Enhanced O&M through Building Performance Monitoring and Benchmarking. Karl Brown

Transcription

1 2006 National Symposium on Market Transformation Working Session III Commercial Programs Track Enhanced O&M through Building Performance Monitoring and Benchmarking Karl Brown Deputy Director, California Institute for Energy and Environment University of California Office of the President (UCOP) 21 March 2006 Working Draft 19 March

2 2006 National Symposium on Market Transformation C3: Enhanced O&M through Building Performance Monitoring and Benchmarking The Next Ten Years University of California Policy (energy provisions drafted 2003) 10% energy use reduction through energy efficiency measures by 2014 California Green Building Initiative (Executive Order 2004) 20% energy use reduction in commercial buildings by 2015 California State University Policy (updated 2005) 15% energy use reduction by 2010 California Public Utilities Commission $2 Billion for ratepayer-supported efficiency programs Ten-Year goals (set in 2005) Working Draft 19 March

3 (California Public Utilities Commission) University of California California State University Pacific Gas and Electric Southern California Edison San Diego Gas & Electric Southern California Gas : $15 Million Continuing in Targeted-Savings Elements Retrofit Information-Only Element Training and Education (includes new construction) Working Draft 19 March

4 Key Program Features Improved Operation of Existing Equipment/Systems (as opposed to retrofit equipment upgrades) Permanent Monitoring with Trending Capability identifies dysfunction assures verification and persistence of savings Savings opportunities identified by combination of: monitoring test protocol-based methods Benchmarking Identification of Future Retrofit Projects Best Practices Report for Future Planning Training for Campus Staff Working Draft 19 March

5 Brief History of PG&E Thermal Energy Storage & Load Profile Monitoring 1993 SMUD/PECI 1st NationalConference on Building Cx California Utilities/CIEE Diagnostics for Cx & Operations IMDS 160 Sansome Street CEC/CIEE IMDS 925 L Street Texas A&M ~ 100 Buildings California Cx Collaborative SMUD/CIEE IMDS 925 L Street Persistence of Retro-Cx PIER UC Santa Barbara CSU Long Beach Central Florida State University UC Merced Planning and Design UC/CSU/IOU Partnership CSU/UC Campuses PIER Working Draft 19 March

6 Funding for: Permanent Monitoring Meters Telemetry Trending Software Whole-Building Energy Sub-System Commissioning Consultants Emphasis on Training for Campus Staff In-House Staff (Limits) Working Draft 19 March

7 Program Statistics (1 of 2): 25 Campuses 9 Plant System Projects 37 Building Projects over 7 million gross square feet ~ half laboratory or other energy intensive buildings Working Draft 19 March

8 Program Statistics (2 of 2): $5 Million Total Funding Project Size $20k - $290k $ $1.54 per gross square foot for buildings Savings Targets (Conservative for Pilot Program) 1 MW peak demand 9,000,000 kwh per year 500,000 therms per year Working Draft 19 March

9 Partial Portfolio Reporting To-Date (27 Feb 2006): 8 Projects (all buildings) 5 buildings with Lab Space Using 16% of Program Funding Producing 35% of Targeted Program Savings Working Draft 19 March

10 Building Type/ Benchmark Rank UC/CSU/IOU Partnership MBCx Projects Preliminary Summary of Results (Buildings) Gross Floor Area (square feet) Energy Intensity Benchmark (Source kbtu/yr/gsf) (1) Nominal Simple Payback Period (years) (2) (3) Energy Use Reduction as % of Building Baseline (1) Results for MBCx Projects Reporting To-Date Lab/1 176, % Lab/2 100, % (4) Lab/4 113, % Lab/5 38, % Non-Lab/1 215, % Non-Lab/2 57, % Results for Combined Projects Reporting To-Date Lab/3 146, % Non-Lab/3 138, % (1) Simplifying ass umptions: 0.6 kw/ton overall chiller plant efficiency, 80% overall boiler plant efficiency, 9,215 SourceBtu/kWh (Cal-Arch 2006). (2) Nomin al price assumptions: $ per non-peak kwh, $ per peak kwh and $1.00 pe r therm. (3) Savings & cost data available (Brown & Anderson 2006). (4) Pending c omplete report. Working Draft 19 March

11 Process Case Study from MBCx Program 1) Install monitoring augmentation Upgrade building power and gas meters Add energy information system (EIS) front end for trending 2) Verify historical energy use baseline with new equipment and existing building chilled water meter 3) Monitor for two days in warm weather Identify chilled water loop imbalance 4) Adjust controls to allow proper chilled water flow to coils 5) Observe fan speed reduction of 40%+ with peak demand reduction & net energy use reduction including chiller plant 6) Document post-measure energy use 7) Continue trend evaluation to ensure persistence of savings with changing building operation and use Could this measure have been identified by other means? Probably Was it identified prior to the MBCx project? No Working Draft 19 March

12 Limited Model New Model Project design based on: Safe Assumptions Information Savings target based on: Savings documentation based on: Confidence in persistence based on: Acceptable retro-commissioning project criteria: Overall efficiency potential: (Pseudo?) certainty from up-front estimates Verification of assumptions Historical measure performance Short payback period? Limited to measures engineers are comfortable estimating? Benchmarking Monitoring Monitoring Longer payback period (with persistence) Includes measures quantifiable through monitoring Working Draft 19 March

13 Partner Team Mark Bramfitt, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E, Co-chair) Karl Brown, UCOP (Co-chair) Maric Munn, UCOP Ryan Stroup, PG&E (Lead for MBCx Training and Education) Len Pettis & Aaron Klemm, CSU Paul Kyllo & Tony Pierce, Southern California Edison Randall Higa, Southern California Gas Guy Hansen, San Diego Gas and Electric Keith Marchando, Sonoma State University Jim Dewey, UC Santa Barbara MBCx Team Consultants Richard Sterrett, Alternative Energy Systems Consulting Mike Anderson, Matt Sullivan & Andrew Meiman, Newcomb Anderson McCormick Ziyad Awad, Awad & Company Working Draft 19 March

14 Support Organizations Portland Energy Conservation, Inc (PECI) Project Scoping Consultant to Campuses MBCx Curriculum Development & Lead Instructor(s) California Energy Commission Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program Technical Support (LBNL) MBCx Case Studies and Needs Assessment Monitoring (EIS) System Architecture Benchmarking MBCx Curriculum Development (PECI thru New Buildings Institute) Commissioning Providers Working Draft 19 March

15 UC/CSU/IOU Energy Efficiency Partnership Contacts: Karl Brown Len Pettis Aaron Klemm Mike Anderson Reference: Brown, K., and M. Anderson Monitoring-Based Commissioning: Early Results from a Portfolio of University Campus Projects. Submitted for publication in Proceedings of the 13 th National Conference on Building Commissioning. Portland, Ore.: PECI. Soon available at: Working Draft 19 March