Willard Bowman Elementary School

Transcription

1 Willard Bowman Elementary School Gregory Rd Anchorage, Alaska AkWarm ID No. CIRI-ANC-CAEC-26 Submitted by: Central Alaska Engineering Company Contact: Jerry P. Herring, P.E., C.E.A Lakefront Drive Soldotna, Alaska Phone (907) February 8, 2012

2 FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE i OF iv

3 FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE ii OF iv

4 AEE... Association of Energy Engineers AHFC... Alaska Housing Finance Corporation AHU... Air Handling Unit ARIS... Alaska Retrofit Information System ARRA... American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ASD... Anchorage School District ASHRAE... American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers BPO... Building Plant Operator BTU... British Thermal Unit CAEC... Central Alaska Engineering Company CCF... Hundreds of Cubic Feet CFL... Compact Fluorescent CFM... Cubic Feet per Minute DDC... Direct Digital Control deg F... Degrees Fahrenheit DHW... Domestic Hot Water ECI... Energy Cost Index EEM... Energy Efficiency Measure EMCS... Energy Management Control System EPA... Environmental Protection Agency EUI... Energy Utilization Index hr(s)... Hour(s) HP... Horsepower HPS... High Pressure Sodium HVAC... Heating, Ventilation, and Air-Conditioning IES... Illuminating Engineering Society IGA... Investment Grade Audit kbtu... Thousands of British Thermal Units kwh... Kilowatt Hour LED... Light Emitting Diode ORNL... Oak Ridge National Laboratory sf... Square Feet SIR... Savings to Investment Ratio SP... Simple Payback W... Watts FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE iii OF iv

5 This Investment Grade Audit (IGA) was performed using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds, managed by Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). IGA s are the property of the State of Alaska, and may be incorporated into AkWarm-C, the Alaska Retrofit Information System (ARIS), or other state and/or public information systems. AkWarm-C is a building energy modeling software developed under contract by AHFC. This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE- EE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. This energy audit is intended to identify and recommend potential areas of energy savings, estimate the value of the savings and approximate the costs to implement the recommendations. Any modifications or changes made to a building to realize the savings must be designed and implemented by licensed, experienced professionals in their fields. Lighting recommendations should all be first analyzed through a thorough lighting analysis to assure that the recommended lighting upgrades will comply with State of Alaska Statute as well as Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) recommendations. Central Alaska Engineering Company bears no responsibility for work performed as a result of this report. Payback periods may vary from those forecasted due to the uncertainty of the final installed design, configuration, equipment selected, and installation costs of recommended Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs), or the operating schedules and maintenance provided by the owner. Furthermore, EEMs are typically interactive, so implementation of one EEM may impact the cost savings from another EEM. Neither the auditor, Central Alaska Engineering Company, AHFC, nor any other party involved in preparation of this report accepts liability for financial loss due to EEMs that fail to meet the forecasted payback periods. This energy audit meets the criteria of a Level 2 IGA per the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, Air-conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). The life of the IGA may be extended on a caseby-case basis, at the discretion of AHFC. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE iv OF iv

6 This report presents the findings of an investment grade energy audit conducted for: Anchorage School District Contact: Calvin Mundt 1301 Labar Street Anchorage, AK Alaska Housing Finance Corporation Contact: Rebekah Luhrs 4300 Boniface Parkway Anchorage, AK This audit was performed using ARRA funds to promote the use of innovation and technology to solve energy and environmental problems in a way that improves the State s economy. This can be achieved through the wiser and more efficient use of energy. The purpose of the energy audit is to identify cost-effective system and facility modifications, adjustments, alterations, additions and retrofits. Systems investigated during the audit included heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), interior and exterior lighting, motors, building envelope, and energy management control systems (EMCS). The January 2009 December 2010 average annual utility costs at this facility are as follows: Electricity $ 72,011 Natural Gas $ 56,439 Total $ 128,450 Energy Utilization Index: Energy Cost Index: kbtu/sf 1.94 $/sf The potential annual energy savings are shown on the following page in Table 1.1 which summarizes the Energy Efficiency Measures (EEM s) analyzed for Bowman Elementary School. Listed are the estimates of the annual savings, installed cost, and two different financial measures of return on investment. Be aware that the measures are not cumulative because of the interrelation of several of the measures. The cost of each measure for this level of auditing is considered to be + 30% until further detailed engineering, specifications, and hard proposals are obtained. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 1 OF 28

7 Rank Feature Improvement Description 1 Lighting: Hallway Lights - Top 2 Setback Thermostat: Section B 3 Lighting: Miscellaneous Incandescent 4 Lighting: Gym Lights 5 Setback Thermostat: Section D 6 Setback Thermostat: Section A 7 Setback Thermostat: Section C 8 Lighting: Parking Lot Lights 9 Other Electrical: Relocatable Classroom Replace with 91 FLUOR T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic and Improve Manual Switching Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section B space. Replace with 25 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section D space. Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section A space. Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section C space. Replace with 17 LED 115W Module Standard Electronic and Controls retrofit Energy Efficiency Upgraded Relocatable Classroom (Refer to Appendix F) 10 Ventilation Install premium efficiency motors on all fans $1,000 = $15,000). Install variable frequency drives to adjust fan motor HP and CFM (4 $3,000 each = $12,000, $2,000 installation per unit = $8,000). Install heat recovery ventilation systems on AHU's (80% efficient, 4 $16,000 each = $64,000). Add variable speed DDC System to ventilation system. Assumed that 65% of total cost is attributed to ventilation with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC for all ventilation systems ($386,951). 11 Lighting: Exterior Entry Lights Replace with 14 LED 25W Module Standard Electronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost 1 Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR 2 Simple Payback (Years) 3 $989 $8, $2,089 $24, $185 $2, $233 $3, $1,075 $17, $1,133 $18, $1,685 $28, $1,936 $37, $856 $29, $25,496 $485, $462 $14, FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 2 OF 28

8 Rank Feature Improvement Description 12 HVAC And DHW 13 Lighting: Section A 3- Bulb 14 Lighting: Hockey Rink Lights 15 Lighting: Section D 3- Bulb 16 Lighting: Section B 3- Bulb 17 Lighting: Entrance Lights 18 Refrigeration: Refrigerators 19 Lighting: Hallway Lights - Bottom 20 Lighting: Section C 2- Bulb 21 Lighting: Section A 2- Bulb 22 Lighting: Section C 3- Bulb 23 Lighting: Section D 2- Bulb 24 Lighting: Section B 2- Bulb TOTAL of All Measures Place DHW pump on timer ($1,000). Replace motors/pumps in boiler room with premium efficiency units $1,800 each = $18,000). Charge hydronic loop with water, install large plate heat exchanger in fan room ($20,000 unit, $5,000 installation) to transfer heat from water to glycol system attached to AHUs. Add variable speed DDC System to heating system. Assumed that 20% of total cost is attributed to heating with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC ($119,062). Replace with 173 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program High Efficiency Electronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Replace with 4 LED (3) 150W Module Standard Electronic Annual Energy Savings Installed Cost 1 Savings to Investment Ratio, SIR 2 Simple Payback (Years) 3 $2,489 $163, $1,099 $84, $386 $12, Replace with 157 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program High Efficiency Electronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor $998 $79, Replace with 58 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 $369 $29, W Energy-Saver Program High Efficiency Electronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Replace with 6 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 $25 $2, W U-Tube Energy-Saver Program High Efficiency Electronic Replace with 12 Refrigerator $330 $12, Replace with 91 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver (2) Program High Efficiency Electronic Replace with 47 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program High Efficiency Electronic Replace with 32 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program High Efficiency Electronic Replace with 236 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program High Efficiency Electronic Replace with 24 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program High Efficiency Electronic Replace with 75 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program High Efficiency Electronic $138 $40, $71 $20, $44 $14, $267 $103, $36 $10, $113 $33, $42,504 $1,274, FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 3 OF 28

9 Table Notes: 1. Cost estimates were generated using the Program Demand Cost Model for Alaskan Schools, 12 th Edition, Updated 2011, developed for the State of Alaska DOE, Education Support Services/Facilities. Renovations Projects Manual provides information on school renovation costs. Upon developing a final scope of work for an upgrade with detailed engineering completed, detailed savings and benefits can then be better determined. Some of the EEM s should be completed when equipment meets the burn-out phase and is required to be replaced and in some cases will take significant investment to achieve. 2. Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) is a life-cycle cost measure calculated by dividing the total savings over the life of a project (expressed in today s dollars) by its investment costs. The SIR is an indication of the profitability of a measure; the higher the SIR, the more profitable the project. An SIR greater than 1.0 indicates a cost-effective project (i.e. more savings than cost). Remember that this profitability is based on the position of that Energy Efficiency Measure (EEM) in the overall list and assumes that the measures above it are implemented first. 3. Simple Payback (SP) is a measure of the length of time required for the savings from an EEM to payback the investment cost, not counting interest on the investment and any future changes in energy prices. It is calculated by dividing the investment cost by the expected first-year savings of the EEM. With all of these energy efficiency measures in place, the annual utility cost can be reduced by $42,504 per year, or 33% of the buildings total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $1,274,310, for an overall simple payback period of 30 years. If only the cost-effective measures are implemented (i.e., SIR > 1.0), the annual utility cost can be reduced by $3,078 per year, or 2.5% of the buildings total energy costs. These measures are estimated to cost $32,344, for an overall simple payback period of 10.5 years. Table 1.2 below is a breakdown of the annual energy cost across various energy end use types, such as Space Heating and Water Heating. The first row in the table shows the breakdown for the building as it is now. The second row shows the expected breakdown of energy cost for the building assuming all of the retrofits in this report are implemented. Finally, the last row shows the annual energy savings that will be achieved from the retrofits. Description Space Heating Space Cooling Water Heating Lighting Refrigeration Other Electrical Ventilation Fans Existing $63,187 $3,973 $3,120 $18,139 $1,487 $9,086 $28,671 $127,663 Building With All $43,477 $3,383 $2,492 $11,119 $1,175 $8,230 $15,282 $85,159 Proposed Retrofits SAVINGS $19,710 $590 $628 $7,020 $312 $856 $13,389 $42,504 Total Cost FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 4 OF 28

10 While the intent of many Energy Efficiency Measures is to increase the efficiency of fuel-burning and electrical equipment, an important factor of energy consumption lies in the operational profiles which control the equipment usage. Such profiles can be managed by administrative controls and departmental leadership. They determine how and when equipment is used, and therefore have a greater impact on energy savings potential than simple equipment upgrades alone. Significant energy cost savings can be realized when EEMs are combined with efficient minded operational profiles. Operational profiles may be outlined by organization policy or developed naturally or historically. These profiles include, but are not limited to; operating schedules, equipment set-points and control strategies, maintenance schedules, and site and equipment selection. Optimization of operational profiles can be accomplished by numerous methods so long as the intent is reduction in energy-using equipment runtime. Due to the numerous methods of optimization, energy cost savings solely as a result of operational optimization are difficult to predict. Quantification, however, is easy to accomplish by metering energy usage during and/or after implementation of energy saving operational profiles and EEMs. Optimization of site selection includes scheduling and location of events. If several buildings in a given area are all lightly used after regularly occupied hours, energy savings can be found when after-hour events are consolidated and held within the most energy efficient buildings available for use. As a result, unoccupied buildings could be shut-down to the greatest extent possible to reduce energy consumption. Operational behaviors which can be combined with equipment upgrades are operating schedules and equipment control strategies including set-points. Occupancy and daylight sensors can be programmed to automatically shut-off or dim lighting when rooms are unoccupied or sufficiently lit from the sun. Operating schedules can be optimized to run equipment only during regular or high-occupancy periods. Also, through a central control system, or with digital programmable thermostats, temperature set-points can be reduced during low-occupancy hours to maximize savings. In addition, domestic hot water circulation systems and sporadically used equipment can be shut-down during unoccupied hours to further save energy. In general, having equipment operating in areas where no occupants are present is inefficient, and presents an opportunity for energy savings. Operational profiles can also be implemented to take advantage of no or low cost EEMs. Examples include heating system optimizations (boiler section cleaning, boiler flush-through cleaning, and completing preventative maintenance on outside air damper and temperature reset systems) and tighter controls of equipment set-backs and shut-downs (unoccupied zones equipment shut-down, easier access to and finer control of equipment for after-hours control). In a large facility management program, implementation of these measures across many or all sites will realize dramatic savings due to the quantity of equipment involved. Changes to building operational profiles can only be realized while simultaneously addressing health, safety, user comfort, and user requirements first. It is impractical to expect users to occupy a building or implement operational behaviors which do not meet such considerations. That said, it is quite practical for management groups to implement administrative controls which reduce losses brought about by excess and sub-optimum usage. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 5 OF 28

11 This comprehensive energy audit covers the 66,367 square foot Bowman Elementary School, depicted below in Figure 2.1, including classrooms, restrooms, administrative offices, an outside portable classroom, and a gymnasium. Utility information was collected and analyzed for two years of energy use by the building. This information was used to analyze operational characteristics, calculate energy benchmarks for comparison to industry averages, estimate savings potential and establish a baseline to monitor the effectiveness of implemented measures. An excel spreadsheet was used to enter, sum, and calculate benchmarks and to graph energy use information (refer to Appendix A for the Benchmark Report). The Annual Energy Utilization Index (EUI) is expressed in Thousands of British Thermal Units/Square Foot (kbtu/sf) and can be used to compare energy consumption to similar building types or to track consumption from year to year in the same building. The EUI is calculated by converting annual consumption of all fuels used to Btu s then dividing by the area (gross conditioned square footage) of the building. EUI is a good indicator of the relative potential for energy savings. A comparatively low EUI indicates less potential for large energy savings. Building architectural, mechanical and electrical drawings were utilized to calculate and verify the gross area of the facility. The gross area was confirmed on the physical site investigation. Refer to Section 6.0 of this report for additional details on EUI issues. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 6 OF 28

12 After gathering the utility data and calculating the EUI, the next step in the audit process was to review the drawings to develop a building profile which documented the building age, type, usage, and major energy consuming equipment or systems such as lighting, heating, ventilation and air condition (HVAC), domestic hot water heating, refrigeration, snow-melt, etc. The building profile is utilized to generate, and answer, possible questions regarding the facility s energy usage. These questions were then compared to the energy usage profiles developed during the utility data gathering step. After this information is gathered, the next step in the process is the physical site investigation (site visit). The site visit was completed on September 27, 2011 and was spent inspecting the actual systems and answering specific questions from the preliminary review. Occupancy schedules, O&M practices, building energy management program, and other information that has an impact on energy consumption were obtained. Photos of the major equipment and building construction were taken during the site visit. Several of the site photos are included in this report as Appendix D. An additional site visit was completed on October 27, 2011 where thermal images of the building s exterior were taken. These thermal images illustrate heat loss exhibited by the school. Several of the thermal images are included in this report as Appendix E. The post-site work includes evaluation of the information gathered during the site visits, developing the AkWarm-C Energy Model for the building, researching possible conservation opportunities, organizing the audit into a comprehensive report, and making recommendations on mechanical, electrical and building envelope improvements. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 7 OF 28

13 Central Alaska Engineering Company (CAEC) began the site survey after completing the preliminary audit tasks noted in Section 2.0. The site survey provided critical input in deciphering where energy opportunities exist within the facility. The audit team walked the entire site to inventory the building envelope (roof, walls, windows and doors, etc.), the major equipment including HVAC, water heating, lighting, and equipment in kitchens, offices, gymnasium, and classrooms. The site survey was used to determine an understanding of how the equipment is used. The collected data was entered into the AkWarm-C Commercial Software (AkWarm-C), a building energy modeling program developed for Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC). The data was processed by AkWarm-C to model a baseline from which energy efficiency measures (EEMs) could be considered. The model was compared to actual utility costs to ensure the quality of baseline and proposed energy modeling performed by AkWarm-C. The recommended EEMs focus on the building envelope, HVAC systems, water heating, lighting, and other electrical improvements that will reduce annual energy consumption. EEMs are evaluated based on building use and processes, local climate conditions, building construction type, function, operational schedule, existing conditions, and foreseen future plans. Energy savings are calculated based on industry standard methods and engineering estimations. When new equipment is proposed, energy consumption is calculated based on the manufacturer s information where possible. Energy savings are calculated by AkWarm-C. Implementation of more than one EEM often affects the savings of other EEMs. The savings may in some cases be relatively higher if an individual EEM is implemented in lieu of multiple recommended EEMs. For example, implementing reduced operating schedule for specific inefficient lighting systems will result in a greater relative savings than merely replacing fixtures and bulbs. Implementing reduced operating schedules for newly installed efficient lighting will result in a lower relative savings, because there is less energy to be saved. If multiple EEM s are recommended to be implemented, the combined savings is calculated and identified appropriately. Cost savings are calculated based on the historical energy costs for the building. Cost estimates were generated using the Program Demand Cost Model for Alaskan Schools, 12 th Edition, Updated 2011, developed for the State of Alaska DOE, Education Support Services/Facilities. Renovations Projects Manual provides information on school renovation costs. The Geographic Area Cost Factor dated April 2011 for Anchorage has an index of 100 and was used in this report. Installation costs include design, labor, equipment, overhead and profit for school renovation projects and used to evaluate the initial investment required to implement an EEM. These are applied to each recommendation with simple paybacks calculated. In addition, where applicable, maintenance cost savings are estimated and applied to the net savings. The costs and savings are applied and a Simple Payback (SP) and Savings to Investment Ration (SIR) are calculated. These are listed in Section 7.0 and summarized in Table 1.1 of this report. The SP is based on the years that it takes for the net savings to payback the net installation cost (Cost divided by Savings). The SIR is calculated as a ratio by dividing the break even cost by the initial installed cost. The lifetime for each EEM is estimated based on the typical life of the equipment being replaced or altered. The energy savings is extrapolated throughout the lifetime of the EEM. The total energy savings is calculated as the total lifetime multiplied by the yearly savings. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 8 OF 28

14 The analysis provides a number of tools for assessing the cost effectiveness of various improvement options. These tools utilize Life-Cycle Costing, which is defined in this context as a method of cost analysis that estimates the total cost of a project over the period of time that includes both the construction cost and ongoing maintenance and operating costs. Savings to Investment Ratio (SIR) = Savings divided by Investment Savings includes the total discounted dollar savings considered over the life of the improvement. When these savings are added up, changes in future fuel prices (usually inflationary) as projected by the Alaska Department of Energy are included in the model. Future savings are discounted to the present to account for the time-value of money (i.e. money s ability to earn interest over time). The Investment in the SIR calculation includes the labor and materials required to install the measure. An SIR value of at least 1.0 indicates that the project is cost-effective - total savings exceed the investment costs. Simple payback is a cost analysis method whereby the investment cost of a project is divided by the first year s savings of the project to give the number of years required to recover the cost of the investment. This may be compared to the expected time before replacement of the system or component will be required. For example, if a boiler costs $50,000 and results in a savings of $5,000 a year, the payback time is 10 years. If the boiler has an expected life to replacement of 20 years, it would be financially viable to make the investment since the payback period of 10 years is less than the project life. The Simple Payback calculation does not consider likely increases in future annual savings due to energy price increases. As an offsetting simplification, Simple Payback does not consider the need to earn interest on the investment (i.e. it does not consider the time-value of money). Because of these simplifications, the SIR figure is considered to be a better financial investment indicator than the Simple Payback measure. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 9 OF 28

15 All results are dependent on the quality of input data provided. In this case the site investigation was limited to observable conditions. No testing or destructive investigations were undertaken. Although energy-conserving methods are described in the EEMs, in some instances several methods may also achieve the identified savings. Detailed engineering is required in order to develop the EEMs to a realizable project. This audit and report are thus intended to offer approximations of the results achievable by the listed improvements. This report is not intended to be a final design document. The design professional or other persons following the recommendations shall accept responsibility and liability for the results. An accurate model of the building performance can be created by simulating the thermal performance of the walls, roof, windows and floors of the building. The HVAC system and central plant are modeled as well, accounting for the outside air ventilation required by the building and the heat recovery equipment in place. The model uses local weather data and is trued up to historical energy use to ensure its accuracy. The model can be used now and in the future to measure the utility bill impact of all types of energy projects, including improving building insulation, modifying glazing, changing air handler schedules, increasing heat recovery, installing high efficiency boilers, using variable air volume air handlers, adjusting outside air ventilation and adding cogeneration systems. For the purposes of this study, Bowman Elementary School was modeled using AkWarm-C energy use software to establish a baseline space heating and cooling energy usage. Climate data from Anchorage, Alaska was used for analysis. From this, the model was be calibrated to predict the impact of theoretical energy savings measures. Once annual energy savings from a particular measure were predicted and the initial capital cost was estimated, payback scenarios were approximated. Project cost estimates are provided in the Section 7.0 of this report reviewing the Energy Efficiency Measures. Limitations of the AkWarm-C Commercial Software are reviewed in this section. The AkWarm-C model is based on typical mean year weather data for Anchorage, Alaska. This data represents the average ambient weather profile as observed over approximately 30 years. As such, the natural gas and electric profiles generated will not likely compare perfectly with actual energy billing information from any single year. This is especially true for years with extreme warm or cold periods, or even years with unexpectedly moderate weather. The heating and cooling load model is a simple two-zone model consisting of the building s core interior spaces and the building s perimeter spaces. This simplified approach loses accuracy for buildings that have large variations in cooling/heating loads across different parts of the building. AkWarm-C does not model HVAC systems that simultaneously provide both heating and cooling to the same building space (typically done as a means of providing temperature control in the space). The energy balances shown were derived from the output generated by the AkWarm-C simulations. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 10 OF 28

16 The original structure of Bowman Elementary School is a single story facility that was built in This building has had no additions made to it. The school has a single portable unit located on the southern side of the building. The school typically opens by 6AM by BPO staff with faculty and student occupancy from 8AM to 4PM during the weekdays. Additional occupancy time keeping the school open includes an after school program. Other rental activities occur in the evenings and weekends in the gymnasium and classroom areas which require the school to remain open as late as 9PM at times. There are an estimated 450 full time student as well as 75 faculty and staff occupants using the building. As architectural drawings were provided for this audit, shell insulation values were assumed using the provided information. No destructive testing was completed for the audit. The insulation values and conditions were modeled using the data provided in the architectural drawings. The following are the assumptions made for the AkWarm-C building model: Exterior walls of the building have double paned metal framed windows in place and have an estimated U-factor ranging from Btu/hr-sf-F. Most of these windows appear to be in good condition. The exterior walls of the elementary school consist of 6-inch metal studs filled with fiberglass batt insulation for an R-21 value. The exterior of the building is covered in brick tiles over cement backer board. Wall height varies from 12 feet to 25 feet, depending on location. The roof system of the school is covered in cedar shingles over 6-inches of composite insulation board. The insulating board sits on top of 0.5-inch of mineral fiberboard. This entire roof system sits on top of 1.5-inch metal decking. The floor/foundation of the building is a concrete slab-on-grade configuration. The slab edge appears to be insulated on the outside, though there is no indication there is insulation installed under the concrete slab from the architectural drawings reviewed for the audit. All doors on this building are commercial grade, metal framed and insulated doors that are halfwindowed or solid. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 11 OF 28

17 Heat is provided to the main school building by three (3) natural gas-fired boilers. The portable classroom is heated electrically. The boilers are located in the first floor mechanical room. A glycol hydronic heating system is circulated throughout the building by circulation pumps located in the boiler room and provides heat to the air handling units. There is a hybrid building DDC control system in place with end devices using pneumatic controls. The heating plants used in the building are: Boiler 1 Fuel Type: Natural Gas Input Rating: 2,049,000 BTU/hr Rated Efficiency: 83.0 % Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic Boiler Operation: All Year Boiler 2 Fuel Type: Natural Gas Input Rating: 2,049,000 BTU/hr Rated Efficiency: 82.0 % Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic Boiler Operation: All Year Boiler 3 Fuel Type: Natural Gas Input Rating: 2,049,000 BTU/hr Rated Efficiency: 82.0 % Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic Boiler Operation: All Year Storage Water Heater Fuel Type: Natural Gas Input Rating: 199,000 BTU/hr Rated Efficiency: 80.0 % Heat Distribution Type: Hydronic Boiler Operation: All Year Domestic Hot Water (DHW) is supplied by a natural gas fired storage hot water heater. DHW is circulated 24/7 around the building and supplies the kitchen, restrooms, teacher s lounge, and the classroom sinks. The hot water heater is located in the first floor mechanical room. Outside air is drawn into the building primarily through air handling units. There are four (4) Air Handling Units (AHUs) located inside of the building providing ventilation to the school. Excess air is removed from the building with the use of exhaust fans and relief air fans located in the mechanical room. The ventilation system is pneumatically controlled via a hybrid DDC system. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 12 OF 28

18 There are several types of light systems throughout the building. The majority of the building has been upgraded to more modern T8 lights with one wing of the school is currently using occupancy sensors in classrooms. The gym lighting system in place is updated to a modern system which provides equivalent illumination with a third less energy and are controlled by occupancy sensors. The T12 lighting systems remaining in the building are good candidates for replacement to new Energy-Saver T8 systems or in the case of the upper hallway lights, removal all together. The high pressure sodium lights (HPS) mounted on the outside of the building are good candidates for replacement. There have been recent advances in LED technology making it a viable option to replace the HPS systems. Several EEM s are provided in this report reviewing the lighting system upgrade recommendations. There are several large plug loads throughout the building. This includes the kitchen equipment, computers with monitors, copy machines, vending machine, clothing dryer, washing machine, refrigerators, microwave ovens and coffee pots. These building plug loads are estimated in the AkWarm-C modeling program at 0.5 watts/sf. Following the completion of the field survey a detailed building major equipment inventory was created and is attached as Appendix C. The equipment listed is considered to be the major energy consuming items in the building whose replacement or upgrade could yield substantial energy savings. An approximate age was assigned to the equipment if a manufactured date was not shown on the equipment s nameplate. As listed in the 2011 ASHRAE Handbook for HVAC Applications, Chapter 37, Table 4, the service life for the equipment along with the remaining useful life in accordance to the ASHRAE standard are also noted in the equipment list. Where there are zero (0) years remaining in the estimated useful life of a piece of equipment, this is an indication that maintenance costs are likely on the rise and more efficient replacement equipment is available which will lower the operating costs of the unit. Maintenance costs should also fall with the replacement. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 13 OF 28

19 The onsite relocatable classroom has an area of 960 square feet and consists of 2x6 wood stud wall construction 16 inches on center with R-19 fiberglass batt insulation in between the studs. The exterior face of the wall is T-111 plywood siding with drywall on the interior side of the wall. Interior and exterior wall height is nine feet at the eaves to twelve feet at the roof peak in the center of the end walls. The above grade floor rests on sleepers. Plywood skirting protects the sleepers and floor construction from the weather. The floor construction is plywood resting on 2x8 wood floor joists and has R-19 fiberglass batt insulation in place. The roof has non-energy heel wood trusses with R-30 fiberglass batt in place. The windows are double pane wood framed with an estimated R-1.5 value. The doors are insulated metal framed with an estimated R-1.7 value. The relocatable classroom at Bowman is heated with electric resistance baseboards on the perimeter and an electric classroom unit ventilator. The electric baseboard temperature set point is controlled by a thermostat on each individual baseboard. This makes it easy for the electric baseboards to be left on at higher temperature than is required which was the typical case found during the audits of these type of portable buildings. There is no temperature set-back capability with the temperature control system in place. Due to the need to keep these buildings portable and due to combustion safety concerns, the ASD standard is to keep all portable buildings on electric resistance heat and not use natural gas for heating. The lighting in the portables is typically 2 lamp, 4 foot long, T-12 light fixtures with magnetic ballasts. Due to the low operation use of the relocatable classroom at Bowman Elementary (which currently appears to be the music classroom) and low run time of the lights (15 hours/week), retrofitting the lights system to modern T-8 lamps with programmable start electronic ballast controlled by occupancy sensors is not cost effective. In the future, this lighting retrofit may be cost effective if the classroom lighting system is utilized more hours during the week. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 14 OF 28

20 Tables provided in Appendix A, Energy Benchmark Data Report, represent the electric and natural gas energy usage for the surveyed facility from January 2009 to December Chugach Electric Association Inc. provides the electricity under their commercial rate schedules. Natural gas is provided by ENSTAR Natural Gas Company under their commercial rate schedules. The electric utility bills for consumption in kilowatt-hours (kwh) and for maximum demand in kilowatts (kw). One kilowatt-hour is equivalent to 3,413 Btu s. The consumption (kwh) is determined as the wattage times the hours it is running. For example, 1,000 watts running for one hour, or 500 watts running for two hours is a kwh. The maximum demand is simply the sum of all electrical devices on simultaneously. For example, ten, 100 watt lights running simultaneously would create a demand of 1,000 watts (1 kw). Demand is averaged over a rolling window, usually 15 minutes. Thus, the facility must be concerned not only with basic electricity usage (consumption) but also the rate at which it gets used. The basic usage charges are shown as generation service and delivery charges along with several non-utility generation charges. The natural gas usage profile shows the predicted natural gas energy usage for the building. If actual gas usage records were available, the model used to predict usage was calibrated to approximately match actual usage. Natural gas is sold to the customer in units of 100 cubic feet (CCF), which contains approximately 100,000 BTUs of energy. The average billing rates for energy use are calculated by dividing the total cost by the total usage. Based on the electric and natural gas utility data provided, the 2009 and 2010 costs for the energy and consumption at the surveyed facility are summarized in Table 6.1 below Average Electric 0.14 $/kwh 0.12 $/kwh 0.13 $/kwh Natural Gas 1.02 $/CCF 0.87 $/CCF 0.95 $/kwh Total Cost $144,264 $112,635 $128,450 ECI 2.17 $/sf 1.70 $/sf 1.94 $/sf Electric EUI 29.8 kbtu/sf 28.2 kbtu/sf 29.0 kbtu/sf Natural Gas EUI 95.5 kbtu/sf 85.1 kbtu/sf 90.3 kbtu/sf Building EUI kbtu/sf kbtu/sf kbtu/sf Data from the U.S.A. Energy Information Administration provides information for U.S.A. Commercial Buildings Energy Intensity Using Site Energy by Census Region. In 2003, the U.S.A. average energy usage for Education building activity is shown to be 83 kbtu/sf. Data from the ARRA funded utility benchmark survey for the subject fiscal years completed on 84 schools in the ASD computed an average EUI of kbtu/sf, and ECI of 1.77 $/sf, with an average building size of 86,356 square feet. Over the analyzed period, the surveyed facility was calculated to have an average EUI of kbtu/sf. This means the surveyed facility uses a total of 43.7% more energy than the US average and 12.1% more energy than the ASD average on a per square foot basis. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 15 OF 28

21 At current utility rates, the Anchorage School District is modeled to pay approximately $127,368 annually for electricity and other fuel costs for Bowman Elementary. Figure 6.1 below reflects the estimated distribution of costs across the primary end uses of energy based on the AkWarm-C computer simulation. Comparing the Retrofit bar in the figure to the Existing bar shows the potential savings from implementing all of the energy efficiency measures shown in this report. Figure 6.2 below shows how the annual energy cost of the building splits between the different fuels used by the building. The Existing bar shows the breakdown for the building as it is now; the Retrofit bar shows the predicted costs if all of the energy efficiency measures in this report are implemented. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 16 OF 28

22 Figure 6.3 below addresses only Space Heating costs. The figure shows how each heat loss component contributes to those costs; for example, the figure shows how much annual space heating cost is caused by the heat loss through the Walls/Doors. For each component, the space heating cost for the Existing building is shown (blue bar) and the space heating cost assuming all retrofits are implemented (yellow bar) are shown. The tables below show AkWarm-C s estimate of the monthly fuel use for each of the fuels used in the building. For each fuel, the fuel use is broken down across the energy end uses. Note, in the tables below DHW refers to Domestic Hot Water heating. Electrical Consumption (kwh) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Refrigeration Lighting Other Electrical Ventilation Fans DHW Space Heating Space Cooling Natural Gas Consumption (ccf) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec DHW Space Heating FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 17 OF 28

23 Energy Utilization Index (EUI) is a measure of a building s annual energy utilization per square foot of building. This calculation is completed by converting all utility usage consumed by a building for one year, to British Thermal Units (Btu) or kbtu s, and dividing this number by the building square footage. EUI is a good measure of a building s energy use and is utilized regularly for comparison of energy performance for similar building types. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Buildings Technology Center under a contract with the U.S. Department of Energy maintains a Benchmarking Building Energy Performance Program. The ORNL website determines how a building s energy use compares with similar facilities throughout the U.S. and in a specific region or state. Source use differs from site usage when comparing a building s energy consumption with the national average. Site energy use is the energy consumed by the building at the building site only. Source energy use includes the site energy use as well as all of the losses to create and distribute the energy to the building. Source energy represents the total amount of raw fuel that is required to operate the building. It incorporates all transmission, delivery, and production losses, which allows for a complete assessment of energy efficiency in a building. The type of utility purchased has a substantial impact on the source energy use of a building. The EPA has determined that source energy is the most comparable unit for evaluation purposes and overall global impact. Both the site and source EUI ratings for the building are provided to understand and compare the differences in energy use. The site and source EUIs for this building are calculated as follows. (See Table 6.4 for details): Building Site EUI = (Electric Usage in kbtu + Natural Gas Usage in kbtu) Building Square Footage Building Source EUI = (Electric Usage in kbtu X SS Ratio + Natural Gas Usage in kbtu X SS Ratio) Building Square Footage where SS Ratio is the Source Energy to Site Energy ratio for the particular fuel. Energy Type Building Fuel Use per Year Site Energy Use per Year, kbtu Source/Site Ratio Source Energy Use per Year, kbtu Electricity 544,253 kwh 1,857, ,204,167 Natural Gas 60,542 ccf 6,054, ,338,790 Total 7,911,775 12,542,957 BUILDING AREA 66,367 Square Feet BUILDING SITE EUI 119 kbtu/ft²/yr BUILDING SOURCE EUI 189 kbtu/ft²/yr * Site - Source Ratio data is provided by the Energy Star Performance Rating Methodology for Incorporating Source Energy Use document issued March FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 18 OF 28

24 The Energy Efficiency Measures are summarized below: Electrical & Appliance Measures Lighting Measures The goal of this section is to present lighting energy efficiency measures that may be cost beneficial. It should be noted that replacing current bulbs with more energy-efficient equivalents will have a small effect on the building heating and cooling loads. The building cooling load will see a small decrease from an upgrade to more efficient bulbs and the heating load will see a small increase, as the more energy efficient bulbs give off less heat. Lighting Measures Replace Existing Fixtures/Bulbs and Lighting Controls Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 1 Hallway Lights - Top 82 FLUOR T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 91 FLUOR T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic and Improve Manual Switching Installation Cost Estimated Life of Measure $8, Energy Savings (/yr) (yrs) $989 Breakeven Cost $21,437 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 2.6 Simple Payback yrs 8 Auditors Notes: Remove T12 lights in the hallways. These lights are pointing upward and do not provide substantial lighting for the hallways of the school. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 3 Miscellaneous Incandescent 25 INCAN A Lamp, Halogen 60W with Manual Switching Replace with 25 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W Installation Cost $2,500 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $185 Breakeven Cost $2,272 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.9 Simple Payback yrs 14 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends replacement of all the existing incandescent lights around the building with energy efficient CFL lights. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 19 OF 28

25 Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 4 Gym Lights 12 FLUOR (4) T5 45.2" F28T5 28W High Lumen (3050 L) HighLight HighEfficElectronic with Manual Switching Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch Installation Cost $3,200 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $233 Breakeven Cost $2,864 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.9 Simple Payback yrs 14 Auditors Notes: This EEM recommends replacement of the gym lights with a modern efficient T5 High Output system. Installation of the more efficient lights and installation of a lighting control package with occupancy sensors and multi-level switching can reduce the gym lighting energy consumption. Below is an example picture of a recently re-lamped gym with the T5 HO system. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 8 Parking Lot Lights 17 HPS 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching, Daylight Sensor Replace with 17 LED 115W Module StdElectronic and Controls retrofit Installation Cost $37,400 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,936 Breakeven Cost $27,833 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.7 Simple Payback yrs 19 Auditors Notes: All of the metal-halide and high pressure sodium lights mounted on the outside of the building are considered to be good candidates for replacement as the heat they emit is wasted to the outdoors. There have been recent advances in LED technology and are recommended to replace the HPS systems. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 11 Exterior Entry Lights 14 HPS 70 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 14 LED 25W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $14,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $462 Breakeven Cost $9,016 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.6 Simple Payback yrs 30 Auditors Notes: See EEM #8 for similar notes. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 20 OF 28

26 Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 13 Section A 3-Bulb 173 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 173 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $84,120 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,099 Breakeven Cost $34,152 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 77 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 32-Watt T8 lights in the building be replaced with 28-Watt Energy Saver T8 bulbs and programmable start ballasts. Additionally, these lights should be installed with occupancy sensors. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 14 Hockey Rink Lights 4 HPS (3) 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 4 LED (3) 150W Module StdElectronic Installation Cost $12,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $386 Breakeven Cost $4,734 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 31 Auditors Notes: See EEM #8 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 15 Section D 3-Bulb 157 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 157 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $79,080 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $998 Breakeven Cost $30,995 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 79 Auditors Notes: See EEM #13 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 16 Section B 3-Bulb 58 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 58 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installation Cost $29,520 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $369 Breakeven Cost $11,451 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 80 Auditors Notes: See EEM #13 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 17 Entrance Lights 6 FLUOR (2) T12 F40T12 35W U-Tube Energy- Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 6 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U-Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Installation Cost $2,640 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $25 Breakeven Cost $1,020 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 105 Auditors Notes: This EEM is recommending the existing 35-Watt T12 U-Tube lights in the building be replaced with 30-Watt Energy Saver T8 U-Tube bulbs and programmable start ballasts. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 21 OF 28

27 Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 19 Hallway Lights - Bottom 91 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 91 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver (2) Program HighEfficElectronic Installation Cost $40,040 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $138 Breakeven Cost $12,554 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback yrs 291 Auditors Notes: See EEM #13 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 20 Section C 2-Bulb 47 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 47 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Installation Cost $20,680 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $71 Breakeven Cost $6,484 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback yrs 291 Auditors Notes: See EEM #13 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 21 Section A 2-Bulb 32 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 32 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Installation Cost $14,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $44 Breakeven Cost $4,355 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback yrs 321 Auditors Notes: See EEM #13 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 22 Section C 3-Bulb 236 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching, Occupancy Sensor Replace with 236 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Installation Cost $103,840 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $267 Breakeven Cost $31,410 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.3 Simple Payback yrs 389 Auditors Notes: See EEM #13 for similar notes. Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 23 Section D 2-Bulb 24 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 24 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Installation Cost $10,560 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $36 Breakeven Cost $1,727 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.2 Simple Payback yrs 291 Auditors Notes: See EEM #13 for similar notes. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 22 OF 28

28 Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation 24 Section B 2-Bulb 75 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 75 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Installation Cost $33,000 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 7 Energy Savings (/yr) $113 Breakeven Cost $5,397 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.2 Simple Payback yrs 291 Auditors Notes: See EEM #13 for similar notes. Mechanical Equipment Measures Heating/Cooling/Domestic Hot Water Measure Rank Recommendation 12 Place DHW pump on timer ($1,000). Replace motors/pumps in boiler room with premium efficiency units $1,800 each = $18,000). Charge hydronic loop with water, install large plate heat exchanger in fan room ($20,000 unit, $5,000 installation) to transfer heat from water to glycol system attached to AHUs. Add variable speed DDC System to heating system. Assumed that 20% of total cost is attributed to heating with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC ($119,062). Installation Cost $163,062 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 20 Energy Savings (/yr) $2,489 Breakeven Cost $83,750 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.5 Simple Payback yrs 66 Auditors Notes: * The combination of these energy efficiency measures are bundled in the AkWarm-C program calculations. The recommendations of this EEM include several retrofit options. Individual retrofit considerations are discussed below in detail. AkWarm-C considers all upgrades to the heating system as one item and therefore predicts a combined savings. Because of this, the savings of individual upgrades, shown below, do not directly compare to the predicted overall savings of a complete upgrade of the heating system. A. Installing an outdoor temperature reset control to the boiler output temperature and installing a Direct Digital Control (DDC) system as a replacement for the current pneumatic control system has been evaluated as a separate EEM. This upgrade will also affect the ventilation and heating temperature set point(s) of the building through refined controls and sensors. This new control system includes charging the hydronic loop with water, rather than glycol and installing a plate heat exchanger in the fan room to supply glycol to the AHUs. Assuming 25% of the DDC system cost is attributed to the heating system with an additional $25,000 for replacing the current glycol system, this upgrade is expected to cost $145,062 and produce an annual energy savings equivalent to $1,319. B. Replacing the electric motors throughout the building with premium efficiency motors will produce an energy savings based on the reduced amount of power used. With this EEM, a refined schedule from a DDC system will reduce the savings from more efficient motors, as mentioned earlier in the first paragraph of this EEM. With motor replacement, the total cost is estimated to be $18,000 for an annual energy savings equivalent to $1,714. Any plate heat exchangers associated with the air handling units have been noted to not have an insulation blanket in place. It is recommended that these heat exchangers be covered with thermal blankets to improve the heat transfer between the water supply system and the glycol system in the air handlers. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 23 OF 28

29 Ventilation System Measures Rank Description Recommendation 10 Install premium efficiency motors on all fans $1,000 = $15,000). Install variable frequency drives to adjust fan motor HP and CFM (4 $3,000 each = $12,000, $2,000 installation per unit = $8,000). Install heat recovery ventilation systems on AHU's (80% efficient, 4 $16,000 each = $64,000). Add variable speed DDC System to ventilation system. Assumed that 65% of total cost is attributed to ventilation with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC for all ventilation systems ($386,951). Installation Cost $485,951 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $25,496 Breakeven Cost $318,470 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.7 Simple Payback yrs 19 Auditors Notes: * The cost of upgrading the pneumatic system was allocated across several of the mechanical energy efficiency measures. The recommendations of this EEM include several retrofit options. Individual retrofit considerations are discussed below in detail. AkWarm-C considers all upgrades to the ventilation system as one item and therefore predicts a combined savings. Because of this, the savings of individual upgrades, shown below, do not directly compare to the predicted overall savings of a complete upgrade of the building ventilation system. A. The programming of ventilation equipment to cycle on and off during low use periods has the potential to save a portion of the total electric power cost. This can be done with no noticeable difference to the occupants of the building, which is vacant or near vacant during low use periods. There is no need for fresh air when the building is vacant. Improved control of the ventilation system is within the capacity of a DDC controller, but the existing pneumatic control scheme is antiquated and is recommended to be upgraded to a new operating system. The ventilation equipment may be slowed down to near the surge point on the blower wheels with the installation of VFD controllers. At the time of the field audit, the variable frequency drive controllers where staged but not installed yet. Installation of demand control on the gym air handling unit by installing a carbon dioxide controller can be used to optimize run time. Upgrading the control system will allow optimizing the On-Off run timing for the ventilation system. There is energy to be saved by the automation system including tuning the variable frequency speed controllers of the fans. The entire DDC system will be spread across the heating and setback temperature controls and has some of the overall cost partitioned within these areas. For the ventilation system, this upgrade is expected to cost $406,951 for an annual energy savings equivalent to $8,801. B. Installation of heat recovery systems to augment the capabilities of the AHUs will greatly reduce the amount of energy wasted in heating outside air brought into the building. A heat recovery system is estimated to cost $64,000 for an annual energy savings of $14,591. C. Replacing the motors throughout the building with premium efficiency motors, combined with installing variable frequency drives, will produce an energy savings based on the reduced amount of power used. With this EEM, a refined schedule from a DDC system will reduce the savings from more efficient pumps, as mentioned earlier in the first paragraph of this EEM. With pump replacement, the total cost is estimated to be $15,000 for an annual energy savings equivalent to $11,563. D. There is peak electric demand costs which can be reduced by operating the equipment strategically to minimize all building lights and electric fan motors from being brought on line at once causing a large demand charge from the electric utility. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 24 OF 28

30 Night Setback Thermostat Measures Rank Building Space Recommendation 2 Section B Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section B space. Installation Cost $24,144 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $2,089 Breakeven Cost $26,586 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.1 Simple Payback yrs 12 Auditors Notes: There are economic reasons why the thermostatic controller set points should be setback during off peak use hours. However one important control data input concerns the water dew point of the air. The water dew point of the inside air varies with the seasons. Currently, there is no humidity measuring instruments normally available to or monitored by the control system or staff and this data is needed before choosing the ideal setback temperatures which varies with the season. As outside air temperatures rise, the inside air dew point also rises. The staff is likely to complain about mildew and mold smells if the temperature is dropped below the dew point and condensation occurs. In keeping with this mildew and mold concern, it is recommended that the control system monitor the water dew point within the building to select how far back the temperature can be set during low use periods. If the water dew point is above 70 o F, then set up the temperature not back. If the water dew point is 50 o F or below then reduce the setback temperature control toward 60 o F. Other parameters relating to the building setback temperature include warm-up time required to reheat the building and preventing any water pipes near the building perimeter from freezing. During extreme cold periods, reducing the setback temperature limit and time appropriately is required to prevent possible problems. Rank Building Space Recommendation 5 Section D Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section D space. Installation Cost $17,853 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,075 Breakeven Cost $13,678 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.8 Simple Payback yrs 17 Auditors Notes: See EEM #2 for similar notes. Rank Building Space Recommendation 6 Section A Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section A space. Installation Cost $18,925 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,133 Breakeven Cost $14,418 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.8 Simple Payback yrs 17 Auditors Notes: See EEM #2 for similar notes. Rank Building Space Recommendation 7 Section C Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section C space. Installation Cost $28,371 Estimated Life of Measure (yrs) 15 Energy Savings (/yr) $1,685 Breakeven Cost $21,446 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.8 Simple Payback yrs 17 Auditors Notes: See EEM #2 for similar notes. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 25 OF 28

31 Mechanical Equipment Measures Rank Building Space Recommendation Relo-1 Relocatable Classroom Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Relocatable Classroom space. Installation Cost Estimated Life of Measure $6, Energy Savings (/yr) (yrs) $726 Breakeven Cost $8,918 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.5 Simple Payback yrs 8 Auditors Notes: This EEM is intended to monitor and control the relocatable classroom interior temperature which currently is under manual control of the electric heat resistance system. Interface with the building DDC system will allow the automation group to heat the building to 70 deg F during occupied times only. All other unoccupied times, the system can be setback to 60 deg F to save on the electric heat cost. Building Shell Measures: Insulation Measures Rank Location Existing Type/R-Value Recommendation Type/R-Value Relo-2 Ceiling w/ Attic: CWA Framing Type: Standard Framing Spacing: 24 inches Insulated Sheathing: None Bottom Insulation Layer: R-30 Batt Modeled R-Value: 30.8 Add R-21 blown cellulose insulation to attic with Standard Truss. Installation Cost Estimated Life of Measure $2, Energy Savings (/yr) $154 (yrs) Breakeven Cost $3,197 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.1 Simple Payback yrs 18 Auditors Notes: This EEM is intended to increase the ceiling to an R-50 insulation value. Rank Location Existing Type/R-Value Recommendation Type/R-Value Relo-3 Exposed Floor: AGF Framing Type: 2 x Lumber Insulating Sheathing: None Top Insulation Layer: R-19 Batt: FG or RW, 6 inches Modeled R-Value: 25.2 Install R-10 rigid board insulation Installation Cost Estimated Life of Measure $2, Energy Savings (/yr) $155 (yrs) Breakeven Cost $3,206 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.1 Simple Payback yrs 19 Auditors Notes: This EEM is intended to increase the floor to an R-30 insulation value. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 26 OF 28

32 Air Sealing Measures Rank Location Existing Air Leakage Level Pa) Recommended Air Leakage Reduction Pa) Relo-4 Air Tightness estimated as: 0.60 cfm/ft2 of abovegrade shell area at 75 Pascals Perform air sealing to reduce air leakage by 6%. Installation Cost Estimated Life of Measure $ Energy Savings (/yr) (yrs) $60 Breakeven Cost $527 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.1 Simple Payback yrs 8 Auditors Notes: This EEM is intended to tighten the building shell to reduce natural infiltration and heat loss. Door Measures Rank Location Size/Type, Condition Recommendation Relo-5 Exterior Door: ED Door Type: Metal - fiberglass or mineral wool Remove existing door and install standard pre-hung U- Modeled R-Value: insulated door, including hardware. Installation Cost Estimated Life of Measure $2, Energy Savings (/yr) $150 (yrs) Breakeven Cost $3,114 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.0 Simple Payback yrs 20 Auditors Notes: This EEM is intended to replace the door assemblies with modern energy efficient doors to reduce heat loss. Window Measures Rank Location Size/Type, Condition Recommendation Relo-6 Window/Skylight: WNSF Glass: Double, glass Frame: Aluminum w/ Thermal Break Spacing Between Layers: Quarter Inch Gas Fill Type: Air Modeled U-Value: 0.67 Solar Heat Gain Coefficient including Window Coverings: 0.46 Replace existing window with U-0.26 vinyl window Installation Cost Estimated Life of Measure $2, Energy Savings (/yr) $133 (yrs) Breakeven Cost $2,054 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 1.0 Simple Payback yrs 15 Auditors Notes: This EEM is intended to replace the window assemblies with modern energy efficient windows to reduce heat loss. Lighting Measures Replace Existing Fixtures/Bulbs Rank Location Existing Condition Recommendation Relo-7 Interior Lights 20 FLUOR (2) T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching Replace with 20 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighLight HighEfficElectronic and Remove Manual Switching and Add new Occupancy Sensor, Daylight Sensor, Multi-Level Switch Installation Cost Estimated Life of Measure $12, Energy Savings (/yr) (yrs) $35 Breakeven Cost $4,604 Savings-to-Investment Ratio 0.4 Simple Payback yrs 346 Auditors Notes: This EEM is intended to upgrade the lighting system and controls to reduce electric use. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 27 OF 28

33 Through inspection of the energy-using equipment on-site and discussions with site facilities personnel, this energy audit has identified several energy-saving measures. The measures will reduce the amount of fuel burned and electricity used at the site. The projects will not degrade the performance of the building and, in some cases, will improve it. Several types of EEMs can be implemented immediately by building staff, and others will require various amounts of lead time for engineering and equipment acquisition. In some cases, there are logical advantages to implementing EEMs concurrently. For example, if the same electrical contractor is used to install both lighting equipment and motors, implementation of these measures should be scheduled to occur simultaneously. Identify your school s major equipment, know when it is used and work with staff to adjust time and duration of use. Also, consider using smart thermostats, relays, timers, on/off switches, and circuit breakers to shut down non-essential equipment and lights before starting equipment which draws a large amount of power. Relays or timers can prevent two large loads from being on at the same time. Peak demand can be best managed if first understood when it occurs. Know your school s peak months, days and hours. Billing information can be used to acquire your benchmark data on the demand load and cost for the school building. Demand costs can be managed by scheduling times of the day when your electric usage is lowest to run equipment that uses the most power. You may want to pay special attention to equipment such as pumps, electric water heaters, 5-horsepower and larger motors, electric heat and commercial appliances. Most equipment has an identification tag or nameplate that lists the kw, or demand. Some tags may only list the amperage (amps and voltage the equipment uses). You can still use this information to figure the approximate usage rate in kilowatts. Multiply amps by volts and divide by 1,000 to get kilowatts. To help manage demand load and cost, install a special meter that records 15 minute load profile information, allowing you to view the electric power consumption over time. This data can help in determining when the peak loads occur. FEBRUARY 8, 2012 AkWarm ID No. CIRI ANC CAEC 26 PAGE 28 OF 28

34 Appendix A Benchmark Reports APPENDIX A

35 REAL Preliminary Benchmark Data Form PART I FACILITY INFORMATION Facility Owner Facility Owned By Date MOA Municipal 07/26/11 Building Name/ Identifier Building Usage Building Square Footage Bowman Elementary Education K 12 66,367 Building Type Community Population Year Built Mixed 261, Facility Address Facility City Facility Zip Gregory Rd Anchorage Contact Person First Name Last Name Middle Name Phone Steven Golab Golab_Steven@asdk12.org Mailing Address City State Zip Anchorage AK Primary Operating Hours Average # of Occupants During Monday Friday 8 4: Saturday Sunday Holidays Renovations Date Details PART II ENERGY SOURCES 1. Please check every energy source you use in the table below. If known, please enter the base rate you pay for the energy source. 2. Provide utilities bills for the most recent two year period for each energy source you use. Heating Oil Electricity Natural Gas Propane Wood Coal $ /gallon $ / kwh $ / CCF $ / gal $ / cord $ / ton Other energy sources? APPENDIX A

36 Bowman Elementary Buiding Size Input (sf) = 66, Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 63, Natural Gas Cost ($) 64, Electric Consumption (kwh) 578, Electric Cost ($) 79, Oil Consumption (Therms) Oil Cost ($) Propane Consumption (Therms) Propane Cost ($) Coal Consumption (Therms) Coal Cost ($) Wood Consumption (Therms) Wood Cost ($) Thermal Consumption (Therms) Thermal Cost ($) Steam Consumption (Therms) Steam Cost ($) Total Energy Use (kbtu) 8,315, Total Energy Cost ($) 144,264 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2009 Natural Gas (kbtu/sf) Electricity (kbtu/sf) Oil (kbtu/sf) Propane (kbtu/sf) Coal (kbtu/sf) Wood (kbtu/sf) Thermal (kbtu/sf) Steam (kbtu/sf) Energy Utilization Index (kbtu/sf) Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2009 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) Electric Cost Index ($/sf) Oil Cost Index ($/sf) Propane Cost Index ($/sf) Coal Cost Index ($/sf) Wood Cost Index ($/sf) Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) Steam Cost Index ($/sf) Energy Cost Index ($/sf) 2.17 APPENDIX A

37 2010 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 56, Natural Gas Cost ($) 48, Electric Consumption (kwh) 548, Electric Cost ($) 64, Oil Consumption (Therms) Oil Cost ($) Propane Consumption (Therms) Propane Cost ($) Coal Consumption (Therms) Coal Cost ($) Wood Consumption (Therms) Wood Cost ($) Thermal Consumption (Therms) Thermal Cost ($) Steam Consumption (Therms) Steam Cost ($) Total Energy Use (kbtu) 7,515, Total Energy Cost ($) 112,635 Annual Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2010 Natural Gas (kbtu/sf) Electricity (kbtu/sf) Oil (kbtu/sf) Propane (kbtu/sf) Coal (kbtu/sf) Wood (kbtu/sf) Thermal (kbtu/sf) Steam (kbtu/sf) Energy Utilization Index (kbtu/sf) Annual Energy Cost Index (ECI) 2010 Natural Gas Cost Index ($/sf) Electric Cost Index ($/sf) Oil Cost Index ($/sf) Propane Cost Index ($/sf) Coal Cost Index ($/sf) Wood Cost Index ($/sf) Thermal Cost Index ($/sf) Steam Cost Index ($/sf) Energy Cost Index ($/sf) 1.70 Note: 1 kwh = 3,413 Btu's 1 Therm = 100,000 Btu's 1 CF 1,000 Btu's APPENDIX A

38 Bowman Elementary Natural Gas Btus/CCF = 100,000 Provider Meter # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (CCF) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Natural Gas Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/Therm) Demand Cost ($) Enstar NGC Jan 09 12/16/08 01/20/ ,641 9,641 $9,727 $1.01 Enstar NGC Feb 09 01/20/09 02/19/ ,293 9,293 $9,378 $1.01 Enstar NGC Mar 09 02/19/09 03/18/ ,918 7,918 $8,000 $1.01 Enstar NGC Apr 09 03/18/09 04/20/ ,276 5,276 $5,352 $1.01 Enstar NGC May 09 04/20/09 05/19/ ,030 3,030 $3,101 $1.02 Enstar NGC Jun 09 05/19/09 06/19/ ,701 2,701 $2,771 $1.03 Enstar NGC Jul 09 06/19/09 07/22/ ,068 2,068 $2,138 $1.03 Enstar NGC Aug 09 07/22/09 08/19/ ,455 2,455 $2,527 $1.03 Enstar NGC Sep 09 08/19/09 09/21/ ,783 2,783 $2,856 $1.03 Enstar NGC Oct 09 09/21/09 10/20/ ,664 4,664 $4,742 $1.02 Enstar NGC Nov 09 10/20/09 11/18/ ,283 6,283 $6,366 $1.01 Enstar NGC Dec 09 11/18/09 12/16/ ,292 7,292 $7,378 $1.01 Enstar NGC Jan 10 12/16/09 01/19/ ,643 8,643 $7,214 $0.83 Enstar NGC Feb 10 01/19/10 02/18/ ,576 6,576 $5,504 $0.84 Enstar NGC Mar 10 02/18/10 03/17/ ,671 5,671 $4,756 $0.84 Enstar NGC Apr 10 03/17/10 04/20/ ,846 4,846 $4,114 $0.85 Enstar NGC May 10 04/20/10 05/18/ ,131 3,131 $2,682 $0.86 Enstar NGC Jun 10 05/18/10 06/18/ ,430 4,430 $3,766 $0.85 Enstar NGC Jul 10 06/18/10 07/19/ ,045 3,045 $2,610 $0.86 Enstar NGC Aug 10 07/19/10 08/20/ ,456 2,456 $2,326 $0.95 Enstar NGC Sep 10 08/20/10 09/21/ ,058 3,058 $2,808 $0.92 Enstar NGC Oct 10 09/21/10 10/19/ ,713 3,713 $3,332 $0.90 Enstar NGC Nov 10 10/19/10 11/16/ ,497 4,497 $3,959 $0.88 Enstar NGC Dec 10 11/16/10 12/15/ ,387 6,387 $5,471 $0.86 Jan 09 to Dec 09 total: 63,404 63,404 0 $64,336 $0 Jan 10 to Dec 10 total: 56,453 56,453 0 $48,541 $0 Jan 09 to Dec 09 avg: Jan 10 to Dec 10 avg: $1.02 $0.87 APPENDIX A

39 Bowman ES Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) vs. Natural Gas Cost ($) 12,000 $12,000 10,000 $10,000 Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) 8,000 6,000 4,000 $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 Natural Gas Cost ($) Natural Gas Consumption (Therms) Natural Gas Cost ($) 2,000 $2,000 0 $0 Date (Mon Yr) APPENDIX A

40 Bowman Elementary Electricity Btus/kWh = 3,413 Provider Customer # Month Start Date End Date Billing Days Consumption (kwh) Consumption (Therms) Demand Use Electric Cost ($) Unit Cost ($/kwh) Demand Cost ($) CEA Jan 09 12/1/ /30/ ,926 2, $9,304 $0.15 $1, CEA Feb 09 12/30/2008 1/30/ ,875 2, $9,227 $0.14 $1, CEA Mar 09 1/30/2009 3/3/ ,871 1, $7,714 $0.15 $1, CEA Apr 09 3/3/2009 4/1/ ,172 1, $7,378 $0.15 $1, CEA May 09 4/1/2009 4/30/ ,006 1, $5,858 $0.16 $1, CEA Jun 09 4/30/2009 6/1/ ,320 1, $4,313 $0.13 $1, CEA Jul 09 6/1/2009 7/1/ ,073 1, $4,345 $0.13 $1, CEA Aug 09 7/1/2009 7/31/ ,400 1, $5,848 $0.14 $1, CEA Sep 09 7/31/2009 8/31/ ,400 1, $6,041 $0.13 $1, CEA Oct 09 8/31/2009 9/30/ ,031 1, $6,875 $0.13 $1, CEA Nov 09 9/30/ /30/ ,938 1, $6,681 $0.12 $2, CEA Dec 09 10/30/ /1/ ,678 1, $6,344 $0.12 $2, CEA Jan 10 12/1/ /30/ ,841 1, $6,478 $0.11 $2, CEA Feb 10 12/30/2010 1/29/ ,025 1, $5,299 $0.12 $2, CEA Mar 10 1/29/2010 3/2/ ,821 1, $5,822 $0.13 $2, CEA Apr 10 3/2/2010 4/1/ ,329 1, $5,455 $0.12 $2, CEA May 10 4/1/2010 5/3/ ,604 1, $5,580 $0.12 $1, CEA Jun 10 5/3/2010 6/2/ ,016 1, $5,329 $0.10 $1, CEA Jul 10 6/2/2010 7/1/ , $3,200 $0.13 $1, CEA Aug 10 7/1/2010 8/2/ ,776 1, $4,958 $0.12 $1, CEA Sep 10 8/2/ ,147 1,473 $5,126 $0.12 CEA Oct ,378 1,617 $5,416 $0.11 CEA Nov ,676 1,627 $5,532 $0.12 CEA Dec ,305 1,785 $5,899 $0.11 Dec 08 to Nov 09 total: 578,690 19,751 1,954 $79,928 $21,949 Dec 09 to Nov 10 total: 548,073 18,706 1,274 $64,094 $14,766 Dec 08 to Nov 09 avg: Dec 09 to Nov 10 avg: $0.14 $0.12 APPENDIX A

41 Bowman ES Electric Consumption (kwh) vs. Electric Cost ($) 70,000 $10,000 $9,000 60,000 $8,000 50,000 $7,000 Electric Consumption (kwh) 40,000 30,000 $6,000 $5,000 $4,000 Electric Cost ($) Electric Consumption (kwh) Electric Cost ($) 20,000 $3,000 $2,000 10,000 $1,000 0 $0 Date (Mon Yr) APPENDIX A

42 Appendix B AkWarm Short Report APPENDIX B

43 Energy Audit Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Bowman Elementary Page 2 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT PROJECT SUMMARY Created 2/8/2012 5:21 PM General Project Information PROJECT INFORMATION AUDITOR INFORMATION Building: Bowman Elementary School Auditor Company: Central Alaska Engineering Co. Address: Gregory Road Auditor Name: Jerry P. Herring City: Anchorage Auditor Address: Lakefront Dr Client Name: Calvin Mundt Soldotna, AK Client Address: 1301 Labar Street Auditor Phone: (907) Anchorage, AK Auditor FAX: Client Phone: ( ) - Auditor Comment: Client FAX: ( ) - Design Data Building Area: 66,367 square feet Design Heating Load: Design Loss at Space: 2,761,431 Btu/hour with Distribution Losses: 2,906,770 Btu/hour Plant Input Rating assuming 82.0% Plant Efficiency and 25% Safety Margin: 4,431,051 Btu/hour Note: Additional Capacity should be added for DHW load, if served. Typical Occupancy: 525 people Design Indoor Temperature: 70 deg F (building average) Actual City: Anchorage Design Outdoor Temperature: -18 deg F Weather/Fuel City: Anchorage Heating Degree Days: 10,816 deg F-days Utility Information Electric Utility: Chugach Electric - Commercial - Lg Natural Gas Provider: Enstar Natural Gas - Commercial - Lg Average Annual Cost/kWh: $0.130/kWh Average Annual Cost/ccf: $0.940/ccf Annual Energy Cost Estimate Description Existing Building With Proposed Retrofits SAVING S Space Heating Space Cooling Water Heating Lighting Refrige ration Other Electri cal Cooking Clothes Drying Ventilatio n Fans Service Fees $63,187 $3,973 $3,120 $18,139 $1,487 $9,086 $0 $0 $28,671 $0 $127,663 $43,477 $3,383 $2,492 $11,119 $1,175 $8,230 $0 $0 $15,282 $0 $85,159 $19,710 $590 $628 $7,020 $312 $856 $0 $0 $13,389 $0 $42,504 Total Cost APPENDIX B

44 Energy Audit Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Bowman Elementary Page 3 Annual Energy Costs by End Use $140,000 $120,000 $100,000 $80,000 Ventilation and Fans Space Heating Space Cooling Refrigeration Other Electrical Lighting Domestic Hot Water $60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $0 Existing Retrofit APPENDIX B

45 Energy Audit Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Bowman Elementary Page 4 PRIORITY LIST RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings 1 Lighting: Hallway Lights - Top 2 Setback Thermostat: Section B 3 Lighting: Miscellaneous Incandescent 4 Lighting: Gym Lights 5 Setback Thermostat: Section D 6 Setback Thermostat: Section A 7 Setback Thermostat: Section C 8 Lighting: Parking Lot Lights 9 Other Electrical: Portable Replace with 91 FLUOR T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic and Improve Manual Switching Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section B space. Replace with 25 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section D space. Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section A space. Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section C space. Replace with 17 LED 115W Module StdElectronic and Controls retrofit Replace with Energy Efficiency Upgraded Relocatable Classroom Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) $989 $8, $2,089 $24, $185 $2, $233 $3, $1,075 $17, $1,133 $18, $1,685 $28, $1,936 $37, $856 $29, APPENDIX B

46 Energy Audit Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Bowman Elementary Page 5 PRIORITY LIST RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings 10 Ventilation Install premium efficiency motors on all fans $1,000 = $15,000). Install variable frequency drives to adjust fan motor HP and CFM (4 $3,000 each = $12,000, $2,000 installation per unit = $8,000). Install heat recovery ventilation systems on AHU's (80% efficient, 4 $16,000 each = $64,000). Add variable speed DDC System to ventilation system. Assumed that 65% of total cost is attributed to ventilation with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC for all ventilation systems ($386,951). 11 Lighting: Exterior Entry Lights Replace with 14 LED 25W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) $25,496 $485, $462 $14, APPENDIX B

47 Energy Audit Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Bowman Elementary Page 6 PRIORITY LIST RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings 12 HVAC And DHW Place DHW pump on timer ($1,000). Replace motors/pumps in boiler room with premium efficiency units $1,800 each = $18,000). Charge hydronic loop with water, install large plate heat exchanger in fan room ($20,000 unit, $5,000 installation) to transfer heat from water to glycol sytem attached to AHUs. Add variable speed DDC System to heating system. Assumed that 20% of total cost is attributed to heating with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC ($119,062). 13 Lighting: Section A 3-Bulb 14 Lighting: Hockey Rink Lights 15 Lighting: Section D 3-Bulb Replace with 173 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Replace with 4 LED (3) 150W Module StdElectronic Replace with 157 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) $2,489 $163, $1,099 $84, $386 $12, $998 $79, APPENDIX B

48 Energy Audit Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Bowman Elementary Page 7 PRIORITY LIST RECOMMENDED ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES Ran k Feature Recommendation Annual Energy Savings 16 Lighting: Section B 3-Bulb 17 Lighting: Entrance Lights 18 Refrigeration: Refrigerators 19 Lighting: Hallway Lights - Bottom 20 Lighting: Section C 2-Bulb 21 Lighting: Section A 2-Bulb 22 Lighting: Section C 3-Bulb 23 Lighting: Section D 2-Bulb 24 Lighting: Section B 2-Bulb Replace with 58 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Replace with 6 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U- Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 12 Refrigerator Replace with 91 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver (2) Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 47 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 32 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 236 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 24 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 75 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Installed Cost SIR Payback (Years) $369 $29, $25 $2, $330 $12, $138 $40, $71 $20, $44 $14, $267 $103, $36 $10, $113 $33, TOTAL $42,504 $1,274, APPENDIX B

49 Energy Audit Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software Bowman Elementary Page 8 ENERGY AUDIT REPORT ENERGY EFFICIENT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Building Envelope Insulation Rank Location Existing Type/R-Value Recommendation Type/R- Value Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Exterior Doors Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Windows and Glass Doors Replacement Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings Annual Energy Savings Air Leakage Rank Location Estimated Air Leakage Recommended Air Leakage Target Installed Cost Annual Energy Savings 2. Mechanical Equipment Mechanical Rank Recommendation Installed Cost 12 Place DHW pump on timer ($1,000). Replace motors/pumps in boiler room with premium efficiency units $1,800 each = $18,000). Charge hydronic loop with water, install large plate heat exchanger in fan room ($20,000 unit, $5,000 installation) to transfer heat from water to glycol sytem attached to AHUs. Add variable speed DDC System to heating system. Assumed that 20% of total cost is attributed to heating with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC ($119,062). Setback Thermostat Rank Location Size/Type/Condition Recommendation Installed Cost 2 Section B Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F 5 Section D Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section B space. Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section D space. Annual Energy Savings $163,062 $2,489 Annual Energy Savings $24,144 $2,089 $17,853 $1,075 APPENDIX B

50 Energy Audit Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software 6 Section A Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F 7 Section C Existing Unoccupied Heating Setpoint: 65.0 deg F Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section A space. Implement a Heating Temperature Unoccupied Setback to 60.0 deg F for the Section C space. Bowman Elementary Page 9 $18,925 $1,133 $28,371 $1,685 Ventilation Rank Recommendation Cost Annual Energy Savings 10 Install premium efficiency motors on all fans $1,000 = $15,000). Install variable frequency drives to adjust fan motor HP and CFM (4 $3,000 each = $12,000, $2,000 installation per unit = $8,000). Install heat recovery ventilation systems on AHU's (80% efficient, 4 $16,000 each = $64,000). Add variable speed DDC System to ventilation system. Assumed that 65% of total cost is attributed to ventilation with new controls on louvers, new sensors, and better feedback to DDC for all ventilation systems ($386,951). 3. Appliances and Lighting Lighting Fixtures and Controls Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost 1 Hallway Lights - Top 3 Miscellaneous Incandescent 91 FLUOR T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic with Manual Switching 25 INCAN A Lamp, Halogen 60W with Manual Switching 4 Gym Lights 12 FLUOR (4) T5 45.2" F28T5 28W High Lumen (3050 L) HighLight HighEfficElectronic with Manual Switching 8 Parking Lot Lights 17 HPS 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching, Daylight Sensor Replace with 91 FLUOR T12 4' F40T12 40W Standard Magnetic and Improve Manual Switching Replace with 25 FLUOR CFL, A Lamp 15W Add new Occupancy Sensor, Multi-Level Switch Replace with 17 LED 115W Module StdElectronic and Controls retrofit $485,951 $25,496 Annual Energy Savings $8,200 $989 $2,500 $185 $3,200 $233 $37,400 $1,936 APPENDIX B

51 Energy Audit Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software 11 Exterior Entry Lights 14 HPS 70 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching 13 Section A 3-Bulb 173 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching 14 Hockey Rink Lights 4 HPS (3) 400 Watt Magnetic with Manual Switching 15 Section D 3-Bulb 157 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching 16 Section B 3-Bulb 58 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching 17 Entrance Lights 6 FLUOR (2) T12 F40T12 35W U-Tube Energy-Saver Magnetic with Manual Switching 19 Hallway Lights - Bottom 91 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard (2) Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching 20 Section C 2-Bulb 47 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching 21 Section A 2-Bulb 32 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 14 LED 25W Module StdElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Replace with 173 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Replace with 4 LED (3) 150W Module StdElectronic Replace with 157 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Replace with 58 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic and Add new Occupancy Sensor Replace with 6 FLUOR (2) T8 F32T8 30W U- Tube Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 91 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver (2) Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 47 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 32 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Bowman Elementary Page 10 $14,000 $462 $84,120 $1,099 $12,000 $386 $79,080 $998 $29,520 $369 $2,640 $25 $40,040 $138 $20,680 $71 $14,000 $44 APPENDIX B

52 Energy Audit Energy Analysis and Cost Comparison AkWarm Commercial Audit Software 22 Section C 3-Bulb 236 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching, Occupancy Sensor 23 Section D 2-Bulb 24 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching 24 Section B 2-Bulb 75 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 32W Standard Instant StdElectronic with Manual Switching Replace with 236 FLUOR (3) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 24 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Replace with 75 FLUOR (2) T8 4' F32T8 28W Energy-Saver Program HighEfficElectronic Bowman Elementary Page 11 $103,840 $267 $10,560 $36 $33,000 $113 Refrigeration Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost 18 Refrigerators 12 Refrigerator with Seasonal Shutdown Replace with 12 Refrigerator Other Electrical Equipment Rank Location Existing Recommended Installed Cost 9 Portable Relocatable Classroom with Manual Switching Replace with Energy Efficiency Upgraded Relocatable Classroom Annual Energy Savings $12,000 $330 Annual Energy Savings $29,224 $856 APPENDIX B

53 Appendix C Major Equipment List APPENDIX C

54 MAJOR EQUIPMENT INVENTORY TAG LOCATION FUNCTION MAKE MODEL TYPE CAPACITY EFFICIENCY MOTOR SIZE ASHRAE SERVICE LIFE B1 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT WEIL MCLAIN H788WS NAT GAS/CAST IRON 2049MBH 83% 1.5HP B2 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT WEIL MCLAIN H788WS NAT GAS/CAST IRON 2049MBH 82% 1.5HP B3 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT WEIL MCLAIN H788WS NAT GAS/CAST IRON 2049MBH 82% 1.5HP WH1 BOILER ROOM DHW PRODUCTION A.O. SMITH BTP NAT GAS 199MBH 80%.25HP ESTIMATED REMAINING USEFUL LIFE GT1 BOILER ROOM GLYCOL STORAGE AXIOM VERTICAL 55GAL - - IMG_3023 PMP1A,B BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT EMERSON P63CZA3018 BASEMOUNTED 40' 3HP 15 0 PMP2A&B BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT POLYPHASE P63CZB3019 BASEMOUNTED 40' 3HP 15 0 PMP3A&B BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT POLYPHASE P63CZB3019 BASEMOUNTED 40' 3HP 15 0 PMP4 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT EMERSON S55JXDYE2681 BASEMOUNTED 10'.25HP 15 0 PMP5 BOILER ROOM GLYCOL MAKEUP GOULD SERIES "J" #JO3 INLINE PUMP 9 69'.3HP 10 0 PMP6 BOILER ROOM DHW GRUNDFOS UP2564SF INLINE PUMP 17'.08HP 10 0 PMP7 BOILER ROOM DHW TACO LO515 INLINE PUMP 17'.25HP 10 0 PMP8 BOILER ROOM BOILER CIRC EMERSON SA55JXFSP3749 BASEMOUNTED 9'.18HP 15 0 PMP9 BOILER ROOM BOILER CIRC EMERSON SA55JXFSP3749 BASEMOUNTED 9'.18HP 15 0 PMP10 BOILER ROOM BOILER CIRC EMERSON SA55JXFSP3749 BASEMOUNTED 9'.18HP 15 0 AHU1 FAN ROOM AIR CIRC SNYDER GENERAL LYF164CH HORIZONTAL 4SP 40HP 20 0 AHU2 FAN ROOM AIR CIRC SNYDER GENERAL LYF150DH HORIZONTAL 4SP 30HP 20 0 AHU3 FAN ROOM AIR CIRC SNYDER GENERAL LHD122DH HORIZONTAL 2SP 7.5HP 20 0 AHU4 FAN ROOM AIR CIRC SNYDER GENERAL LHD111CH HORIZONTAL 2SP 5HP 20 0 REF1 FAN ROOM&B125A CHILL AIR MITSUBISHI PUYA18NHA3 HORIZONTAL 1.5TONS EFF 21 SEER 3HP CUH1 ENTRIES BUILDING HEAT TRANE H46A002 UPBLAST 230CFM.03HP 20 0 UH1 BOILER ROOM BUILDING HEAT TRANE 252P HORIZONTAL 4162CFM.25HP 20 0 UH2 GENERATOR ROOM BUILDING HEAT TRANE UHSA 20W2 HORIZONTAL 315CFM.04HP 20 0 UH3 OUTDOOR STOR. ROOM BUILDING HEAT TRANE UHSA 20W2 HORIZONTAL 315CFM.04HP 20 0 UH4 FAN ROOM BUILDING HEAT TRANE USHA 90W2 HORIZONTAL 1162CFM.13HP 20 0 UH5 FAN ROOM BUILDING HEAT TRANE USHA 90W2 HORIZONTAL 1162CFM.13HP 20 0 RF1 (6) FAN ROOM RELIEF FAN PACE PM HORIZONTAL 1.5HP 20 0 EF1 FAN ROOM EXHAUST PACE UF18 CENTRIFUGAL 1HP 25 0 EF2 ROOF EXHAUST GREENHECK 142 CENTRIFUGAL 1.5SP 1HP 25 0 EF3 FAN ROOM EXHAUST PACE U8F CENTRIFUGAL 25 0 EF4 JANITOR A140 EXHAUST PENN ZEPHYR JR UPBLAST 20 0 EF5 JANITOR B114 EXHAUST PENN ZEPHYR JR UPBLAST 20 0 NOTES APPENDIX C

55 Appendix D Site Visit Photos APPENDIX D

56 1. Windows Typical of School 2. Example of Window Width 3. Doors Typical of School 4. School s Portable Classroom Unit APPENDIX D

57 5. Western Roof Overview 6. Eastern Roof Overview 7. South Face Of School Showing Natural Gas Meter (Bottom) & Building Exhaust Vents 8. South Facing Entrance Showing Exterior Recessed Downlights Typical of School, APPENDIX D

58 9. Pole7Mounted Exterior Light Fixture Typical of School 10. Boiler Room Overall 11. Boiler 1, Natural Gas Fired Cast Iron Boiler Typical 12. Boiler 2 Close7Up APPENDIX D

59 13. Boiler 3 Close7Up 14. Natural Gas Fired Domestic Hot Water Heater 15. Boiler Hot Water/Glycol Circulation Pumps 16. DHW Supply & Circulation Pumps APPENDIX D

60 17. Close7up of Typical Circulation Pump 18. Air Handling Unit & Hot Water Control Valve (Right) Typical 19. Exhaust Fan Typical of School 20. Exterior Relief Fan Outputs APPENDIX D

61 21. Centrifugal Exhaust Fan Typical of School 22. Mitsubishi Chill Air System Condensing Unit 23. Mitsubishi Chill Air System Output Located in Server Room 24. Mitsubishi Chill Air System Digital Control APPENDIX D

62 25. In7Duct Heating Coil Typical of School 26. Unit Heaters Typical of School 27. Smoke Control System Subassembly Panel 28. Variable Speed Control Panel (To be Installed) APPENDIX D

63 29. Portable Classroom Thermostat Set to 70 (F) 30. Portable Classroom Light Fixtures Multi7Purpose Room Light Fixtures Hallway Light Fixtures Typical of School APPENDIX D

64 Computer Lab Light Fixtures Typical Classroom Light Fixtures Typical Domestic Refrigeration Unit Commercial Kitchen Refrigeration APPENDIX D

65 Appendix E Thermal Site Visit Photos APPENDIX E

66 1. North Facing Western Most Door Of Building, Note High Heat Loss Surrounding Door. APPENDIX E

67 A B 2. West Facing Northern Most wall of building Heat Loss Thru Window Frames (A) and Wall Framing (B) APPENDIX E

68 B A 3. Northern most wall of building. School s Slab Foundation, (A) Heat Loss Expected. Note Heat Loss Thru Wall Framing. (B) APPENDIX E

69 4. Northern Building Entrance Exhibiting Unusual Heat Loss. APPENDIX E

70 5. Northern Wall Of Building, Example of Conductive Heat Loss Thru The Wall Framing. APPENDIX E

71 6. North Eastern Corner Of School, Showing Mechanical Room Roof And Featuring Air Intake Vent. APPENDIX E

72 7. Eastern Wall As Seen From The Playground, Heat Loss Surrounding Roof Windows Expected. APPENDIX E

73 B A 8. Eastern Most North Facing Wall Showing Multiple Widow Sample (A) And Conductive heat Loss Thru The Wall Framing. (B) APPENDIX E

74 9. South Side Of School s Portable Classroom Unit, Excessive Heat Loss Areas Illustrated. APPENDIX E

75 10. Additional View Of The South Side Of School s Portable Classroom Showing Typical Heat Loss APPENDIX E

76 11. Portable s Foundation Skirting Showing High Heat Loss APPENDIX E

77 12. South Facing Eastern Most Wall Of School Typical School Wall Showing High Heat Loss At Building Juncture. APPENDIX E