Premium Sample Reports

Similar documents
Commissioning and Retro Commissioning Programs Title Slide for Energy Efficiency

Campus Annual Energy Use Report

Understanding Customer Billing Data

Electric Forward Market Report

Southwest Texas Junior College

equest Home Energy Model ME 514 ~ HVAC Sean Rosin University of Idaho/Boise State University Spring 2016

Leveraging Smart Meter Data & Expanding Services BY ELLEN FRANCONI, PH.D., BEMP, MEMBER ASHRAE; DAVID JUMP, PH.D., P.E.

WAKE TECHNICAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE SUSTAINABLE ENERGY PLAN. Energy Plan

Utility Bill Data Accounts Payable s Secret Weapon for Managing Costs and Addressing Stakeholder Questions

Woking. q business confidence report

A Selection Guide for Resource Conservation Managers

Giuseppe Giordano Founder & CEO

2/17/2017. Energy Accounting & Education. Topics (Electricity) Creating Electricity

ENERGY MANAGEMENT PLAN - HEADQUARTERS. ABC Winery 123 1st Street Franklin, NJ 12345

Streamlining Utility Billing Analysis and Reporting

AN INTRODUCTION TO WEATHER NORMALIZATION OF UTILITY BILLS FOR ALTERNATIVE ENERGY CONTRACTORS. John Avina, Director Abraxas Energy Consulting

PacifiCorp Annual Review of DSM Programs California

Is More Always Better? A Comparison of Billing Regression Results Using Monthly, Daily and Hourly AMI Data

Actions Taken. Implementation Comments. Qualification. State Water Resources Control Board Office of Research, Planning & Performance

Why Use A DES ESCO? Benefits of A DES ESCO?

Establishing a Baseline, Energy Audits and Energy Star s Portfolio Manager

UTILITIES REPORT PERIOD AUGUST 2007 TO JULY University of Aberdeen

COMPANY PROFILE 2016

MONITORING, TARGETING AND REPORTING (MT&R) FUNDAMENTALS AND APPLICATIONS IN THE COP PROGRAM. Robert Greenwald, P.Eng., MBA Prism Engineering g Ltd.

Managing Energy Use and Cost with Integrated Metering

The Biggest Loser REDUCING HIGHER EDUCATION COSTS BY 50%

LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION LITERATURE REVIEW STEEPLE

Administration Division Public Works Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

Aug 4, Determining Metrics for Success

Low-Hanging Fruit Simple Steps Toward Energy Effective Building Operations

YWCA 1503 S. Denver Tulsa, Oklahoma 5/18/2010 Performed By

Energy Data Efficiencies & Inefficiencies. Speaker: Mike Meola

Rainwater tank study of new homes

Allstream Centre Energy Performance Report

Green Buildings Make Cents

Senior Project Director Environmental Finance Center at the University of North Carolina

The Energy Program Tricycle: Which Wheel Should You Put in Front?

Results and Recommendations from Energy Audit of Shageluk. For VEEP Grants Village of Shageluk, Alaska

Preliminary Report for: Iowa Lottery

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

Deep Energy Retrofit of a HighRise MURB

Water Auditing 101. William D. Chvala, Jr., CEM. Greg Sullivan, PE, CEM. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

City of San Clemente Water Usage Report

Harvard Green Campus Initiative. An approach to campus ecology

PROGRAM YEAR 1 ( ) EM&V REPORT FOR THE RESIDENTIAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY BENCHMARKING PROGRAM

LIBRARY ENERGY WALK- THROUGH. Andy Robinson, Training and Education, SEDAC

Local Water Supply Planning - North Carolina Division of Water Resources

Marysville School District Resource Conservation Program. John Bingham Marysville S.D. Ray Burton Snohomish Co. P.U.D.

Xavier University of Louisiana

NWC District Energy Campus Energy - RFQ Supporting Documentation. April 25, 2018

TOP 10 STRATEGIES FOR NEW AND EXISTING BUILDINGS

ENERGY EFFICIENT RETROFIT OF A HIGH-RISE MULTIFAMILY BUILDING

Developing an Accurate Baseline for Electricity Consumption, Focusing on University Residence Halls

The Energy and Sustainability Advantage:

Farm Energy Efficiency June Collin Macpherson - JCM Solutions

City of Portsmouth Water Efficiency Efforts. updated: March 2017

Energy Usage Reduction Program

CHP Case Studies. Midwest CHP Application Center (MAC) .org (312) University of Illinois at Chicago Energy Resources Center UIC

Greening Your Business Energy Efficiency in Buildings

HILLS CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS BEVERLY PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION FROM:

WATER MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION PLAN FOR THE BEAVER DAM VILLAGE SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT FINAL. September 14, 2004 Job Number:

PV Generation Potential 17.1 kbtu/ft2/yr 15.4

7 Measurement and Verification for Generic Variable Loads

State Agency Energy Savings Program

One year in the Colourworks

City of Cape Town, Xola Myekwa Session 5.2 Page 1

Corn and Soybean Market Update, August 9, 2017

SUSTN Courses with Lab Applications. Overview of all SUSTN Core Classes: Highlighting Commissioning, Energy Auditing, and Measurement & Verification

Review of PG&E Home Energy Reports Initiative Evaluation. CPUC Energy Division Prepared by DNV KEMA, Inc

5 Star London Hotels - Example Report

Sample Reports. for. HAP v4.80 Example Problem

Technical Report Two: Building and Plant Energy Analysis Report

Hotels: Water and Energy

BEYOND O&M. Shawn Maurer SEDAC Building Energy Specialist. Smart Energy Design Assistance Center (SEDAC), University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

Findings through Nov. 2016

Second Quarter 2013 Performance

Energy Management System ISO By: Eng. Fadi Al Shihabi Senior Manager Ernst & Young BEP, CEM,CRM

17% 2,300,000 AED. Project Case Study. Fairmont the Palm

Energy Efficiency / Conservation Case Studies in Waste Water Treatment Facilities

ENERGY MODELING TOOLS: SOLUTIONS FOR CREATING A HIGH PERFORMANCE BUILDING. Presented by Neil Maldeis Energy Solutions Engineering Leader, Trane

Condenser Water Heat Recovery"

Traffic Department Anchorage: Performance. Value. Results.

CIP Routine/Small Purchasing Team Close-out

THREE POWERFUL UTILITY BILL ANALYSIS METHODS FOR THE ENERGY MANAGER. John Avina, Director Abraxas Energy Consulting

5/1/2013. Puget Sound Conditions. LID research, data, guidelines, specifications, and regulations are evolving rapidly.

Energy Report - February 2008

Tempering the Thirst Of America s Driest City

Solar, Wind and Market Power in the New Zealand Electricity Market (and hydro lake dynamics) Mina Bahrami Gholami and Stephen Poletti

Southern York County Library

MASTER COMPETITIVE SERVICE AGREEMENT MANAGEMENT OFFICE SUMMARY REPORT May 2008

SANTA MARGARITA WATER DISTRICT LARGE LANDSCAPE LUNCHEON

Energy Modeling Tools Solutions for Creating an Intelligent Building

INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM

Energy Savings Analysis Generated by a Real Time Energy Management System for Water Distribution

Life-Cycle Costing (LCC)

Clean Energy Extension

a comparative study of secondary glycol and direct expansion refrigeration systems

MARKET ANALYSIS REPORT NO 2 OF 2013: SWEET POTATO

A Five-Year Energy Demand Conservation Plan For Cornwall Community Hospital 2014 to 2018

Financial Intelligence NCIA 2016 National Training Conference Pittsburg April 18 th & 19 th

Transcription:

Premium Sample Reports Under the WegoWise Premium subscription, we deliver the following reports in pdf format to present actionable information and answers to common questions property managers and owners have about their buildings' utility data. Samples for each of these reports are included below. Report Schedule Potential Audience 1. Tracking Report Flag meters where energy and water use is higher than expected, comparing a meter to itself. Identify the meters with problems (water leaks, equipment faults) or billing errors. Are my meters performing as expected? Which ones are high? Monthly Building Maintenance Regional Managers 2. Building Opportunity Report Evaluate energy and water for each building in the portfolio with targeted recommendations, prioritized by size of savings opportunity. Use budgets efficiently by focusing on the biggest bang for the buck. How is each building in my portfolio doing? What should I do to improve? Which buildings should I focus on first? Annually Building Maintenance Regional Managers Asset Managers Operations Executives 3. Property Performance Summary Summarize energy and water costs for each property, and highlight variances. How much am I spending on utilities? How is spending changing from last year to this year? How is the rate changing? Quarterly CFO, Finance Department Regional Managers Asset Managers Operations Executives 4. Measurement & Verification Report Analysis for specific upgrade projects. Control for weather changes to see exactly how much money projects are saving. Are my upgrade projects saving energy and water? Am I seeing the savings I was promised? Quarterly Building Maintenance Regional Managers Asset Managers Operations Executives

Tracking Report WegoWise March 2016 Date Electric Property Building Account (kwh) Cost of Severity Sunset Acres 117 Deion Flat #4425620217 2,309 $485 uuu Honeywell Estates 2132 Pattie Walk #8838382774 1,159 $228 uu Gas Date Property Building Account (Therms) Cost of Severity Monterey Court 395 Giovanna Mission #31396731 253 $304 uuu Sunset Acres 6251 Stephany Mountain #5967682425 79 $107 uuu Sunset Acres 405 Coralie Manors #7826276343 40 $52 u Date Feb-16 Feb-16 Water Property Building Account (Gallons) Cost of Severity Monterey Court 7923 Olga Ramp #3145638410 90,081 $1,081 uuu Monterey Court 7099 Metz Ferry #3145638410 49,012 $588 uu Harbor Court 812 Derek Loop #6284855803 17,088 $225 u About this analysis The table above highlights the most important usage spikes that have exceeded the usage predicted by WegoWise's weather -adjusted model, which is built for each meter based on its historical usage. The severity of each spike is indicated by diamond symbols, which correspond to the degree that the most recent data point exceeded the model s prediction. When prioritizing spikes to address, take into consideration both the cost incurred from the spike as well as the degree to which the meter strayed from its model. Least Severe u uu uuu uuuu Most Severe

WegoWise has identified a spike. Now what? Discovering the cause of the spike requires a process of elimination. Ask yourself the following questions: Has maintenance work or construction recently occurred in the building? Depending on the type of work that was in progress, it is very plausible that electric, gas or water usage would increase. Has mechanical equipment been replaced or added to the building? A difference in utility usage can sometimes be attributed to a change in mechanical equipment. Has there been a change in occupancy? The number of occupants can directly impact electric, gas and water usage. If you answered No to all of the above questions, then the most recent bill for the meter should be checked for accuracy. It is possible that your utility company has misread your meter and overbilled you, or the bill may be a correction of a previous mistake. On-site staff should check the meter and when appropriate, follow up with tenants. Electric Check for broken or left-on appliances and HVAC equipment, broken or faulty electric meters Gas Check for malfunctioning appliances and gas-fueled HVAC equipment, as well as faulty gas pipes or meters Water Check for leaking or broken fixtures, failing toilet flappers, leaking pipes, incorrectly scheduled irrigation Questions? Call or email your WegoWise Client Manager!

Property Performance Summary WegoWise Q1 2016 Summary All Utilities Spend Q1 2015 Q1 2016 Variation $136,698 $140,567 $3,869 Year over Year Spend Variation +3% Electric Whole Building kwh Total Cost Rate ($/kwh) Q1 2016 295,662 $65,046 $0.22 Q1 2015 305,557 $52,094 $0.17 Variation Gas -9,895 $12,951 $0.05-3% 25% 29% Whole Building Therms Total Cost Rate ($/therm) Q1 2016 29,801 $27,946 $0.94 Q1 2015 36,095 $32,050 $0.89 Variation Water -6,293 -$4,104 $0.05-17% -13% 6% Whole Building Gallons Total Cost Rate ($/gal) Q1 2016 2,460,293 $47,575 $0.019 Q1 2015 2,878,705 $52,554 $0.018 Variation -418,413 -$4,978 $0.001-15% -9% 6% +25% -13% -9%

Building Opportunity Report WegoWise 2015-2016 Current Spend: $60,923 Potential Savings: $20,825 Focus on gas Total Electric Gas Water Cost Usage (kwh) Cost Usage (therms) Cost Usage (gal) 4/2015-3/2016 Median $60,923 $4,284 39,926 $40,682 43,253 $15,957 2,092,636 $40,098 $3,337 30,868 $24,991 24,751 Potential Savings $20,825 $947 9,058 $15,692 18,502 $11,770 $4,186 1,543,600 549,036 Recommendations In this building, natural gas is the biggest opportunity to cut utility bills. Specifically, a weather-adjusted regression analysis of your data reveals the Heating Efficiency of the building is high relative to comparable buildings, which means the building is using too much gas to deliver a given amount of heating. - 5 10 15 Best Median This building: 14.6 Heating Efficiency (btu/sqft/deg/day) Worst Save on Heating: Maintenance of furnaces and boilers can save enough in gas to cover the cost of the service, sometimes in one heating season. Learn about more efficient heating options at http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/ furnaces-and-boilers While this analysis uses all available data and rigorous statistical analysis, these recommendations should be viewed *as suggested areas to investigate. Onsite experts will be able to determine if the savings suggested here are feasible. How was this calculated? Utility costs are based on actual billing information (when available) or regional cost averages from US EIA. Median building performance is obtained from the WegoWise database or publicly available datasets, and potential savings is either the difference between this building and the median or a 20% savings for extreme outliers. Recommendations are developed by WegoWise, applying regression analysis where applicable.

Measurement & Verification Report WegoWise Through June 2016 201 South St Boston, MA 02111 Boiler Upgrade Replaced the original boiler with an updated system Retrofit completed January 2014 Financial Performance Project Costs: Payback: Annual Cost Avoidance: Cumulative Cost Avoidance: $ 10,000 3.8 years* $ 2,600/year* $ 6,840 (30 Months) Savings Analysis Pre-project Savings Target: Annual Savings: Cumulative Savings: Cumulative Percent Savings: 20% 1,989 therms/year* 5,301 therms (30 Months) 43%* *Calculated from 30 months of post retrofit data 1

Is this project saving energy? The chart below shows performance over the 2.5 years since the project was implemented. The graphs illustrate the impact of the project on energy consumption. The baseline model, displayed as a grey line on the graph, represents the projected usage of the building in the absence of the upgrade. This baseline is developed using a five-parameter statistical regression. It is a model of the building s preproject usage pattern, based on historical usage and weather data. The dotted green line shows the building s actual usage and the light-blue vertical line represents the time period in which the retrofit was implemented. The grey shaded area, the fixed-fit window, is the range of data that is used to create the weather-normalized model. How was this calculated? The baseline model employed in this analysis complies with the methodology outlined in ASHRAE 14-2002 (Whole Building Performance Approach), and Option C of the IPMVP protocol. The pre-retrofit baseline model fits sufficiently with the empirical data (R 2 =0.99). The coefficient of variation (root mean squared error) is.9% and net determination bias is 0.01%. 2

Is the project on target? During the planning for the project, a target of 20% therm savings was determined. This chart shows the cumulative therm savings for the five years after the project was implemented. The horizontal dashed line represents the five-year target. Five Year Savings Analysis 6,000 Cumulative Savings (Therms) 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 Target Savings 1,000-2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Projected Savings Versus Target The project has exceeded its five-year 20% target after only 2 years of postretrofit performance. 3

Monthly Savings and Cost Avoidance Breakdown This table outlines the monthly baseline and actual usage quantities for gas consumption, effective rate for this meter, and cost avoidance. This offers an accurate assessment of how much less/more was spent due to the retrofit. Month Baseline (Therms) Actual (Therms) Savings (Therms) Savings % Effective Rate ($/Therms) Cost Avoidance Jan-14 900 529 371 41% $1.30 $482.82 Feb-14 762 429 334 44% $1.28 $427.90 Mar-14 714 355 359 50% $1.31 $469.74 Apr-14 416 199 218 52% $1.45 $315.25 May-14 202 155 47 23% $1.60 $74.21 Jun-14 118 108 9 8% $1.69 $15.97 Jul-14 120 109 11 9% $1.68 $18.27 Aug-14 120 116 5 4% $1.65 $7.76 Sep-14 146 117 29 20% $1.64 $47.20 Oct-14 278 155 122 44% $1.59 $194.12 Nov-14 555 270 284 51% $1.33 $376.54 Dec-14 673 333 340 51% $1.29 $438.40 Jan-15 899 488 410 46% $1.18 $482.52 Feb-15 926 445 481 52% $1.09 $522.79 Mar-15 723 335 388 54% $1.15 $446.69 Apr-15 373 169 204 55% $1.36 $277.29 May-15 161 122 39 24% $1.57 $61.98 Jun-15 148 116 32 21% $1.53 $48.29 Jul-15 120 117 3 3% $1.51 $4.93 Aug-15 120 118 2 2% $1.50 $3.53 Sep-15 118 127 (9) -8% $1.40 -$12.60 Oct-15 280 149 131 47% $1.45 $189.84 Nov-15 371 181 190 51% $1.44 $273.91 Dec-15 456 235 222 49% $1.49 $329.94 Jan-16 771 387 383 50% $1.30 $499.61 Feb-16 668 408 260 39% $1.16 $302.03 499 331 168 34% $1.22 $204.08 Apr-16 387 219 169 44% $1.22 $205.35 May-16 254 153 101 40% $1.30 $131.59 Jun-16 122 121 1 0% $1.39 $0.72 4