Part 3: M

1
Part 3 MV Methods

• Definition of Savings
• MV Guidelines
• Examples Applications

2
FEMP MV Guidelines

• Derived from IPMVP
• For federal energy projects
• Step-by-step procedural guide
• Defines MV methods by project type
• Current version is 2.2 (2000)
• Available at
• http//www.eere.energy.gov/femp/financing/superesp
  cs_mvresources.cfm
• http//ateam.lbl.gov/mv/
• 1-800-DOE-EREC

3
FEMP MV Compliance

• Complying with the FEMP ( and IPMVP) guidelines
  requires
• Developing an MV plan using the defined methods
• Following the MV plan
• The important consideration is what is in the plan

4
FEMP ( IPMVP) MV Options
5
Options A and B vs. Options C and D
Options A and B are retrofit-isolation
methods Options C and D are whole-facility
methods The difference is where the boundary
lines are drawn
6
Option A

• Simple approach (and low cost)
• Performance parameters are measured (before and
  after), usage parameters may be estimated and
  then stipulated
• Used where the potential to perform needs to be
  verified but accurate savings estimation is not
  necessary
• Option A is NOT stipulated savings!

7
Stipulate

• To stipulate is to agree to a term or condition
• Under FEMP, to stipulate means to estimate
  without measurement
• A stipulated value remains constant for the
  contract term regardless of how it may change
  over time

8
Appropriate Use of Stipulations

• Parameter is well understood
• Owner willing to accept risk
• Owner has previous experience
• Probable success of ECM
• Small savings and/or small uncertainty
• Greater MV costs not justified
• Stipulations dont add too much uncertainty
• Monitoring serves no other purpose

9
Inappropriate Use of Stipulations

• Owner unwilling to assume risk
• Parameters not known with reasonable certainty
• Potential for technical problems
• Monitoring provides valuable information
• Stipulation significantly contributes to overall
  uncertainty

10
Sources of StipulationsAcceptable Unacceptable

• Engineering analysis
• Measurement-based models
• Manufacturers data
• Standard tables
• TMY weather
• ANSI/ARI/ASHRAE
• Facility logs

• Undocumented assumptions
• Proprietary algorithms
• Unsupported handshake agreements
• Guesses at parameters
• Models based on questionable data
• Other buildings (w/ some exceptions)

11
Option A Applications

• Projects where performance remains constant,
  usage can be readily characterized, and
  uncertainty is not a major issue
• Lighting efficiency
• Efficient motors
• Rate changes
• Operations Maintenance

12
Option B

• Under Option B, some or all parameters are
  measured periodically or continuously
• Applicable where accurate savings estimation is
  necessary and where long-term performance needs
  to be tracked
• Reduced uncertainty, but requires more effort

13
Option B Applications

• Projects with large elements of uncertainty
  and/or risk ()
• Variable-speed drives on fans and pumps
• Chillers and chiller plants
• Energy management control systems
• Projects where equipment needs constant attention

14
Option B Benefits

• Reasons to use Option B instead of A
• Real MV
• Better equipment performance
• Improved OM
• Ongoing Commissioning
• Remote monitoring

15
Option C

• Option C looks at energy use and cost of entire
  facility, not at specific equipment
• Conceptually simple, may be difficult in practice
• Can consider weather, occupancy, etc.
• Useful where total savings need to be valued but
  component savings do not
• Commercial software is available that simplifies
  implementation

16
Option C Limitations

• Does not verify at component level
• Requires savings to be significant (gt 20 of
  baseline consumption)
• Requires historical data (gt 1 year)
• May take time to evaluate savings
• Requires building meters (not campus)
• May require baseline adjustment to account for
  non-project-related factors

17
Option C Applications

• Projects where facility usage remains constant
  and historical data is present
• Weather-dependent projects
• Heating projects
• Comprehensive and/or campus-wide projects
  (w/reservation)
• Multiple interacting measures in a single building

18
Option C Programs

• EnergyCAP, FASER (discontinued)
• Good Steward Software http//www.goodstewardsoftwa
  re.com/
• EEM Suite
• Silicon Energy http//www.siliconenergy.com
• EZ Sim
• Stellar Process http//ezsim.com
• Metrix, Utility Manager Pro 4.0
• Abraxas Energy Consulting http//www.abraxasenergy
  .com/products.php
• Optimum Energy Products Ltd
• http//www.optimumenergy.com/software/

This list is not complete. Listing here does not
imply endorsement.
19
Option D

• Option D treats building as computer model
• Flexible, but requires significant effort
• Applications
• New construction
• Energy management control systems
• Building use changes
• Building envelope modifications additions

20
Option D Limitations

• Uses specialized software that requires
  significant experience to use
• Results vary with effort (and ) expended
• Requires measurements for calibration
• Weather-related usage often stipulated
• Still need to verify potential to perform
• Annual inspections recommended

21
Option D Programs

• DOE-2
• J.J. Hirsch Associates http//www.doe2.com/
• eQuest
• Energy Design Resources http//www.doe2.com/
• PowerDOE
• J.J. Hirsch Associates http//www.doe2.com/
• EnergyPlus
• LBNL DOE http//gundog.lbl.gov
• Visual DOE 4.0
• Eley Associates http//www.archenergy.com/
• Trace 700
• Trane http//www.trane.com/commercial/software/tra
  ce/index.asp
• Market Manager
• Optimum Energy http//www.optimumenergy.com/

This list is not complete. Listing here does not
imply endorsement.
22
Example FEMP 2.2 MV Methods

• Option A Lighting (LE-A-01/02)
• Option B Variable-Speed Drive (VSD-B-01)
• Option C Heating Plant
• Option D New Construction

23
Example Lighting Project

• Consider the following lighting project
• Upgrade 5,000 fixtures in a typical office
• MV Approach LE-A-01 or LE-A-02
• LE Lighting Efficiency
• A Option A
• 01/02 Specific approach

24
Project Information

• Performance
• Baseline power consumption is 86 Watts
• Proposed power consumption is 56 Watts
• Difference is 30 Watts
• Usage
• Baseline New 3,000 hours/year
• Financial
• Energy 0.10/kWh

25
FEMP Methods LE-A-01 / 02

• LE-A-01
• Fixture powers are estimated (stipulated) based
  on table of standard fixture powers provided by
  local utility (or other source)
• Operating hours estimated (stipulated)
• LE-A-02
• Fixture powers are measured on a sample of
  fixtures (measured)
• Operating hours estimated (stipulated)

26
Estimated Lighting Savings

• E Savings QTY (Before After) Hours
• ES (5,000) (86 W - 56 W) (3,000 hours)
  (1 kW / 1000 W)
• ES 450,000 kWh/year
• Cost Savings (Unit Cost) (Energy Savings)
• Cost Savings (450,000 kWh) (0.10/kWh)
• Cost Savings 45,000/year

27
Example VSD Project

• Consider the following project
• Install a variable-speed drive on HVAC fan
• Baseline Fan Operates continuously at a single
  speed and power no matter what the cooling load
  is
• VSD Fan Speed andpower change with coolingload
  (outside temperature)
• MV Approach VSD-B-01(Variable Speed Drive,
  Option B, Method 1)

28
Project Information

• Performance
• Baseline fan Constant power (140 kW)
• VSD Fan Power changes w/ weather
• Usage
• Fan operates 24/7
• Financial
• Energy 0.10 / kWh

29
VSD-B-01 Monitor Fan Performance
30
Calculate Monthly Savings
E Savings S (kWBefore - kWAfter) (1
Hour) Cost Savings (Unit Cost) (Energy Savings)
31
Heating Project w/ Option C

• Consider heating system upgrade at eastern US
  military base
• Baseline Gas-fired boilers with central steam
  plant provide heat to buildings
• New System Shut down steam plant, install gas
  furnaces in all buildings

32
Project Information

• Performance
• Baseline Low efficiency and steam loss
• New High efficiency, no steam loss
• Usage
• Driven by weather
• Financial
• Gas is (was) 0.50 / therm

33
Compare Gas Use to Temperature
34
Develop Baseline Model
35
Calculate Monthly Savings
Baseline, therms 25.6 HDD - 1,378
Note Savings not adjusted to TMY weather
36
New Construction w/ Option D

• Consider building currently in design phase
• Proposed building incorporates energy-efficient
  design features selected and implemented by ESCO
• Baseline building is existing design before ESCO
  modifications

37
Develop Computer Model...
38
...And Evaluate Results
39
Calculate Savings

• Evaluate energy use for each scenario
• Calculate savings for each scenario relative to
  base case

40
Validate Savings

• Compare first-year energy use to post-retrofit
  model
• Calibrate / Adjust model(s) to match building
• or
• Fix building!
• Perform annual inspections

41
Calibrate Model
42
Review and Discussion

• Total energy use and savings are a function of
  both usage and performance
• Options A and B are retrofit-isolation methods
• Options C and D are whole-facility methods
• Can mix and match methods

43
Review Questions

• What two factors determine energy savings?
• How does one comply with the FEMP Guidelines?

Click hereto go to MV Part 4