now it is fixed. bill analysis. retro-commissioning benchmarking note, this case is extreme but...

7
Feb -0 7 May -07 Aug -07 Nov -0 7 Feb -08 May -08 Aug -08 Nov -08 Feb -0 9 May -09 Aug -0 9 Nov -09 Feb -10 May -10 Aug-10 Nov-1 0 Feb-11 May -11 Aug-11 Nov -11 Feb-12 May -12 Aug-12 Nov -12 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 SBHS: Monthly Electricity Usage On-Peak kWh Off-Peak kWh Cooling Degree Days Electricity (kWh) Now it is fixed. Fe Ap Ju Au Oc De Fe Ap Ju Au Oc De Fe Ap Ju Au Oc De Fe Ap Ju Au Oc De Fe Ap Ju Au Oc De Fe Ap Ju Au Oc De 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 SBHS: Monthly Gas Usage Therms Heating Deg Days Gas Use (therms) BILL ANALYSIS

Upload: polly-willis

Post on 27-Dec-2015

214 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Now it is fixed. BILL ANALYSIS. RETRO-COMMISSIONING BENCHMARKING Note, this case is extreme but it’s not alone. It’s roughly 2.5 times the average use

Feb-07

Apr-07

Jun-07

Aug-07

Oct-07

Dec-07

Feb-08

Apr-08

Jun-08

Aug-08

Oct-08

Dec-08

Feb-09

Apr-09

Jun-09

Aug-09

Oct-09

Dec-09

Feb-10

Apr-10

Jun-10

Aug-10

Oct-10

Dec-10

Feb-11

Apr-11

Jun-11

Aug-11

Oct-11

Dec-11

Feb-12

Apr-12

Jun-12

Aug-12

Oct-12

Dec-12

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

300

SBHS: Monthly Electricity Usage On-Peak kWh Off-Peak kWh Cooling Degree Days

Elec

trici

ty (k

Wh)

Cool

ing

Degr

ee D

ays

Now it is fixed.

Feb-07

Apr-07

Jun-07

Aug-07

Oct-07

Dec-07

Feb-08

Apr-08

Jun-08

Aug-08

Oct-08

Dec-08

Feb-09

Apr-09

Jun-09

Aug-09

Oct-09

Dec-09

Feb-10

Apr-10

Jun-10

Aug-10

Oct-10

Dec-10

Feb-11

Apr-11

Jun-11

Aug-11

Oct-11

Dec-11

Feb-12

Apr-12

Jun-12

Aug-12

Oct-12

Dec-12

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

SBHS: Monthly Gas Usage Therms Heating Deg Days

Gas U

se (t

herm

s)

Heati

ng D

egre

e Da

ys

BILL ANALYSIS

Page 2: Now it is fixed. BILL ANALYSIS. RETRO-COMMISSIONING BENCHMARKING Note, this case is extreme but it’s not alone. It’s roughly 2.5 times the average use

RETRO-COMMISSIONINGBENCHMARKING

• Note, this case is extreme but it’s not alone.• It’s roughly 2.5 times the average use and cost.

1 -

MS

2 - E

lem

4 - E

lem

6 -

M

S

8 -

K-1

2

10

- H

S

12 -

Ele

m

14

- H

S

16 -

Ele

m

18

- H

S

20 -

Ele

m

22

- H

S

24 -

Ele

m

26 -

Ele

m

28

- M

S

30 -

Ele

m

32 -

Ele

m

34 -

Ele

m

36 -

Ele

m

38 -

Pre

-K

40 -

Ele

m

42

- H

S

43

- H

S

46 -

Ele

m

0

50

100

150

200

250

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5SEDAC Illinois K-12 School Energy Use

IntensitiesGas kBtu/sf Electric kBtu/sf $/sf

kBtu

/sf-

yr

$/s

f

'09-'10

'08-'09

'10-'11

Page 3: Now it is fixed. BILL ANALYSIS. RETRO-COMMISSIONING BENCHMARKING Note, this case is extreme but it’s not alone. It’s roughly 2.5 times the average use

Only consider renewables after implementing all of the previous ideas

The cost per unit energy saved of high efficiency equipment and improved design is less than the cost per unit of energy of wind or solar

Renewables do, however, make great marketing and educational opportunities and can be more affordable when incentives are available

EXTRA CREDIT: RENEWABLES

Page 4: Now it is fixed. BILL ANALYSIS. RETRO-COMMISSIONING BENCHMARKING Note, this case is extreme but it’s not alone. It’s roughly 2.5 times the average use

4

Renewables:

• Plan the infrastructure now for future

• Select site-appropriate technologies

• Use to take last step to net-zero

EXTRA CREDIT

Page 5: Now it is fixed. BILL ANALYSIS. RETRO-COMMISSIONING BENCHMARKING Note, this case is extreme but it’s not alone. It’s roughly 2.5 times the average use

Savings from renewables not shown in savings table

3 kW solar array funded through ICECF

Program to put panels on all schools

This site does not have sufficient wind resources to consider educational level turbine

CASE STUDY RENEWABLES

Page 6: Now it is fixed. BILL ANALYSIS. RETRO-COMMISSIONING BENCHMARKING Note, this case is extreme but it’s not alone. It’s roughly 2.5 times the average use

Total Incremental Cost $546,120

Incentives $340,508

Final Incremental Cost $205,612

Annual Utility Savings w/o solar $33,037

Simple Payback 6.2 years

IRR (5% acceptable) 10.3%

Net Present Value (10 yr, 5%) $53,952

CASE STUDY SUMMARY

07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 -

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0 91.0 92.5 80.3

19.7

43.5 39.7

Energy Use Intensity

07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13

Page 7: Now it is fixed. BILL ANALYSIS. RETRO-COMMISSIONING BENCHMARKING Note, this case is extreme but it’s not alone. It’s roughly 2.5 times the average use

STRATEGY SUMMARYForm & Environment

1. Orientation & Form

2. Insulation

3. Air Sealing

Loads

4. Lighting

5. Loads

Heating, Ventilating, & Air Conditioning

6. Heating

7. Cooling

8. Motors & Pumps

9. Building Automation

10. Commissioning

How SEDAC can help with new construction… Design Assistance

Public sector Private sector

Incentive Review Public Sector

Services are funded by DCEO or Utility at no charge to the project or owner