One year into the new operation, NVFEL realized a reduction in electricity usage of 37%, from 9 million to 5.6 million kWh, and in peak demand of 67%, from 3 to 1 MW, with no power factor penalties incurred. Figures 40-5 and 40-6 compare the baseline and verified postimplementation electricity usage and cost, respectively, over the first year of operation. An additional 1.5 million kWh savings is projected once the fuel cell, which was the last improvement to be commissioned, is supplying maximum requirements.

It is important to note that while the efficiency improvements dramatically reduced electric demand and usage, a sizable portion was achieved through energy sources switching from electricity to natural gas for chiller operation. Still, even with the increase in natural gas usage for the absorption machines, the extensive thermal efficiency improvements resulted in an overall reduction of natural gas usage of some 40%. This conversion provided significant operating cost savings in that gas rates were relatively modest, while electric demand charges were quite high. Moreover, it allowed the EPA to meet its collateral objective of eliminating CFC usage.

The goal of dramatically reducing water consumption was accomplished, as annual usage was cut in half, largely through the elimination of once-through cooling. This provided significant operating cost savings, while meeting this important environmental objective.

As a result of the equipment upgrades and new control system, OM&R costs were also reduced, further increasing annual savings, while improving comfort conditions.

As a result of reducing and controlling loads and installing new central plant systems, heating and cooling capacity is now sufficient to properly meet all facility load requirements and mission reliability has been increased.

In total, the annual operational cost savings were sufficient to pay for the annual finance and service phase OM&R payments to the contractor. Hence, the ESPC project allowed EPA to meet all of its objectives, including environmental, operational, and reliability improvements, and accomplish a complete overhaul of the 30-year old energy infrastructure, while paying for it exclusively out of annual cost savings, with no up-front investment required.

Figure 40-5 Comparison of Baseline and Post-Implementation Electricity Usage. Source: Steve Dorer, EPA-NVFEL; Larry Good, Good Consulting; Philip Wirdzek, EPA; and Rick Levin, NORESCO

Figure 40-6 Comparison of Baseline and Post-Implementation Electricity Cost. Source: Steve Dorer, EPA-NVFEL; Larry Good, Good Consulting; Philip Wirdzek, EPA; and Rick Levin, NORESCO

Figure 40-5 Comparison of Baseline and Post-Implementation Electricity Usage. Source: Steve Dorer, EPA-NVFEL; Larry Good, Good Consulting; Philip Wirdzek, EPA; and Rick Levin, NORESCO

Figure 40-6 Comparison of Baseline and Post-Implementation Electricity Cost. Source: Steve Dorer, EPA-NVFEL; Larry Good, Good Consulting; Philip Wirdzek, EPA; and Rick Levin, NORESCO

□ Electronic Ballasts

□ Specular and Aluminum Reflectors

□ Compact Fluorescent La

□ LED Exit Sign Replacem

□ Street Light Replacements

□ Direct and Indirect HID Lighting,

□ Task Lighting

□ New Fixture Layout Desig

□ Occupancy Sensors

□ Daylighting Controls

Chapter Forty-One

□ LAN Systems/Network Interfacing

□ Control Programming/Systems Control

□ Process Control r Seasonal Operation ! Humidity Control

□ Chiller/Boner optimization Control

□ Enthalpy Control/Economizers

Technical Analysis

□ Remote communication Control and Monitoring

□ Preventative/Predictive Maintenance

□ Equi----1 Perf----------1 E------11_, all integrated energy and resource cost reduction programs must start with a study that identifies >rtunities and quantifies them in such a way that a scope of work can be developed and financial decisions can be made. Commonly, a two-phased study approach is used for this purpose. Prior to this, an additional third stage, or Scoping Audit, should be added to the process to initially verify if there is viable project potential. It serves to provide early screening of potential measures and leads to the determination of an overall plan of action.

Upon completion of the Scoping Audit, an initial group of measures to be proposed to the host facility as the core of the project has been established. This is reviewed by the facility for comment and acceptance. Upon acceptance, the facility commits to proceed with the next phase of evaluation, which is the Preliminary Feasibility Study. This study refines the proposed group of measures and critically tests their feasibility and economics. It includes a fairly comprehensive review of the entire facility. The study team develops a full understanding of existing conditions and formulates energy resource cost reduction and facility upgrade measures that will be proposed to the facility as the basis of the eventual implementation contract. This Preliminary Feasibility Study goes beyond the standard measure categories and includes any appropriate site-specific measures in the evaluation. Once these measures are modified as needed and accepted by the facility, the study team will complete the evaluation of cost and savings through a final "investment grade" Detailed Feasibility Study.

The technical study, or measure evaluation, process from conception to contract can be described as having three phases.

1. Scoping Audit: Identify a general approach to the facility and a core group of measures on which a resource efficiency and cost reduction program can be based so that intent can be established.

2. Preliminary Feasibility Study: Evaluate and refine the core group and any other measures to generate a reliable, quantified proposal so that a commitment can be established to proceed with a final investmentgrade study.

3. Detailed Feasibility Study: Finalize all evaluation with detailed analysis and measurement to generate an investment-grade proposal so that capital funding commitments can be made and a contract can be executed to proceed with design or turnkey implementation.

This process is flexible and can be adjusted to accommodate special conditions. For example, results of previous energy audits may be used to streamline or even eliminate the Scoping Audit and Preliminary Energy Study phases.

These two analytical phases — the Preliminary Feasibility Study and the Detailed Feasibility Study — are to be executed sequentially. They should be based on the groundwork laid in the Scoping Audit phase and be in accordance with a Project Development Plan. This chapter presents step-by-step detail for executing a two-phased technical analysis for the purpose of developing an integrated energy and resource efficiency and cost reduction program. This is preceded by brief descriptions of the Scoping Audit and Project Development Plan processes.

The technical analysis study format is presented from the perspective of an independent analytical team performing the work as would be the case with a consulting engineering firm. In practice, such a team can be fully or partially staffed by internal personnel. The team may also be part of an energy services company (ESCo) offering turnkey design-build or performance contracting services. Regardless of the source of the study team, the same basic approach would apply.

Guide to Alternative Fuels

Guide to Alternative Fuels

Your Alternative Fuel Solution for Saving Money, Reducing Oil Dependency, and Helping the Planet. Ethanol is an alternative to gasoline. The use of ethanol has been demonstrated to reduce greenhouse emissions slightly as compared to gasoline. Through this ebook, you are going to learn what you will need to know why choosing an alternative fuel may benefit you and your future.

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment