $2,170.74
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -5,136 gal $3.68 ($535,489)
Net Present Worth ($506,200)
EEM-11: Optimize AHU-12 System
Energy Analysis
Ventilation SA CFM MAT T,room MBH Hours kBtu η boiler Gallons
AHU-12 Existing -6,310 55 68 -89 3,000 -265,777 68%-2,822
Optimized 6,310 63 68 34 3,000 102,222 68%1,085
-163,555 -1,737
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Balance systems 0 1 LS $7,000 $7,000
Estimating contingency 0 15%$1,050
Overhead & profit 0 30%$2,415
Design fees 0 10%$1,047
Project management 0 8%$921
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -1,737 gal $3.68 ($181,055)
Net Present Worth ($168,600)
EEM-12: Electrical Room 8 Heat Recovery
Energy Analysis
Exhaust Grille
CFM Troom Tosa MBH Hours Heat, kBtu η boiler Gallons
-1,510 70 40 -49 3,000 -146,772 82% -1,292
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Transfer ran, ductowrk, electrical, balancing 0 1 LS $5,500 $5,500
Estimating contingency 0 15%$825
Overhead & profit 0 30%$1,898
Design fees 0 10%$822
Project management 0 8%$724
Annual Costs
Fan maintenance 1 - 25 1 LS $50.00 $851
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -1,292 gal $3.68 ($134,736)
Net Present Worth ($124,100)
Ketchikan High School 30 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907.789.1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
EEM-13: Replace Aerators and Showerheads
Energy Analysis
Fixture Existing Proposed Uses/day Days Water,Gals % HW kBTU kWh
Summer
Showerhead 20.0 10.0 20 60 -12,000 80% -6,405 -1,877
Lavatories 0.3 0.2 200 60 -2,160 80% -1,153 -338
School Year
Showerhead 20.0 10.0 30 180 -54,000 80% -28,823 -8,448
Lavatories 0.3 0.2 1,800 180 -58,320 80% -31,129 -9,123
-126,480 -19,786
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Replace lavatory aerators 0 60 ea $35 $2,100
Replace showerhead 0 27 ea $35 $945
Energy Costs
Electric Energy (Effective Cost)1 - 25 -19,786 kWh $0.099 ($34,313)
Net Present Worth ($31,300)
EEM-14: Optimize AHU-8 System
Energy Analysis
Ventilation SA CFM MAT T,room MBH Hours kBtu η boiler Gallons
AHU-8 Existing -15,100 55 70 -245 1,800 -440,316 68%-4,675
Optimized 15,100 68 70 33 1,800 58,709 68%623
-381,607 -4,052
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
IAQ OSA damper 0 1 LS $14,000 $14,000
Balance system 0 1 LS $7,000 $7,000
Control modifications 0 1 LS $2,500 $2,500
Estimating contingency 0 15%$3,525
Overhead & profit 0 30%$8,108
Design fees 0 10%$3,513
Project management 0 8%$3,092
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -4,052 gal $3.68 ($422,438)
Net Present Worth ($380,700)
Gallons per Use
Ketchikan High School 31 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907.789.1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
EEM-15: Install Flue Dampers
Energy Analysis
Number CFM T,flue T,room MBH kBTU η boiler Gallons
3 -20 160 70 -6 -51,088 68% -542
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Install flue dampers 0 3 ea $1,200 $3,600
Estimating contingency 0 15%$540
Overhead & profit 0 30%$1,242
Design fees 0 10%$538
Project management 0 8%$474
Annual Costs
Flue damper maintenance 1 - 25 3 ea $100.00 $5,108
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -542 gal $3.68 ($56,555)
Net Present Worth ($45,100)
EEM-16: Electric Room 208 Heat Recovery
Energy Analysis
Transformer
kVA ηnew KW kWh Heat, kBtu η boiler Gallons
150 98.9% -1.7 -14,454 -49,317 82% -434
225 99.0% -2.3 -19,710 -67,251 82% -592
-116,568 -1,026
Heat Pump Energy
Recovery, kBtu COP kWh HP Heat, kBtu η boiler Gallons
-116,568 3 11,388 38,856 82% -342
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Seal EF-34 exhaust through roof 0 1 LS $600 $600
Install ductowrk to supply heated air to gym, balancing 0 1 LS $7,000 $7,000
Estimating contingency 0 15%$1,140
Overhead & profit 0 30%$2,622
Design fees 0 10%$1,136
Project management 0 8%$1,000
Annual Costs
A/C Unit maintenance 1 - 25 1 LS $300.00 $5,108
Energy Costs
Electric Energy 1 - 25 11,388 kWh $0.091 $18,263
Electric Demand 1 - 25 36 kW $2.97 $1,876
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -1,026 gal $3.68 ($107,009)
Net Present Worth ($68,300)
Ketchikan High School 32 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907.789.1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
EEM-17: Optimize AHU-7 System
Energy Analysis
Ventilation SA CFM MAT T,room MBH Hours kBtu η boiler Gallons
AHU-7 Existing -12,000 55 65 -130 1,800 -233,280 68%-2,477
Optimized 12,000 60.5 65 58 1,800 104,976 68%1,115
-128,304 -1,362
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
IAQ OSA damper 0 1 LS $14,000 $14,000
Control modifications 0 1 LS $2,500 $2,500
Estimating contingency 0 15%$2,475
Overhead & profit 0 30%$5,693
Design fees 0 10%$2,467
Project management 0 8%$2,171
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -1,362 gal $3.68 ($142,032)
Net Present Worth ($112,700)
EEM-18: Optimize AHU-3 and AHU-4
Energy Analysis
Ventilation SA CFM MAT T,room MBH Hours kBtu η boiler Gallons
AHU-3 Existing -6,900 40 65 -186 1,800 -335,340 68%-3,561
Optimized 6,900 62 65 22 1,800 40,241 68%427
AHU-4 Existing -4,000 40 65 -108 1,800 -194,400 68%-2,064
Optimized 4,000 62 65 13 1,800 23,328 68%248
-466,171 -4,950
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
AHU-3
Reconfigure ductwork 0 1 LS $4,100 $4,100
Toilet exhaust fan 0 1 LS $3,500 $3,500
Copier room transfer fan 0 1 LS $2,700 $2,700
Convert EF-13 to return fan 0 1 LS $7,300 $7,300
General exhaust fan 0 1 LS $15,800 $15,800
Balancing 0 1 LS $6,000 $6,000
AHU-4
Return ductowrk 0 1 LS $5,000 $5,000
New exhaust fan 0 1 LS $3,500 $3,500
New return fan 0 1 LS $19,000 $19,000
Remove EF-14 System 0 1 LS $2,000 $2,000
Balancing 0 1 LS $2,500 $2,500
Estimating contingency 0 15% $10,710
Overhead & profit 0 30% $24,633
Design fees 0 10% $10,674
Project management 0 8%$9,393
Annual Costs
Fan maintenance 1 - 25 2 LS $100.00 $3,405
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -4,950 gal $3.68 ($516,050)
Net Present Worth ($385,800)
Ketchikan High School 33 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907.789.1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
EEM-19: Remove Chilled Water AHU Coils
Energy Analysis
Fan Energy
Unit CFM ΔP η, fan BHP kW Hours kWh
AHU-5 21,300 -0.25 50% -1.7 -1.2 1,040 -1,300
AHU-6 CC 12,880 -0.25 50% -1.0 -0.8 1,040 -786
-2.0 -2,086
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Remove AHU-5 coil 0 1 LS $500 $500
Remove AHU-6 reheat coils 0 5 LS $300 $1,500
Annual Costs
Coil maintenance 1 - 25 -6 ea $30.00 ($3,065)
Energy Costs
Electric Energy 1 - 25 -2,086 kWh $0.091 ($3,345)
Electric Demand 1 - 25 -24.1 kW $2.97 ($1,254)
Net Present Worth ($5,700)
EEM-20: Install Boiler Room Heat Recovery
Energy Analysis
Heat Recovery
Input, MBH Jacket Loss MBH Hours Loss, kBtu Factor Recovery, kBtu η boiler Gallons
4,848 -1.0% -48 8,760 -424,641 75% -318,481 82%-2,804
Heat Pump Energy
Recovery, kBtu COP kWh HP Heat, kBtu η boiler Gallons
-318,481 3 31,114 106,160 82% -935
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Boiler room heat pump 0 1 LS $15,000 $15,000
Gym fan coil unit 0 1 LS $6,000 $6,000
Piping between heat pump and fan coil 0 1 LS $22,000 $22,000
Controls 0 1 LS $6,000 $6,000
Estimating contingency 0 15%$7,350
Overhead & profit 0 30% $16,905
Design fees 0 10%$7,326
Project management 0 8%$6,446
Annual Costs
Heat pump maintenance 1 - 25 1 LS $250.00 $4,257
Energy Costs
Electric Energy 1 - 25 31,114 kWh $0.091 $49,897
Electric Demand 1 - 25 60.0 kW $2.97 $3,126
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -3,739 gal $3.68 ($389,819)
Net Present Worth ($245,500)
Ketchikan High School 34 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907.789.1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
EEM-21: Electrical 151 and Server Room 131 Heat Recovery
Energy Analysis
Server Room
Heat Recovery
Input, MBH Hours Heat, kBtu Factor Recovery, kBtu η boiler Gallons
-27 8,760 -239,113 100% -239,113 82% -2,105
Heat Pump Energy
Recovery, kBtu COP kWh HP Heat, kBtu η boiler Gallons
-239,113 3 23,360 79,704 82% -702
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Split A/C Unit with ducted condenser 0 1 LS $37,000 $37,000
Ductwork amd grilles, balancing 0 1 LS $8,500 $8,500
Piping 0 1 LS $3,000 $3,000
Estimating contingency 0 15%$7,275
Overhead & profit 0 30% $16,733
Design fees 0 10%$7,251
Project management 0 8%$6,381
Annual Costs
A/C Unit maintenance 1 - 25 1 LS $300.00 $5,108
Energy Costs
Electric Energy 1 - 25 23,360 kWh $0.091 $37,462
Electric Demand 1 - 25 36 kW $2.97 $1,876
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -2,807 gal $3.68 ($292,673)
Net Present Worth ($162,100)
EEM-22: Install Automatic Valves on Unit Heaters
Energy Analysis
Loss, BTUH Number Factor Loss, kBTU Boiler Effic Fuel, gals
-1,000 10 20% -17,520 70% -185
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Install automatic valves and connect to fan wiring 0 10 ea $400 $4,000
Estimating contingency 0 15%$600
Overhead & profit 0 30%$1,380
Design fees 0 10%$598
Project management 0 8%$526
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -185 gal $3.68 ($19,329)
Net Present Worth ($12,200)
Ketchikan High School 35 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907.789.1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
EEM-23: Upgrade Transformers
Energy Analysis
Number kVA ηold ηnew KW kWh
2 75 97.4% 98.7% -1.95 -17,082
3 225 98.0% 99.0% -6.75 -59,130
1 300 98.0% 99.0% -3.00 -26,280
-11.7 -102,492
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Replace transformer, kVA 75 0 2 LS $10,400 $20,800
Replace transformer, kVA 225 0 3 LS $18,200 $54,600
Replace transformer, kVA 300 0 1 LS $22,800 $22,800
Estimating contingency 0 10%$9,820
Overhead & profit 0 30% $32,406
Energy Costs
Electric Energy 1 - 25 -102,492 kWh $0.091 ($164,366)
Electric Demand 1 - 25 -140 kW $2.97 ($7,315)
Net Present Worth ($31,300)
EEM-24: Upgrade Motors
Energy Analysis
Equip Number HP ηold ηnew kW Hours kWh
RF-12 1 1.5 84.5% 86.5% -0.02 2,610 -58
AHU-11 1 3 86.5% 89.5% -0.07 2,160 -145
P-9A 1 3 81.5% 89.5% -0.18 4,380 -784
P-9B 1 3 81.5% 89.5% -0.18 4,380 -784
AHU-3 1 5 86.5% 89.5% -0.11 6,205 -694
EF-1 1 5 86.5% 89.5% -0.11 1,800 -201
AHU-12 1 7.5 88.5% 91.7% -0.18 1,530 -274
RF-13 1 7.5 88.5% 91.7% -0.18 1,800 -322
P-11A 1 7.5 86.5% 91.7% -0.29 4,380 -1,274
P-11B 1 7.5 86.5% 91.7% -0.29 4,380 -1,274
AHU-6 1 15 71.0% 92.4% -2.39 1,800 -4,310
AHU-13 1 15 90.2% 92.4% -0.25 1,800 -443
AHU-5 1 20 87.0% 93.0% -0.90 1,800 -1,611
-5.1 -12,177
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs HP
Replace motor 1.5 0 1 LS 955 $955
Replace motor 3 0 3 LS 1,080 $3,240
Replace motor 5 0 2 LS 1,290 $2,580
Replace motor 7.5 0 4 LS 1,690 $6,760
Replace motor 15 0 2 LS 2,660 $5,320
Replace motor 20 0 1 LS 3,160 $3,160
Energy Costs
Electric Energy 1 - 25 -12,177 kWh $0.091 ($19,529)
Electric Demand 1 - 25 -62 kW $2.97 ($3,218)
Net Present Worth ($700)
Ketchikan High School 36 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Energy and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907.789.1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
EEM-25: Replace Humanity's Wing Roof Insulation
Energy Analysis
Component Area R,exist R,new ΔT MBH kBtu η boiler Gallons
Roof 13,440 12 40 30 -23.5 -206,035 68%-2,188
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Year Qty Unit Base Cost Year 0 Cost
Construction Costs
Remove pavers and foam insulation 0 13,400 sqft $1 $13,400
Install polyisocyanurate insulation, 3"0 13,400 sqft $5 $67,000
Install polyisocyanurate insulation, 3"0 13,400 sqft $5 $67,000
Tapered insulation 0 13,400 sqft $4 $53,600
Estimating contingency 0 15% $30,150
Overhead & profit 0 30% $69,345
Design fees 0 10% $30,050
Project management 0 8% $26,444
Energy Costs
Fuel Oil 1 - 25 -2,188 gal $3.68 ($228,080)
Net Present Worth $128,900
Ketchikan High School 37 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Appendix B
Energy and Utility Data
Ketchikan High School 38 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Billing Data
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907-789-1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
ELECTRIC RATE
Ketchikan Public Utilities Commercial Service
Electricity ($ / kWh )$0.0897
Cost of Power Adjustment ($ / kWh)$0.0000
Demand ( $ / kW )$2.91
Customer Charge ( $ / mo )$36.30
Sales Tax ( % )0.0%
ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTION AND DEMAND
kWh kW kWh kW kWh kW kWh kW
Jan 188,200 454 200,800 470 157,600 457 181,200 483 181,950
Feb 182,300 485 212,000 464 172,600 457 198,000 539 191,225
Mar 153,900 509 164,600 450 134,800 481 172,400 465 156,425
Apr 209,700 479 180,500 445 183,200 529 180,800 467 188,550
May 153,200 476 154,200 492 169,600 463 174,400 439 162,850
Jun 172,900 263 135,900 440 199,400 443 158,800 467 166,750
Jul 93,300 294 116,200 209 108,000 311 126,800 301 111,075
Aug 107,800 474 69,200 311 131,600 273 102,200 255 102,700
Sep 159,400 502 177,000 421 157,800 427 166,800 423 165,250
Oct 191,000 477 148,600 427 184,400 469 112,200 419 159,050
Nov 208,100 450 175,000 471 181,600 473 235,000 507 199,925
Dec 182,900 472 165,800 457 225,800 495 197,400 465 192,975
Total 2,002,700 1,899,800 2,006,400 2,006,000 1,978,725
Average 166,892 445 158,317 421 167,200 440 167,167 436 164,894
Load Factor 51%51%52%53%435
ELECTRIC BILLING DETAILS
Month Energy Demand Cust & Tax Total Energy Demand Cust & Tax Total % Change
Jan $14,137 $1,257 $36 $15,430 $16,254 $1,333 $36 $17,623 14.2%
Feb $15,482 $1,257 $36 $16,776 $17,761 $1,496 $36 $19,293 15.0%
Mar $12,092 $1,327 $36 $13,455 $15,464 $1,280 $36 $16,781 24.7%
Apr $16,433 $1,467 $36 $17,936 $16,218 $1,286 $36 $17,540 -2.2%
May $15,213 $1,275 $36 $16,524 $15,644 $1,205 $36 $16,885 2.2%
Jun $17,886 $1,216 $36 $19,139 $14,244 $1,286 $36 $15,567 -18.7%
Jul $9,688 $832 $36 $10,556 $11,374 $803 $36 $12,213 15.7%
Aug $11,805 $722 $36 $12,563 $9,167 $669 $36 $9,873 -21.4%
Sep $14,155 $1,170 $36 $15,361 $14,962 $1,158 $36 $16,156 5.2%
Oct $16,541 $1,292 $36 $17,869 $10,064 $1,147 $36 $11,247 -37.1%
Nov $16,290 $1,304 $36 $17,630 $21,080 $1,403 $36 $22,518 27.7%
Dec $20,254 $1,368 $36 $21,658 $17,707 $1,280 $36 $19,023 -12.2%
Total $ 179,974 $ 14,486 $ 436 $ 194,896 $ 179,938 $ 14,346 $ 436 $ 194,720 -0.1%
Average $ 14,998 $ 1,207 $ 36 $ 16,241 $ 14,995 $ 1,196 $ 36 $ 16,227 -0.1%
Cost ($/kWh)$0.097 92% 7% 0% $0.097 -0.1%
Month 2007 2008 2009 Average
Electrical costs are based on the current electric rates.
2009 2010
2010
Ketchikan High School 39 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Annual Electric Consumption
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907-789-1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecElectric Use (kWh)Month of the Year
Electric Use History
2007
2008
2009
2010
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecElectric Demand (kW)Month of the Year
Electric Demand History
2007
2008
2009
2010
Ketchikan High School 40 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Electric Cost
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907-789-1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School 2010
$ 0
$ 5,000
$ 10,000
$ 15,000
$ 20,000
$ 25,000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecElectric Cost (USD)Month of the Year
Electric Cost Breakdown
2010
Electric Use (kWh) Costs
Electric Demand (kW) Costs
Customer Charge and Taxes
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Electric Demand (kW)Electric Use (kWh)Month of the Year
Electric Use and Demand Comparison
2010
Electric Use
Electric Demand
Ketchikan High School 41 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Annual Fuel Oil Consumption
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907-789-1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Ketchikan High School
Year Fuel Oil Degree Days
2,007 136,000 7,430
2,008 106,835 7,385
2,009 131,125 7,538
2,010 137,556 7,390
5,000
5,500
6,000
6,500
7,000
7,500
8,000
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
2007 2008 2009 2010 Degree DaysGallons of Fuel OilYear
Annual Fuel Oil Use
Fuel Oil
Degree Days
Ketchikan High School 42 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Alaska Energy Engineering LLC Billing Data
25200 Amalga Harbor Road Tel/Fax: 907-789-1226
Juneau, Alaska 99801 jim@alaskaenergy.us
Annual Energy Consumption and Cost
Energy Cost $/MMBtu Area ECI EUI
Fuel Oil $3.47 $35.79 180,614 $3.66 139
Electricity $0.097 $29.95
Source Cost
Electricity 1,978,725 kWh $192,100 6,800 27%
Fuel Oil 134,894 Gallons $468,100 18,300 73%
Totals $660,200 25,100 100%
Annual Energy Consumption and Cost
Consumption Energy, MMBtu
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
$40
Fuel Oil ElectricityCost $ / MMBtuCost of Heat Comparison
Ketchikan High School 43 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Appendix C
Equipment Data
Ketchikan High School 44 Energy Audit (October 2011)
MotorHP / Volts / RPM / EfficP 2AB P 1 Utilidor 2 Secondary Unit Loop7.5 HP/ 480 VP 3AB P 1 Utilidor 2 Secondary Fan Loop3 HP/ 480 VP 4 P 1 Boiler Room Head Circulation2 HP/ 480 V/ 1725 rpm/ 82.5% not usedP 5 P 1 Boiler Room Glycol Make up1/3 HP/ 120 V/ 3450 rpmP 6AB P 1 Utilidor Utilidor Sump Drain1/3 HP/ 120 VP 1AB Boiler Room Fuel Oil Circulation1/2 HP/ 120 V1/2 HP/ 120 V1 WP 2ABBoiler Room Generator Fee Water3 HP/ 208 VB1 Boiler Room Primary Boiler Weil Mclain 14943770 MBHPrimary Burner Gordon Piatt R-12-0-5011.7-35 GPH 5 HP/ 460 V/ 3450 rpmmodulatingB2 Boiler Room Lag BoilerWeil Mclain 15944070 MBHLag BurnerGordon Piatt R-12-0-5011.7-35 GPH 5 HP/ 460 V/ 3450 rpmmodulatingAC 1 UtilidorLab SystemChampion HR7B-25275 CFM 7 1/2 HP/ 480 V/ 1745 rpm/ 82.9% dual motorAC 2 Boiler Room Control System20 HP/ 480 VB3 Boiler Room Lag BoilerWeil Mclain 15942 HP/ 208 VLag BurnerGordon Piatt R-12-0-5011.7-35 GPH 5 HP/ 460 V/ 3450 rpmmodulatingPMP 7 ABBoiler Room DHW18.5 GPM 3/4 HP/ 460 VPMP 8ABUtilidor Unit VentsSecondary Heading Circulation 125 GPM 3 HP/ 1750 rpmPMP 9ABUtilidor Fan HCSecondary Heading Circulation 50 GPMPMP 11ABUtilidorSecondary Hydronic Loop260 GPM 7 1/2 HP/ 1150 rpmPMP 13 Boiler RoomSecondary Hydronic Loop62 GPM 3/4 HP/ 1750 rpmPMP 15ABBoiler RoomSecondary Hydronic Loop40 GPM 1/4 HP/ 120 VAHU 1 R1 Penthouse Phase 1 Constitution Temtrol DH-164P41000 CFM 60 HP/ 480 V/ 1780 rpm/ 94.1%SF AHU 160 HP/ 480 V/ 1780 rpm/ 94.1%AHU 2 R1 Penthouse GymTemtrol DH-27P13500 CFM 10 HP/ 460 V/ 1760 rpmAHU 3 Mechanical 303 Phase 2Pace6900 CFM 5 HP/ 208 V/ 1750 rpm/ 87.5%AHU 4 Mechanical 301Pace 1A24AFST4000 CFM 5 HP/ 208 V/ 1750 rpm/ 87.5%AHU 5 Mechanical Mezz.PACE 98-73200-0121900 CFM 20 HP/ 460 V/ 1758 rpm/ 87%Ketchikan High School - Major Equipment InventoryCapacityNotesUnit IDLocation Function Make Model
Ketchikan High School 45 Energy Audit (October 2011)
MotorHP / Volts / RPM / EfficKetchikan High School - Major Equipment InventoryCapacityNotesUnit IDLocation Function Make ModelAHU 6 Mechanical Mezz.PACE DF 33AFSWSI13730 CFM 15 HP/ 480 V/ 1785 rpm/ 71%AHU 7 Mechanical Mezz. ClassroomPACE PF-40AFSWSI22615 CFM 40 HP/ 480 V/ 1480 rpmAHU 8 Auxiliary GymPACE PF-33AFSWSI13500 CFM 10 HP/ 480 V/ 1760 rpm/ 91%AHU 9 Art & Pottery900 CFM 10 HPAHU 10 Corridor4500 CFM 5 HPAHU 11 P IV Penthouse Gym West Side Haakon AIRPAK13500 CFM 3 HP/ 460 V/ 1745 rpm/ 86.5%SF for AHU 1115 HP/ 460 V/ 4130 rpmRF 1A P1 Penthouse AHU 1 Return Fan35500 CFM 10 HP/ 480 V/ 1760 rpm/ 91.7%RF 1B P1 Penthouse AHU 1 Return Fan35500 CFM 10 HP/ 480 V/ 1760 rpm/ 91.7%EF 1 P1 Penthouse Men's Bathroom Exhaust Greenheck SFB-18-50730 CFM 5 HP/ 480 V/ 1740 rpm/ 86.5%EF 2 Chemical Storage Animal Dissection Fan190 CFMLow UseEF 3 Room 123 Fume hood720 CFM 1/2 HP/ 120 VLow UseEF 4 Chemistry Lab 120 Fume hood720 CFM 1/2 HP/ 120 VLow UseEF 5 Physics Lab Fume hood1495 CFM 1/2 HP/ 120 VLow UseEF 6 Science 115 Fume hood720 CFM 1/2 HP/ 120 VLow UseEF 7 Science 115 General Science Exhaust2060 CFM 1/2 HP/ 120 V/ 1750 rpm Low UseEF 8 Physics 1252180 CFM 1/2 HP/ 120 V/ 1750 rpm Low UseEF 9 Chemistry Lab 120 General Science Exhaust2180 CFM 1/2 HP/ 120 V/ 1750 rpm Low UseEF 10 Biology 117 General Science Exhaust2440 CFM 1/2 HP/ 120 V/ 1750 rpm Low UseEF 11 Boiler Room Utilidor Vent2200 CFM 3/4 HP/ 480 V/ 830 rpm Low UseCF 1 Boiler Room Combustion Air Fan4200 CFM 1 1/2 HP/ 480 V/ 830 rpmEF 13 AHU 3 Mechanical Relief AHU 3 Pace U-30AFSTD9300 CFM 5 HP/ 460 V/ 1745 rpm/ 86.5%EF 14 AHU 4 Mechanical Relief AHU 4 Pace U-11FCSTD1200 CFM 3/4 HP/ 1750 rpmsecured, only used for 1 floorEF 15 BalconySpot Light Exhaust Air1000 CFM 1/2 HP/ 1750 rpmnever runsEF 16 Mechanical Mezz. Stage CraftPace PF-16B1SWS12000 CFM 1/2 HP/ 115 V/ 1725 rpm do efficiencyEF 17 Stage Craft Bathroom Exhaust Pace SCF65AM1500 CFM 1/6 HP/ 115 V/ 1725 rpm do efficiencyEF 18 Mechanical Mezz. Kitchen Fume Hood4400 CFM 3 HPEF 19 Above 247 Dishwasher Fan600 FRM 1/4 HPauto on w/dishwasherKetchikan High School 46 Energy Audit (October 2011)
MotorHP / Volts / RPM / EfficKetchikan High School - Major Equipment InventoryCapacityNotesUnit IDLocation Function Make ModelEF 20 Above 247 Bathroom Exhaust1200 CFM 1/2 HP/ 1725 rpmEF 21 Arts Room Art Main Exhaust532 CFM 1/4 HPEF 22 Kiln Room Kiln Exhaust880 CFM 1/4 HPEF 23Mechanical Room 8Auxiliary Gym BathroomPace SCF-124AM12325 CFM 3/4 HP/ 480 V/ 1725 rpm no efficiency EF 24 Training Room Space Exhaust725 CFMRF 2Mech. Mezz. AuditoriumReturn AirPACE PF40 AFSWSQ21900 CFm 10 HP/ 460 V/ 1760 rpm/ 91%RF 3Mechanical Mezz. StageReturn AirPACE PF36 AFS113530 CFM 7.5 HP/ 480 V/ 1765 rpm/ 91.7%RF 4Mech. Mezz. ClassroomReturn AirPACE PF44 AFSWS129225 CFM 7.5 HP/ 48 VRF 5Mech. Mezz. Aux. GymReturn AirPACE PF 36 AFSWS11800 CFM 5 HP/ 480 V/ 1740 rpm/ 89.5%EF 26Boiler Room PenthouseLocker RoomsSnyder General22RDKB1CW5155 CFM 3 HP/ 460 V/ 1760 rpm/ 89.5%EF 27Boiler Room PenthouseApplied Tech810 CFM 1/2 HP/ 120 V/ 1627 rpmEF 28 Sawdust 200A Collection Fan1640 CFM 5 HP/ 208 V/ 3450 rpmEF 29Welding Shop CeilingSolvent Tank HoodSnyder General16RPKB1CCW10 2000 CFM 1.5 HP/ 460 V/ 1730 rpmEF 30 Auto Shop Grinding Table1000 CFM 2 HP/ 460 V/ 1047 rpmEF 31Boiler Room PenthouseAutomotive ExhaustSnyder General110TCCW2000 CFM 5 HP/ 460 V/ 1750 rpmEF 32 203Hot Water Tank Room McQuay1500 CFM 1/2 HP/ 120 V/ 775 rpm offEF 33 Auto Shop Outboard Engine2250 CFM 2 HP/ 460 V/ 1810 rpmEF 34Boiler Room PenthouseElectric Room2370 CFM 1.5 HP/ 120 V/ 737 rpm 2nd deck191 Maintenance TransformerSquare D EE 150 T3HF150 KVA 115° Temp RiseTP RatedBoiler Room TransformerSquare D 225T3H225 KVA 150° Temp RiseNot TP RatedMechanical Mezz. TransformerSquare D 75T3HETSNIP75 KVA 115° Temp RiseNot TP RatedMechanical Mezz. TransformerSquare D 300T90HFTSNLP 300 KVA 115° Temp RiseNot TP RatedMechanical Mezz. TransformerSquare D 225T3HFTSNLP 225 KVA 115° Temp RiseNot TP RatedUtilidorTransformerSquare D 35549-17222-022 225 KVA 115° Temp RiseNot TP RatedRoofFridge/Freezer Condenser20 B 30 13 Amp 6.3 KVAServer Room TransformerSquare D 34349-17212-064 75 KVA 115° Temp RiseNot TP RatedAHU 12 P-IV Penthouse Gym LockersHaakon AIRPak6310 CFM 7.5 HP/ 460 V/ 1755 rpm/ 88.5%3" water columnRF 12 204 Penthouse Return1660 CFM 1.5 HP/ 460 V/ 1745 rpm/ 84%
Ketchikan High School 47 Energy Audit (October 2011)
MotorHP / Volts / RPM / EfficKetchikan High School - Major Equipment InventoryCapacityNotesUnit IDLocation Function Make ModelAHU 13 P-IV Penthouse Technology Complex Haakon AIRPak14930 CFM 15 HP/ 460 V/ 1750 rpm/ 90.2%RF 13 204 Penthouse Return10490 CFM 7.5 HP/ 460 V/ 1775 rpm/ 88.5%WH1 Hot Water Room DHWAutrol WHS 120 CDW120 gallonindirectWH2 Hot Water Room DHWAutrol WHS 120 CDW120 gallonindirectWH3 Hot Water Room DHWAutrol WHS 120 CDW120 gallonindirectCH1 Roof70 tonsAC 3 Boiler RoomIngersol Rand2-253E55 HP/ 230 V/ 1725 rpm/ 81.5%AC 4 Boiler Room Air Compressor ShopIngersol Rand234 D-22 HP/ 208 V/ 1725 rpm/ 78.5%AC 5 Boiler Room Dry Pipe SprinklerIngersol RandP307120T7.5 HP/ 460 V/ 1725 rpm/ 85.5%3 KitchenHot Food Service Seco Elite 3-HF3 KVA 208 V/ 14 Amps5a KitchenBeverage Dispenser Servend MD-250.30 KVA 120 V/ 2.5 Amps5b KitchenIce DispenserServend Series C41.85 KVA 120 V/ 15.4 Amps8a KitchenShake Machine Sanserver 826E1.49 KVA 208 V/ 4.14 Amps8b KitchenSoft Serve Machine Sanserve 826E2.82 KVA 208 V/ 7.82 Amps9 KitchenHot CabinetPrecision RSU-4011.01 KVA 120 V/ 8.40 Amps10a KitchenConvection Oven Lang 2-ECCO-S111650 KVA 208 V/ 31.92 Amps10b KitchenConvection Oven Lang 2-ECCO-S111650 KVA 208 V/ 31.92 Amps11 KitchenRangeLang 3 6-521 KVA 208 V/ 58.29 Amps13 KitchenVentilatorLighting0.60 KVA 120 V/ 5 Amps14a KitchenBrazing PanMarketForge21.18 KVA 208 V/ 58.5 Amps14b KitchenBrazing PanMarketForge2.4 KVA 120 V/ 2 Amps15 KitchenSteamerMarketForge9.01 KVA 208 V/ 25 Amps17 KitchenKettle24.14 KVA 208 V/ 67 Amps20 KitchenWalk-in Freezer6.48 KVA 208 V/ 18.30 Amps22 KitchenWalk-in Cooler6.48 KVA 208 V/ 18.30 Amps25 KitchenDisposer2.82 KVA 208 V/ 7.82 Amps27 KitchenDishwashing44.17 KVA 208 V/ 51 AmpsP 1A Boiler RoomBoiler Circulation Pump LegPaco 11-40957-146201 728 gpm 20 HP/ 480 V/ 1760 rpm/ 93% 71 TPH
Ketchikan High School 48 Energy Audit (October 2011)
MotorHP / Volts / RPM / EfficKetchikan High School - Major Equipment InventoryCapacityNotesUnit IDLocation Function Make ModelP 1B Boiler RoomBoiler Circulation Pump LeadPaco 11-40957-146201 728 gpm 20 HP/ 480 V/ 1760 rpm/ 93%P 7A Boiler Room DHW Circulation Taco 1615B3E2-6.853/4 HP/ 480 V/ 1725 rpm no efficiencyP 7B Boiler Room DHW Circulation Taco 1615B3E2-6.853/4 HP/ 480 V/ 1725 rpmP 12ASecondary Loop Taco FM50108.5B2H1C220 370 gpm 10 HP/ 460 V/ 1760 rpm/ 96.7%P 12BSecondary Loop Taco FM50108.5B2H16760 370 gpmP 14AHot Water Tank RoomDHW Circulation Taco 1611B3E14.55 gallon 1/4 HP/ 115 V/ 1725 rpmrecirculation loop legP 14BHot Water Tank RoomDHW Circulation Taco 1611B3E14.55 gallon 1/4 HP/ 115 V/ 1725 rpmrecirculation loop leadP 15AHot Water Tank RoomDHW Circulation Taco 122B3E14.31/4 HP/ 115 V/ 1725 rpmrecirculation loop leadP 15BHot Water Tank RoomDHW Circulation Taco 122B3E14.31/4 HP/ 115 V/ 1725 rpmrecirculation loop legP 2A UtilidorBuilding Heating Loop Paco painted over224 gpm 7.5 HP/ 480 V/ 1760 rpm/ 91%P 2B UtilidorBuilding Heating Loop Paco painted over224 gpm 7.5 HP/ 480 V/ 1760 rpm/ 91%P 3A UtilidorAHU 1&2Paco162 gpm 3 HP/ 480 V/ 1760 rpm/ 88.5%P 3B UtilidorAHU 1&2 Heating Loop Paco painted over162 gpm 3 HP/ 480 V/ 1760 rpm/ 88.5%P 11A UtilidorBuilding Heating Loop Paco 10-30125-1A0001-1743 295 gpm 7.5 HP/ 460 V/ 1170 rpm/ 86.5%P 11B UtilidorBuilding Heating Loop Paco 10-30125-1A0001-1743 295 gpm 7.5 HP/ 460 V/ 1170 rpm/ 86.5%P 9A UtilidorAHU 3/4 Heat Loop Paco 16-30707-130101-1622E3 HP/ 208 V/ 1760 rpm/ 81.5%P 9B UtilidorAHU 3/4 Heat Loop Paco 16-30707-130101-1622E3 HP/ 203 V/ 1760 rpm/ 81.5%P 8A UtilidorAHU 3/4 Heat Loop Paco 13-15707-130101-14421 HP/ 208 V/ 1745 rpmP 8B UtilidorAHU 3/4 Heat Loop Paco 13-15707-130101-1442
Ketchikan High School 49 Energy Audit (October 2011)
Appendix D
Abbreviations
AHU Air handling unit
BTU British thermal unit
BTUH BTU per hour
CBJ City and Borough of Juneau
CMU Concrete masonry unit
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CUH Cabinet unit heater
DDC Direct digital controls
DHW Domestic hot water
EAD Exhaust air damper
EEM Energy efficiency measure
EF Exhaust fan
Gyp Bd Gypsum board
HVAC Heating, Ventilating, Air-
conditioning
HW Hot water
HWRP Hot water recirculating pump
KVA Kilovolt-amps
kW Kilowatt
kWh Kilowatt-hour
LED Light emitting diode
MBH 1,000 Btu per hour
MMBH 1,000,000 Btu per hour
OAD Outside air damper
PSI Per square inch
PSIG Per square inch gage
RAD Return air damper
RF Return fan
SIR Savings to investment ratio
SF Supply fan
UV Unit ventilator
VAV Variable air volume
VFD Variable frequency drive
Ketchikan High School 50 Energy Audit (October 2011)