NATIONAL TERTIARY SECTOR ANALYSIS€¦ · Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES...
Transcript of NATIONAL TERTIARY SECTOR ANALYSIS€¦ · Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES...
1
NATIONAL TERTIARY SECTOR ANALYSIS Factsheets on best practice in the tertiary sector EE/RES
2
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
DOCUMENT TITLE
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES applications
DOCUMENT TYPE
Deliverable D2.1 (WP2 – T2.1)
VERSION
Version 3.0
DATE
30/06/2018
AUTHORS
Chiara Wolter, Ambiente Italia
Guillaume de Laboulaye, ENERGIES 2050
Marko Bisčan, Marko Karan, Energy Institut Hrvoje Požar
Maria Frangou, Stavroula Tournaki; Technical University of Crete
Neuza Rosa, Jesus Ferreira Consultores
Pedro Luis Espejo, Paolo Michele Sonvilla, CREARA
EDITORS
Pedro Luis Espejo, CREARA Consultores
Paolo Michele Sonvilla, CREARA Consultores
PROJECT SUMMARY
Achieving the European Union’s 2020 energy efficiency targets and at the same time reducing its
dependency on energy imports is a huge task that requires innovative approaches and tools – such
as the ones Trust EPC South wants to provide.
The Trust EPC South project aims to unleash the tertiary sector market potential for energy
efficiency investments in Southern Europe by developing a new investment assessment instrument
backed by an established building rating methodology (Green Rating™). Such instrument shall support
energy service companies (EPC providers and facilitators), financing institutions and tertiary market
actors thanks to the application of a standardised methodology to the investment assessment and
decision processes, ultimately allowing to reduce barriers to energy efficiency investments.
Trust EPC South, a project financed by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 programme, will pursue
its ambitious objectives in Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Croatia and Greece. The project
consortium, led by the Spanish firm CREARA, is composed by interdisciplinary experts representing the
participating countries and by the international non-profit organisation Green Rating Alliance. The
partners are united by the common intent to stimulate investments in the target markets, which are
offering great opportunities for energy efficiency as well as energy performance contracting.
3
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT SUMMARY 2
INTRODUCTION 4
ACCRONYMS 5
OVERVIEW OF BEST PRACTICES 6
OVERVIEW OF PILOT PROJECTS 8
BEST PRACTICES FACTSHEETS 11
PILOT PROJECTS FACTSHEETS 44
4
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
INTRODUCTION
Within the scope of Trust EPC South, the project consortium initially conducted a thorough market
analysis in the six southern European participating countries. This analysis includes an advanced state
of the art of sustainable energy solutions for the tertiary sector and the characterisation of the
corresponding tertiary sector segments, the assessment of market barriers as well as the presentation
of available financing solutions. It also includes the evaluation of the most promising sustainable energy
projects or “best practices”, which are presented in this report.
These best practices have been used to generate standardised sustainable energy project technical
functional models that have been used to develop the GREPCon tool. Thirty three (33) factsheets are
presented in this report to show which are the most common solutions used and outline how they are
being implemented, how they are financed and what are the other conditions for success.
Additionally, at the end of the project, this document has been complemented with 46 factsheets
describing the pilot projects identified and supported by Trust EPC South’s in the six participating
countries.
The factsheets cover the main tertiary sector segments: Retail, Health, Hospitality, Offices, Sports
Centres or Education. Since the purpose is mainly to highlight the most promising sustainable energy
solutions, and due to the challenging EPC market conditions in the participating countries, not all of the
projects chosen involve EPC contracts, but also other more traditional arrangements such as energy
supply contracts or turnkey projects.
They also cover a wide range of measures, from boilers’ replacement to optimisation of energy
management systems, energy monitoring tools, and the installation of renewable energy sources. The
interventions on the building envelope are less represented due to their long investment recovery times.
For each factsheet, a set of over 20 indicators is provided, divided into four areas:
• Introductory information including segment of activity and stakeholders involved;
• The project’s context, where the facility and initial situation/energy use are described;
• Specifications of the contract: including duration, planned savings, contractual details, financing
arrangements and results;
• Additional comments have also been added when relevant to further detail the project and its
specificities (elements for success, advantages for the clients, etc.).
The choice of the indicators has been made to create synergies with existing initiatives such as
TRANSPARENSE and EESI2020, but also to give a comprehensive overview and thus reinforce our
analysis on potential EE and RES applications in tertiary sectors. One important criteria used in the
selection of the best practice cases is their replicability, as one aim of our work is to stimulate the
development of further implementations.
5
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
ACCRONYMS
CCHP: Combined Cooling, Heating and Power:
DH: District Heating
DH&C: District Heating and Cooling
DHW: Domestic Hot Water
EE: Energy efficiency
ESCO: Energy Service Company
EPC: Energy Performance Contract
FEDENE: Fédération des Services Énergie Environnement
H&C: Heating and Cooling
HVAC: Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning
IPMVP: International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol
IRR: Internal Rate of Return
LED: Light Emitting Diode
PV: Photovoltaic
RES: Renewable Energy Source
ROI: Return on Investment
ST: Solar Thermal Systems
TPF: Third Party Financing
6
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
OVERVIEW OF BEST PRACTICES
Code Tertiary Segment Client Summary - main fields of action
ES1 Retail CC parque sur de Madrid Efficient Lighting and HVAC systems
ES2 Health Hospital La Paz Various EE measures
ES3 Hospitality Confidential More efficient thermal power
ES4 Education Confidential Efficient lighting and HVAC systems
ES5 Retail Berriak Monitoring, efficient lighting and others
ES6 Health Hospital Virgen de la Poveda
Efficient lighting, monitoring, heat pumps, building insulation
ES7 Offices Stratenergy Optimal energy use, efficient lighting, insulation, heat pumps
FR1 Hospitality Groupe Accor Boiler replacement, hot water exchanger, Building Management System, buffer for iced water
FR2 Retail Carrefour Refrigeration systems, closer management, remote monitoring, training and awareness raising
FR3 Retail Logidis Comptoirs Modernes Evaporators' fans, Refrigerating systems
FR4 Education Sup'Elec and CESAL Heating system management, efficient lighting, rescheduling
FR5 Retail Ubinail Rodamco Regulation of heat pumps, Management of roof top, Ventilation and lighting
FR6 Health Clinic of Saint Priest - Private hospital of Lyon East
Building Management System, boiler, awareness raising
FR7 Health CHU Toulouse - Energy pole PURPAN
Raising awareness, Set point temperatures regulation, ventilation, management of pumps' speed, biomass heaters and heat recovery
GR1 Offices KG Law Firm Efficient lighting, monitoring and energy management, boilers, insulation, heat exchanger for hot water
GR2 Hospitality Mistral Hotel Automatic controls, monitoring and management
GR3 Hospitality Hotel Solar protection, efficient lighting, automatic controls, monitoring and management, PVs, ST, heat pumps
GR4 Health Mpodosakeio Hospital Efficient Lighting
GR5 Offices Administration of Western Macedonia
Efficient Lighting
HR1 Hospitality Adriainvest Inženjering Solar collectors, Heat recovery, PV systems, building management system
7
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
Code Tertiary Segment Client Summary - main fields of action
HR2 Offices Crosco Low temperature hot water boilers feed with natural gas
IT1 Retail Conad del Tirreno Efficient refrigeration, lighting, air conditioning, management; structural revamping, internal layout.
IT2 Sport Center Palasport Treviglio Review of lighting system
IT3 Hospitality Confidential Building insulation, solar protection and PV plant
IT4 Sport Center Confidential Centralised heat generation, heat recovery, metering devices, lighting
IT5 Offices/Hospitality Confidential Thermal insulation, windows replacement, lighting, PV plant
PT1 Hospitality Confidential Various EE measures
PT2 Hospitality Confidential PV generation plant
PT3 Health Long-term Care Facilities PV generation plant
PT4 Health Retirement Home and Day Care Center
PV plant, solar thermal panels, biomass boilers, heat pumps, pipe insulation, efficient lighting, monitoring
PT5 Sport Center Indoor swimming pool Pipe insulation, lighting, isothermal pool cover, solar thermal, monitoring
PT6 Retail Hypermarket Lighting
PT7 Health Confidential Biomass boiler and lighting
8
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
OVERVIEW OF PILOT PROJECTS
Code Segment Type of building Main measures Level of
Investment (k€) Projected
Savings (MWh/y)
PP01 Education University Lighting, boiler burners,
thermostatic valves, occupancy sensors…
238 112
PP02 Education University
Sun shading devices, Lighting, Occupancy
sensors, Variable frequency drives for pumps, PV plant
237 237
PP03 Hospitality Apart Hotel Lighting, water saving
aerators, BMS, PV and solar thermal plants
89 166
PP04 Office Modern offices Efficient lighting, presence
sensors, energy star procedure in computers
130 362
PP05 Tertiary services
Offices and other tertiary
Efficient lighting, presence sensors, Inverted chiller
200 137
PP06 Tertiary services
Ederly residence and offices
Efficient lighting, presence sensors, variable frequency drives for pumps and solar
thermal plant
162 327
PP07 Commerce Shopping mall Efficient lighting, presence sensors, BMS, PV plant
946 1031
PP08 Commerce Shopping mall Efficient lighting, BMS, PV
plant 240 356
PP09 Hospitality Hotel Efficient lighting, variable
frequency drives for pumps 73 285
PP10 Hospitality Hotel Efficient lighting, variable
frequency drives for pumps 125 409
PP11 Hospitality Hotel
Efficient lighting, presence sensors, Biomass boiler,
Solar thermal and PV plant, pipework insulation
411 321
PP12 Education School, offices and dormitories
Windows replacement, HVAC schedule definition, Efficient lighting, BMS, PV
plant
47 112
PP13 Education School, offices and dormitories
HVAC schedule definition, Efficient lighting,
Thermostatic valves, PV plant
50 126
PP14 Hospitality Hotel Efficient lighting, HVAC
schedule definition, Solar thermal plant
40 77
PP15 Hospitality Hotel
Efficient lighting, windows replacement, building
insulation, thermostatic valves
51 40
9
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
Code Segment Type of building Main measures Level of
Investment (k€) Projected
Savings (MWh/y)
PP16 Education School, offices and dormitories
HVAC schedule definition, Efficient lighting,
Thermostatic valves 65 107
PP17 Hospitality Hotel Windows replacement, sun shading devices, efficient
lighting 65 43
PP18 Offices Modern offices HVAC schedule, Efficient
lighting, PV plant 45 172
PP19 Commerce Retails Efficient Lighting 184 694
PP20 Logistics Storage and
offices Efficient lighting, BMS,
building insulation 183 956
PP21 Offices Offices Windows replacement,
efficient lighting, automatic doors and presence sensors
38 43
PP22 Offices Offices
Efficient lighting, Variable Frequency drives, Window films, solar thermal and PV
plants
110 229
PP23 Hospitality Hotel and restaurant
PV plant, efficient lighting and appliances, presence
sensors 104 195
PP24 Hospitality Hotel and
restaurant, spa
Inverter chiller, Heat recovery systems, Building insulation, Substitution of windows, Solar thermal
plant, Swimming pool heat cover, Efficient lighting
539 1002
PP25 Leisure Leisure/Sports
centre
Inverter chiller, boiler replacement, air curtains, window films, PV Plant
178 410
PP26 Health Hospital Boiler replacement, heat
recovery, window films, PV plant
600 1602
PP27 Hospitality Hotel Efficient lighting, solar
thermal plant 10 130
PP28 Hospitality Hotel Efficient lighting, PV plant 32 12
PP29 Offices Offices Efficient lighting and
inverted chillers 686 1601
PP30 Leisure Public pools Condensing boilers, Solar
thermal plant, HVAC reconstruction
426 1328
PP31 Health Thalasso Heat pump, solar thermal,
efficient lighting 500 1110
10
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
Code Segment Type of building Main measures Level of
Investment (k€) Projected
Savings (MWh/y)
PP32 Hospitality Hotel
Inverter chiller, Building insulation, Substitution of windows, Efficient lighting,
HVAC schedule, condensation boiler
441 543
PP33 Hospitality Hostel Building insulation, Efficient
lighting and presence sensors, condensation boiler
133 192
PP34 Commerce Shopping mall Efficient lighting, Variable Frequency drives, HVAC
schedule, PV plant 529 754
PP35 Tertiary services
Bank office Windows replacement and
building insulation 490 285
PP36 Education Primary school Efficient lighting, biomass boiler, building insulation,
PC Plant 268 172
PP37 Leisure Sport centre
Building insulation, Substitution of windows,
presence sensors, condensing boiler
140 266
PP38 Leisure Sport centre
Inverter chiller, Thermostatic valves, Building insulation, ,
Efficient lighting, condensation boiler
91 253
PP39 Office Offices Efficient lighting,
condensation boiler, PV Plant
143 120
PP40 Education School Building insulation, , Efficient lighting, condensation boiler
189 205
PP41 Leisure Sport centre Efficient lighting,
condensation boiler, roof insulation
94 105
PP42 Hospitality Buildings complex
Efficient lighting, PV and solar thermal plants
166 140
PP43 Education School Efficient lighting, PV and
solar thermal plants, BMS 89 78
PP44 Tertiary services
Offices and shopping mall
Efficient lighting, BMS 48 67
PP45 Offices Offices Efficient lighting,
condensation boiler 19 109
PP46 Offices Offices Efficient lighting,
condensation boiler 19 109
11
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BEST PRACTICES FACTSHEETS
BP1 CC PARQUE SUR DE MADRID ES1
1. Introduction
Name of client CC Parquesur de Madrid (Shopping Center)
Segment of activity Retail
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC project
Service provider / facilitator Efirenova
Location and climatic region Madrid (Mediterranean / Continental climate)
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Shopping Center
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 Building: 151,200 m2
Age of buildings Opened in 1989
Description of the initial situation Large building with old and inefficient equipment for H&C
Main energy use Heating & Cooling
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner EE measures for individual areas and DH for the whole centre
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 15 N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented - Implementation of efficiency measures for HVAC, Design and implementation of high efficiency HVAC with CCHP and DH&C, Implementation of energy efficiency measures for individual stores
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 20 %
Corresponding financial savings Confidential
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 196 t
Cost of investment 7.5 M€
Payback period (estimated or real) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty and maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol
Financed provided by (100 % ESCO, mix?) 100 % provided by a third party (Bank)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients DH&C implementation (CCHP system)
Best Practice criteria assessment Representative contract in the private sector with duration of 15 years. Financed by a third party
General comments Energy savings obtained reached 44 %
12
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP2 HOPITAL LA PAZ ES2
1. Introduction
Name of client Hospital ''La Paz''
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EE project (turnkey and energy supply contract)
Service provider / facilitator Dalkia
Location and climatic region Madrid (Mediterranean / Continental climate)
Other operators involved Gas Natural Servicios (energy provider for the duration of contract)
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Number of buildings and surface in m² 17 buildings and 4 large hospitals; approximately 180,000 m2
Age of buildings Built in 1964
Description of the initial situation Thermal installation providing hot water and heating for all the facilities working for more than 40 years
Main energy use H&C
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy efficiency and savings
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 15 2015
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
New H&C installation: - Natural gas thermal power station - Natural gas supply - Improvement of facilities (insulation, lighting and others)
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 30 %
Corresponding financial savings Total of 9 M€ savings
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Confidential
Cost of investment 36.2 M€
Payback period (estimated or real) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty and maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol
Financed provided by (100 % ESCO, mix?) Dalkia and Gas Natural Servicios
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients New installation and immediate savings without financing the project
Best Practice criteria assessment Large EE project for a very important hospital of Spain that offers EE measures and energy supply with maintenance and warranty of equipment
General comments This project could lead to several more in health sector
13
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP3 HOTEL ES3
1. Introduction
Name of client Hotel (the client’s name is confidential)
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator EE Project
Location and climatic region Confidential
Other operators involved N.A.
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 Building
Age of buildings Confidential
Description of the initial situation Thermal installation using diesel oil as energy source
Main energy use Diesel
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Replace the installation and reduce energy costs
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 10 Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Replacement of equipment: -High efficiency heat pumps -Implementation of pilot monitoring & control system
Energy savings guaranteed by contract Financial savings were guaranteed but not the energy savings
Corresponding financial savings 40 %
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Confidential
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) 7 years
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty and maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) EPC provider
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Specialized software establishing set points according to the meteorological conditions in the area helping save more energy
Best Practice criteria assessment Pilot project of high efficiency equipment with new type of monitoring and control system
General comments
14
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP4 SCHOOL ES4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity School
Type of contract (EPC/other) EE project (turnkey solution)
Service provider / facilitator Gese Servicios Energéticos
Location and climatic region Confidential
Other operators involved N.A.
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building School
Number of buildings and surface in m² Mid-size school with primary education and high school
Age of buildings Confidential
Description of the initial situation Old H&C and DHW systems, optimization needed for lighting
Main energy use Electricity
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 700.46 kWh/day (not per m2)
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy efficiency and savings
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year Confidential Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Main implemented measures: - Optimization of lighting system - Management of heating and cooling and DHW
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 27 % (economically)
Corresponding financial savings ~10 k€ /year Daily consumption before: 96.86 €/day and after: 44.06 €/day 57 % savings on energy consumption
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) NA
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty and maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) EPC provider
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients New installation and immediate savings without having to fund the project
Best Practice criteria assessment Small EPC project that promotes EE in the education sector and increases customer’s trust. Strong savings above contractual engagements
General comments
15
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP5 BERRIAK ES5
1. Introduction
Name of client Berriak
Segment of activity Retail
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC project
Service provider / facilitator Gese Servicios Energéticos
Location and climatic region Basque Country (Oceanic climate)
Other operators involved Dexma energy management (management solution)
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Supermarket
Number of buildings and surface in m² 4 supermarkets in different locations
Age of buildings Confidential
Description of the initial situation Berriak supermarkets wanted to promote energy efficiency to reduce their energy consumption and in the meantime their environmental impact, without disrupting their customers comfort and well being
Main energy use Electricity
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available)
335 k€/year (each supermarket)
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner
Energy efficiency and savings
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year Confidential Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
- Monitoring for refrigeration equipment - Lighting system optimization - Energy management system implementation
Energy savings guaranteed by contract Confidential
Corresponding financial savings Confidential
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 34 t/year
Cost of investment 10 k€/supermarket
Payback period (estimated or real) 6 months
Particular safeguards conditions Confidential
Achieved savings (if already implemented) 20.3 k€ in savings obtained the first year
Details on monitoring and assessment Dexma energy management monitoring solution
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) EPC provider
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Monitoring for their food conservation equipment
Best Practice criteria assessment Replicability and scalability of the solution; project developed in 4 different facilities with a single contract
General comments
16
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP6 HOSPITAL VIRGEN DE LA POVEDA ES6
1. Introduction
Name of client Hospital ‘Virgen de la Poveda’
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC project
Service provider / facilitator Creara
Location and climatic region Madrid (Mediterranean / Continental climate)
Other operators involved N.A.
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 Building: 20,000 m2
Age of buildings Built in 1978
Description of the initial situation Low efficiency equipment and diesel heating system
Main energy use Heating (41 %)
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 3,643 TWh (total)
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Renovation of facilities
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 4+2 (contract fixed for 4 years and could be extended for 2 additional years)
2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Main measures implemented: - Led lighting - Monitoring & control - High efficiency heat pumps - Building insulation improvement
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 25 %
Corresponding financial savings 30 %, 102 k€/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 270 k€ + VAT
Payback period (estimated or real) 2.4 years
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty, no maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) EPC Provider (which obtained financing through a leasing from a Bank)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Renovation of equipment and facilities
Best Practice criteria assessment Innovative and replicable pilot. The successful development of this project will lead to several more
General comments
17
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP7 STRATENERGY ES7
1. Introduction
Name of client Stratenergy
Segment of activity Offices
Type of contract (EPC/other) EE project
Service provider / facilitator Creara
Location and climatic region Basque Country (Oceanic climate)
Other operators involved N.A
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Office
Number of buildings and surface in m² 5 buildings: 1 for offices, 1 laboratory and 3 for industrial process
Age of buildings Confidential
Description of the initial situation High consumption facilities
Main energy use Electricity
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 7.4 TWh/year (3.8 TWh excluding industry)
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Optimization of energy consumption
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 7 years 2015
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Some of the measures implemented: - Optimization and control system - LED Lighting - Insulation improvement - Heat pumps installation
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 20 %
Corresponding financial savings Confidential
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Confidential
Cost of investment 500 k€
Payback period (estimated or real) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty, no maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP protocol
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Customer
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Guaranteed savings; EE measures for whole facilities
Best Practice criteria assessment Important project for office, laboratory and industrial facilities in one single contract
General comments
18
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP8 ACCOR FR1
1. Introduction
Name of client Groupe Accor
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Siemens Building Technologies
Location and climatic region Paris (Temperate)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² Hotel Sofitel Paris Arc de triomphe
Age of buildings Over 30 y
Description of the initial situation Hotel 125 rooms with boiler 1.5 MW and a refrigeration group of 441 kW
Main energy use Heating
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Pilot project to reduce energy consumption especially linked to heating
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 4 2006
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Boiler replacement, Installation of a hot water exchanger, Building Management System, Installation of a tarpaulin buffer for iced water to reduce groups' uses in peak hours
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 21 %
Corresponding financial savings 40,000 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 175,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4.5
Particular safeguards conditions -
Details on monitoring and assessment Control and analysis of consumption; Regular energy reports; Partnership with ESCO; Training and support
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % Siemens (ESCO)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Could carried out work without the need for investments
Best Practice criteria assessment
Good practice but not followed up because: - Accor Group is more interested in investing itself in EE - lack of visibility over energy use after the end of the contract - issues with monitoring, unable to see if savings were clearly coming from the measures implemented
General comments http://www.urbanisme-puca.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/emergence-contrats-performance-energetique-marche-francais.pdf
19
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP9 CARREFOUR FR2
1. Introduction
Name of client Carrefour
Segment of activity Commerce
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Schneider electric
Location and climatic region France (Temperate, Mediterranean and oceanic)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Commercial centres
Number of buildings and surface in m² 16 buildings for a total of minimum 162,827 m²
Age of buildings Various
Description of the initial situation Carrefour aimed at improving the energy efficiency of its commercial centres, the mechanisms for monitoring energy consumption were especially deficient
Main energy use Mainly gas (Heating)
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Carrefour aimed at improving the way energy is managed. They wanted a ROI of 3y maximum and asked Schneider Elec. To launch a process of audits and recommendations for each building
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 3 2005
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Optimization and reconfiguration of systems for refrigeration, Energy Management, Installation of a remote monitoring system, Training and involvement of Carrefour's staff
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 12 %
Corresponding financial savings 800,000 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment Based on energy saving and PB period: probably between 1.5 and 2 M€
Payback period (estimated or real) 2.5
Achieved savings (if already implemented) 14 % achieved
Particular safeguards conditions Bonus or malus (penalties) are subject to a global balance each year
Details on monitoring and assessment Remote monitoring system, follow-up with Carrefour's staff
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % Carrefour
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Schneider carried on everything and the ROI was quite short
Best Practice criteria assessment Savings above guarantees
General comments Source: Ortega (2011), Carrefour et Schneider
20
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP10 LOGIDIS COMPTOIRS MODERNES FR3
1. Introduction
Name of client Logidis Comptoirs Modernes
Segment of activity Commerce
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Schneider electric
Location and climatic region Le Mans (Temperate)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Logistic platform, Offices, Storages
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 dry storage 51,000 m², 1 cold storage 14,000 m², Offices 2,500 m²
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation LCM is part of Carrefour, which has developed projects with Schneider Electric. LCM wanted to sign an EPC to develop energy efficiency of its platform in Le Mans.
Main energy use Energy use at 50 % for Refrigeration. Total energy use 9 GWh
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner The client wanted a solution to reduce its energy bills, while keeping its installations working, producing a refrigeration of quality and easing maintenance
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 3 N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Optimized management of evaporators' fans, Optimization of management and regulation of the 2 main refrigerating systems + installation of speed regulator, Installation of High Floating Pressure
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 18% including 36% on refrigeration systems
Corresponding financial savings N.A.
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) Inferior to 2 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Not communicated
Particular safeguards conditions Bonus malus depending on performances
Details on monitoring and assessment Classic monitoring approach – IPMVP, trimestral analysis of results
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) N.A.
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Could carried on its own activities, rapid ROI (2y)
Best Practice criteria assessment Good practice with an integrated approach to EE in logistic platforms and Offices
General comments Private contract, Source Schneider, Ortega (2011)
21
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP11 SUP’ELEC/CESAL FR4
1. Introduction
Name of client Sup'Elec and CESAL
Segment of activity Education
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Schneider electric, EDF
Location and climatic region Gyf sur Yvette (Temperate)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building School premises and students' housing
Number of buildings and surface in m² 60,000 m². The campus is made of 3 sites including one which is older than 30 y.
Age of buildings Over 30 years
Description of the initial situation
Sup'Elec school and CESAL manage the students’ campus. They aimed to modernize buildings and offer greater comfort to users, reduce costs, and minimize environmental impacts. Buildings were becoming old and a comprehensive new strategy regarding energy management was necessary. They could not invest without guarantees on savings.
Main energy use Heating and lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Improve the users' comfort, upgrade the installations to current standards, promote exemplarity and sustainable management
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 10 1998
Sustainable Energy measures implemented New heating system management, Replacement of luminaires, Optimization of external lighting, Integration of practical constraints and specific schedule of the school in the design of solutions
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 15 % per year
Corresponding financial savings 100,000 € HT per year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 100 t/year
Cost of investment 1 M€
Payback period (estimated or real) 7 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Performances guaranteed by Schneider and EDF
Particular safeguards conditions Guaranteed performances
Details on monitoring and assessment Global monitoring and awareness raising provided by Schneider / EDF, Monitoring and reporting of performances, Training of staffs
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Confidential
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Could carried on its own activities, ROI 7 y
Best Practice criteria assessment Performance are guaranteed and despite high investment, the payback period was short
General comments Private contract. Source EDF, Schneider, FEDENE, Ortega (2011)
22
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP12 UBINAIL RODAMCO FR5
1. Introduction
Name of client Ubinai Rodamco
Segment of activity Real estate - Commercial centers
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Dalkia
Location and climatic region Near Melun (Temperate)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Commercial centers
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 commercial centre, more than 50.000 m²
Age of buildings Built in 1997
Description of the initial situation Commercial centre with need for improvement in energy efficiency
Main energy use Cooling, heating, lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Reduced energy use
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 3 2009
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Regulation of heat pumps' differential pressure; Better management of roof top; Hourly programming for fresh air Automatic lighting system in technical corridors
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 5 % for electricity and 10 % for gas
Corresponding financial savings After a year: 60,000 € in electricity (17 %) and 12,000 € in gas (25 %)
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 40,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) Less than 3 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) 17 % in electricity, 25 % for gas
Particular safeguards conditions Performances guaranteed by contract
Details on monitoring and assessment Dalkia is in charge of the site exploitation
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % Dalkia
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Short Payback period, no investment needed
Best Practice criteria assessment Savings above guarantees, funding from ESCO, possibilities to extend
General comments Private contract, source: Ortega (2011), Ubinail Rodamco sust. Dev. Report 2008
23
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP13 CLINIC ST PRIEST FR6
1. Introduction
Name of client Clinic of Saint Priest - Private hospital of Lyon East
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Dalkia
Location and climatic region France (Temperate)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Clinic
Number of buildings and surface in m² 12,000 m², 189 beds and places for patients
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Need for energy efficiency improvement in the clinic
Main energy use Gas heating
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Gas consumption: 4,055 MWh pcs/y Electricity consumption: 2,641 MWh/year
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Reduce energy use
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 5 2011
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Optimized energy use: Building Management System was reprogrammed, 3 way-valve installed upstream the boiler Raise awareness of staff towards sustainable behaviours Realization of a guide presenting environmental good practices
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 14 %
Corresponding financial savings N.A.
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 28,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) N.A.
Achieved savings (if already implemented) On-going project
Particular safeguards conditions N.A.
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP protocol
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) N.A.
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use and increased comfort for patients
Best Practice criteria assessment Example of good practice in a clinic
General comments Private contract, source: FEDENE
24
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP14 CHU TOULOUSE FR7
1. Introduction
Name of client CHU Toulouse - Energy pole PURPAN
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Dalkia
Location and climatic region France (Mediterranean and oceanic)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Number of buildings and surface in m² 4 Health related buildings – 73,000 m² 1 building for logistic (technical rooms, offices and kitchen) – 5,300 m² Housing building – 1,500 m²
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Goal of the EPC was to reduce energy use in all premises
Main energy use Heating
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 17,190 MWh/y for heating 6,410 MWh/y for cooling and refrigeration
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Reduce global energy use
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 25 2012
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Raising awareness of users Adjustment of heating and cooling set point temperature Hourly programming of offices and common blocs' ventilation, Electronic variation of pumps' speed, Biomass heaters, Heat recovery, Etc.
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 15 %
Corresponding financial savings Confidential.
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 80 % (5,300 t/y)
Cost of investment N.A.
Payback period (estimated or real) N.A.
Achieved savings (if already implemented) The contract is still recent
Particular safeguards conditions Partnership contract
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol opt C
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) -
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Regular savings on the long term
Best Practice criteria assessment Long term contract, systemic approach to energy, high reduction in GHGs thanks to RE
General comments Private contract, source: FEDENE, CHU Toulouse
25
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP15 KG LAW FIRM GR1
1. Introduction
Name of client KG Law Firm
Segment of activity Office
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator COFELY GDF SUEZ
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Office
Number of buildings and surface in m² 3 buildings 850 m2
Age of buildings 9 Years
Description of the initial situation High-energy consumption basically associated with the HVAC systems. There was a need to implement energy efficiency improvements, but no funds were available.
Main energy use Main energy use was electricity associated with air conditioning
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 590 kWh/(m²y)
N.A3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy cost reduction, Awareness about environmental issues
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 5 years 2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Efficient lighting, Monitoring and energy management systems, Boilers, Compensation systems, Insulation of boilers and hot water piping, Heat exchanger for hot water
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 18.44 kWh/m²/year
Corresponding financial savings 16 % - 10,000 €
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 9.000 Kg
Cost of investment 15,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 2.5 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Particular safeguards conditions Maintenance contract for 5 years.
Details on monitoring and assessment
The building’s baseline consumption was created through a five-year collection of bills, and by software the energy consumption has been allocated on each of the energy demands (heating, cooling etc.). Counters were placed in order to record the daily, monthly and annual consumption; comparing those levels to the baseline they could calculate the energy savings achieved.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use and increased comfort
Best Practice criteria assessment The financing savings per year (16 %) and the low payback period (2.5 years) make this EPC a good practice.
General comments Private contract
26
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP16 MISTRAL HOTEL GR2
1. Introduction
Name of client Mistral Hotel
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Α&Β Energy
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² 8,800
Age of buildings 25
Description of the initial situation
Settings associated with the cooling, heating and hot water production systems, leading to high-energy consumption. There was a need to implement efficiency improvements, but no funds were available and experts should operate and monitor the facilities.
Main energy use Electricity for cooling and lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 112.5 kWh/m²/year
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy cost reduction, Environmental policy of the company Awareness about environmental issues
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 1 2012
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Automatic controls, Monitoring and energy management systems
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 54.000 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 8.5 % 7,400 €
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 15,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 2 years
Particular safeguards conditions Proof with statistical analysis for the energy saving amount
Details on monitoring and assessment
A network, of automatic control systems and energy meters was placed on the boiler room and the hot water production system allowing the ESCO to perform tele-monitoring on the facility and prevent matters associated with maintenance and energy wasting. The energy savings were calculated with the IPMVP.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Mix
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use
Best Practice criteria assessment The financing savings per year (8.5 %) and the low payback period (2 years) make this case a good practice.
General comments Private contract
27
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP17 HOTEL GR3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hotel
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator ETVA VIPE
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² 600
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation The main problem had to do with the set-points, associated with the cooling, heating and hot water production systems, leading to high-energy consumption
Main energy use Electricity
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 240 kWh/m²/year
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy cost reduction
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 10 years 2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Shading, Efficient lighting, Automatic controls, monitoring and energy management systems, Boilers, Compensation systems, PVs for electricity, Solar collectors for Hot Water, Heat pumps
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 48 kWh/m²/year
Corresponding financial savings 21 %, 12.000 €
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 80,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6.1 years
Particular safeguards conditions Letter of guarantee, pledging of equipment, Payment upon completion of the billing period, Equipment warranty, 24 hours troubleshooting warranty
Details on monitoring and assessment Control and regular analysis of consumption
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use and increased comfort for clients
Best Practice criteria assessment The level of financing savings per year (21 %) and the low payback period (6.1 years) make this case a good practice
General comments Private contract
28
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP18 MPODOSAKEIO HOSPITAL GR4
1. Introduction
Name of client Mpodosakeio Hospital
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES Co. (Energeiakes Technologies)
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved Regional Development Agency of Western Macedonia (ANKO) SA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Number of buildings and surface in m² 20,000 m²
Age of buildings 14 years
Description of the initial situation High level of electricity consumed for lighting. Old technology fluorescent lamps operating 24/7 had to be replaced.
Main energy use Electricity for cooling and lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 369.1 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner
EPC contract with Third-Party Financing during the implementation of Pilot Action 2.1: "Mechanisms of Third Party Financing - TPF" of the MARIE project with the participation of Regional Development Agency of Western Macedonia (ANKO) SA
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 5 years 2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Replacing 60 old technology fluorescent lamps Τ8 58W with 60 LED lamps 31W (Master LED tube, PERF 1500mm 31W/865 T8)
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 16,293.60 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 2,085.60 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 4,200 kg
Cost of investment 2,900 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 2 years
Particular safeguards conditions
Client is responsible for the good operational conditions of lighting bulbs and the facility. ESCO is responsible for the replacement and repairing of any problematic bulb or malfunction. In case of not achieving the goals for energy consumption while there is good operation of the lights the ESCO has to bear the cost.
Details on monitoring and assessment Benchmarking was used to calculate and measure the energy savings achieved. Luminance and electrical power were measured before and after the EE applications
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) TPF
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use
Best Practice criteria assessment This contract is one of the 2 first contracts signed in Greece, created to be an example of best practices
General comments Private contract. The contract had reached the final stage but no signatures had been signed.
29
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP19 ADMINISTRATION OF WESTERN MACEDONIA GR5
1. Introduction
Name of client Administration of Western Macedonia
Segment of activity Public Offices
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES Co. (Energeiakes Technologies)
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved Regional Development Agency of Western Macedonia (ANKO) SA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Office
Number of buildings and surface in m² 11,200 m²
Age of buildings Built in 2003
Description of the initial situation High energy consumption related to 14 high-pressure lamps with Na bulbs that were used for outdoor lighting. Significant energy saving could be achieved by replacing them with Power LED lighting type.
Main energy use Electricity for lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 164.2 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner
EPC contract with Third-Party Financing during the implementation of Pilot Action 2.1: "Mechanisms of Third Party Financing - TPF" of the MARIE project with the participation of Regional Development Agency of Western Macedonia (ANKO) SA
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 10 years 2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Replacing lighting the perimeter of the building 14 High Pressure lamps with Na bulbs 250W replaced with Power LED type “700mA, 4000Κ Power 110W –13720lm, Disano / 3282 Rolle T3”
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 8,623.81 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 1,136.20 €
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 3,550 kg CO2
Cost of investment 6,200 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6 years
Particular safeguards conditions
The client is responsible for the good operational conditions of the lighting bulbs and the facility. ESCO is responsible for the replacement and repairing of any problematic bulb or malfunction. In case of not achieving the goals for energy consumption while there is good operation of the lights, the ESCO has to bear the cost.
Details on monitoring and assessment Benchmarking was used to calculate and measure the energy savings achieved. Luminance and electrical power were measured before and after the EE applications
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) TPF
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use
Best Practice criteria assessment This contract is one of the 2 first contracts signed in Greece, created to be an example of best practices
General comments Private contract. The contract had reached the final stage but no signatures had been signed.
30
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP20 ADRIAINVEST INŽENJERING HR1
1. Introduction
Name of client Adriainvest Inženjering
Segment of activity Hotel - Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator HEP ESCO
Location and climatic region Biograd na moru (Mediterranean)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² N.A.
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Adria Hotel has 208 modern equipped rooms. All rooms are air-conditioned and have a balcony, shower, toilet, mini-bar, telephone, and satellite TV. Fuel oil is used for DHW and heating.
Main energy use Cooling and DHW
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Project to reduce energy consumption especially linked to DHW
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 8 2011
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Solar collectors for domestic hot water preparation Hot water tanks (2 x 6,500 l) Heat recovery from existing chiller for DHW Installation of photovoltaic system 30 kW Building Management System
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 75 % of Fuel oil consumption (30,000 l) 36,000 kWh of electricity produced
Corresponding financial savings 44,760 EUR/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 78.6 t
Cost of investment 276,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6
Particular safeguards conditions Client is responsible for the good operational conditions of the installed equipment.
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP is used
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Short payback period, no initial investment
Best Practice criteria assessment Integrated approach to EE including installation of RES
General comments One of the few ESCO projects in tertiary sector in Croatia
31
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP21 CROSCO HR2
1. Introduction
Name of client Crosco
Segment of activity Offices
Type of contract (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator HEP ESCO
Location and climatic region Zagreb (Continental)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Office
Number of buildings and surface in m² N.A.
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Fuel oil is used for DHW and heating.
Main energy use Heating
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Project to reduce energy consumption especially linked to heating
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 6 2008
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Low temperature hot water boilers (2 x 575 kW) on natural gas
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 140,000 kWh
Corresponding financial savings 56,500 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 247,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4
Particular safeguards conditions Client is responsible for the good operational conditions of the installed equipment.
Details on monitoring and assessment Modified IPMVP is used
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Short payback period, no investment
Best Practice criteria assessment High financial and energy savings
General comments One of the few ESCO projects in tertiary sector in Croatia
32
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP22 CONAD DEL TIRRENO IT1
1. Introduction
Name of client CONAD del Tirreno
Segment of activity Retail - Supermarket stores
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator 3EPC
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved Unicredit (financing institution)
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Supermarkets - retail stores for large scale distribution: measures on several buildings with different location
Number of buildings and surface in m² 18 buildings, with an average of 1,000 m2 for about 20,000 m2
Age of buildings 15 years on average
Description of the initial situation The buildings needed a deep renovation, involving the refurbishment of the building and the requalification of the plants, in particular the refrigeration equipment.
Main energy use Heating, cooling and lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Between 600 and 1,200 kWh/m2
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy cost reduction, awareness toward environmental issues
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 8 years 2015
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Revamping of freezing equipment; Installation of low dispersion refrigerated bars; LED illumination; Revamping of air conditioning systems; Advanced Energy Management Service for Energy Efficiency Certifications; Structural revamping; Renewed internal layout.
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 35 ~ 50 % in energy consumption per year Performance guarantee specifically tailored for each single store
Corresponding financial savings 35 ~ 50 % in energy bill per year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Average of 50 ~ 150 t CO2 per year
Cost of investment 33 M€
Payback period (estimated or real) 3 ~ 7 years estimated on technological/structural interventions
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Just implemented
Particular safeguards conditions Special privilege, accounts pledge, transfer of VAT credit
Details on monitoring and assessment Implementation of the system Mætrics® Advanced to enhance energy management: consumption monitoring, system controls, alert and ticketing for maintenance, waste quantification;
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Project finance (Unicredit)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients The realization of the intervention in project financing has enabled the possibility of a deeper renovation, involving energy efficiency and space refurbishment
Best Practice criteria assessment Best practice innovation: combination of a guaranteed savings and a Project Finance structure. Replicability.
General comments Private contract
33
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP23 PALASPORT TREVIGLIO IT2
1. Introduction
Name of client Palasport Treviglio
Segment of activity Sport Centres
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Nesco srl
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Sport hall
Number of buildings and surface in m² Around 2,000 m2
Age of buildings 15 years
Description of the initial situation - High and frequent voltage fluctuations - Continuous generation of harmonics with big impact on all electronic devices - Unbalanced star point - Rephasing needed
Main energy use Lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 113 MWh/y (for lighting purposes)
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Increase the efficiency of the plant
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 5 years N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Review and optimisation of the lighting system, based on harmonics filtering, rephasing and balancing of the system
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 22 %
Corresponding financial savings 5,400 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 24 %
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) 3.5 years estimated
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Particular safeguards conditions Client is responsible for the operational conditions, which have to be
maintained above a contractual limit
Details on monitoring and assessment The performance of the plant is continuously controlled by remote
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients No initial investment needed, a part of shared savings from the beginning of the contract
Best Practice criteria assessment Short duration of the contract by a guaranteed saving of 22 % on the baseline
General comments Source: www.nescosrl.it
34
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP24 HOTEL IT3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator Confidential
Location and climatic region Mediterranean – Central Italy
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 building, 9.000 m2
Age of buildings ~ 30 years
Description of the initial situation The hotel presented a very high H&C energy consumption. The low quality of the outer envelope and the large glazed surface determined a large consumption in both winter and in summer.
Main energy use H&C, lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Costs reduction, energy efficiency improvement
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year N.A. N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
- Thermal insulation of the building envelope (external walls, roof) and of the heat distribution net - Reduction of the solar gains in summer through shadowing - PV plant 67.54 kWp (covering about 10 % of the yearly electricity consumption)
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 607 MWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 100,000 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 180 t/y
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) 5.3 years estimated
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Particular safeguards conditions White certificates go directly to the ESCO
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Partly self-funded, partly public money (incentives)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Higher investment possible, due to the mix of financing. Very short payback for efficiency measures on the building structure
Best Practice criteria assessment Mix funding and short payback period. Use of performance bond
General comments Project is still in a study phase: it is very important to have a good risk analysis, a clear baseline and the complete MV program before signing the contract.
35
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP25 SPORT CENTRE IT4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Sport facilities
Type of contract (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator Confidential
Location and climatic region Mediterranean - Tuscany
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Sport Hall
Number of buildings and surface in m² 3 buildings ~ 5,000m2
Age of buildings Built in 1968; 1976; 2002
Description of the initial situation Several little units for heating purposes
Main energy use H&C, lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Costs reduction, energy efficiency improvement
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year N.A. N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Centralized heat generation, heat recovery, metering devices, substitution of existing lamps with LED
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 120 MWh/y (electricity) + 115,000 m3 (natural gas)
Corresponding financial savings 132,500 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 300 t/y
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) IRR of the project 7.76 % IRR for the investor 12.36 %
Achieved savings (if already implemented) 9.8 years estimated for the project, 8.5 for the investor
Particular safeguards conditions White certificates go directly to the ESCO
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Partly self-financing, partly public money (incentives)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Strong costs reduction
Best Practice criteria assessment Mix funding and short payback period. Use of performance bond
General comments Project is still in a study phase: it is very important to have a good risk analysis, a clear baseline and the complete MV program before signing the contract.
36
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP26 OFFICES AND HOSTEL IT5
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator Confidential
Location and climatic region Mediterranean – Northern Italy
Other operators involved A bank as financer; an additional ESCO for the PV plant
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Offices and hostel
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 Building, ~ 1,700m2
Age of buildings 45 y
Description of the initial situation The building needed refurbishment and the management aimed to reach an high efficiency standard, in order to offer more comfort in a low-cost hospitality premise
Main energy use H&C, lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Costs reduction, energy efficiency improvement
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year N.A. N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented - Thermal insulation external walls and roof, - windows replacement - LED, PV plant
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 170 MWh/y (electricity) + 25,000 m3/y (natural gas)
Corresponding financial savings 48,000 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 120 t/y
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) IRR of the project 5.45 %
Achieved savings (if already implemented) 4.3 years estimated for the extra costs
Particular safeguards conditions White certificates go directly to the ESCO
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Partly self-financing, partly financed by a bank
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients The finance contract and the EPC contract will be aligned in time, in order to ease their realization.
Best Practice criteria assessment Very good negotiation of the financing. Performance bond
General comments Project is still in a study phase: it is very important to have a good risk analysis, a clear baseline and the complete MV program before signing the contract.
37
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP27 5 STAR HOTEL PT1
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Tourism
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator VIVAPOWER Showrooms
Location and climatic region Madeira - Oceanic
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building 5-star Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² N.A.
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Hotel with casino, fitness centre, pool, spa, restaurants, 379 rooms, common areas, etc. Total electric baseline 2,887 MWh/year; Lighting baseline 407 MWh/year; Pumps baseline 320 MWh/year
Main energy use Electricity and thermal
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Reducing the cost of energy, improving the energy efficiency of the hotel and, at the same time, maintaining the high quality of the hotel
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 6 years Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented 250 kWn PV Plant + circulation pumps + efficiency lighting
Energy savings guaranteed by contract PV Plant 382 MWh/year + circulation pumps 82 MWh/year + lighting 113 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings PV Plant 44,321 €/year + circulation pumps 8,712 €/year + efficiency lighting 12,429 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) ~ 208 t CO2
Cost of investment Circulation pumps + efficiency lighting = 56,500 €; PV Plant = 343,661 €; Total investment cost = 400,161 €
Payback period (estimated or real) Circulation pumps + efficiency lighting = 2.7 years; PV Plant = 7.8 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Performance guarantee of the equipment (PV modules, circulation pumps and efficiency lighting) during the contract period; No energy production guarantee
Details on monitoring and assessment Monitoring the energy production of the PV Plant + Monitoring the circulation pumps and efficiency lighting working hours and consumption
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Mixed financing: 60 % ESCO+ 40 % public
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Part of the financing provided by public funds, which was an added value for the client
Best Practice criteria assessment The combination of implemented RES and EE measures will provide a considerable reduction in the electricity costs.
General comments N.A.
38
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP28 RURAL TOURISM PT2
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Tourism
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator VIVAPOWER Nova
Location and climatic region Portalegre - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Rural tourism
Number of buildings and surface in m² N.A.
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Rural tourism composed by 5 properties
Main energy use N.A.
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Implementing RES through PV plant
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 20 years 2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented 456 kWn PV plant
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 903 MWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 99,760 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) ~ 325 t
Cost of investment 533,500 €
Payback period (estimated or real) ~ 5years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Performance guarantee of the PV equipment
Details on monitoring and assessment Monitoring of the PV plant through a dedicated monitoring system
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Short payback, no investment
Best Practice criteria assessment Performance of renewable energy is guaranteed and monitored, funding 100 % ESCO and short payback period
General comments N.A.
39
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP29 LONG-TERM CARE FACILITY PT3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator VIVAPOWER Nova
Location and climatic region Portimão - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Long-term Care Facilities
Number of buildings and surface in m² N.A.
Age of buildings Built in 2011 - 4 years
Description of the initial situation Long-term Care Facilities with capacity for 60 patients
Main energy use N.A.
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Reduce energy cost
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 15 years Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented 30 kWn PV Plant
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 65,805 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 7,752 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) ~ 24 t
Cost of investment 39,311 €
Payback period (estimated or real) ~ 5 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Performance guarantee of the PV equipment
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Short payback, no investment
Best Practice criteria assessment Performance of renewable energy is guaranteed and monitored, funding 100 % ESCO and short payback period
General comments N.A.
40
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP30 RETIREMENT HOME PT4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Energia Própria
Location and climatic region Borba - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Retirement Home and Day Care Center
Number of buildings and surface in m² 2,458.37 m²
Age of buildings 1988 - 27 years
Description of the initial situation
Retirement Home and Day Care Center with a community centre; laundry facilities; social, administrative and services areas; bedrooms; toilets; kitchens; etc. Retirement Home occupation is 61 people and Day Care Centre about 24 people. Average consumption: 171 MWh/y (electricity), 472 MWh/y (propane gas)
Main energy use Electricity (HVAC, lighting, equipment); Propane gas (equipment, DWH)
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner The objective was to implement EE and RES that promote and reduce energy consumption of the building,
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 15 years (only in the case of PV) Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented 65 kWn PV Plant + Solar thermal panels + biomass boilers + pumps + pipe insulation + efficient lighting + monitoring system
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 116,320 kWh/year (for the PV plant with EPC); Total savings for EE measures: 26.9 kWh/year (electricity) + 200.7 kWh/year (propane gas)
Corresponding financial savings
12,319 €/year (for the PV Plant with EPC); EE measures: 1,136 €/year (Solar thermal) + 5,795 €/year (biomass boiler) + 155 €/year (pumps) + 2,073 €/year (pipe insulation) + 2,690 €/year (lighting) + 3,195 €/year (monitoring system); Total financing savings for EE: 15,423 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) ~ 42 t (for the PV Plant with EPC) + 30 t (EE measures)
Cost of investment
73,005 € (for the PV plant with EPC) + EE measures: 11,300 € (solar thermal) + 41,815 € (biomass boiler) + 2,260 € (pumps) + 4,840 € (pipe insulation) + 22,990 € (lighting) + 21,900 € (monitoring system). Total investment for EE measures: 104,900 €
Payback period (estimated or real) ~ 6 years (for the PV plant) + 6,8 years (for EE measures)
Particular safeguards conditions Performance guarantee of the PV equipment during the EPC contract.
Details on monitoring and assessment Monitoring of the PV Plant and EE measures
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO (for PV Plant) + 100 % national funds for EE measures
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Mixed investment which will benefit the client in terms of energy savings and cost reduction
Best Practice criteria assessment Mixed of investment, EPC and services dealing with RES and EE
General comments PV plant with EPC contract and EE measures implementation without
41
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP33 HOSPITAL PT7
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) Implementation of EE measures
Service provider / facilitator Energia Própria
Location and climatic region Lousada - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Number of buildings and surface in m² 3,420 m²
Age of buildings 2001 - 14 years
Description of the initial situation Hospital with rooms, technical areas, bathrooms, living rooms, office rooms, observation rooms and consultation, medical operation rooms, bar, changing rooms, common areas, isolation rooms, pharmacy, etc.
Main energy use Electricity and Propane Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention (if available)
N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Costs savings maintaining the operation of the building
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year Confidential Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Biomass boiler + lighting
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 106,628 kWh/year (lighting) + 450,635 kWh/year (biomass boiler)
Corresponding financial savings 8,060 €/year (lighting) + 21,982 €/year (biomass boiler)
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 41 t
Cost of investment 11,956 € (lighting) + 128,571 € (biomass boiler)
Payback period (estimated or real) 1.5 years (lighting) + 6 years (biomass boiler)
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions N.A.
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) National Fund
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Financing by a National Fund, ensuring the energy and costs savings for the client
Best Practice criteria assessment Combination with National Fund and simple EE measures with short payback
General comments Project is still in a study phase
42
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP31 SWIMMING POOL PT5
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Sport Facility
Type of contract (EPC/other) Implementation of EE measures
Service provider / facilitator Self Energy Engineering & Innovation
Location and climatic region Fiães - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Indoor swimming pool
Number of buildings and surface in m² 2,898 m²
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Sports Complex with indoor swimming pool, with common areas, bathrooms, sports halls, classrooms, technical areas, etc.
Main energy use Electricity and Natural gas
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Implementation of RES and EE measures
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year Confidential Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Pipe insulation + lighting + variable speed drivers + isothermal pool cover + solar thermal system + monitoring system
Energy savings guaranteed by contract
169,741 kWh/year (Isothermal pool cover) + 19,949 kWh/year (solar thermal system) + 4,892 kWh/year (lighting) + 2,355 kWh/year (variable speed drivers) + 32,251 kWh/year (pipe insulation) + 75,939 kWh/year (monitoring system)
Corresponding financial savings
6,000 €/year (isothermal pool cover) + 600 €/year (solar thermal system) + 405 €/year (lighting) + 195 €/year (variable speed drivers) + 970 €/year (pipe insulation) + 3,000 €/year (monitoring system). Total financial savings: 11,170 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total ~ 67 t
Cost of investment
43,500 € (Isothermal pool cover) + 10,000 € (solar thermal system) + 2,000 € (lighting) + 1,260 € (variable speed drivers) + 3,200 € (pipe insulation) + 23,000 € (monitoring system) Total cost of investment: 82,960 €
Payback period (estimated or real)
7 years (Isothermal pool cover) + 16 years (solar thermal system) + 5 years (lighting) + 6 years (variable speed drivers) + 3 years (pipe insulation) + 4 years (monitoring system). Total payback period: ~ 7 years
Particular safeguards conditions N.A.
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Financed by a National Fund
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients No investment by the Client and the Sport Complex will be the main beneficiary of the implementation of the measures
Best Practice criteria assessment Project implementation combining the installation of RES and EE measures dedicated to sport facilities
General comments No EPC in this project. Only implementation of RES and EE measures in order to reduce the consumption of the sport facility
43
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
BP32 HYPERMARKET PT6
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hypermarket
Type of contract (EPC/other) Implementation of EE measures
Service provider / facilitator Energia Própria
Location and climatic region Santa Maria da Feira - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hypermarket
Number of buildings and surface in m² 10,532 m²
Age of buildings Built in 1998 - 17 years
Description of the initial situation Hypermarket with shopping gallery, toilets, technical areas, offices, kitchens, parking car, sales area, etc. Baseline 2.910.187 kWh/year (electrical consumption)
Main energy use Electricity, Natural gas and diesel
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Rationalizing the building's energy consumption by implementing energy efficiency measures and, consequently, the reduction of bills
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year N.A. N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Replacement of the existing lighting
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 231,877 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 19,939 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) ~ 83 t
Cost of investment 47,526 €
Payback period (estimated or real) ~ 2 years
Particular safeguards conditions N.A.
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Potentially will be financed by a local/national fund
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Combination of local/national fund, with EE measure dedicated to the lighting system with sort payback, maintaining and ensuring the quality of system
Best Practice criteria assessment Short payback period
General comments Project is still in a study phase
44
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PILOT PROJECTS FACTSHEETS
PP01 EDUCATION ES’1
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Education
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far CREARA
Location and climatic region Madrid – warm temperate
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building University
Surface in m² 36 100 m²
Annual energy use ~ 2 500 MWh
Main energy use Heating and lighting
Main energy source Electricity and fuel
Energy use per m² before intervention 70,6 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Enhancing energy efficiency
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 12
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Substitution of boiler burners and
fuel type, Thermostatic valves for radiators, Occupancy and presence
sensors, Variable frequency drives for pumps
Potential Energy savings 112331 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 45.481 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 100 t
Cost of investment 238100€
Payback period (estimated or real) 5 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Following the assessment, it has been proposed as a client-financed scenario of 80% debt and 20% equity with a 7 year loan, considering a 12 year time horizon and corresponding to an A GREPCon rating
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility could save 23 % of its total energy costs Rapid ROI
Status of project Started
General Comments The EPC Contract model was proposed but at the end it was decided to implement the project through a turnkey contract
45
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP02 EDUCATION ES’2
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Education
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far CREARA
Location and climatic region Valence – hot-Summer Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building University
Surface in m² 16315 m²
Annual energy use ~ 1 500 MWh
Main energy use Cooling and lighting
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 91.3 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Enhancing energy efficiency and reducing cooling energy use through EPC or turnkey project
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 12y
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Installation of sun shading devices, Substitution of conventional lamps,
Occupancy and presence sensors, Variable frequency drives for
pumps, Photovoltaic plant (production)
Potential Energy savings 236.801 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 23 367 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 100 t
Cost of investment 237 173€
Payback period (estimated or real) 10 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Following the assessment, a client-financing scenario of 80% debt and 20% equity was discussed with a loan duration of 12 years
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing D : Medium-Low Profitability, medium-high likelihood of bad performance, medium-long payback time, with a medium-low level of security in the financing
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility could save 20 % of its total energy costs
Status of project Started
General Comments Although the investment has only a D GREPCon rating, the owner of the installation was interested in implementing the measures in two different phases as turnkey contract projects.
46
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP03 HOSPITALITY ES’3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far CREARA
Location and climatic region Madrid – warm temperate
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Apart Hotel
Surface in m² 9193 m²
Annual energy use ~ 580 MWh
Main energy use Domestic hot water
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 63.1 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Although the hotel presents an efficient lighting system there is still potential to achieve considerable energy savings
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, water saving aerators, solar thermal
plant, PV plant (production), Building Management System
Potential Energy savings 166330 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 13544 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 63 t
Cost of investment 89 374€
Payback period (estimated or real) 6 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 10 years EPC contract scenario, with 80% financing
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing B : Medium-High Profitability, medium-low likelihood of bad performance, medium-short payback time, with a medium-high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility could save 30 % of its total energy costs with low ROI
Status of project Assessment phase
General Comments Preliminary assessment
47
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP04 OFFICE ES’4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Office
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far CREARA
Location and climatic region Barcelona – Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Modern offices
Surface in m² 14646 m²
Annual energy use ~ 2 700 MWh
Main energy use Lighting and ITs
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 184,3 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective
The tenant of part of the building has no control of heating and cooling systems. The lighting system has already been analysed and it was found that there is a huge potential in the substitution of the lighting system by a more efficient one
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 9
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, occupancy and presence sensors,
implementation of energy star procedure in computers
Potential Energy savings 361785 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 30878 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 107 t
Cost of investment 130 000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 9 years EPC contract scenario, with 80% financing
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The client could save 14 % of its total energy costs with low ROI
Status of project Assessment phase
General Comments Preliminary assessment, waiting for Information from the client in order to complete the study.
48
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP05 TERTIARY SERVICES ES’5
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Tertiary services
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Bureau Veritas Iberia
Location and climatic region Terrassa – Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Offices and other tertiary buildings
Surface in m² 4131 m²
Annual energy use ~ 572 MWh
Main energy use Air conditioning
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 138,5 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective
The current air conditioning systems are very inefficient and many of equipment are obsolete. The energy consumption by air conditioning represents 60%, and it can be lowered considerably with a more efficient technology
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 20
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Occupancy and presence sensors,
Substitution of a low efficiency chiller with inverter chiller
Potential Energy savings 137 000 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 17819 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 50 t
Cost of investment 200 000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 11 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 20 years EPC contract scenario, with 50% financing
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment There is a high saving potential in the substitution of a low efficiency chiller with inverter chiller and the substitution of lamps. The facility can save 35% of its total energy costs
Status of project Under implementation
General Comments NA
49
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP06 TERTIARY SERVICES ES’6
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Tertiary services
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Bureau Veritas Iberia
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Elderly residence and offices
Surface in m² 11 902 m²
Annual energy use ~ 1 843 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 154.8 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective
Private institution wanting to make an inventory of existing equipment of their installations, acquire in-depth understanding of the energy management of their installations and know which EE measures could be implemented in order to reduce their energy and economic costs
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 20
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Replacement of lamps ballast,
Occupancy and presence sensors, Variable frequency drives for pumps,
Solar thermal plant
Potential Energy savings 326 253 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 26187 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 51 t
Cost of investment 162 367 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 8 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 20 years client contract scenario, with 80% financing
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment There is a high saving potential in the substitution of conventional lamps and in the installation of a solar thermal plant. The facility can save 19% of its total energy costs
Status of project Planning phase
General Comments Under a 20 years EPC contract scenario, with 80% financing, the investment could reach a C GREPCon rating
50
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP07 COMMERCIAL ES’7
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Commercial
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Bureau Veritas Iberia
Location and climatic region Madrid, warm temperate
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Shopping mall
Surface in m² 220 000 m²
Annual energy use ~ 8 426 MWh
Main energy use Air conditioning
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 38.3 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Key issue is to ensure energy savings as foreseen
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 20
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Occupancy and presence sensors,
Installation of a photovoltaic plant, Building Energy Management System
Potential Energy savings 1 031 000 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 165 403 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 307 t
Cost of investment 946 371 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 20 years EPC Contract scenario, with 60% financing
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment High saving potential in the substitution of conventional lamps, installation of a photovoltaic plant and building management system The facility could save 13% of its total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning phase
General Comments None
51
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP08 COMMERCIAL ES’8
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Commercial
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Bureau Veritas Iberia
Location and climatic region Madrid, warm temperate
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Shopping mall
Surface in m² 67 091 m²
Annual energy use ~ 3 900 MWh
Main energy use Lighting and air conditioning
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 58.1 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Key issue is to ensure energy savings as foreseen
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Photovoltaic plant ,Building Energy
Management System
Potential Energy savings 356 416 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 46 685 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 307 t
Cost of investment 239 650 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 9 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 10 years EPC Contract scenario, with 60% financing
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment High saving potential in the substitution of conventional lamps and installation of a Building Energy Management System The facility could save 9,2% of its total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning phase
General Comments Could start in 2018
52
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP09 HOSPITALITY ES’9
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Bureau Veritas Iberia
Location and climatic region San Sebastian, Oceanic
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Surface in m² 13 130 m²
Annual energy use ~ 3 024 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 230.3 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective This hotel is a historical building close to the beach, and needs a better energy management system.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 5
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Replacement of lamps ballast,
Photocell to dim luminous flux based on natural light, Variable frequency
drives for pumps
Potential Energy savings 285 445 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 35 392 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 12.3 t
Cost of investment 73 270 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 3 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 5 years EPC contract scenario, with 60% financing
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment There is a high saving potential in the substitution of conventional lamps and Variable frequency drives for pumps The facility can save 9% of its total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning phase
General Comments Possible project start date: 2018
53
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP10 HOSPITALITY ES’10
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Bureau Veritas Iberia
Location and climatic region Palma de Mallorca, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Surface in m² 20 907 m²
Annual energy use ~ 4 982 MWh
Main energy use Heating and air conditioning
Main energy source Gas (heating) and electricity (AC)
Energy use per m² before intervention 238.3 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective This hotel is a historical building with conventional installations and equipment that wants to reach higher energy efficiency.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 5
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Replacement of lamps ballast,
Photocell to dim luminous flux based on natural light, Variable frequency
drives for pumps
Potential Energy savings 408 786 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 56 043 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 15 t
Cost of investment 124 616 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 3 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 5 years EPC contract scenario, with 60% financing
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment High saving potential in the substitution of conventional lamps and in the installation of a solar thermal plant The facility can save 10% of its total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning phase
General Comments Possible project start date: 2018
54
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP11 HOSPITALITY ES’11
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far CREARA
Location and climatic region Madrid, warm temperate
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Surface in m² 20 356 m²
Annual energy use ~ 1 621 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 79.6 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective The owner of the building is interested in exploiting the huge potential existing in the substitution of the heating, lighting and hydraulic distribution systems
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Occupancy and presence sensors,
Installation of biomass boiler for heating, Pipework and boiler insulation,
Solar thermal plant, Photovoltaic plant (generation)
Potential Energy savings 371 227 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 57 544 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 325 t
Cost of investment 410 884 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 10 years Client Financing contract scenario
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment High saving potential in the HVAC and building management system of the building The facility could save 33,0% of its total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning phase
General Comments none
55
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP12 EDUCATION FR’1
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Education
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far ENERGIES 2050
Location and climatic region Avignon, Humid Subtropical climate
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Classrooms, offices and dormitories
Surface in m² 1838 m²
Annual energy use ~ 306 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 166.5 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective This private education organisation is involved in sustainability initiatives and energy efficiency. They want to exploit opportunities in this field but lack means to invest.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 7
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of windows (the single glazed windows in the old building),
HVAC Schedule definition to avoid waste, Substitution of conventional
lamps, Building Management System, PV Panels (5kw)
Potential Energy savings 112 331 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 11 176 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 20.2 t
Cost of investment 47 050 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 7 years EPC project under a financial scenario of 10% grant, 80% debt, 20% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC Contract financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Lack of resources for investing but high EE potential – EPC could be a strong solution. The facility can save 22% of its total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning phase
General Comments Medium scale project but opportunities to bundle with other similar educational organisations are discussed
56
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP13 EDUCATION FR’2
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Education
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far ENERGIES 2050
Location and climatic region Montélimar, Humid Subtropical climate
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Classrooms, offices and dormitories
Surface in m² 1643 m²
Annual energy use ~ 323 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 196.6 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective
Managers of this education building shown interest in implementing energy saving measures, mainly as they are engaged in sustainability policies. They lack resources for investing and need support of subventions or a loan with preferential conditions, or through innovative mechanisms.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 6
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, HVAC schedule definition (including
upgrade of the heat distribution system), Thermostatic valves for
radiators, PV Plant
Potential Energy savings 125 911 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 10 690 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 23 t
Cost of investment 50 000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 5 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Client financed project under a financial scenario of 10% grant, 70% debt and 30% equity.
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Lack of resources for investing but high EE potential The facility can save 30% of its total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning phase
General Comments Medium scale project but opportunities to bundle with other similar educational organisations are discussed
57
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP14 HOSPITALITY FR’3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far ENERGIES 2050
Location and climatic region South Corsica, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Surface in m² 2700 m²
Annual energy use ~ 515 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 190.7 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective The hotel is engaged in a strategy for high energy performances and is willing to invest in this field.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 6
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, HVAC schedule definition solar
thermal plant
Potential Energy savings 76 607 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 7756 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~9 t
Cost of investment 40 000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 5 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Client financed project under a financial scenario of 60% debt and 40% equity.
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Large potential for replicability The facility can save 15% of its total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Started
General Comments Higher investments are possible (up to 70000€) but the profitability is lower and ROI longer
58
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP15 HOSPITALITY FR’4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far ENERGIES 2050
Location and climatic region Mercantour, Mountainous
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Surface in m² 900 m²
Annual energy use ~ 120 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 133.3 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Owners want to invest in energy efficiency to ensure comfort during winter time. Building in poor shape and energy efficiency investments could be added to the necessary refurbishments.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Substitution of windows, Building
insulation, Thermostatic valves
Potential Energy savings 40 337 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 3346 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~7.3 t
Cost of investment 51 000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 14 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Client financed project under a financial scenario of 50% debt and 50% equity.
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing C : Medium Profitability, medium likelihood of bad performance, medium payback time, with a medium level of security in the financing
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Old mountainous hotel which already went through some refurbishment but which globally shows very poor energy performances. The facility can save 35% of its total energy costs
Status of project Started
General Comments Hotel willing to open in winter – will require refurbishments in any cases
59
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP16 EDUCATION FR’5
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Education
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far ENERGIES 2050
Location and climatic region Avignon, Humid Subtropical climate
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Classrooms, offices and dormitories
Surface in m² 1672 m²
Annual energy use ~ 217 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Electricity and gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 130 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective
Managers of this education building shown interest in implementing energy saving measures, mainly as they are engaged in sustainability policies. They lack resources for investing and need support of subventions or a loan with preferential conditions, or through innovative mechanisms.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
BMS, Thermostatic valves for radiators, Substitution of conventional
lamps, HVAC Schedule definition
Potential Energy savings 106 882 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 7 331 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 23 t
Cost of investment 65 000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 10 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Client financed project under a financial scenario of 80% debt and 20% equity.
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing B : Medium-High Profitability, medium-low likelihood of bad performance, medium-short payback time, with a medium-high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Lack of resources for investing but high EE potential The facility can save 28% of its total energy costs
Status of project Started
General Comments Medium scale project but opportunities to bundle with other similar educational organisations are discussed
60
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP17 HOSPITALITY FR’6
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far ENERGIES 2050
Location and climatic region Verdon, Mountainous
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Surface in m² 1200 m²
Annual energy use ~ 282 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 235 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Owners shown interest in implementing energy efficiency and improving constantly their performances in this field. They have several labels including the Eco Label but need to unlock funds for investments.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 20
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of windows (single glazed in the old building), Installation of
sun shading devices, Substitution of conventional lamps
Potential Energy savings 43448 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 6360 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 1,5 t
Cost of investment 65 000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 10 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing The investment has been currently proposed as a 20 years loan directly made to the client under a financial scenario of 70% debt, 30% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing C : Medium Profitability, medium likelihood of bad performance, medium payback time, with a medium level of security in the financing
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Lack of resources for investing but high EE potential. The facility can save 15% of its total energy costs
Status of project Started
General Comments None
61
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP18 OFFICES FR’7
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Offices
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far ENERGIES 2050
Location and climatic region Paris, oceanic
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Offices
Surface in m² 2600 m²
Annual energy use ~ 340 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 130.8kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Owners shown interest in investing in energy efficiency as part of their global actions for sustainability.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 5
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
HVAC schedule definition, Automatic shut off for HVAC, Substitution of
conventional lamps, Rooftop PV plant (3kW)
Potential Energy savings 172229 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 22970 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 7.4 t
Cost of investment 45 000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 3 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 5 years EPC project under a financial scenario of 50% debt, 50% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 50% of its total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments None
62
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP19 COMMERCE FR’8
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Commercial
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far ENERGIES 2050
Location and climatic region Across France
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Shopping centres
Surface in m² 40 000 m²
Annual energy use ~ 2 400 MWh
Main energy use Lighting
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 60kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Reduce lighting energy consumption across 90+ retails – limited opportunities in the other fields.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 5
Sustainable Energy measures recommended Substitution of conventional lamps
Potential Energy savings 694000 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 90 000 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 20 t
Cost of investment 184 000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 3 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 5 years EPC project under a financial scenario of 25% debt, 70% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Large investment, rapid ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments
Retails are of special interest, not individually as clients often rent the space located in large commercial centers, but at a larger scale. Focus is here primarily on lighting as it is the main consumption source and it is directly under control of client
63
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP20 TERTIARY SERVICES FR’9
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Logistics
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far ENERGIES 2050
Location and climatic region Paris, Oceanic
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Storages/logistics
Surface in m² 30 000 m²
Annual energy use ~ 6 400 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 213.3kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Reduce lighting energy consumption across 90+ retails – limited opportunities in the other fields.
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Building management system,
Building insulation
Potential Energy savings 935587 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 19280 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 183 t
Cost of investment 183 000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 9 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 10 years equity financing project
GREPCon Project Rating
Equity financing C : Medium Profitability, medium likelihood of bad performance, medium payback time, with a medium level of security in the financing
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Large investment, owners are planning to invest in structural refurbishment of buildings and to implement at the same time EE measures
Status of project Planning
General Comments Recent extension of the previous buildings needs structural refurbishment in any cases
64
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP21 OFFICES GR’1
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Offices
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Confidential
Location and climatic region Chania, Crete, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Offices
Surface in m² 1545 m²
Annual energy use ~ 97 MWh
Main energy use Cooling and heating
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 62.9 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Reduce energy losses especially from the openings
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 8
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of single-glazing windows with double-glazing ones with
thermal-break, Installation of automatic door at entrance, Substitution of
conventional lamps with LED, Occupancy and presence sensors in the
corridors and toilets
Potential Energy savings 42569 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 7628 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 42 t
Cost of investment 37575 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 3 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing EPC financing in combination with grants
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment
The energy saving scenarios and corresponding interventions emerged after interviews and collaboration with the building managers to investigate their investments priorities. The facility can save 44 % of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Under implementation
General Comments Old building from 1968, 4-floors, located in the town center. Building occupants will benefit from improved indoor environmental conditions, due to the improvements in the building envelope.
65
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP22 OFFICES GR’2
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Offices
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Confidential
Location and climatic region Athens, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Offices
Surface in m² 6575 m²
Annual energy use ~ 943 MWh
Main energy use Server rooms
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 143.4 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Reduce electricity use, increase use of RES, become nearly zero energy building
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 8
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps with LED, Variable Frequency Drives
with CO2 sensors for Air Handling Units, Window films to improve their
solar factor, Solar thermal plant for DHW, Photovoltaic plant
Potential Energy savings 229151 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 26251 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 207 t
Cost of investment 109,900 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 8 years EPC project under a financial scenario of 60% debt, 40% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A: High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 24% of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI, despite already considered an energy efficient building,
Status of project Planning
General Comments Built in 2008 following bioclimatic architecture, has applied EN ISO 50001:2011. Potential start date 2018 (Q3)
66
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP23 HOSPITALITY GR’3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Confidential
Location and climatic region Rethymno, Crete, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel and restaurant
Surface in m² 4450 m²
Annual energy use ~ 517 MWh
Main energy use Restaurant/kitchen
Main energy source Electricity and gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 116.2 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Improve energy efficiency of the facilities and invest in RES, become nearly zero energy building
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 8
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Photovoltaic plant, Installation of ceiling fans, Substitution of electric
appliances with gas appliances in the kitchen, Substitution of appliances
in laundry with more efficient ones, Occupancy and presence sensors in
corridors, Substitution of conventional lamps with LED
Potential Energy savings 194651 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 21218 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 170t
Cost of investment 103605 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 8 years EPC project under a financial scenario of 60% debt, 40% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing B : Medium-High Profitability, medium-low likelihood of bad performance, medium-short payback time, with a medium-high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 34% of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Under implementation
General Comments Key issues to overcome: regulatory issues with the PV installation due to the grid limitations in islands.
67
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP24 HOSPITALITY GR’4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Confidential
Location and climatic region Lasithi, Crete, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building 15 buildings complex, that includes guests’ rooms and suites, restaurants, bars, swimming pools, spa centre, kids club
Surface in m² 18000 m²
Annual energy use ~ 2082 MWh
Main energy use Cooling
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 115.7 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Improve energy efficiency of the facilities and comfort, increase use of RES, become nearly zero energy building
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of low efficiency chiller with inverter chiller, Heat recovery
systems, Thermal insulation of building envelope, Substitution of
windows, Solar thermal plant, Swimming pool heat cover, Substitution of
conventional lamps with LED
Potential Energy savings 1001573 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 103900 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 521t
Cost of investment 539000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 10 years client financing under a financial scenario of 60% debt, 40% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 32% of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Under implementation
General Comments
The financial indicators arising from the insulation measure may not be as good as for the rest of measures, however it needs to be considered that insulation significantly improves indoor environmental conditions, an aspect which is particularly important for hotels (guest comfort)
68
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP25 LEISURE GR’5
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Leisure
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Confidential
Location and climatic region Chania, Crete, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Leisure/Sport centre
Surface in m² 4172m²
Annual energy use ~ 862 MWh
Main energy use Cooling and heating
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 206.6 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Exploit large potential for energy efficiency
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 8
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of low efficiency chiller with inverter chiller, Substitution of
boiler, Air curtains installation in main entrance, Improve solar factor,
Photovoltaic plant installation
Potential Energy savings 410241 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 73515 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 406t
Cost of investment 178500€
Payback period (estimated or real) 3 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 8 years EPC project under a financial scenario of 60% debt, 40% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 48% of total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments
The facility has a significant energy efficiency potential, mainly due to the poor energy management applied so far. The interventions in the windows and door, as well as the cooling/heating system, will significantly improve comfort of occupants
69
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP26 HEALTH GR’6
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Healthcare
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Confidential
Location and climatic region Athens, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Surface in m² 45,000 m²
Annual energy use ~ 19411 MWh
Main energy use Cooling and Heating
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 431.4 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Improve energy efficiency and management in the facility and increase use of RES
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional boiler with condensing boiler, Heat recovery
systems, Window films to improve solar factor, PV plant in the outdoor
parking (solar parking shadings)
Potential Energy savings 1602240 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 91250 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 549t
Cost of investment 600000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 7 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 10 years client financing under a financial scenario of 60% debt, 40% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment
The facility can save almost 100,000 €/year of its total yearly energy costs and improve its energy efficiency despite already being a highly efficient building. In addition the facility will acquire a shaded parking lot (PV plant).
Status of project Planning
General Comments
Due to the numerous already implemented energy saving interventions, the savings percentage that can be achieved is relatively small (8%); nevertheless, this corresponds to a significant amount of energy savings (1.6 GWh/year).
70
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP27 HOSPITALITY HR’1
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far EIHP
Location and climatic region Brac, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building 4 stars family hotel
Surface in m² 978 m²
Annual energy use ~ 40 MWh
Main energy use Lighting and Domestic Hot Water
Main energy source Electricity and gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 40.8 kwh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Improve energy efficiency of the facilities in this hotel built in 1970 and partially reconstructed in 2002
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of all lamps with LED lamps, Installation of a solar thermal
plant, Reactive power compensation
Potential Energy savings 130 214 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 2814€/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 7t
Cost of investment 10000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 10 years client financing under a financial scenario of 70% debt, 30% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 41% of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments None
71
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP28 HOSPITALITY HR’2
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far EIHP
Location and climatic region Split, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel and Spa
Surface in m² NA
Annual energy use ~ 223 MWh
Main energy use Heating and cooling
Main energy source Electricity and fuel
Energy use per m² before intervention NA
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Project deals with upgrade of highly energy efficient hotel to the status of nearly zero energy building
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 15
Sustainable Energy measures recommended Substitution of halogen lamps with LED lamps, Photovoltaic plant
Potential Energy savings 11532 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 2200€/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 2.5t
Cost of investment 32000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 15 years client financing project with a grant of 73%, 19% debt and 8% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 9% of its total yearly energy costs
Status of project Planning
General Comments None
72
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP29 OFFICES HR’3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Offices
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far EIHP
Location and climatic region Zagreb, Oceanic
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Offices
Surface in m² NA
Annual energy use ~ 25 983 MWh
Main energy use Heating and cooling
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention NA
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Improve EE in this complex of office buildings constructed in 1970
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 9
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of low-efficient lamps, Substitution of low efficiency chillers
with inverter chillers
Potential Energy savings 1605726 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 127000€/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 23t
Cost of investment 686000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 5 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 9 years client financing project with a grant of 27%, 51% debt and 22% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 6% of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments None
73
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP30 LEISURE HR’4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Leisure
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far EIHP
Location and climatic region Osijek, Oceanic
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Public pool and sport centre
Surface in m² NA
Annual energy use ~ 2 770 MWh
Main energy use Swimming pools
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention NA
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Project deals with energy renovation of public pool in Osijek, constructed in 1998 with an annual consumption of 2.770 MWh
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 11
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Replacement of existing conventional boilers with condensing boilers,
Installation of solar thermal plant, HVAC reconstruction – new air
handling units, Installation of new frequency regulated filter pumps
Potential Energy savings 1327628 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 47000€/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 155t
Cost of investment 426000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 5 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 11 years EPC project with a grant of 50%, 45% debt and 15% equity, invested by the EPC provider
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 38% of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments Additional savings can be achieved by taking water savings in to account
74
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP31 HEALTH HR’5
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Health
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far EIHP
Location and climatic region Crikvenica, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Specialised hospital / Thalassotherapy
Surface in m² NA
Annual energy use ~ 2 786 MWh
Main energy use Pools
Main energy source Fuel
Energy use per m² before intervention NA
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Project deals with energy renovation of public specialized hospital in Crikvenica, constructed form 1922 till 2014 with some medium reconstructions in last 10 year
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 12
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Installation of heat pump for heating and DHW, Installation of solar
thermal plant, Substitution of conventional lamps with LED lamps,
Capacitive power factor correction
Potential Energy savings 1110067 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 60000€/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 355t
Cost of investment 500000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 5 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 12 years EPC project with a grant of 35%, 46% debt and 19% equity, invested by the EPC provider
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 40% of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments The EPC provider, for the duration of the EPC, will receive the 100% of the obtained savings in order to operate the contract making sure maximum savings are achieved and repay the debt.
75
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP32 HOSPITALITY IT’1
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Ambiente Italia
Location and climatic region NA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Surface in m² 4000m²
Annual energy use ~ 1 136 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 283.9 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Improve EE in the hotel
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Occupancy and presence sensors,
Substitution of a low efficiency chiller with inverter chiller, HVAC
schedule definition, Substitution of windows, Thermal insulation of
building envelope (it’s a partial renovation: only interior façade),
Substitution of conventional boiler with condensing boiler
Potential Energy savings 543466 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 62092€/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 83t
Cost of investment 441000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Client financed scenario with 20% debt and 80% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 37% of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments it is possible to take advantage of a 65% tax credit on the investment costs available during the first 10 years following the investment.
76
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP33 HOSPITALITY IT’2
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Ambiente Italia
Location and climatic region NA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hostel
Surface in m² 2682m²
Annual energy use ~ 370 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 138 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Improve EE in the hostel
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Thermal insulation of building envelope, Substitution of conventional
lamps, Occupancy and presence sensors combined with photocell,
Substitution of conventional boiler with condensing boiler
Potential Energy savings 192266 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 16929 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 23t
Cost of investment 133446 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Client financial scenario basing on a 20% grant, 70% debt and 30% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing B : Medium-High Profitability, medium-low likelihood of bad performance, medium-short payback time, with a medium-high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 52% of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments To reinforce the profitability, it is possible to take advantage of a 65% tax credit on the investment costs available during the first 10 years following the investment.
77
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP34 COMMERCE IT’3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Commerce
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Ambiente Italia
Location and climatic region NA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Shopping mall
Surface in m² 73753 m²
Annual energy use ~ 10 620 MWh
Main energy use Heating and cooling
Main energy source Gas and electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 144 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective The Shopping mall management wants to reach a better energy performance
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 6
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
HVAC schedule definition, Substitution of conventional lamps, Variable
frequency drives for pumps, Photovoltaic plant
Potential Energy savings 753736 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 179000 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 508t
Cost of investment 529083 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 2 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing EPC financial scenario of 80% debt and 20% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment The facility can save 10.4% of its total yearly energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments
If the investment will be done within December 2018, it can receive a 50% tax refund in 10 years. Without the subsidy the investment still remains A rated. The PV plant energy production do not contribute to energy savings, but has been accounted in CO2 savings and in the economic and financial costs and revenues.
78
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP35 TERTIARY SERVICES IT’4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Financial services
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Ambiente Italia
Location and climatic region NA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Bank office
Surface in m² 6560 m²
Annual energy use ~ 1 202 MWh
Main energy use Heating and cooling
Main energy source Gas and electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 183.3 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Heating and cooling are the main consumption items, therefore an intervention on the envelope could be very appreciated also in terms of internal comfort
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 20
Sustainable Energy measures recommended Substitution of windows, Thermal insulation of building envelope
Potential Energy savings 284 950 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 41 716 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 57t
Cost of investment 490130 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 9 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Equity financing
GREPCon Project Rating
Equity financing D : Medium-Low Profitability, medium-high likelihood of bad performance, medium-long payback time, with a medium-low level of security in the financing
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment By the financial analysis this intervention seems to be not very interesting, but the value increase of the building and the renovation needs made the investment possible.
Status of project Planning
General Comments A part of the investment can be recovered from the income tax payments. As an EPC project, this investment would result in a lower E GREPCon rating
79
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP36 EDUCATION IT’5
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Education
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Ambiente Italia
Location and climatic region NA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Primary school
Surface in m² 2333 m²
Annual energy use ~ 377 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 161.6 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Reduce energy use
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 15
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Installation of biomass boiler for
heating, Thermal insulation of building envelope, Photovoltaic plant
Potential Energy savings 172306 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 42651 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 35t
Cost of investment 268 385 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing EPC financial scenario of 20% grant, 56% debt and 24% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 45% of total energy costs with rapid ROI
Status of project Already validated, start 2018
General Comments none
80
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP37 LEISURE IT’6
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Leisure
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Ambiente Italia
Location and climatic region NA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Sport centre
Surface in m² 1963 m²
Annual energy use ~ 517 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 263.3 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Client interested in EPC to enhance energy efficiency
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 15
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of windows, Thermal insulation of building envelope,
Substitution of conventional boiler with condensing boiler, Occupancy
and presence sensors
Potential Energy savings 266306 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 19665 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 60t
Cost of investment 139976 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 7 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing EPC financial scenario of 10% grant, 60% debt and 40% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing C : Medium Profitability, medium likelihood of bad performance, medium payback time, with a medium level of security in the financing
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 52% of total energy costs
Status of project The project could be started before the end 2018
General Comments
Potential for a 65% tax credit for the client during the first 10 years (6, 5% of the investment can be recovered annually from the income tax payments). A client financed scenario has a better result, reaching an A GREPCon Rating
81
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP38 LEISURE IT’7
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Leisure
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Ambiente Italia
Location and climatic region NA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Sport centre
Surface in m² 4260 m²
Annual energy use ~ 2 004 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 470.5 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective
The sport center was built in 2000, but the energy performance is not very high. The administration board is interested in enhancing its energy performance. There is a considerable potential in the improvement of the lighting system
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 11
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Occupancy and presence sensors,
Photocells to dim luminous flux based on natural light, Substitution of a
low efficiency chiller with inverter chiller, Thermostatic valves for
radiators; Thermal insulation of building envelope
Potential Energy savings 253089 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 21742€/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 59t
Cost of investment 91516 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 3 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing EPC financial scenario 80% debt and 20% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 12% of total energy costs
Status of project Planning
General Comments A 65% / 50% tax credit for the client during the first 10 years
82
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP39 OFFICE IT’8
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Office
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Ambiente Italia
Location and climatic region NA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Offices
Surface in m² 5270 m²
Annual energy use ~ 640 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Fuel
Energy use per m² before intervention 121.4 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective The building needs several interventions, first of all the substitution of the existing fuel boiler
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 8
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Substitution of a conventional boiler
by condensation boiler, PV plant
Potential Energy savings 119503 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 35267€/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 28t
Cost of investment 143285 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Client financial scenario 80% debt and 20% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing B : Medium-High Profitability, medium-low likelihood of bad performance, medium-short payback time, with a medium-high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 40% of total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments A larger refurbishment would be needed and could reduce the consumption by 60-70 %, but the investment is too large for the client.
83
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP40 EDUCATION IT’9
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Education
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Ambiente Italia
Location and climatic region NA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building School
Surface in m² 2867 m²
Annual energy use ~ 338 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 118 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective The building needs several interventions, affecting also the outer envelope
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 10
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Thermal insulation of building
envelope, Substitution of a conventional boiler by condensation boiler,
PV plant
Potential Energy savings 205 000 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 19713 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 45t
Cost of investment 189000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 7 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Client financial scenario 60% debt and 40% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 68% of total energy costs
Status of project Planning
General Comments
The building needs an overall refurbishment, and the owner intends to reach also an energy performance upgrade. The realization with an EPC scheme would reach a lower financial performance, giving the project an D GREPCon Rating
84
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP41 LEISURE IT’10
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Leisure
Type of project (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator involved so far Ambiente Italia
Location and climatic region NA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Sport centre
Surface in m² 2439 m²
Annual energy use ~ 219 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 89.8 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective The sport hall was built in the ‘70, and has a very large energy use
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 9
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Thermal insulation of building
envelope (Roof only), Substitution of a conventional boiler by
condensation boiler
Potential Energy savings 105356 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 11122 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 23.4t
Cost of investment 93923€
Payback period (estimated or real) 7 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing Client financial scenario 80% debt and 20% equity
GREPCon Project Rating
Client financing C : Medium Profitability, medium likelihood of bad performance, medium payback time, with a medium level of security in the financing
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 47% of total energy costs
Status of project Planning
General Comments
There is a 50% tax credit for the client during the first 10 years (5% respectively of the investment can be recovered annually from the income tax payments). The realization with an EPC Financed scheme would reach a E GREPCon Rating
85
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP42 HOSPITALITY PT’1
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far PSE
Location and climatic region Lisbon, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Senior residences building with apartments, restaurants/bar, gymnasium, leisure rooms, gardens, kitchen and technical areas
Surface in m² 15724 m²
Annual energy use ~ 737 MWh
Main energy use HVAC
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 46.9 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Exploit large potential for EE and RES
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 15
Sustainable Energy measures recommended Substitution of conventional lamps, Solar thermal plant, PV plant
Potential Energy savings 140300 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 58023 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 81.3t
Cost of investment 165673€
Payback period (estimated or real) 2 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 15 years EPC contract scenario, with 80% financing by ESCO and 20% by the Client
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC Contract A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 43% of total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Planning
General Comments Currently under review
86
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP43 EDUCATION PT’2
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far PSE
Location and climatic region Lisbon, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building School building with classrooms, laboratories, gymnasium, offices, bar, kitchen and technical areas
Surface in m² 8621 m²
Annual energy use ~ 654 MWh
Main energy use Heating
Main energy source Electricity and gas
Energy use per m² before intervention 75.9 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Exploit large potential for EE and RES
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 20
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Solar thermal plant, PV plant,
Building Management System
Potential Energy savings 78112 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 13971 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 24t
Cost of investment 89000€
Payback period (estimated or real) 4 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 20 years EPC contract scenario, with 80% financing by ESCO and 20% by the Client
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC Contract B : Medium-High Profitability, medium-low likelihood of bad performance, medium-short payback time, with a medium-high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 18% of total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Under review
General Comments Although the Client financing could reach an A GREPCon rating, the Client prefers the EPC scheme
87
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP44 TERTIARY SERVICES PT’3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Tertiary services
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far PSE
Location and climatic region Lisbon, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Office building with offices, shopping and technical areas
Surface in m² 5475 m²
Annual energy use ~ 352 MWh
Main energy use Lighting
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 64.2 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Exploit large potential for EE
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 15
Sustainable Energy measures recommended Substitution of conventional lamps, Building Management System
Potential Energy savings 67018 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 11105 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 7t
Cost of investment 48000€
Payback period (estimated or real) 2 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 15 years EPC contract scenario, with 80% financing by ESCO and 20% by the Client
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC Contract A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 19% of total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Under review
General Comments None
88
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP45 OFFICES PT’4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Tertiary services
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far PSE
Location and climatic region Lisbon, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Offices building with office rooms, open space, conference rooms, WC, kitchen, common areas and technical areas
Surface in m² 10 434m²
Annual energy use in kWh ~ 781 MWh
Main energy use HVAC
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 74.8 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Exploit large potential for EE
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 15
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Substitution of conventional boiler
for condensing boiler
Potential Energy savings 108972 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 18758 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 7.8t
Cost of investment 18758€
Payback period (estimated or real) 2 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 15 years EPC contract scenario, with 70% financing by ESCO and 30% by the Client
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC Contract A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 15% of total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Under review
General Comments Client shared savings 7%
89
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018
PP46 OFFICES PT’5
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Tertiary services
Type of project (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator involved so far PSE
Location and climatic region Lisbon, Mediterranean
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Offices building with office rooms, open space, conference rooms, WC, kitchen, common areas and technical areas
Surface in m² 13400m²
Annual energy use ~ 660 MWh
Main energy use HVAC
Main energy source Electricity
Energy use per m² before intervention 49.2 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Main objective Exploit large potential for EE
Project Duration (in years) as proposed 20
Sustainable Energy measures recommended
Substitution of conventional lamps, Substitution of conventional boiler
for condensing boiler
Potential Energy savings 84902 kWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 13400 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 6t
Cost of investment 52679€
Payback period (estimated or real) 3 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Financing 20 years EPC contract scenario, with 70% financing by ESCO and 30% by the Client
GREPCon Project Rating
EPC Contract A : High Profitability, low likelihood of bad performance, very robust structure, short payback time, with a high level of security in the loan
4. Additional comments
Best Practice criteria assessment Facilities can save 13% of total energy costs with short ROI
Status of project Under review
General Comments Client shared savings 5%
90
Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES application
16/10/2018