Gloucester, MA - Official Website | Official Website

�

�

�

�

��

�

� ��

��

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

��

��

� ��

��

��

!�� "��#��$�

�

��

�

��

%�� "��

� �� "��%&��

�

'��#��#��

i

��

��

�

��

�

�

�

�

�

��

�

�

��

�

�

�� !��

�

�

"��#��$ ��%��&��'��(��

�

"��#��)�� *� �� &��'�+(�

�

"��#��)�� !�%�� +��&��'��(��

�

�

�

�

�

�

Revised 12/14/2010

City of Gloucester Green Communities Gran Application – January 2011 Page 1

GRANT APPLICATION

INSTRUCTIONS

Applicants must complete all required sections in order to be considered for a grant award.

Applications will be accepted beginning Friday, December 17, 2010 and must be submitted by January 21, 2011. One unbound hard copy and one compact disc copy must be submitted by 5:00pm on January 21, 2011 to the following address:

Department of Energy Resources Green Communities Division 100 Cambridge Street, 10th Floor Boston, MA 02114 ATTN: Jane Pfister

Applicant must be a Green Community that was designated during Fiscal Year 2011 Previously designated Green Communities / grant awardees are not eligible in this cycle and will be notified of future grant opportunities.

The amount of funding available in this grant application cycle is $4,000,000. It is anticipated that another cycle of grants will be made available in Summer 2011 following a designation application and qualification process in late Spring. The amount of funding available in the Summer will be dependent upon the proceeds received from future RGGI auctions.

In advance of grant applications, designated Green Communities will be notified of the grant amounts they are eligible to receive. Grant amounts will be based on the following: o a base amount o an additional amount based on a per capita income and population allocation formula o an additional amount to Communities that adopted as‐of‐right generation to meet Criterion #1 o an additional amount to regionally designated Green Communities. No grant amounts will exceed $1Million.

The amounts listed above will be dependent upon the available and the number of qualified communities receiving grants.

GREEN COMMUNITIES GRANT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2011

Revised 12/14/2010


Regional applicants must list all participating municipalities in the co‐applicants section of this application and include documentation confirming the establishment of the regional entity.

If any funds are to be used for administrative costs, justification must be provided. In no case shall more than 10% of grant awards be used to fund administrative costs.

Applicants must check off the applicable project boxes and complete all appendices.

NOTE: In addition to reporting requirements to maintain your Green Communities designation, there will also be reporting requirements for your Green Communities grant. These requirements will be detailed when your grant award is executed.

QUALIFIED PROJECTS Designated Green Communities are eligible to submit a grant application to fund all or a portion of the costs of studying, designing, constructing and implementing energy efficiency activities, including but not limited to:

Energy conservation measures and projects

Procurement and installation of energy management services

Adoption of demand side reduction initiatives

Adoption of energy efficiency policies.

Financing the siting and construction of renewable and alternative energy projects on municipally‐owned land.

APPLICANT INFORMATION Municipality / Local Government / Regional Entity Gloucester

Contact (print) Susan St. Pierre

Street Address 3 Pond Road

Title Clean Energy Project Manager

City/Town State Zip Code Gloucester MA 01930

Telephone Email 978‐281‐9781 sstpierre@gloucester‐ma.gov

CO‐APPLICANTS Please list all municipalities that are part of the designated regional Green Community, along with contact information for each. Also, please include letters in support of the regional entity’s proposed project(s) from the:

(insert more rows as needed)

Revised 12/14/2010


DESIGNATION INFORMATION Date of Designation: December 16, 2010

__________________________________________________________________________________________

GRANT APPROVAL PROCESS

Green Communities will be notified of the grant amount they are eligible to apply for.

Applications must be submitted by the established deadline.

No more than 10% of the grant amount can be used to fund administrative costs; justification must be provided to demonstrate that the project would not otherwise occur without the administrative funding.

The Green Communities Division will convene a Project Management Team (PMT) to review each application. Applications / Projects will be reviewed based on the following factors: Project Narrative (Appendix A)

Project feasibility (energy audits, site assessments, availability of resources; e.g. wind speeds, permitting )

Budget / Project Plan (including project budget, pay‐back, funds leveraged, procurement status, project schedule, etc.)

Projected Energy and Climate Impacts (Appendix B)

Alignment with Five Year Energy Reduction Plan / Consistency with Green Communities Program Criteria

Greenhouse gas reductions

Cost/Benefit ratio – calculate the amount of fossil fuel energy reduced by funds spent Projected Economic Development Benefit (Appendix C)

Job creation / job retention

Other economic development benefits associated with this project

FUNDING REQUEST Please provide a brief description of the project(s) for which you are requesting funding. More extensive descriptions are requested as Appendices; see further direction at the end of this document. Applicants must also complete the summary and metrics tables below for all proposed projects in the Green Community. The City intends on utilizing the grant funds to implement energy efficiency measures at the O’Maley School and Skating Rink that were identified in a 2009 Whole Building Energy Audit.

Revised 12/14/2010


ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECTS A Green Community may apply for funding for all or a portion of the costs of studying, designing, constructing and implementing energy efficiency activities. DOER recommends using the staged approach outlined in the 2008 ENERGY STAR Building Upgrade Manual, which is outlined below, to plan energy efficiency upgrades in buildings. This approach optimizes the cost and energy savings by addressing the most cost‐effective measures first. This approach also ensures that large building systems, such as HVACs, will be right‐sized for an energy efficient building. The complete manual can be downloaded from: http://www.energystar.gov/ia/business/EPA_BUM_Full.pdf

Revised 12/14/2010


Table 1: Energy Efficiency Project(s) Description

Energy Efficiency Projects Brief Description

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 11 O’Maley School & Rink – Computer Power Management

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 2 O’Maley School & Rink –Schedules, Set Points, O&M

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 3 O’Maley School & Rink –Vending Machine Controls

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 4 O’Maley School & Rink – Airseal Building Envelope

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 5 O’Maley School & Rink – Variable Speed Drives SD,HW, CHW Pumps

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 6 O’Maley School & Rink – Premium Motors

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 7 O’Maley School – Demand Control Ventilation Auditorium & Library

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 8 O’Maley School – Demand Control Ventilation Gym

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 9 Skating Rink ‐ Install a Low E Ceiling in the O’Maley Skating Rink

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 10 Skating Rink ‐ Heat Exchanger

Energy Management Services

Demand Side Reduction Initiatives

Energy Efficiency Programs & Policies

Combined Heat & Power (must be eligible for the Alternative Portfolio Std, i.e. no oil or coal)

District Heat

Other Energy Efficiency (this includes requests for incremental costs for fuel efficient vehicles)

Design Fees for Energy Conservation Measures listed above

1 Please insert additional lines in the table for each independent Energy Conservation Measure as needed.

Revised 12/14/2010


Table 2: Energy Efficiency Project(s) Metrics

Energy Efficiency Measures

Specific Page References

from attached audit or study2

Funding Requested

($)

Projected Annual Cost Savings ($)

Simple Payback Period (years)3

Projected Annual Energy Savings (kWh, therms, gallons)4

Projected Annual Energy Savings

(MMBtu)5

Projected Annual GHG Reduced (lbs CO2e)

(a)

Projected Jobs

Created/Retained (FTE)

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 1

project: pg. 12‐21 funding:

$500 $875 0.6 6,250

21 5,481

See Total

Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) 26,7

project: 12‐21 funding:

$1,500 $7,800 0.2 37,436

310 80,910

See Total


project: funding: 12‐21

$1,800 $1,120 0.9 8,000

27 7,047

See Total



$15,000 $6,974 1.7 22,382

349

91,089See Total



$43,123 $11,381 1.6 81,292

277 72,297

See Total



$14,220 $945 14 6,752

23 6,003

See Total



$20,269 $11,145 0.1 29,277

600 156,600

See Total



$10,135 $4,186 1.4 2,791

279 72,819

See Total



$63,389 $19,057 1.5 136,123

464 121,104

See Total



$12,900 $4,314 3 4,689

276 72,036

See Total

2 Please provide a specific page number/range from the audit or study that provides project details Also. please provide specific page number of audit, study or vendor quote that provides basis for the funding request. 3 The cost basis for the simple payback period shall be the cost of the more efficient unit minus the cost of the code compliant unit. 4 Please include units, i.e. if saving 500 kWh by installing efficient lighting, list as “500 kWh” not “500”. 5 See Btu Conversion Chart Below. 6 Please insert additional lines in the table for each independent Energy Conservation Measure as needed. 7 All proposed replacement units for failing/outmoded or inefficient equipment must have a rated efficiency of 15% better than 780 CMR 13.00 8th edition.

Revised 12/14/2010


Energy Management Services

project: funding:

Demand Side Reduction Initiatives8

project: funding:

Energy Efficiency Programs & Policies7

project: funding:

Combined Heat & Power project: funding:

District Heat project: funding:

Other Energy Efficiency project: funding:

$15,364 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

Energy Efficiency Subtotals

N/A

$198,200 $67,797 2.5

334,992 2,626 685,386 5 ‐ 8 (T)

(a) METHOD USED FOR CALCULATION The total GHG reduction formula: 890 lbs of CO2 per 1MWH (per ISO NE 2008). This is the emissions rate 890 lbs CO2/1MWH x 1 MWH/1000 KWH x 1KWH/3412 BTU x 1,000,000/1 MMBTU = The result is 261 lbs CO2 per MMBTU

BTU CONVERSION CHART Use this chart to convert a unit of energy (KWh, therms, gallons, etc.) to MMBtu. This enables comparison across multiple fuel types. Fuel Energy Content of Common Fossil Fuels per DOE/EIA BTU Content of Common Energy Units – (1 million Btu equals 1 MMBtu)

1 barrel(42 gallons) of crude oil = 5,800,000 Btu

1 gallon of gasoline = 124,000 Btu (based on U.S. consumption, 2007)

1 gallon of diesel fuel = 139,000 Btu

1 gallon of heating oil = 139,000 Btu

1 barrel of residual fuel oil = 6,287,000 Btu

1 cubic foot of natural gas = 1,028 Btu (based on U.S. consumption, 2007)

1 gallon of propane = 91,000 Btu

1 short ton of coal = 20,169,000 Btu (based on U.S. consumption, 2007)

1 kilowatt hour of electricity = 3,412 Btu

1 therm = 100,000 Btu

8 Please estimate only the projected direct annual cost savings, annual energy savings, annual GHG reductions, and jobs created/retained by the program/policy/initiative.

Revised 12/14/2010


RENEWABLE OR ALTERNATIVE ENERGY PROJECTS A Green Community may apply for funding for the siting and construction of renewable and alternative energy projects on municipally‐owned land.

Table 3: Renewable / Alternative Energy Project(s) Description

Renewable / Alternative Energy Projects

Brief Description

Wind Turbines

Solar PV

Solar Thermal

Biomass or Biofuel Combined Heat & Power9, 10

Biomass Thermal8

Hydro Construction/Repair11

Hydro Feasibility Studies12

Geothermal

Other Renewable/Alternative Energy

9 Biomass projects eligible for the grant program must 1) utilize only clean wood chips or wood pellet fuel, 2) meet all applicable ASME and UL safety certifications, 3) achieve fuel conversion efficiency ratings that are amongst the highest of those of commercially available products, typically above 80-85%, and 4) utilize Best Available Control Technology (BACT) to reduce air emissions to levels that are amongst the lowest achieved by commercially available technology. 10 Biofuels must be consistent with the definition of “Eligible Liquid Biofuel” in the Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard – Class I, 225 CMR 14.02, which is defined as follows: A liquid fuel that is derived from Eligible Biomass Fuel and that yields at least a 50 per cent reduction in Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions relative to average lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions for petroleum distillate fuel sold in 2005, as determined by the Department in consultation with the MassDEP and the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs; or that is derived from waste feedstocks consisting of previously used or discarded solid, liquid or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, commercial or household food service activities that would otherwise be stored, treated, transferred or disposed. Waste feedstock shall include, but not be limited to, waste vegetable oils, waste animal fats, substances derived from wastewater and the treatment of wastewater, or grease trap waste. Waste feedstock shall not include petroleum-based waste or waste that otherwise meets the definition of hazardous waste, unless otherwise determined by the MassDEP. 11 Hydro projects must be certified by the Low Impact Hydro Institute. Projects seeking funding for the construction or repair of hydroelectric facilities must be eligible for qualification for DOER's Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard (RPS) as either a Class I or Class II facility. This qualification requires certification from the Low Impact Hydro Institute (LIHI) and review by the MA Department of Fish and Game. 12 Hydro projects must be certified by the Low Impact Hydro Institute. Projects seeking funding for feasibility studies must submit as part of their application a letter from the MA Department of Fish and Game providing 1) a preliminary determination that the proposed facility or repair poses no clear threat to the ecological integrity of the waterway, and 2) a list of design/construction elements that will likely be required for the project to assure that the ecological integrity of the waterway is maintained or improved.

Revised 12/14/2010


Table 4: Renewable & Alternative Energy Project(s) Metrics

Renewable / Alternative Energy Projects

Specific Page

Reference from

attached feasibility study2

Funding Requested

($)3


Simple Payback Period (years)

Projected Annual Energy Savings (kWh, therms, gallons)4

Projected Annual Energy

Produced (MMBtu)

Projected Annual GHG

Reduced (lbs CO2e)

Projected Jobs

Created/ Retained (FTE)

Wind Turbines

Solar PV

Solar Thermal

Biomass or Biofuel Combined Heat & Power8, 10

Biomass or Biofuel Thermal8

Hydro Construction/Repair11

Hydro Feasibility Studies12

Geothermal

Other Renewable/ Alternative Energy

Renewable / Alternative Energy Subtotals

Revised 12/14/2010


Table 5: Total Green Community Energy Project(s) Metrics

All Proposed Energy Projects

Specific Page Reference

Funding Requested

($)


Simple Payback Period (years)

Projected Annual Energy Savings/ Produced (MMBtu)

Projected Annual GHG Reduced (lbs CO2e)

Projected Jobs

Created/ Retained (FTE)

Energy Efficiency Subtotal N/A $198,200.00 $67,797 2.5 2,626 5‐8 (T)

Renewable / Alternative Energy Subtotal

N/A

TOTAL N/A $198,200.00 $67,797 2.5 2,626 5‐8 (T)

Revised 12/14/2010


CERTIFICATION OF APPLICATION Pursuant to MGL c25A Sections 2 and 10, the applicant is required to certify that they are authorized to execute the application and verify that all information submitted is true. RESOLUTION OF AUTHORIZATION Resolved that, Mayor Carolyn A. Kirk,

is authorized to execute said Application on the behalf of the City of Gloucester, the applying

community and verify that the information in this application is true.

______________________________________________ 01/20/2011 [signature] [date] Mayor, City of Gloucester, MA

[title] [TO BE COMPLETED BY NOTARY] I, ___________________________________ _,

as a notary public, certify that I witnessed the signature of the above named

______________________________ , and that said person stated that he or she is authorized

to execute this resolution, and that the individual verified his/her identity to me, on this date:

______________________________________ [date] ______________________________________ [signature] My commission expires on: ________________ NOTARY SEAL HERE:

Revised 12/14/2010


APPENDICES Appendix A: Project Narrative

Background The O’Maley Middle School was constructed in 1972 and is comprised of 143,000 square feet. The Building is connected to a public skating rink that was built at the same time and is about 42,000 square feet in size. The Facility (Middle School and Skating Rink) are 100% heated and 30% air conditioned. The School has a capacity for 900 including 800 children as well as teachers and staff grades 6 through 8. The Rink is used primarily for ice hockey and includes office space for rink staff, locker rooms and rink and spectator areas. All areas except for the rink and spectator areas are heated by a hot water loop from the School. The Facility also shares electric meters.

Project Scope Project Purpose A Whole Building Program Energy Assessment was completed for the Facility in 2009 (See Exhibit 1). The report recommended several energy efficiency measures. The proposed grant will implement a combination of Facility‐wide No/Low Cost Measures as well as additional improvements to the School building envelope and mechanical systems and the installation of Low E Ceiling and Heat Exchanger in the Skating Rink.

O’Maley School & Rink

Revised 12/14/2010


Benefits Some of the low cost improvements such as power management and schedules/O&M will result in immediate energy savings and improve building comfort. Other measures such as air sealing the building envelope with increase the Facility’s heat retention by eliminating air leakage. Other measures will reduce consumption, increase energy efficiency and reduce energy costs to the City, as well as reduce GHG emissions. Additionally, the work will create temporary jobs required to design/install the improvements. Installing the Low E ceiling in the Skating Rink will reduce heat radiated from the ceiling to the ice thereby lowering the loads on the chillers. The ceiling may also reduce condensation by creating a barrier between the space and at he roof thereby limited temperature differentials that create condensation. Installing the heat exchanger at the Skating Rink will eliminate the need to draw hot water from the School for the zamboni operations at the Skating Rink by turning waste heat form the chillers into a practical energy source for water heating. This will in turn reduce energy use by the boiler and the hot water system at the School. Timeline The City intends on developing the appropriate procurement documents or arrange to conduct his work in conjunction with National Gird to implement all of the improvements upon notification of approval of grant application, awarding the grant within the following three months and completing the system installation in late summer of 2011. Procurement Status The City will develop procurement documents over the next month or arrange to conduct this work in conjunction with National Grid. Anticipated Impact The work would be done during the summer months to avoid/minimize impact to the school population. Timeline Project Documentation See Documentation Attachment 1 Project Budget See Budget Attachment 2 Project Support toward Five Year Energy Reduction Plan and other Green Communities Criteria See Five Year Energy Reduction Plan/Green Communities Narrative Attachment 3

Revised 12/14/2010


DOCUMENTATION ATTACHMENT 1

Project Viability and Project Schedule Project Viability The energy efficiency measures that have been identified for implementation should be easily implemented. Some of the items will require analysis by weatherization/mechanical/HVAC specialists. The energy usage at the O’Maley Facility is documented in the City of Gloucester’s Green Communities Application, Attachment 3, Criteria 3 Baseline Energy Reduction Plan (included as Exhibit 2 to this document). As shown in Table 1 on the following page, (which is excerpted from the Baseline Reduction Plan) the O’Maley School/Rink Facility is one of the six highest energy users of municipal buildings excluding treatment plant and pumping stations. Project Schedule The City is currently preparing a draft bid request and expects to issue the request shortly after being notified that the grant has been awarded for this project. A project schedule has been developed and is included below. The work will occur during the summer of 2011 to avoid disruptions during the school year with an August 26, 2011 completion date.

2011J F M A M J J A S O N D

PlannedEventMilestone

TargetMilestone

Page 1 of 1 1/20/11

Implementation ScheduleO'Maley School & Rink Energy Efficiency Meausres

EndStartTask

3/19/111/22/111. Procurement

3/21/113/21/112. Award Contracts/Procure Equipment

8/26/114/5/113. Project Implementation

Develop Energy Study

Implement Recommendations

1/22 3/19

3/21

4/5 8/26

Revised 12/14/2010


Energy Savings According to the Whole Building Energy Assessment that was developed for the O’Maley School/Rink

facility n 2009, the measures proposed for implementation will result in significant energy savings for

the City. These results are summarized in the Table on page 6 of this grant application and represent a

15.7% reduction in energy usage.

Revised 12/14/2010


13 Note that fuel oil usage is embedded in the total Site Energy Use column. For example, the City Hall electrical use (114,040 kwh equals 389,104kBtu’s which is less than 20% of the total energy use (1 kwh x

3.412 kBtu) .Thus, the remaining 1,701,303.88 1,732,094 kBtu of energy use is oil usage. Refer to Table 3 for a breakdown of oil usage. 14 Note that all of the smaller city sewer pump stations were included as one line item. 15 Note that all of the smaller city water pump stations were included as one line item.

Table 1 ‐ Municipal Building Energy Use FY 2009

Building ID Facility Name Period Ending Date Rating

Electric Use (kWh)

Natural Gas Use (therms) Site Energy Use (kBtu)

13

Site EUI (kBtu/Sq. Ft.)

2288973 Babson Drinking Water Plant 06/30/2009 N/A 1,178,400.0 8,742.0 4,894,900.8 0.0

2028394 Bayview Fire 06/30/2009 N/A 13,292.0 0.0 308,448.2 105.7

2036127 Beeman Memorial School 06/30/2009 92 123,910.0 0.0 2,350,578.9 62.1

2028252 Central Fire Station 06/30/2009 N/A 122,309.0 0.0 632,704.7 53.3

1869119 City Hall 06/30/2009 95 114,040.0 0.0 2,090,408.4 60.4

1962016 City Hall Annex 06/30/2009 73 131,700.0 0.0 449,360.4 42.6

2207770 DPW ‐ 22 Poplar YARD 06/30/2009 N/A 202,600.0 0.0 1,749,221.8 364.4

2041967 DPW 26 Poplar YARD 06/30/2009 N/A 105,313.0 11,446.0 1,503,928.0 33.5

2329785 DW Pump Stations (sewer)14 06/30/2009 N/A 212,162.0 0.0 723,896.7 361.9

2036085 East Gloucester School 06/30/2009 73 123,337.0 927.0 2,625,782.2 90.7

1701499 Gloucester High School 06/30/2009 56 1,609,200.0 114,794.0 19,334,386.0 78.2

1534404 Gloucester O'Maley School and Rink 06/30/2009 N/A 2,375,000.0 0.0 16,691,493.1 91.2

2028465 Gloucester Police 06/30/2009 N/A 223,009.0 20,386.0 2,799,506.7 95.9

2226569 Gloucester Wastewater Treat. Plant 06/30/2009 86 1,095,600.0 0.0 4,837,032.0 0.0

2289036 Klondike Water Plant 06/30/2009 N/A 91,800.0 0.0 313,221.6 0.0

1958680 Legion Building 06/30/2009 N/A 10,222.0 195.0 560,320.4 146.5

2288988 Magnolia Ave DW Plant 06/30/2009 N/A 549,300.0 13,609.0 3,235,111.6 0.0

2028427 Magnolia Fire Station 06/30/2009 N/A 11,029.0 0.0 196,570.3 42.5

2033306 Plum Cove School 06/30/2009 91 171,850.0 0.0 1,497,132.7 49.2

2329765 Pump Stations water15 06/30/2009 N/A 937,592.0 0.0 3,199,063.9 1,599.5

1876217 Rose Baker Senior Center 06/30/2009 N/A 102,680.0 2,524.0 602,744.2 56.1

1876142 Sawyer Free Library 06/30/2009 N/A 188,600.0 3,973.0 1,421,619.6 50.6

2207762 Stanley Marchant Building 06/30/2009 N/A 24,583.0 0.0 83,877.2 104.8

2033740 Veterans School 06/30/2009 92 110,247.0 17,617.0 2,137,862.8 61.3

2045846 Visitor Center 06/30/2009 N/A 7,080.0 0.0 24,157.0 5.3

2028405 West Gloucester Fire 06/30/2009 N/A 13,292.0 0.0 200,408.3 67.3

2033441 West Parish School 06/30/2009 77 123,507.0 0.0 3,731,670.7 92.1

Total for all Facilities selected 9,971,654.0 194,213.0 78,195,408.2

Revised 12/14/2010


BUDGET ATTACHMENT 2

Energy Efficiency Measures Project Budget ($)

Utility Incentive16 Net Cost to City

O’Maley School & Rink – Computer Power Management

$500 0 $500

O’Maley School & Rink –Schedules, Set Points, O&M

$1,500 0 $1,500

O’Maley School & Rink –Vending Machine Controls

$1,800 $800 $1,000

O’Maley School & Rink – Airseal Building Envelope

$15,000 $2,824 $$12,176

O’Maley School & Rink – Variable Speed Drives SD,HW, CHW Pumps

$43,123 $25,300 $17,823

O’Maley School & Rink – Premium Motors

$14,220 $945 $13,275

O’Maley School – Demand Control Ventilation Auditorium & Library

$20,269 $19,370 $900

O’Maley School – Demand Control Ventilation Gym

$10,135 $4,186 $5,949

Skating Rink ‐ Install a Low E Ceiling in the O’Maley Skating Rink

$63,389

$34,803 $28,586

Skating Rink ‐ Heat Exchanger $12,900 $2,689 $12,900

Total $198,200

$90,917 $107,283

16 Note that utility incentives identified in the 2009 study may not be applicable. The City will pursue all possible utility rebates with National Grid upon receipt of the grant monies.

Revised 12/14/2010


FIVE YEAR ENERGY REDUCTION PLAN/GREEN COMMUNITIES NARRATIVE ATTACHMENT 3

Support of Five Year Energy Reduction Plan The Energy Efficiency Measures proposed to be undertaken by this grant will implement many of the measures outlined in the City’s Five Year Energy Reduction Plan that was included in the Green Communities Designation Application (see Table 3 in Exhibit 2, Energy Conservation Opportunities and Five Year Energy Reduction Plan from the City’s Green Communities Plan).

Revised 12/14/2010


Exhibit 1 Whole Building Program O’Maley School and Rink

Gloucester O'Maley School and Skating Rink

Prepared for

NATIONAL GRID

Prepared by

B2Q Associates, Inc.

Beverly, MA

Revision Date

May 6, 2009

Wh

ole

Bu

ildin

g P

rog

ram

NGRID Whole Building Program

5 Arrowhead Lane

Beverly, MA 01915

Opportunities Screening Final Report

O’Maley Middle School and Skating Rink


Walk Through Date: 12/4/2008

Address: 32 Cherry Street, Gloucester, MA

Facility Description

O’Maley Middle School

Building Description

City of Gloucester middle school, built in 1972, approximately 143,000 square feet (sqft). This building

is connected to an adjacent skating rink and these buildings will be described separately, but benchmarked

together because they share electric meters and heating systems. This facility is 100% heated and 30% air-

conditioned and houses the 6th

– 8th

grades.

Approximately 800 student capacity, total of approximately 900 occupants including teachers, staff and

students.

Utilities Electric Supply Company: Suez Energy

Electric Distribution Company: National Grid

Electric Rate Code: G3

Oil Company: Todd Oil

HVAC

(9) Air Handling Units (AHUs) serving all areas except perimeter classrooms, arranged in block sections;

each air handler has linked return fan.

Approximately (30) Unit Ventilators (UVs) serving perimeter classrooms, (1) per classroom

Heating (3) Cleaver Brooks oil boilers serve Hot Water (HW) loop:

(2) Model OB500X-200, each 8,369 MBH input, 10hp blower motor;

(1) Model CB500X-70, 2,929 MBH input, 2hp blower motor.

Limited baseboard Fin Tube Radiation (FTR) in Library and other areas

HW loop serves AHUs, UVs, FTR and Skating Rink AHUs:

(2) 30hp pumps, each 93.6% efficient, run alternately (AHUs)

(1) 10hp pump, 87.5% efficient (UVs, FTR),

(1) 7.5hp pump, 84% efficient (Skating Rink); common spare for UV/FTR and Skating Rink pumps.

Via AHUs, UVs, FTR


Patterson Kelley shell and tube Heat Exchanger (HX) provides Domestic Hot Water (DHW) from HW

loop, 1980 gal, installed in 1972.

Cooling (2) McQuay Air-Cooled Chillers (ACCs), each 155 tons, serve Chilled Water (CHW) loop to AHUs,

approximately 10 years old.

(2) 25hp pumps circulate CHW loop, each 90.2% efficient, run alternately with common spare.

Lighting T5 Fluorescent recently installed in gym. T12 in most areas of school, incandescent lighting in

mechanical rooms.

Building Automation System (BAS or EMS) Digital - pneumatic controls; Siemens system provides primitive controls for AHU fan operation and

VFDs. VFD control acts only as on/off switch as VFDs can only be run at 100% or off. No trends

currently set up.

Other Equipment Approximately 125 computers

175 kW diesel backup generator

(7) Vending machines

Full service kitchen, primarily propane fired

Schedules Occupancy Schedules are as follows:

• School hours: 7am to 4pm M – F

BAS Equipment Schedule:

• 5am – 4pm, staggered starts and stops by 10 min for different equipment


Skating Rink

Building Description

Skating rink attached to O’Maley middle school, also built in 1972, approximately 40,000 sqft. This rink

is used primarily for ice hockey with some figure skating use. This facility includes office space for rink

staff, locker rooms, and rink and spectator area. All areas other than the rink and spectator area are heated

by a HW loop from O’Maley School.

HVAC

(3) AHUs serve skating rink, locker rooms and offices. Typically only unit serving locker rooms and

offices is run.

Heating Via AHUs served by HW loop from O’Maley School

Approximately (2) electric cabinet heaters in mechanical room

Limited HW FTR near rink entrance and exits

Domestic HW tank, estimated 175 gallons, served by O’Maley School

Cooling (2) Chillers provide cooling to glycol loop, each 125hp reciprocating compressor motor, 94.5% efficient.

Typically only one chiller is needed to maintain ice temperature.

(2) 30hp centrifugal pumps circulate glycol loop.

Lighting Recent lighting upgrades to T5 fluorescent over ice. T12 fluorescent in locker rooms, mechanical rooms,

rink office and lower hallway. See Lighting Report for details.

Building Automation System (BAS or EMS) Honeywell DDC controls chiller loop at unit level. DCX unit controls rink equipment, however system is

malfunctioning and cannot be used for scheduling and setpoints.

Other Equipment Zamboni, equipped with 110 gal HW tank

(4) Vending machines

Schedules Occupancy Schedules are as follows:

• Operating hours: 5:30am – 12am, 7 days/week

• Ice is not constantly in use during day time, i.e. during school and work hours


Contacts

Customer’s Contacts Brian Tarr Assistant Superintendent 978-281-9801 [email protected]

David Anderson HVAC/Energy Manager 978-281-9807 [email protected]

Michael Tracy Principal 978-281-9850 [email protected]

J.D. MacEachern Rink Manager 978-281-9856 [email protected]

National Grid

Anita Hagspiel Principal Analyst/ Program Manager 781-907-1581 [email protected]

Denise Rouleau Rouleau Consulting 978-281-0623 [email protected]

NGRID’s TA Consultants

Richard Andelman B2Q Associates, Inc. 978-263-9395 [email protected] Joshua Doolittle B2Q Associates, Inc. 978-846-1994 [email protected]


Utility Data and Benchmarking The table below compares this building to a typical benchmark - EPA Portfolio Manager. Portfolio Manager is a Web-based tool supported

by the EPA which rates your building against similar buildings.

$/kWh $/gallon$0.14 $2.00

Building Type

EPA

Bldg

Type

Area

sqft

Occ

W/ft2

UnOcc

W/ft2

EPA

Rank

(1-100)

2007

Electric

$/sqft

2007 Fuel

$/sqft

Total

$/sqft

High School K-12 School 183,000 2.25 1.09 N/A $1.65 $0.73 $2.39

Norm. Site

Total kBtu

/sqft

2008 Site

National

Average

kBtu/sqft

% Diff

from

National

Average

kBtu/sqft

Norm.

Source

Total

kBtu

/sqft

2008

Source

National

Average

kBtu/sqft

% Diff

from

National

Average

kBtu/sqft2006 1,989,000 2,415,140 11

2007 2,158,000 9,412,620 9,377,709 12 51 91 75 22% 173 169 2%2008 1,379,000 9,769,060 8

Building Information

Site

Operating Costs / SqFtPerformance Ratings

Year

Norm.

Fuel

kBtu kWh/sqft

Norm.

Fuel kBtu

/sqft

Actual

Fuel

kBtu

Actual

Electric

kWh

Energy Use IndicesElectric and Fuel Use

Source

The terms in the table above are described on the next page.

Buildings can apply for an Energy Star Award when they receive a rank of 75 or above. This building cannot receive an EPA Rank because

the Skating Rink accounts for more than 10% of the total facility area (approximately 22%). Please note that many calculations are grayed

out for 2006 and 2008. This is because electric and oil data for these periods was not sufficient to provide accurate comparisons.


The following terms are used in the table above:

• Building type: The type of building being examined.

• EPA Building Type: EPA Portfolio Manager has a limited number of building types used for benchmarking one building against

another. The EPA building type indicates what type of building was chosen to compare this building against.

• Occ W/sqft: This is the occupied Watts per square foot (W/ft2), which is an indication of how much energy is being used while the

building is occupied on a typical day.

• Unocc W/sqft: This is the unoccupied Watts per square foot, which is an indication of how much energy is being used while the

building is unoccupied on a typical day. High levels of unoccupied W/ft2 indicate that equipment is running when there are few

people in the building, and may indicate the opportunity to shutoff equipment.

• EPA Rank: This is the rank of the building in EPA’s Portfolio Manager benchmarking tool. The scale is 1 to 100, with an average

building ranking a 50. Buildings can apply for an Energy Star Award when they receive a rank of 75 or above.

• Site and Source: Shown in the table above are the total annual electric and fuel use, and approximate costs per square foot based on

average electric and fuel rates. Site and Source benchmark indices are also shown. Site means how much energy is consumed at the

site, while Source means how much energy is consumed back at the power plants used to generate the energy, which is then

transmitted to the Site. The difference is in the conversion of kWh – for Site the conversion is 3.413 kBtu/kWh, while for Source it

is 10.3 kBtu/kWh.

• Site/Source National Avg. kBtu/sqft: The Site or Source energy intensity (energy use per square foot) this facility would consume if

it had an EPA Rank of 50.

• Actual Fuel kBtu: How much heating energy was used during the year, including gas, oil, propane, and other heating fuels.

Measured in kBtu, which is 1000 Btu’s, or 1/100 of a therm of natural gas.

• Norm. Fuel kBtu: The heating energy used during the year, normalized to 30 yr averages.

• kWh/sqft: The total electric energy use per year in kilowatt-hours divided by the gross square footage of the building.

• Norm Site Total kBtu/sqft: The total Site-based energy use of the building, including electricity use and normalized fuel use,

divided by the gross square footage of the building.

• Norm Source Total kBtu/sqft: The total Source-based energy use of the building, including electricity use and normalized fuel use,

divided by the gross square footage of the building.


Electric utility and oil delivery data for this facility are shown below:

Electric Use and Demand

Previous Year and Current Year-to-Date

050

100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

Electricity Use 2006 (kWh) 209,000 212,000 205,000 189,000 142,000 183,000 112,000 55,000 105,000 189,000 183,000 205,000

Electricity Use 2007 (kWh) 201,000 200,000 191,000 210,000 194,000 214,000 120,000 84,000 151,000 197,000 194,000 202,000

Electricity Use 2008 (kWh) 213,000 231,000 163,000 159,000 168,000 181,000 149,000 115,000 0 0 0 0

Electric Demand 2006 (kW) 540 520 540 510 500 610 580 330 500 560 530 540



Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

kW

kW

h

Oil Use Previous Years and Year-to-Date

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

Oil Use 2006 (gallons) 3,149 1,168 1,168 0 0 35 1,557 3,521 6,653

OIl Use 2007 (gallons) 15,287 14,332 9,767 6,225 640 0 0 0 0 562 6,923 13,497

Oil Use 2008 (gallons) 12,857 12,488 9,928 2,000 13,001 9,502 10,003

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Gallo

ns


Benchmarking Notes:

• Electricity use follows seasonal trends and is fairly consistent from year to year. Large reductions in use can be seen in the months

of July and August each year, as the school is mostly unoccupied and the skating rink is shut down. Electric demand is fairly

consistent except for a spike in July 2008; this might be due to skating rink and school chillers operating on a peak day, however it

may indicate an opportunity to shutdown or set back equipment.

• Oil use follows seasonal trends; actual use may differ because the tank may not be completely empty at the time of each delivery.


Electricity End-Use Reconciliation Estimate The chart below estimates the percentage of annual electricity use by each of the resources listed.

Lighting27%

Plug Loads, Misc equip,

Kitchen13%

HVAC Fans17%

HVAC Cooling

10%

Skating Rink Chillers

27%

Pumps6%


Energy Efficiency Measures for Further Study The energy efficiency measures (EEMs) recommended for further study are summarized on the next page. This is based on initial discussions

and observations, and each will require further detailed study of the systems to ensure that they are compatible with the technologies suggested.

Costs and savings estimates for each measure are shown as initial estimates, with further refinement needed through detailed study of the

facility. As the opportunities listed here are studied in more detail, additional opportunities may emerge.

These initial cost and savings estimates are expected to be within 15% of the final numbers, which will be determined after a detailed study of

the facility.

Important Note(s):

1. Since a “menu” of choices is supplied for this report, there is deliberately overlap in costs and savings estimates. This means that there

is overlap in the savings estimates if all measures were to be done together. It also means that there are likely economies of scale to be

realized by doing multiple projects, and that cost estimates could be lowered.

2. Additional recommendations and explanations are included in the text following the EEM table. Not all recommendations are included

in the EEM table because some measures may need more detailed study or are otherwise outside the scope of this preliminary study.

3. All electric and gas rebates included on the following table are estimates and actual incentives need to be confirmed with the utility.

4. All gas rebates are contingent upon the school becoming a National Grid gas customer.

5. Some measures included in the table represent different levels of the same type of measure and savings and cost calculations are

redundant. In these cases, all of the redundant measures are included in the table as line items, however only the measure with the most

savings is included in the total savings and costs line.


Energy Efficiency Measure Table

Total Cost $1,109,157

lbs of

Pollutants

Reduced

Equiv trees

planted

Equiv gallons

of gasoline

$0.14 $/kWh Total Savings $179,945 CO2 1,516,154 759 75,808

$1.50 $/therm Simple Payback 6.2 yrs SO2 2,939NOx

Reduction 1,586

Item

No.

Savings

Estimate

(kWh)

Equivalent

Therms

Savings

Savings

Estimate

($)

Cost

Estimate

($)

Potential

Electric

Incentive

($)

Potential Gas

Incentive

($)

Net Cost

($)

Simple

Payback

(yrs)

1

1a 6,250 0 $875 $500 $0 $0 $500 0.61b 35,553 1,883 $7,801 $1,500 $0 $0 $1,500 0.2

1c 8,000 0 $1,120 $1,800 $800 $0 $1,000 0.9

1d 21,580 941 $4,433 $1,500 $0 $0 $1,500 0.32 59,254 4,706 $15,355 $40,500 $28,057 $0 $12,443 0.8

3 13,038 1,883 $4,649 $25,000 $0 $1,883 $23,117 5.0

4 19,558 2,824 $6,974 $15,000 $0 $2,824 $12,176 1.75 81,292 0 $11,381 $43,123 $25,300 $0 $17,823 1.6

6 6,752 0 $945 $14,220 $945 $0 $13,275 14.07 -1,400 2,002 $2,807 $49,601 $0 $6,007 $43,595 15.58 207,820 -5,911 $20,229 $239,513 $167,659 $0 $71,854 3.6

9 0 18,908 $28,362 $639,860 $0 $12,802 $627,058 22.110 97,788 7,530 $24,985 $149,817 $37,050 $7,530 $105,237 4.211 570 1,997 $3,076 $10,000 $0 $1,997 $8,003 2.6

12 19,558 2,824 $6,974 $10,500 $0 $125 $10,375 1.5

13a 24,096 5,181 $11,145 $20,269 $14,189 $5,181 $900 0.113b 0 2,791 $4,186 $10,135 $0 $4,186 $5,949 1.4

14 208,353 0 $29,169 $263,312 $16,121 $0 $247,191 8.5

15 79,975 -4,704 $4,140 $110,000 $0 $0 $110,000 26.6

16 42,653 941 $7,383 $36,336 $25,435 $941 $9,960 1.317 32,339 0 $4,527 $8,382 $5,100 $0 $3,282 0.7

18 136,123 0 $19,057 $63,389 $34,803 $0 $28,586 1.519 2,000 2,689 $4,314 $12,900 $0 $2,689 $12,900 3.0

837,689 41,779 $179,945 $1,491,846 $339,338 $46,040 $1,109,157 6.2

39% -- 41%

Brine Chiller Replacement

Heat Exchanger Install

Elec Rate

Gas Rate

Low E Ceiling

BAS Upgrade

BAS Upgrade/Repair

Dehumidifier Install

Retro-Commissioning

Facility-wide Measures

EEM

Kitchen Hood Controls

No/Low Cost Measures

Schedules, Setpoints, O&MComputer Power Management

Vending Machine Controls

VSD HW, CHW Pumps

Insulation HW Pipe, Ducts

Lighting Upgrades

Education & Awareness

Airseal Building Envelope

% of Total Existing Amount

Total

Thermostat Upgrade

O'Maley School Measures

Premium MotorsSolar Hot Water

Boiler Upgrade

Skating Rink Measures

DCV Aud, LibDCV Gym

VSD Brine Pumps

Results Climate Impact TableUtility Rates

NOTE: Equivalent Therms Savings are shown instead of projected oil savings because the city is considering switching the

primary heating fuel to natural gas. Gas incentives are contingent upon the facility becoming a NGrid gas customer.


Additional Information on Energy Efficiency Measures

Facility-wide Measures

1. No/low cost measures: National Grid is providing guidance on a number of no and low

cost measures which can be implemented. Please review the Notebook provided by

National Grid. Reviewing these measures and educating personnel can provide

immediate energy savings and improve comfort throughout the buildings. In addition,

the following no/low cost measures are recommended:

a. Computer Power Management: Power Management features are standard in

Windows and Macintosh operating systems, and can place monitors and

computers into a low-power “sleep mode” after a period of inactivity. Touching

the mouse or keyboard “wakes” the computer and monitor almost instantly. There

are many ways to activate sleep features across entire networks of computers,

including free solutions that utilize open source software and/or tools that you

may already have at your disposal. Alternatively, a number of commercial

software packages offer more feature-rich solutions for a fee, and may deliver

more energy savings.

To maximize power savings, set computers to enter system standby or hibernate

after 30 minutes or less of inactivity, and set monitors to enter sleep mode after 15

minutes or less of inactivity. The lower the time settings, the more energy you

save. On laptops, be sure to activate these settings in the AC as well as DC

(battery) power profiles. See the Energy Star website for more information at: http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=power_mgt.pr_power_management

b. Schedule, Setpoints and O&M Measures: All spaces should have their schedules

and temperature setpoints for occupied and unoccupied periods reviewed and

tightened in the BAS. See Appendix A for more detailed information about

energy use patterns and electric loads.

Check all copiers, personal appliances, printers, etc. and ensure they are set to

power down to their standby or energy saving modes when not in use. There

appears to be a large number of personal appliances in the building which should

be shut off when not in use, and/or consolidated with central cafeteria equipment.

Create a preventative maintenance (PM) program, to systematically check and

manage the following items:

Adjust Belts

Clean Condenser Coils

Clean Evaporator Coils

Clean Filters

Check Refrigerant Charges

Maintain Condenser Fans and

Motors

Fix Refrigerant Leaks

Maintain Cabinet Integrity

Maintain Outside Air Dampers

Check Airflow

Maintain Fans

Seal Ducts


During our walkthrough we noticed some AHUs with loose belts, which can

decrease fan and motor efficiency. Incorporating a quality PM vendor will keep

equipment running smoothly and efficiently, and identify potential problems early

on.

c. Vending Machine Controls: These controls will power down the vending machine

(including lights and refrigeration) whenever there is no foot traffic in front of the

machine for a period of time. This is done through the use of a motion sensor.

The controls periodically power up the refrigeration system to maintain product

temperature and sense machine operation so that the machine is only powered

down when the compressor is not operating (in order to prevent adverse impacts

on compressor life)

d. Education and Awareness: This measure is geared towards teaching the students,

teachers, and staff about their impact on energy use and energy efficiency and is

more community focused than the other recommended measures. The school is a

people-driven facility, and educating the people who use it about energy

efficiency and raising their awareness about how they can individually make a

positive impact can go a long way towards reducing energy consumption.

National Grid can assist the school in implementing this measure.

Action Items:

• Utilize internal IT staff for Computer Power Management

• Utilize internal facilities staff for Schedule, Setpoints, and O&M

• Arrange for self-install of Vending Machine Controls

• Work with NGRID to create an Education and Awareness Program

2. Retrocommissioning (RCx): RCx is the process of systematically going through the

building to determine whether equipment is functioning correctly, and then

recommending and implementing no or low cost measures to improve energy efficiency

and reduce maintenance costs. During the site visit, we sampled equipment and found

that, in general, there is opportunity for adjusting equipment operations and improving

energy efficiency. Below is a list of items which can be addressed, many at no or low

cost.

a. The Variable Speed Drives (VSDs) installed on all large fans are only serving to

function as an on/off control and only reduce speed during night setback periods.

These drives are not being utilized to their full capability, as it appears that the

current BAS is not set up to ramp the drives up and down between 50 to 100%

capacity as needed. While this is an improvement from the previous condition of

equipment operating 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, there is still a lot of room to

increase the effectiveness of the drives through improved controls. See BAS

Upgrade section in the O’Maley School measures below for more details on VSD

control improvements.

b. All spaces in the building need to have their schedules and temperature setpoints

reviewed, to tighten the occupied and unoccupied periods and setpoints.

Examples are mentioned below:


i. In general, O’Maley equipment scheduled occupied times are from 5am to

4pm, however some spaces are not regularly used for the entire operation

periods and schedules for equipment serving those areas may be adjusted

to minimize energy use. Good candidates for evaluation are the gyms,

cafeteria and the auditorium.

ii. We noticed that the HW temperature for AC-1 was 110°F. This is low for

HW systems and may indicate a broken or mis-calibrated temperature

sensor or may be a result of a poorly insulated HW loop.

iii. During the summer, it was noted that all interior AHU VSDs were

operating at 60% capacity. The fans in many of these areas may be turned

completely off if they are not in use during the summer. If they must be

used, the VSDs should be run at minimum speed.

c. Optimal start/stop is an algorithm which optimizes the start and stop time of

equipment, so that units are automatically turned on to bring space temperatures

to their setpoints only at the time needed, rather than starting or stopping on a

fixed schedule. Optimal start/stop strategies should be implemented into the

Building Automation System (BAS).

d. As part of the RCx process, building facility staff should be trained on the use of

the Building Automation system to utilize the system to its maximum potential.

This is extremely important, as it will help staff monitor and diagnose equipment,

as well as optimize the runtime of equipment and the overall energy use of the

building.

e. One immediate RCx measure is to perform a walk-through during unoccupied

periods to audit equipment which is operating even though it should be turned off

during these periods.

f. Upgrade BAS software to the latest version. Up to date software adds advanced

control strategies such as optimal start/stop, seven day scheduling, water loop

temperature reset, reliable economizing based on enthalpy calculations, etc. New

software is also Web-based and accessible via an Internet Browser by anyone

authorized. This allows facility managers to easily check on systems or make

changes from remote locations if alarms (problems) are generated and sent to their

cell phones. A software update would greatly help with existing scheduling

issues, saving energy. Refer to EPO data in Appendix A for more details.

g. Take advantage of “trending” BAS points over time to view how equipment

behaves over several weeks. Often examining a point (temperature, humidity,

etc) requires seeing how that information behaves over a period of time. By

setting up trends on all the equipment in the building, at any point in time facility

staff can review how that equipment has been behaving over the past several

weeks, and determine if there is a problem. No trends are currently set up.

Action Items:

• Arrange for EMS/HVAC specialist to review the existing control system


• Incentives for RCx Studies are available from National Grid. Determine if

these incentives apply.

3. Insulation of HW, CHW Pipe and Supply Air Ducts: This measure is to replace, repair

and install insulation on sections of pipe and duct where insulation has been damaged or

removed. Insulation is designed to create a heat transfer-resistant barrier between the pipe

or duct and the air in the spaces they run through, to minimize heat gains and losses.

Uninsulated or badly insulated pipes and ducts can significantly increase heating and

cooling loads, causing equipment to use more electricity and fuel to heat or cool the

building. During our walkthrough we noticed several areas where insulation was

damaged or removed from pipes, most notably in the hallway connecting the school and

skating rink. In addition, there are several supply air ducts in mechanical rooms with

damaged or no insulation.

Action Items:

• Arrange for insulation vendor to review insulated systems

4. Weatherize Building Envelope: This measure is to increase the heat retention of all

spaces in the facility by improving door and window seals, and eliminating air leakage.

Typical weatherization measures include caulking gaps and joints, weather-stripping

outside doors and access panels, and air-sealing air handling units and ducts. During our

walkthrough we noticed several spaces with air leakage problems, including half-open

entrance doors in the skating rink and poorly sealed exterior doors.

Action Items:

• Arrange for weatherization specialist to review building envelope

5. VSD on HW, CHW, and DHW pumps: This measure is to add variable speed drives

(VSDs) to the pumps which serve the heating and cooling loops for the school and

skating rink. These VSDs modulate the speed of the motor to meet variations in building

loads. Just as a car is not driven at maximum speed on the roadways at all times, there is

no reason to run a pump at full speed at all times. It should speed up and slow down to

meet the needs of the building. There is a big potential for energy savings by

incorporating VSDs into pumping systems due to the cubic relationship between motor

speed and electrical power used; a small reduction in speed can create significant energy

savings.

Action Items:

• Arrange for VSD specialist to install

6. Premium motors on pumps: This measure is to replace the existing HW, CHW, and

DHW pumps serving the school and skating rink with new, premium efficiency motors.

This measure is to both increase efficiency and to use motors that will allow the variable

speed drives to work with the system.

Action Items:

• Arrange for contractor to install


7. Solar Hot Water: This measure is to install solar hot water collectors to heat water for

domestic and zamboni use. This renewable technology reduces the cost of fossil fuels

required for domestic hot water use by offsetting a portion of the heating load. Reducing

the amount of fossil fuel being burned would also reduce the greenhouse gases that are

released into the atmosphere.

The array of solar collectors could either be situated on a building roof or in a nearby

field with adequate year-round sunlight. The solar collectors would heat a mixture of

glycol and water for freeze protection, which would be pumped through a heat exchanger

to transfer the heat from the glycol loop to the domestic and/or zamboni hot water

system. This hot water can then be stored in an insulated tank for night-time use as well.

Note that a more detailed study would be required to determine the feasibility of this

measure, and to complete the design and engineering required. In addition, the estimated

payback shown in the EEM Table above does not include the savings from changing

heating systems from oil to natural gas; additional savings from this fuel switch would

apply to the solar HW system and reduce the payback to approximately 5 years.

Note: Savings from this measure may overlap with a Heat Exchanger Install.

Action Items:

• Arrange for solar HW specialist to design system

8. Lighting Upgrades: National Grid offers incentives for upgrading existing lighting to

more efficient lighting fixtures. In addition, there are a number of lighting control

strategies that can be used to reduce energy consumption. We recommend the following

upgrades and control strategies for further investigation:

a. Lighting Occupancy Sensors: Occupancy sensors can reduce unnecessary energy

use by performing the duties of turning lights in an area on and off when they

sense someone entering or leaving an area. Areas that are good candidates for

occupancy sensors are those that are used infrequently or unpredictably, such as

classrooms, private offices, conference rooms, storage rooms, and bathrooms. The

school has several of these types of areas, most notably the cafeteria, classrooms,

gym, and corridors.

b. Daylight Dimming Sensors: Dimming sensors measure the amount of natural light

reaching a space, and use dimming ballasts to reduce or increase the amount of

light accordingly. By reducing the light levels when there is adequate natural

light in some areas, electrical and cooling energy can be reduced. Areas that have

a lot of natural light such as the library are good candidates for dimming sensors.

Action Items:

• See Lighting Report

• Arrange for lighting controls specialist to review lighting systems


O’Maley School Measures

9. Boiler Upgrade: This measure is a capital replacement of existing oil boilers. These

boilers have been in use for over 35 years, and the efficiency of these boilers may be 75%

or less. New high efficiency gas boilers can have efficiencies up to 93%. Switching to

natural gas would require significantly less heating fuel than the current boilers use. The

energy savings alone may not justify this measure, however, the typical effective

economic life of a boiler is considered to be around 20 years. Replacing these units may

also decrease costs associated with maintaining old equipment.

Action Items:


10. BAS System Upgrade: This measure is to upgrade and expand or replace the existing

BAS for the school. The current BAS has limited control capabilities and almost no

control strategies. This building has a considerable amount of large equipment, and

energy use could be significantly reduced by adding sensors and better control strategies

to this equipment. Existing VSDs installed on the large AHUs cannot be used to their

full potential because sensors, control boards, and control algorithms are not installed;

existing boilers and pumps are controlled by the original pneumatic system that uses only

a simple manual timeclock.

Installing a complete BAS with equipment controls will enable advanced control

algorithms to be implemented as well as better “trending” by creating more monitored

BAS points (BAS points are sensors networked with the BAS, see RCx sub-section above

for more information on trending).

Up to date software adds advanced control strategies such as optimal start/stop, seven day

scheduling, water loop temperature reset, reliable economizing based on enthalpy

calculations, etc. New software is also Web-based and accessible via an Internet Browser

by anyone authorized. This allows facility managers to easily check on systems or make

changes from remote locations if alarms (problems) are generated and sent to their cell

phones. A software update would greatly help with existing scheduling issues, saving

significant energy. Refer to EPO data in Appendix A for more details.

Note: A BAS Software Upgrade can also be incorporated as part of an RCx project, and

savings calculations may overlap between the two measures.

Action Items:

• Arrange for EMS/HVAC specialist to review the existing control system

11. Kitchen hood controls: Add controls, variable speed drives, and smoke sensors to

kitchen hoods and kitchen make up air systems to reduce runtime and conditioning of

outside air. Kitchen hoods can be overlooked and left running for long periods of time,

often when the kitchen is in use but the specific piece of cooking equipment they serve is

not. When this occurs, conditioned air is exhausted outside and must be constantly

replaced with more conditioned air from outside, wasting energy. Kitchen hood controls

can reduce the energy used to constantly condition outside air by cutting down on

unnecessary hood exhaust runtimes. One possible product to use is Melink hood fan

controls.


Action Items:

• Arrange for Kitchen Hood specialist to install

12. Thermostat Upgrade: This measure is to replace existing thermostats in spaces served by

UVs with new thermostats. Currently, each UV is controlled by a thermostat located in

the space it serves, with only a simple temperature dial that must be manually set back at

night and on weekends. New thermostats would be digital and include built in

night/weekend temperature setback controls that lower temperature setpoints during

unoccupied periods and raise setpoints back up during occupied periods. These controls

reduce the unnecessary energy use during times when there are no occupants. In

addition, new thermostats can be readily incorporated into a BAS for global control.

Action Items:


13. Demand-controlled ventilation (DCV) in the Gym, Auditorium, and Library: DCV is a

control strategy that adjusts the quantity of outdoor ventilation air supplied to a zone

based on the number of occupants and the ventilation rate required to provide adequate

indoor air quality. Designers often design HVAC systems for the maximum number of

occupants in a space, however these spaces are rarely used to full capacity. For areas

with highly fluctuating occupancy characteristics, a significant amount of heating and

cooling energy can be saved by applying the right amount of ventilation air to satisfy the

ventilation requirements. Typically CO2 sensors are used to indicate the occupancy

levels, and the amount of ventilation air required.

Action Items:

• Arrange for DCV specialist to install


Skating Rink Measures

14. Brine Chiller Replacement: The existing brine chiller serving the ice rink is old and can

be replaced with a newer, more efficient model. A replacement chiller would utilize

modern Turbocore chiller technology with increased compressor efficiency, significantly

reducing the annual energy used by the rink refrigeration system. A new chiller would be

compatible with modern controls and could be readily incorporated into a BAS. The air-

cooled condensing unit would be replaced with a water-cooled heat rejection system for

increased efficiency. This should be implemented as part of a planned capital

replacement of the system.

Action Items:


15. Dehumidifier Install: This measure is to install a gas-fired desiccant based dehumidifier

to serve the rink. Currently, there is no functional dehumidifier, so facility staff cannot

regulate humidity levels in the rink. High humidity levels in the swing seasons cause

condensation to form on the rafters and drip on the ice, requiring an extensive effort by

facilities staff to maintain the ice surface and causing structural steel to rust and wood to

rot. High humidity levels can also cause fog to occur over the ice surface, which can be

dangerous. A new dehumidifier would eliminate ice fog and condensation drips, be

energy efficient, and could be easily controlled by a BAS and run only when necessary.

Maintaining proper humidity levels can also reduce energy used by the chillers because

condensation causes an added heat load due to latent heat as the water changes from a

vapor to a liquid.

Action Items:

• Arrange for dehumidification specialist to review existing HVAC systems

16. BAS Repair/Replacement: The current BAS serving the skating rink does not function

correctly, and is out of date. Repairing or replacing the BAS would enable equipment

scheduling and allow facilities staff to better monitor the ice and heating systems. An up

to date BAS could incorporate advanced ice management strategies such as ice

temperature reset, which adjusts the glycol loop temperature based on the temperature of

the ice surface. This can reduce energy use by lowering the load on the chillers when

conditions permit. This also can enable facilities staff to maintain the desired ice surface

temperature more consistently.

Action Items:

• Arrange for HVAC/EMS specialist to review existing control systems

17. VSD on Brine Pumps: This measure is to add variable speed drives to the pumps which

serve the brine ice refrigeration loop. This is very similar to adding VSDs to heating and

cooling pumps, modulating the speed of the motor to meet variations in ice refrigeration

loads. The VSDs could be easily controlled by a new BAS, or they could be controlled

independently based on ice surface temperature. A more detailed study would be

required to determine the feasibility of this measure and to complete the engineering and

controls design required.


Action Items:

• Arrange for VSD specialist to install

18. Low E Ceiling: This measure is to install Low E panels on the ceiling over the rink. The

‘E’ stands for emissivity, which is a factor of how much energy is given off in the form

of radiation by an object. Over 25% of the heat load on the ice can be due to energy

radiated to the ice surface by the ceiling. Installing a Low E ceiling can create energy

savings by reducing the heat radiated from the ceiling to the ice, lowering the load on the

chillers. Low E ceilings can also reduce condensation simply by creating a barrier

between the space and the roof, limiting the temperature differences that cause

condensation.

Action Items:

• Arrange for Ice Rink Ceiling specialist to install

19. Heat Exchanger (HX) Install: This measure is to install an HX on the Condensed Water

(CW) line from the chillers to heat water for the zamboni and for domestic use. A

properly sized HX would eliminate the need to draw hot water from the O’Maley school.

The zamboni requires large quantities of hot water to maintain the ice, and installing an

HX would turn waste heat from the chillers into a practical energy source for water

heating, reducing energy used by the boilers and HW system in the O’Maley school.

Currently, the use of hot water by the ice rink is limited to certain hours of the day and

creating an on-site source of hot water would eliminate this restriction.

Note: Savings from this measure may overlap with a Solar Hot Water Install.

Action Items:

• Arrange for HVAC engineer to design


Recommendations Not Included in Summary Table: 1. Replace Unit Ventilators in classroom: replace older unit ventilators in the classrooms

with new units. Several of the units appear to be more than 35 yrs old and are in need of

replacement. This should be done as part of a planned capital replacement of the units.

2. “Green” your building by enrolling in the LEED EB O&M rating system: A sustainable

building maximizes operational efficiency while minimizing environmental impacts. As a

cutting-edge, consensus-based system for certifying green building performance,

operations and maintenance, the LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations &

Maintenance (O&M) Rating System provides a road map for property managers,

portfolio owners and service providers who wish to drive down operating costs while

increasing occupants’ productivity in an environmentally responsible manner.

The LEED for Existing Buildings: O&M Rating System is a set of voluntary performance

standards for the sustainable ongoing operation of buildings. It provides sustainability

guidelines for building operations, periodic upgrades of building systems, minor space-

use changes, and building processes. It is intended to provide existing buildings an entry

point into the LEED certification process.

LEED for Existing Buildings: O&M certification is based on actual building operating

performance, not design expectations. The certification application must provide data

demonstrating that the building’s operations meet the LEED for Existing Buildings:

O&M prerequisites and attempted credits. The performance of the entire building must

be included in measurements and calculations; tenant spaces may not be excluded.

LEED for Existing Buildings: O&M addresses building exterior and site maintenance

programs, efficient and optimized use of energy and water, the purchase of

environmentally preferred products and food, waste stream management and ongoing

indoor environmental quality. In addition, LEED for Existing Buildings: O&M provides

sustainability guidelines for whole-building cleaning and maintenance, recycling

programs and systems upgrades to improve building energy performance, water

consumption, indoor environmental quality and materials use.

Action Items:

• Contact B2Q for more information on improving sustainability and

certifying your building through the USGBC LEED EB O&M process

• See www.usgbc.org for more information.


Next Steps • Immediately implement no/low cost measures

• Determine objectives and level of interest to proceed with detailed study

• Contact National Grid to review opportunities and begin detailed audit of opportunities.

B2Q is available to assist with implementing any selected measures.

• Detailed report reviewed

• Implementation of recommended measures

Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Richard Andelman, PE, CEM, CBCP

Joshua Doolittle


Appendix A – Energy Use Patterns

A summary of the annual electricity demand and consumption is shown in the table below, and

in more detail on the following page. This information is from account 8846705000, and

represents a period of 304 days from January 1 – October 31, 2008. A ten-month period is used

in this case because data for the entire year was not available at the time of this assessment.

Total Energy Usage ( kWh) 1,750,973

Total Weekday Energy Usage ( kWh) 1,357,635

Total Weekend Energy Usage ( kWh) 393,339

Weekday Maximum Demand ( kW) 716

Weekend Maximum Demand ( kW) 374

Total Energy ( kWh) 1,750,973

Energy Usage Table 2007 - 2008

The weekend energy use is approximately 22% of the total energy use, which is typical of a

school. The maximum weekend demand is approximately 52% of the peak demand for this

meter. This indicates that high power equipment may be used on the weekend, and although

there may be good reason for this use, such as sporting events, there may be an opportunity to

turn off or set back this equipment.


The 2D demand graph that follows is a graphical representation of when peak periods are

occurring at the facility. The X-axis shows the day of the year, and the Y-axis shows the hour of

the day. The colors of the graph indicate the range of electricity demand (kW), with each

corresponding range identified by the legend at the top of the graph. Similar to a topographical

map, each band can be thought of as a “contour line” of electricity demand. The dark bands in

the graph depict times when the demand is equal to or less than the lower end of the kW scale.

1/1

/2008

1/1

0/2

008

1/1

9/2

008

1/2

8/2

008

2/6

/2008

2/1

5/2

008

2/2

4/2

008

3/4

/2008

3/1

3/2

008

3/2

2/2

008

3/3

1/2

008

4/9

/2008

4/1

8/2

008

4/2

7/2

008

5/6

/2008

5/1

5/2

008

5/2

4/2

008

6/2

/2008

6/1

1/2

008

6/2

0/2

008

6/2

9/2

008

7/8

/2008

7/1

7/2

008

7/2

6/2

008

8/4

/2008

8/1

3/2

008

8/2

2/2

008

8/3

1/2

008

9/9

/2008

9/1

8/2

008

9/2

7/2

008

10/6

/2008

10/1

5/2

008

10/2

4/2

008

11/2

/2008

0:15

2:30

4:45

7:00

9:15

11:30

13:45

16:00

18:15

20:30

22:45

O'Maley School 2D Map

January - October 2008

0-90 90-180 180-270 270-360 360-450 450-540 540-630 630-720

kW

Occupied and unoccupied hours can be distinguished by the contrasts seen from 5 – 7am and

from 2 – 4pm. The staggered start up and shut down times of equipment can be seen from the

increasing and decreasing demand during these periods, indicated by the changing color bands.

Demand is typically 270kW and higher at night during the winter months, approximately 38% of

the annual peak demand. This indicates that although some equipment is scheduled off at night

there may be additional opportunities to shut off or set back equipment. Upgrading the BAS

would provide much more control for facilities staff over building equipment by improving

scheduling, creating building-wide night and weekend temperature setback rules, as well as

advanced equipment control algorithms. See the ‘Additional Information on Energy Efficiency

Measures - RCx’ section for details on BAS controls.


The graph below shows the following:

• Green – peak annual energy demand.

• Red – average annual weekday demand.

• Blue – average annual weekend demand.

• Pink – demand on Tuesday, 9/9/2008 for comparison. It can be seen that demand is

almost as high on this day as on the annual peak day. In addition, the graph shows that

this day and the annual peak day have a far higher demand than the average weekday. If

a complete BAS were installed, it would be possible to minimize demand on peak days

such as these using demand limiting BAS control algorithms.

Profile for Account "8846705000 CITY OF GLOUCESTER S"

including 09/09/2008

Selected Date Range Tuesday, January 01, 2008 Through Friday, October 31, 2008


The load duration curve is a plot of the percentage of time that this building’s load is at various

demand levels. For example, on a downward sloping curve, the demand at a 10% level would

indicate that the demand is at or above that level for 10% of the time. A curve with a steep

section at the beginning, such as this one, would be indicative of a load profile that spends very

little time at high or full load, and a flat curve would indicate that there is very little variation in

load over time. This plot is useful in identifying the potential for peak demand reduction.

We plotted this curve for period of 10 months, as described in the Energy Use Table above. The

data from this curve shows that the load at the school is below approximately 260kW for

approximately 95% of the time.

It appears that there is a significant opportunity for peak demand reduction, as evidenced by the

difference between the peak of over 700kW and the 95% load of approximately 410kW. This is

a very steep load duration curve and it would be possible to shed load using demand limiting

control strategies available with a BAS upgrade.


Appendix B – Statement of Energy Performance

OMB No. 2060-0347

STATEMENT OF ENERGY PERFORMANCEGloucester O'Maley School and Rink

Building ID: 1534404 For 12-month Period Ending: March 31, 20081

Date SEP becomes ineligible: N/A Date SEP Generated: January 28, 2009

FacilityGloucester O'Maley School and Rink30-32 Cherry StreetGloiucester, MA 01930

Facility OwnerN/A

Primary Contact for this FacilityN/A

Year Built: 1972Gross Floor Area (ft2): 183,000

Energy Performance Rating2 (1-100) N/A

Site Energy Use Summary3

Electricity (kBtu) 7,414,276 Fuel Oil (No. 2) (kBtu) 8,836,787 Natural Gas (kBtu)4 0 Total Energy (kBtu) 16,251,063

Energy Intensity5 Site (kBtu/ft2/yr) 89 Source (kBtu/ft2/yr) 184 Emissions (based on site energy use) Greenhouse Gas Emissions (MtCO2e/year) 1,534 Electric Distribution Utility Massachusetts Electric Co National Average Comparison National Average Site EUI 75 National Average Source EUI 169 % Difference from National Average Source EUI 9% Building Type K-12

School

Stamp of Certifying Professional

Based on the conditions observed at thetime of my visit to this building, I certify that

the information contained within thisstatement is accurate.

Meets Industry Standards6 for Indoor EnvironmentalConditions:Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality N/A Acceptable Thermal Environmental Conditions N/A Adequate Illumination N/A

Certifying ProfessionalN/A

Notes: 1. Application for the ENERGY STAR must be submitted to EPA within 4 months of the Period Ending date. Award of the ENERGY STAR is not final until approval is received from EPA.2. The EPA Energy Performance Rating is based on total source energy. A rating of 75 is the minimum to be eligible for the ENERGY STAR.3. Values represent energy consumption, annualized to a 12-month period.4. Natural Gas values in units of volume (e.g. cubic feet) are converted to kBtu with adjustments made for elevation based on Facility zip code.5. Values represent energy intensity, annualized to a 12-month period.6. Based on Meeting ASHRAE Standard 62 for ventilation for acceptable indoor air quality, ASHRAE Standard 55 for thermal comfort, and IESNA Lighting Handbook for lighting quality.

The government estimates the average time needed to fill out this form is 6 hours (includes the time for entering energy data, PE facility inspection, and notarizing the SEP) and welcomessuggestions for reducing this level of effort. Send comments (referencing OMB control number) to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S., EPA (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW,Washington, D.C. 20460.

EPA Form 5900-16

FOR YOUR RECORDS ONLY. DO NOT SUBMIT TO EPA.

Please keep this Facility Summary for your own records; do not submit it to EPA. Only the Statement of Energy Performance(SEP), Data Checklist and Letter of Agreement need to be submitted to EPA when applying for the ENERGY STAR.

FacilityGloucester O'Maley School and Rink30-32 Cherry StreetGloiucester, MA 01930

Facility OwnerN/A

Primary Contact for this FacilityN/A

General InformationGloucester O'Maley School and Rink

Gross Floor Area Excluding Parking: (ft2) 183,000 Year Built 1972 For 12-month Evaluation Period Ending Date: March 31, 2008

Facility Space Use SummaryO'Maley Middle School & Rink

Space Type K-12 School

Gross Floor Area(ft2) 143,000

Number of Students 800

Number of PCs 125

Weekly operating hours 45

Cooking Facility Yes

Percent Cooled 30

Percent Heated 100

Months 10

School Districto N/A

Ventilated Yes

O'Maley Rink

Space TypeOther -

Recreation

Gross Floor Area(ft2) 40,000

Number of PCso N/A

Weekly operating hourso 119

Workers on Main Shifto N/A

Energy Performance ComparisonEvaluation Periods Comparisons

Performance Metrics Current(Ending Date 03/31/2008)

Baseline(Ending Date 07/31/2007) Rating of 75 Target National Average

Energy Performance Rating N/A N/A 75 N/A N/A

Energy Intensity

Site (kBtu/ft2) 89 85 44 N/A 75

Source (kBtu/ft2) 184 182 92 N/A 169

Energy Cost

$/year $ 165,550.78 $ 109,194.36 $ 82,794.03 N/A $ 139,823.29

$/ft2/year $ 0.90 $ 0.60 $ 0.45 N/A $ 0.76

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

MtCO2e/year 1,534 1,485 767 N/A 1,296

kgCO2e/ft2/year 8 8 4 N/A 7

More than 50% of your building is defined as K-12 School. This building is currently ineligible for a rating. Please note the National Average column represents theCBECS national average data for K-12 School. This building uses X% less energy per square foot than the CBECS national average for K-12 School. Notes:o - This attribute is optional.d - A default value has been supplied by Portfolio Manager.


Appendix C – Images

O’Maley School

Uninsulated HW pipes, HW pumps, pneumatic system time clock, auditorium, large gym, AHU with VSD


Skating Rink

Rink area, entry doors not completely closed, malfunctioning DCX controller, old HX connection, glycol loop circulation pumps, chiller

Revised 12/14/2010


Exhibit 2

Table 3 from Green Communities Designation Application

Measure by Facility Total Savings

(kwh)

Total Savings

Therms

Savings Estimate

(S)

Total Savings

mmbtu)

Source of Energy

Savings Estimate

Cost Estimate National Grid

($ 2009 data)

Net Cost to

City ($)

Payback

(years)

Implementation Year

(FY)

City Hall Post 5 Year Plan

Sawyer Freet Library 0 Post 5 Year Plan

Senior Center 0 Post 5 Year Plan

Fire Department 0 Post 5 Year Plan

Police Department 0

Total 0 0 0 0 0 0

School Operational Conservation

Measures

Estimated Annual Savings over

Baseline

10190 School

Department (a) FY 2009‐2014

High School

BAS Upgrade 80,307 14855 $32,843 1760 Audit (a) $74,994 $71,244 $3,750 0.1FY 2014

Lighting Upgrades 335336 53538 1144 EMC Proposal

(c)

$299,739 $109,875 $189,864

FY 2011‐2013

No/Lo Cost Schedule setpoints, O&M 16,061 900 $3,796 145 Audit (a) $1,000 $0 $1,000 0.3 Post 5 Year Plan

Vending Machine Controls 5,600 0 $840 19 Audit (a) $1,260 $350 $910 1.1 Post 5 Year Plan

Spray Faucet 0 480 $672 48 Audit (a) $80 $80 $0 0 Post 5 Year Plan

Education and Awareness 17,324 990 $3,985 158 Audit (a) $1,000 $0 $1,000 0.3 Post 5 Year Plan

Walk in Weather Strips 2,250 0 $338 8 Audit (a) $500 $0 $500 1.5 Post 5 Year Plan

Var. Speed Drives/ Pump Motor Retro. 51,169 0 $7,675 175 Audit (a) $26,623 $11,935 $14,688 1.9

Post 5 Year Plan

Demand Controlled Ventilation Auditorium, Lecture Hall, Library 20,362 6338 $11,927 703 Audit (a) $24,480 $23,256 $1,224 0.1

Post 5 Year Plan

Gym 0 3161 $4,426 316 Audit (a) $8,160 $4,080 $4,080 0.9 Post 5 Year Plan

Retro Commiss. 53,538 9903 $21,895 1173 Audit (a) $39,200 $17,640 $21,560 1Post 5 Year Plan

Weatherize Bldg Envelope 5,354 990 $2,190 117 Audit (a) $5,000 $2,500 $2,500 1.1 Post 5 Year Plan

Kitchen Hood Controls 396 1215 $1,760 123 Audit (a) $10,000 $3,645 $6,355 3 Post 5 Year Plan

High Efficiecny Air Filters 2,601 0 $715 9 Audit (a) $0 $0 $0 0 Post 5 Year Plan

Insulation Hot Water Piping 0 201 $292 20 Audit (a) $650 $225 $425 1.5 Post 5 Year Plan

Total High School 5 Year Savings 415,643 14,855 $86,381 2,904 $374,733 $181,119 $193,614

Total High School 5 Years + 0 174,655 24,178 $60,511 $3,014 $117,953 $63,711 $54,242

(a). Estimate of annual operational savings based on average energy savings realized since the School Department began participating in Energy Education, Inc. in April of 2005.

(b). High School (July 2009 ) and O'Maley School (May 2009) Whole Building Program Audits prepared by B2Q

(c). Energy Management Consultants Proposal For High School Lighting Analysis, September, 2010

TABLE 3

Energy Conservation Opportunities and Five Year Energy Reduction Plan

AUDITS PENDING


(kwh)

Total Savings

Therms

Savings Estimate

(S)

Total Savings

mmbtu)

Source of Energy

Savings Estimate


($ 2009 data)

Net Cost to

City ($)

Payback Implementation

Year

Middle School (Complex)

Retro Commissioning 59,254 4706 $15,355 673 Audit (a) $40,500 $28,067 $12,433 .0.8 FY2012

Air Seal Building Envelope 19,558 2824 $6,974 349 Audit (a) $15,000 $2,824 $12,176 1.7 FY2011

Lighting Upgrades 207,820 (5,911) $20,229 118 Audit (a) $239,513 $167,659 $71,854 3.6 FY2010

No/Lo Cost Computer Power Management 6,250 0 $875 21 Audit (a) $500 $0 $500 0.6Post 5 Year Plan

Schedule setpoints, O&M 35,563 1883 $7,801 310 Audit (a) $1,500 0 $1,500 0.3Post 5 Year Plan

Vending Machine Controls 8,000 0 $1,120 27 Audit (a) $1,800 $800 $1,000 0.9 Post 5 Year Plan

Insulate Hot Water Pipes&Ducts 13,038 1883 $4,649 233 Audit (a) $25,000 $1,883 $23,117 5Post 5 Year Plan

VSD, HW CHW Pumps 81,292 0 $11,381 277 Audit (a) $43,123 $25,300 $17,823 1.6Post 5 Year Plan

Premium Motors 6,752 0 $945 23 Audit (a) $14,220 $945 $13,275 14Post 5 Year Plan

Solar Hot Water (1,400) 2002 $2,807 195 Audit (a) $49,601 $6,007 $43,594 15/5Post 5 Year Plan

O”Maley (School Bldg) Boiler Upgrade 0 18908 $28,362 1891 Audit (a) $639,860 $12,802 $627,058 22.1 Post 5 Year Plan

BAS Upgrade 97,788 7530 $24,985 1087 Audit (a) $149,817 $44,580 $105,237 4.2 FY2014

Kitchen Hood Controls 570 1997 $3,076 202 Audit (a) $10,000 $1,997 $8,003 2.6 FY2012

Thermostat Upgrade 19,588 2824 $6,974 349 Audit (a) $10,500 $125 $10,375 1.5 FY2012

DOV Aud. Lab 24,096 5181 $11,145 600 Audit (a) $20,269 $19,370 $899 0.1 FY2012

DOV Gym 0 2791 $4,186 279 Audit (a) $10,135 $4,186 $5,949 1.4 FY2012

O'Maley Rink Brine Chiller Replacement 208,353 0 $29,169 711 Audit (a) $263,312 $16,121 $247,191 8.5

Dehumidifier Install 79,975 (4,704) $4,140 ‐198 Audit (a) $110,000 $0 $110,000 26.6

BAS Upgrdde/Repair 42,663 941 $7,383 240 Audit (a) $36,336 $26,376 $9,960 1.3

VSD Brine Pumps 32,339 0 $4,527 110 Audit (a) $8,382 $5,100 $3,282 0.7

Low E Ceiling 136,123 0 $19,057 464 Audit (a) $63,389 $34,803 $28,586 1.5

Heat Exhanger Install 2000 2689 $4,314 276 Audit (a) $12,900 $2,689 $10,211 3

Total Middle School 5 Year Savings 428,674 40,850 $121,286 5,548 $1,135,594 $281,610 $853,984

Total Savings Middle School Complex

5 years +

792,990 43925 $176,896 7098 $1,470,644 $203,084 $1,267,560

TABLE 3 (continued)

Energy Conservation Opportunities Identified Through Energy Audits (continued)


(kwh)

Total Savings

Therms

Savings Estimate

(S)

Total Savings

mmbtu)

Source of Energy

Savings Estimate


($ 2009 data)

Net Cost to

City ($)

Payback Implementation

Year

Beeman Replace Boiler 34,293 117 Manufacturer$94,995 FY2011

East Gloucester Replace Boiler 34,293 117 Manufacturer$94,995

$94,995FY 2010

Plum TBD

Veterans TBD

West Parish TBD

Total Elementary Schools 5 Year Plan 68586 0 234 $189,990 $189,990

Total All Facilities 5 Year Plan 912,903 55,705 $207,667 18,875 $1,700,317 $462,729 $1,237,588

Total All Facilities 5 years +

1,036,231 68,103 $237,407 20,536 $1,778,587 $266,795 $1,511,792

The City's 20% Energy Reduction Goal is 16,398.5 MMbtu's. The City’s current energy use is 81,992.68 MMbtu’s. A 20% reduction in that use is equivalent to 16,398.5 MMbtu’s which would reduce energy consumption to 65,594.14 MMbtu’s over

the five year period ending in FY 2014.

TABLE 3 (continued)

Facility Cost Cost/FY

FY2010 East Gloucester

Boiler $94,955

Total FY 2010 $94,955

FY2011 Middle School

Air Seal Building Env. $15,000

High School

Lighting Phase 1 $99,913

Beeman School

Boiler $94,955

Total FY 2011 $209,868

FY 2012 Middle School

Retro Commission $40,500

Kitchen Hood Controls $10,000

Thermostat Upgrade $10,500

DOV Aud. Lab $20,269

DOV Gym $10,135

High School


Total FY 2012 $191,317

FY2013 High School


High School

BAS Upgrade $74,994

Total FY 2013 $174,907

FY2014 Middle School

BAS Upgrade $149,817

High School

BAS Upgrade $74,994

Total FY 2014 $224,811

Breakdown by FY

Revised 12/14/2010


Appendix B: Projected Energy and GHG Impact Please include all projects together in the tables below

Please provide the GHG calculations for fossil fuel energy reductions related to the proposed project in the table below using the provided emission factors.

Cost/Benefit ratio – calculate the amount of fossil fuel energy reduced by funds spent

GHG Calculations Emission Factors For computation of GHG emission reductions due to displaced grid electricity, the applicant must use the average system emission factor (lbs. CO2 per MWh) provided by the ISO New England, the electric grid operator.17 At this time the current value is 890 lbs CO2 per MWh.

Fuel

Emission Factors18

Pounds CO2 per Unit Volume or Mass

Pounds CO2 per Unit Energy

Distillate Fuel (No. 1, No. 2, No. 4 Fuel Oil and Diesel) 22.384 per gallon 161.266 per MMBtu

Motor Gasoline 19.533 per gallon 156.262 per MMBtu

Natural Gas (Pipeline) 120.485 per 1000 ft3 116.976 per MMBtu

Natural Gas (Pipeline) 820.376 per barrel

Propane 12.67 per gallon 139.110 per MMBtu

Propane 532.14 per barrel

Electricity from the Grid 890 per MWh

17 Reference for ISO New England GHG Emission Factor is: 2008 New England Electric Generator Air Emissions Report, August 2010 18 Source for all of the above emission factors, except for Grid Electricity, is: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/coefficients.html

Revised 12/14/2010


GHG Calculations Table & Sample Calculations

A B C D E F G

Measure Fuel


Units (gallon, MMBtu, MWh)

Emission Factor

GHG Reduced per Year (Pounds CO2)

19

GHG Reduced per Year (Pounds CO2(a)

Insulation Natural Gas 100 MMBtu 117.08 11,700

Replace School Fluorescent Lights

Electricity 100 MWh 890 89,000 5,481

Computer Power Mgmt

Electricity 21

6.2 MWh 5,518 115,878 5,481

Schedules/Set Points/

Electricity 310

36 MWh 32,040 9,932,400 80,910

Vending Machines

Electricity 27

8 MWh 7,120 192,240 7,047

Airseal Bldg Envelope

Oil 349

207 MWh 184,230 64,296,270 91,089

VSD/HW/CHW Pumps

Electricity 277 81 MWh

72,090 19,968,930 72,297

Premium Motors

Electricity 23

7 MWh6,230 143,290 6,003

DCV Aud & Library

Electricity 600

24 MWh 21,360 12,816,000 156,600

DCV Gym Electricity 279 0 0 0 72,819

Low E Ceiling Electrical 464 136 MWh 12,1040 65,162,560 121,104

Heat Exchanger Electrical 276 2 MWh 1,780 491,280 72,036

685,386

(a) METHOD USED FOR CALCULATION

The total GHG reduction formula: 890 lbs of CO2 per 1MWH (per ISO NE 2008). This is the emissions rate 890 lbs CO2/1MWH x 1 MWH/1000 KWH x 1KWH/3412 BTU x 1,000,000/1 MMBTU = The result is 261 lbs CO2 per MMBTU

19 This number is determined by multiplying Column C x Column E.

Revised 12/14/2010


Cost/Benefit Ratio Table & Sample Calculations For computation of the amount of fossil fuel energy reduced per funds spent, please use the following table.

20 Please calculate using the BTU conversion chart provided below Table 2. 21 This is calculated by dividing the amount of the Green Communities grant request (Column C) for this specific measure by the projected annual energy savings in MMBtu (Column D).

A B C D E

Measure Fuel GC Grant Request ($)


(MMBtu)20

Cost/Benefit Ratio of GC

Grant (MMBtu/$)21

Insulation Natural Gas

10,000 100 100

Computer Power Mgmt

Electricity $500 21 0.04

Schedules/Set Points/

Electricity $1,500 310 0.21

Vending Machines

Electricity $1,800 27 0.02

Airseal Bldg Envelope

Oil $15,000 349 0.02

VSD/HW/CHW Pumps

Electricity $43,123 277 0.01

Premium Motors

Electricity $14,220 23 .002

DCV Aud & Library

Electricity $20,269 600 0.03

DCV Gym Electricity $10,135 279 0.03

Low E Ceiling Electrical $63,389 464 0.01

Heat Exchanger

Electrical $12,900 276 0.02

Revised 12/14/2010


Appendix C: Projected Economic Development Benefit

Please provide for EACH project

Please provide evidence of job creation, job retention, market transformation or other economic development benefits associated with this project. For job creation/retention numbers, please provide in terms of FTEs (1 FTE = 40 hr work week) The proposed project involves several energy efficiency measures that include procurement of mechanical equipment and installation of materials such as the low E ceiling. It is estimated that approximately 5‐8 part time jobs will be created through this work.

Gloucester, MA - Official Website | Official Website

Documents

Transcript of Gloucester, MA - Official Website | Official Website