HomeMy WebLinkAboutVillage End Use Energy Eff Program Exec Summary West Region Final Report 2005-2007
FINAL REPORT
AEA Grant # 2195234
West Region
2005 – 2007
Prepared for:
Alaska Energy Authority
813 West Northern Lights Blvd.
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Phone (907) 269-3000
Fax (907) 269-3044
Prepared By:
Alaska Building Science Network
5401 Cordova St. Suite 303
Anchorage, Alaska 99511
Phone (907) 562-9927
Fax (907) 770-5412
May 2007
2
Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program ’05 – ’06
AEA Grant # 2195234 Administered by Alaska Building Science Network
Final Report - Executive Summary: West Region
- By ABSN Project Manager Geoff Butler, May, 2007
From Jan. 2005 – Jan. 2007 the following 8 rural Alaska villages received energy efficiency
upgrades to community buildings:
Chefornak, Chevak, Kasigluk, Kongiganak, Kwigillingok, Mekoryuk, Nunapitchuk, Quinhagak
Total program grant funds: $298,000 Grant funds averaged per village: $37,250
________________________________________________________________________
The goal of these grant projects was to facilitate energy efficiency upgrades to community buildings
that would deliver the greatest energy savings at the fastest payback on grant funds. Energy efficient
lighting upgrades were the first measures undertaken. ABSN provided project development,
coordination, training, technical assistance, materials and logistical support to facilitate these projects.
To advance technology transfer and provide rural employment and skills training, we partnered
directly with 31 rural village entities region-wide and provided lighting retrofit training to approximately
50 local maintenance staff who completed lighting and other energy upgrades in their buildings.
Region-wide, 88 community buildings and 62 teacher-housing units operated by rural school districts
received energy efficiency improvements.
Original energy audits for these projects estimated light fixture (replacement) at a cost of $355 per
fixture. Within this scenario, the 1,603 linear fluorescent light fixtures retrofitted region-wide, alone,
would have cost $569,065 to complete! With ABSN’s methods, when we deduct materials costs of
heating measures, T5 and CFL lighting materials grant-wide, our cost for linear fluorescent retrofits is
$138 per fixture. ABSN’s approach of partnering with local city, tribal governments, village
corporations and rural school districts, coupled with the substantial in-kind contributions arising from
these partnerships - facilitated the lighting upgrades and allowed us to pursue many additional energy
savings measures as well as provide skills training and employment for rural maintenance staff, all at
a fraction of original audit estimates for these projects.
Primary Accomplishments of this Grant Region-wide:
• 1,603 linear fluorescent lighting retrofits
• 1,052 Compact fluorescent light bulb installations
• Nine T5 light fixture upgrades in school gym and multi-purpose facilities
• $ 30,651 grant funds spent on additional energy efficiency measures beyond lighting
- 2 low-mass boiler installations (partial in-kind support)
- 2 boilers received energy efficiency cleaning, tuning and outdoor temp controls
- 21 programmable thermostats installed
• 19 rural maintenance staff received comprehensive boiler energy efficiency and maintenance
training (classroom hours provided in-kind by ABSN through AHFC funding).
• Acquired $ 77,057 in matching grant resources – extending the capacity of AEA grant funding
by 25.8%
• All within the total budget of $298,000
3
Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
Grant funds payback and fuel saving measures
Savings from heating measures and corresponding grant expenditures are not included in
payback calculations. Our region-wide payback estimate of 2.43 years* on total grant funds
includes spending for all lighting and heating measures, but it does not account for any
savings from the heating measures. In other words, our payback figures absorb the full cost
of fuel savings measures, but do not benefit from any savings resulting from them. The
heating measures will result in measurable fuel savings, which we currently do not have data
to calculate. If it was possible to calculate fuel savings from the heating measures we are
confident it would measurably reduce payback time on total grant funds.
Region-Wide Lighting Upgrade Summary
For all linear fluorescent, compact fluorescent bulb and T5 lighting retrofits and
installations: (for 8 villages compared with 9 villages in the NW/SW regions)
• Pre-retrofit energy use for all lighting: 289.07 kW
• Post-retrofit energy use for all lighting: 146.22 kW
• Energy savings from all lighting upgrades: 142.85 kW
• Pre-retrofit to post retrofit energy reduction: 49 %
• Estimated Annual Savings Range:
Hours Per Day /
250 Days Per Year
Electrical
Savings
Avoided Diesel
Use (gallons)
Avoided
Diesel Costs
Payback
Est. (yrs)
4 Hours $ 70,125 10,963 $ 22,035 4.25
7 Hours $ 122,718 19,185 $ 38,562 2.43
10 Hours $ 175,311 27,408 $ 55,088 1.70
• Total grant funds for all energy efficiency measures: $ 298,000
• Simple mean payback (All grant funds, but accounting for lighting savings only) 2.43 Years
Additional Energy Efficiency Measures (Region-wide grant funding: $30,696)
After completing lighting measures with good payback, we dedicated remaining grant funds
to fuel saving measures and heating system energy efficiency training for village
maintenance staff. For our regional boiler training in Bethel and our village boiler trainings,
ABSN provided $2,100 for each of 2 trainings, or $4,200 total in-kind contributions region-
wide. Our organizational focus in energy efficiency and northern building science places us
in the unique position of being able to dovetail similar objectives from different projects
providing a win-win benefit to the VEUEEM grants. These and many other in-kind resources
enabled us to go far beyond the originally conceived scope of work and greatly expand the
capacity of these energy efficiency projects.
4 0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.00KilowattsChefornakChevakKasiglukKongiganakKwigillingokMekoryukNunapitchukQuinhagakWest Region - AEA Village End Use Energy Efficiency Program '05-'06Energy Reduction - Region-Wide All Lighting MeasuresPre-Retrofit Energy UsePost-Retrofit Energy UseAlaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
5 0.002.004.006.008.0010.0012.0014.0016.00KilowattsChefornakChevakKasigluk, AkiukKasigluk, AkulaKongiganakKwigillingokMekoryukNunapitchukQuinhagakWest Region - AEA Village End Use Energy Efficiency Program '05-'06T5 Gym & Common Area Lighting UpgradesPre-Retrofit Energy UsePost Retrofit Energy UseAlaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
6 Full Cost of Electricity West Region '05-'06 Villages$-$0.10$0.20$0.30$0.40$0.50$0.60$0.70ChefornakChevakKasiglukKongiganakKwigillingokMekoryukNunapitchukQuinhagakAEA Village End Use Energy Efficiency Progam '05-'06Cost/kW`Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
7 AEA, VEUEEM - Summary of Program Results for '05 - '06 West Grant Activities Building / Lighting Use Estimates of 7 hrs / day, 250 days/year: Annual Savings (kWh) Electricity Cost per kWh (without PCE) Annual Village-wide savings (dollars) Utility Fuel Usage (kWh/gal) from '05 AEA PCE Report Annual Avoided Fuel Oil (gallons)Diesel Cost per gallon (from '05 AEA, PCE Report) Annual Avoided Fuel Costs (dollars)Total Project Costs: All grant delivery, labor, materials, shipping and, disposal costs Simple Payback (yrs) # of Rural Entities Worked With # of community Buildings Worked In # of Teacher Housing Units Worked In Est. # of Maintenance Staff Worked With 23,230 $ 0.49 $ 11,382 12.28 1,892 $ 2.41 $ 4,559 $ 37,250 3.27 4 11 4 5 76,704 $ 0.50 $ 38,352 12.77 6,007 $ 1.83 $10,992 $ 37,250 0.97 4 14 21 8 30,863 $ 0.60 $ 18,518 13.71 2,252 $ 1.83 $ 4,120 $ 37,250 2.01 3 14 7 8 22,166 $ 0.40 $ 8,866 12.42 1,785 $ 2.42 $ 4,319 $ 37,250 4.20 4 12 7 5 14,737 $ 0.47 $ 6,926 13.25 1,112 $ 2.28 $ 2,536 $ 37,250 5.38 4 10 5 5 18,998 $ 0.47 $ 8,929 13.96 1,361 $ 1.83 $ 2,490 $ 37,250 4.17 4 8 4 5 45,959 $ 0.47 $ 21,600 13.19 3,485 $ 2.06 $ 7,180 $ 37,250 1.72 4 12 10 8 17,327 $ 0.47 $ 8,144 13.41 1,292 $ 1.83 $ 2,365 $ 37,250 4.57 4 7 4 6 249,982 $122,718 19,185 $ 16.49 $38,562 $ 298,000 31 88 62 50 $122,718 Projected Annual Savings (dollars) for all 8, '05-'06 - West villages $298,000 Total Grant Funds For All 8, '05-'06 West villages Simple Payback: 2.43 years to payback entire grant (building use time: 7 hrs/day & 250 hrs/yr) $ 38,235 Total Project Cost for NW/SW Villages $ 37,250 Total Project Cost for West Villages Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
8 AEA, VEUEEM - Summary of Program Results for '05 - '06 West Grant Activities Building / Lighting Use Estimates of 7 hrs / day, 250 days/year: # of 4' Fluorescent light Fixtures Retrofitted # of CFLS Installed # of Gym / Multi-purpose Bldgs Upgraded with T5s Additional Measures Beyond Lighting (Materials and Labor Cost) 9, Low-Mass Boiler training and installation for SD Staff 3 Boilers cleaned, tuned and retro'd with outside temp controls Provided energy efficiency boiler training for 19 village maint staff Installed 21 Programmable T-Stats Total In Kind Contributions from all Village Entities 149 35 1 $ 5,570 2 3 $ 7,921 372 446 1 $ 275 6 $ 10,805 184 79 2 $ 1,989 1 2 $ 16,487 218 71 1 $ 4,954 1 2 5 $ 8,529 152 39 1 $ 4,954 1 $ 7,571 129 136 1 $ 5,144 1 3 $ 9,255 251 168 1 $ 2,432 1 9 5 $ 9,081 148 78 1 $ 5,377 2 $ 7,408 1603 1052 9 $ 30,696 2 2 19 21 $ 77,057 $ 569,065 USKH Original estimates to replace 3,248 fixtures. Bethel was 7 maint staff total $ 76,884 25.80% $ 12,421 USKH estimates total cost to REPLACE 35, 2-lamp T8 light fixtures in Kong, school, line 33 of their detailed costs. $ 355 per fixture replacement 2 maint staff to be trained as part of LKSD MOA w/ Low-mass boiler project. $ 23,081 USKH estimates total cost to REPLACE 65 T8 light fixtures in SAVOONGA, line 25 of their detailed costs. $ 355 per fixture replacement $ 137.96 ABSN averaged cost per linear fluorescent fixture: Total West grant funds - heating measures cost - T5 materials and shipping costs - materials cost of CFLs (1,052 x $2), all divided by number of linear fluorescent fixtures retrofitted region wide (1,603). Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
9 AEA, VEUEEM - Summary of Program Results for '05 - '06 West Grant Activities Building / Lighting Use Estimates of 7 hrs / day, 250 days/year: Pre-retrofit Energy Use (watts) Pre-retrofit Energy Use (Kilowatts) Post-retrofit Energy Use (watts) Post-retrofit Energy Use (Kilowatts) Percent Wattage Reduction, Pre to Post retrofit Energy Use Savings (watts) Pre-Retrofit (kW) Post-Retrofit (kW) Energy Use Savings (kW) Lighting / Building Use (hours/day)Lighting / Building Use (days/year) Chefornak 27,248 27.25 13,974 13.97 49% 13,274 27.25 13.97 13.27 7 250 Chevak 79,043 79.04 35,212 35.21 55% 43,831 79.04 35.21 43.83 7 250 Kasigluk 38,572 38.57 20,936 20.94 46% 17,636 38.57 20.94 17.64 7 250 Kongiganak 29,783 29.78 17,117 17.12 43% 12,666 29.78 17.12 12.67 7 250 Kwigillingok 20,011 20.01 11,590 11.59 42% 8,421 20.01 11.59 8.42 7 250 Mekoryuk 23,711 23.71 12,855 12.86 46% 10,856 23.71 12.86 10.86 7 250 Nunapitchuk 46,520 46.52 20,258 20.26 56% 26,262 46.52 20.26 26.26 7 250 Quinhagak 24,180 24.18 14,279 14.28 41% 9,901 24.18 14.28 9.90 7 250 TOTALS 289,068 289.07 146,221 146.22 49% 142,847 289 146 143 Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
10
Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
Lighting Strategy and Savings Estimates
During initial site visits we verified lighting assessments including quantity, locations, and
wattage of existing fixtures. From initial assessments and site visits we designed lighting
plans and applied various lamp and ballast combinations along with de-lamping strategies to
achieve a balance of optimal energy efficiency and good light levels for the activity at hand.
From initial assessments and our lighting retrofit plans we determined pre and post energy
use by building, village entity, village-wide and region-wide. With a known energy use, we
could estimate energy and cost savings based on a predicted building and lighting use
pattern. Since this information is extremely variable and would require separate grant funds
to determine individual building use for these projects, we are reporting our saving estimates
based on 250 days / year use and a 3-tier range of 4, 7, and 10 hours/day. For the purposes
of this report we will focus on a mean lighting use of 7 hours/day. This generic use time is
intended to average the use pattern of all buildings in our projects. Individual buildings and
individual room spaces will have a wide range of use patterns. The actual savings and
payback resulting from these projects we feel will fall somewhere within our range of 4 to 10
hours a day.
When considering savings estimates, it should be noted that for all practical purposes the
only thing we can determine with reasonable accuracy is pre and post energy use. When it
comes to savings, there are other questions that arise including: Who actually sees the
savings? If the energy use is reduced in a village, the required operating costs of a village
utility must still be met. Utility rates will continue to increase to meet operating costs. Where
savings occur, some will be to the State of Alaska in reduced PCE payments, and some will
be to the electricity rate-payer. There is also the question of load verses capacity of a given
generation system. In some cases where a generation system’s capacity is over-extended,
dropping the electrical load will be favorable for that utility as they may be spared the costs of
generator replacement or overhaul. In other cases, if a system is somewhat oversized for the
load already, an additional drop in electrical use may not be favorable to the utility or school.
The optimal operating cycle of a given generator will consume a set amount of fuel over time.
Reduction in electrical load may not translate directly to how much fuel is burned in a given
generator.
Although these factors should be understood, the pressures of ever-increasing fuel costs,
coupled with the facts of life in rural Alaska, necessitate the pursuit of energy efficiency
programs wherever possible. Also, the trend of improved diesel generation technology, and
the ability to tailor power generation levels to match load cycles, means that projects
dedicated to overall load reduction are critical. This trend is another practical reason to
pursue energy efficiency as an important principle.
We at ABSN are extremely pleased with the results of our work in association with these
projects and are happy to be contributing toward energy efficiency cost savings for rural
Alaska.
11
Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
Savings and Payback Ranges - West Region Villages
Based on hours of operation: 7 hrs/day for 250 days/year
Community Annual Savings
Projections
Total Project
Costs
Simple
Payback
(yrs)
Chefornak $ 11,382 $ 37,250 3.27
Chevak $ 38,352 $ 37,250 0.97
Kasigluk $ 18,518 $ 37,250 2.01
Kongiganak $ 8,866 $ 37,250 4.20
Kwigillingok $ 6,926 $ 37,250 5.38
Mekoryuk $ 8,929 $ 37,250 4.17
Nunapitchuk $ 21,600 $ 37,250 1.72
Quinhagak $ 8,144 $ 37,250 4.57
TOTALS: $122,718 $ 298,000 2.43
AEA Village End Use Energy Efficiency Program '05-'06
12
Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
Savings and Payback Ranges - West Region Villages
Based on hours of operation: 4 hrs/day for 250 days/year
Community Annual Savings
Projections
Total Project
Costs
Simple
Payback
(yrs)
Chefornak $ 6,504 $ 37,250 5.73
Chevak $ 21,916 $ 37,250 1.70
Kasigluk $ 10,582 $ 37,250 3.52
Kongiganak $ 5,066 $ 37,250 7.35
Kwigillingok $ 3,958 $ 37,250 9.41
Mekoryuk $ 5,102 $ 37,250 7.30
Nunapitchuk $ 12,343 $ 37,250 3.02
Quinhagak $ 4,653 $ 37,250 8.00
TOTALS: $70,125 $ 298,000 4.25
Community Annual Savings
Projections
Total Project
Costs
Simple
Payback
(yrs)
Based on hours of operation: 10 hrs/day for 250 days/year
Chefornak $ 16,261 $ 37,250 2.29
Chevak $ 54,789 $ 37,250 0.68
Kasigluk $ 26,454 $ 37,250 1.41
Kongiganak $ 12,666 $ 37,250 2.94
Kwigillingok $ 9,895 $ 37,250 3.76
Mekoryuk $ 12,756 $ 37,250 2.92
Nunapitchuk $ 30,858 $ 37,250 1.21
Quinhagak $ 11,634 $ 37,250 3.20
TOTALS: $175,311 $ 298,000 1.70
AEA Village End Use Energy Efficiency Program '05-'06
13
Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
Notes on Budget and Grant Spending
Our objective has been to spend grant funds evenly between villages to the greatest
extent possible. Since the beginning of the grant in January, 2005 expenditures were
separated by village, and also by specific budget category. Expenses were entered into
individual village budget spreadsheets according to the following categories: Field
Management, Project Management, Travel Expenses, Materials, and Village Labor. Each
village budget totals $37,250, which is the original total grant amount of $298,000 divided
by eight villages. As we got into spending on measures beyond lighting we did our best to
choose projects that stayed within the individual village budgets. To adequately cover
energy savings measures beyond lighting, left over village budgets within the region were
pooled as needed to cover these measures. For example, the materials and labor costs
to install two low-mass boilers in Chefornak were averaged and shared between all LKSD
villages. It should be noted that all additional energy savings measures were undertaken
in villages that showed interest and that provided matching funds for labor or materials to
help make projects happen.
The village budget spreadsheets that come with these final reports as appendices are
current to the beginning of January, 2007 when new AEA grant funds were added to this
grant. Toward the end of the ’05-’06 grant cycle in late 2006, the individual village budgets
allowed us to determine where remaining monies could be spent on additional energy
saving measures. Between January, 2005 and the end of June, 2007 financial reporting
period, all ’05-’06 spending for this grant will have been billed to AEA.
Disposing and Recycling Old Lamps and Ballasts
ABSN’s goal was to ensure that all old and unused lamps and ballasts were shipped out
of the villages to Anchorage for proper disposal and recycling. In cases where the
existing 34-watt T-12 lamps were fairly new, village building owners sometimes preferred
to keep the materials and pass them along for continued use. In most cases, lamps were
at or near their useful lifespan and were no longer putting out optimum light. All
fluorescent lamps contain mercury and as such should not be disposed of in landfills. As
part of ’05 – ’06 projects, ABSN developed a system of packing and shipping used lamps
and old magnetic ballasts from the villages to Total Reclaim Inc. of Anchorage - the
largest recycler of fluorescent lamps in the state. From Anchorage the lamps and ballasts
travel by container ship to lower 48 recycling facilities. The mercury from lamps is
reclaimed, and the ballasts are recycled for their materials.
For shipping used lamps and ballasts from most villages to regional hubs we arranged
free back-haul service - generously provided by Alaska Transportation Service (ATS).
From the hub communities back to Anchorage, Northern Air Cargo provides backhaul at
reduced rates for this program. Used lamps and non-PCB ballasts travel as general
freight in properly sealed containers. Used lamps are categorized as non-hazardous
universal waste.
14
Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
Packing used lamps for recycling A village shipment of used lamps
and ballasts
Bring used lamps to the air strip
8ft, T-12 lamps prepared for
recycling.
8ft lamp recycling container . 8ft lamps prepared for shipping.
PCB Ballast Disposal
Ballasts manufactured during or before 1979 are considered to contain PCBs, and are classified
hazardous waste. In some villages where PCB ballasts are found, they must be dealt with under
OSHA, EPA, and DOT regulations for proper removal and transportation. About half our villages in
this region had some PCB ballasts to remove and dispose of in order to complete lighting retrofits in
all community buildings. As part of ’05 – ’06 projects, ABSN developed a PCB ballast removal and
disposal method for village maintenance staff within EPA and DOT compliance and approved by
Alaska State OSHA office. Proper removal procedures were facilitated by ABSN, with the village
building owner and their maintenance staff taking responsibility for proper removal - as the generator
of the hazardous waste.
Double checking ballasts for PCBs DOT approved haz-mat container of PCB ballasts
ready for shipment
15
Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
The following eight village reports detail
lighting and heating measures
undertaken in each of our
west region villages:
16
Alaska Building Science Network - Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program – ’05-‘06 Final Reports West Region
ELECTRONIC APPENDICES
Village End Use Energy Efficiency Measures Program ’05 – ‘06
West Region Final Reports
_______________________________________________________________
Electronic appendixes associated with these projects are provided as part of
our final reports including:
• Cover page and Final Report Executive Summary, file name:
(Cover_ExecSummary_West_FinalReport05-06.doc)
• Regional final reporting summary data, charts and calculations spreadsheets:
(SummaryFinalReportDataWest_'05-'06.xls)
• Final reports for each village in a folder titled:
(Final_ReportsVEUEEM’05-‘06_West)
• Pre-Post retrofit spreadsheets for each village, in folder titled:
(TallySheets_West_'05-'06Final_Reports)
• Regional final reporting summary data – By building energy savings calcs, file name:
(BldgSummary_Data_West'05-'06.xls)
• Contact information for all village contacts, file name:
(Contacts_West_VEUEEM'05-'06.xls)
• Budget breakdowns – by village from 12-31-06, file name:
(BudgetByVillageWest_'05-'06_FinalReport.xls)
• Grant comparison memorandum, file name:
(Memo_VEUEEM'05-'06_Comparison.doc)