- Количество слайдов: 79
Maximize Value How to get HIGH EFFICIENCY UTILITY SYSTEMS by using LOW EFFICIENCY COMPONENTS
Presentation Format Presented by- Randall E. Witte, CEM [email protected] 2 conserv. com President, Emc 2 Con. Serv, Inc. (Consultants specializing in utility cost reduction and environmental benefits) 1 st Place, ASHRAE Industrial Energy Awards Soon-to-be Six-Sigma Black Belt This program is to help you examine the ideas you likely have about cutting utility costs, improving reliability and reducing environmental impact. Many techniques will be discussed, but this is NOT a typical “how-to-do" presentation. It is intended to guide you on “HOW-TO-THINK”.
Presentation Format n n n n Business needs How did we get here? Alternative approaches available What does the FUTURE hold? Government & Industry response High Performance Buildings and Integrated Utilities Paradigm Busters Case Studies n n n #1 - Existing Paper Manufacturing Plant #2 - New School Construction #3 - Large Office HVAC Upgrade #4 - Commercial Laundry Plant Concept Wrap-up Questions and Comments
BUSINESS NEEDS & WANTS (Why we are all HERE today!) Virtually all organizations have similar needso Access to Reliable Energy o High Quality Energy Sources and Supplies Stable Energy Prices (preferably cheaper) o Environmentally-Friendly Utility Systems o Low-Maintenance Utility Systems o High Reliability Utility Systems o Unfortunately, they often run into the worst of all possible conditions-
The REAL WORLD As utility users search for their energy nirvana they come face-to-face with all kinds of obstaclesn INTANGIBLESIt is becoming harder to define, control, and focus on the problem n PRICE / COST-BASED SOLUTIONSEasy to define and quantify, but they often don’t actually SOLVE the problems n MISGUIDED EFFORTSFaced with high quality, efficient & inexpensive imports, the auto industry focused on price because they didn’t realize that lower cost was the by-product of the quality and efficiency.
How Did We Get Here? n Engineering services are considered “overhead”, so cost-control purchasing has caused “ value design to be ” replaced with adequate “ design effort ”
How Did We Get Here? n Specialists are now focusing on efficiency for single components, or specific utility systems, that they understand
How Did We Get Here? (cont’d) n Purchasing decisions are made based on CAPITAL cost without concern for LIFE CYCLEcost. Capital cost is only 8 -12% of the TOTAL cost of system ownership.
How Did We Get Here? (cont’d) n Utility operating cost evaluations were based on “past experiences” or current conditions. Future utility costs will depend on future events.
Utility System Cost Containment Typical Approaches & Concerns Supply Side Approach Real Time or Time of Day Rates Production Constraints Energy Cost Volatility Administrative Demands Brokers & Negotiated Costs “Better Value” Supply Risk Interruptible Contracts Production Constraints Fuel Storage Space Additional Staff Training Alternate Fuel Choices Similar to “Interruptible”
Utility System Cost Containment Typical Approaches & Concerns End-Use Approach Utility Data Management Energy Management System Administrative Demands Facility Service Only Can Not Support Process Often Over-ridden “Lean Usage” Approach Focus on Discrete Usage On-Site Power Generation “Systems” Approach Additional Staff Training Specialty Maintenance Often Not Integrated “Lean”, but more thorough
Problems Resulting From Using Typical Savings Approaches Ø LIMITED “ASSURED” SAVINGS vs. INVESTMENT COST (ACCESS TO FUNDS) Ø RISK OF DISRUPTIONS TO PRODUCTION Ø SUSCEPTIBLE TO RAPID PRICE SWINGS Ø SUSTAINABILITY OF SAVINGS Ø SUBSTANTIAL ADMINISTRATIVE DEMAND Ø ADVERSE INTERACTIONS OF “SOLUTIONS” Ø FINGER-POINTING WHEN PROBLEMS ARISE
What does the future hold? Fuel / Energy costs will continue to climb, driven by a variety of market and environmental influencesplus the fact there is a limited amount of fossil fuels available
The future (Part 2) n OIL- Supplier issues • Several sources, but many unstable • Any disruption causes price spikes plus driven by China’s growing dema • Just became the #2 importer • Their economy is ONLY 3% of world GDP growing at 10 -15% annually • Adding jobs at 8 -million per year
The future (Part 3) n Natural Gas-Tends to track “oil” in cost per BTU • Current market conditions are showing skewed pricing due to low summer demand “full” storage wells • Added demand pressure coming because it’s “clean”, and a key element in “hydrogen” economy
The future (Part 4) n ELECTRICITYReasonable long-term option, but facing added costs that mu be covered in rates • Major investment for stable “grid” • Additional generating capacity • Environmental issues increase construction and operating costs • Nuclear is viable long-term option, b faces significant investment, long lea times, and fuel storage.
The future (Part 5) U. S. manufacturing (and housing) growth will “fuel” more domestic energy demand Opportunities for significant energy cost savings are available, but will require conscientious effort Organizations that proactively plan to reduce consumption will be more successful than their competition
Government and Industry’s Response to the Problem Lots of “smart” folks trying to come up wi simple “cookbook” regulations to solve th problem • Developed by individual industry specialists • Proposed solutions are focused on energy components they understand • “Creativity” is allowed, but most engineers (and regulators) don’t understand utility systems and their relationships “K. I. S. S. ” is usually NOT the solution best for a complex problem
Today’s CHALLENGE Rule #1 - Commercial and Industrial facilities are NOT residential structures. Rule #2 - Most Building and Energy Codes tend to ignore Rule #1.
Today’s SOLUTION Optimum efficiency (& lowest costs) at a fac occur when ALL components work together toward a common result. There is no economic “value” gained in SPENDING MONEY to make a building more thermally and air-side “tight”, then having SPEND MORE MONEY MORE ENERGY to and remove the trapped heat and contaminants
Finding the right path How business has responded to other needsn PRODUCT QUALITY Failure analysis, Paredo Charts, ISO 9001 n PROCESS EFFECTIVENESS 6 -Sigma Black Belt Analysis, Systems Re-engineering n ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT LEED analysis, design, and operation, ISO 14001 Each “solution” requires commitment, thorough analysis, and big-picture perspective- and they solve problems COST-EFFECTIVELY.
Achieving the Goal Winning a race at Le Mans needs a very different approach than the Indy 500 or a NASCAR event. n Fewer rules on equipment assembly, parts, or required fuel economy n Success means components are matched to specific needs and other components n Reliability matched to peak performance High Performance Building Design provides the right solution to today’s demanding business practices and utility operating needs.
High Performance Building Design • Incorporates INTEGRATED UTILITIES Concepts • Designed & built based on intended results- and integrated into “PROCESS” • Life Cycle Performance becomes prime criteria for selecting facility components • THESE AREN’T HOUSES!
KEY CONSIDERATIONS for High Performance Building Designl Six feet back from any exterior wall is ALWAYS interior space. l Significant heat-producing systems (like computers) are generally always “ON” l Thermopane glass and high insulation holds excess heat inside the “box” l Many buildings operate at “net positive” heat down to below freezing outside temp.
More CONSIDERATIONS for High Performance Building Designl The Electric energy required to cool a space (remove heat) has a thermal cost ($/BTU) that is 200%-400% higher than the fuel required to add heat to a space. l Many “standard” utility system designs are not able to properly support actual space requirements because the designers did not understand all the dynamics of the building AND the occupants.
TYPICAL “CENTRAL” PLANT UTILITIES ARRANGEMENT Each system designed for efficient, stand-alone operation USER Comp Air USER USER Boiler USER USER Elect USER USER Chiller USER HVAC USER USER USER USER
The FACILITY is the SYSTEM USER USER USER USER UTILITY USER USER USER USER USER USER USER USER UTILITY USER USER USER USER UTILITY USER USER USER UTILITY USER User USER USER USER UTILITY USER USER • The structure, lighting, power, compressed air, heating, cooling, domestic water, refrigeration, sewer, fire protection, plus all of the process loads are ALL JUST SUB-SYSTEMS. • How well the sub-systems work together determines how well the FACILITY will work, and how much it will cost to operate & maintain.
High Performance Utilities v “Integrated” utility systems- the by-product of one component becomes the input to another v Core components are matched to “continuous” loads and related utilities so system operates “steady-state” v Component “efficiency” doesn’t matter. High Performance Utilities recycle by-products v Modular components allow for peak loading v TOTAL component operating cost consideredutilities, maintenance, life expectancy, replacement Because energy purchases are recycled, there is much lower environmental (CO 2, etc. ) impact
High Performance Concept • Sub-systems, the process, and the building, produce heat as a by-product of operation. • Integrated utilities produce electricity, extract heat (with distilled water refrigerant) and reject heat to “cooling” water. • Other sub-systems, including the process, are heat-using and can be significantly aided by the rejected utility heat put into “cooling” water or directly to the “user” device.
INTEGRATED UTILITIES CENTRAL PLANT RELATIONSHIP BOILER ELECTRIC COMP AIR CHILLER HVAC
Integrated Utilities are only limited by your imagination This approach is a GENERIC solutionn The value of generic solutions is their flexibility and adaptability n The previous slides have shown how you can integrate “normal” utilities n The next slides will show you (a little) just how far this concept can go and still show significant value
Waste Water Treatment Plants (Another Integrated Utilities Application) ¢ The size of a typical treatment plant (land area and components) is determined byl l l ¢ ¢ ¢ Total Peak Design Flow Contaminants to be Remediated Ambient Weather (“bug” operating ranges) A treatment plant for a large manufacturing complex might be $2. 5 M, and need 2 acres of land at -20 F. By preheating the effluent (using excess heat from the plant processes) to 100 F, the treatment plant cost can be lowered to $1. 5 M and only 1 acre of land. In addition to lower space requirements and cost, risk of plant operating upset is virtually eliminated
Residential “Total Solutions” (Another Integrated Utilities Application) ¢ ¢ To do “the right thing”, lots of folks buy 94% efficient furnaces. It’s only useful half the time, so they also get high-efficiency air conditioners. They spend about twice as much as “regular” units, but it’s worth it. For LESS fuel than that new furnace needs, you couldl l l Make all the electricity you need to run your home Use the rejected generator heat to run a cooling unit to extract heat from a ground loop (or your home in summer) Use the combined rejected heat for ALL of your Hot Water Then use the cooler rejected heat for your home (or pool) Then use the cooler rejected heat for your garage Then use the cooler rejected heat to melt snow & ice For about the same price as the Hi-E system
Paradigm Busters n n The following slides identify several issues where “common sense” and “conventional wisdom” is just plain WRONG. We will present the ideas that are apparent “conflicts with reason”, then explain WHY they are the right way to handle a situation.
Paradigm Buster #1 More insulation and tighter building’s will generally INCREASE operating costs and LOWER indoor air quality. The amount of “internal” heat from motors, lights, computers, and processes is usually well above the “skin” (perimeter walls and roof) losses of the building. A classic example is a large office complex built with glass walls. If you drive by on a cold winter morning, you will see the A/C system rejecting excess heat even after the perimeter losses have been covered. That’s before the people arrive.
Paradigm Buster #2 Air Conditioning a factory can cost less to operate (and have a lower life-cycle cost) than if it’s just ventilated with exhaust fans. Exhaust fans take heat from lights, motors and plant processes that you have already “paid for” (or was free building skin load) and throw it away. Meanwhile, boilers are heating water or other process loads (heat you are removing). An Integrated Utility gathers that energy and puts it back into the process. Improved morale, higher productivity and reduced defects are additional side-benefits.
Paradigm Buster #3 Economizers and other “free-cooling” systems waste energy, increase operating costs, and lower indoor air quality. Per #2, throwing away “already purchased” heat and buying more is a hidden money-waste. Economizers bring in outside air that is much “drier” than from a cooling coil. The inside air gets so dry that it is a great breeding ground for bacteria (50% RH has the highest mortality rate for “bugs”). Dry air also adds to sinus and skin problems, and encourages static- which is bad for your electronic equipment.
Paradigm Buster #4 Increasing lighting levels can lower the utility costs of a manufacturing facility. With Integrated Utilities, a thermal device called a “generator” has a by-product called electricity that is used to run the lights. If you recycle waste heat from the lights back into the process with a thermally-driven cooling unit, ALL of the energy put into the generator stays in the building or the process. The increased lighting levels also improve the working environment and reduce accident rates.
Paradigm Buster #5 Using low-efficiency motors reduces a plant’s utility costs. “By-product” electric heat is also a factor here. The electrical energy gets recycled much as the lighting does to lower the heat energy purchases. Depending on where the motors are located, they can also take the place of “normal” heaters, saving capital. These motors cut maintenance expense because it’s easy to rewind or rebuild them. Reliability improves because replacements are fairly easy to acquire.
CASE STUDIES These projects are not “how-to” teaching aids. They are guidesdemonstrating the value of using a comprehensive approach to solving problems by studying how components perform, understanding relationships, and focusing on life-cycle costs. #1 - Existing Paper Manufacturing Plant #2 - New School Construction #3 - Large Office HVAC Upgrade #4 - Commercial Laundry Plant Concept
Case Study #1 Existing Paper Manufacturing Plant
Existing Conditions l 4 -year old facility l State-of-the-art, using “best available” manufacturing technology systems l Main Utilities- Natural Gas and Electricity l Process utilities- 200# &125# steam, RO water, vacuum (dewatering), natural gas dryers l Process water from river (sand filter) l $25, 000 annual utility costs
Project Goals n n This project was initiated to determine what opportunities were available to reduce the operating costs of the plant The intent was to identify projects that could easily, and quickly, be installed and functional to minimize disruption to plant production
Integrated Utilities Solutions (A FEW OF THE HIGH POINTS DEVELOPED) ¢ “Unload” major electric motors w/ parallel hydraulic drives coupled to gas turbine (20% lower cost than electric generator and panel interface, easier to maintain)- THIS DRIVE CONCEPT IS CURRENTLY BEING PATENTED ¢ Waste heat of turbine makes 15 PSI steam used to drive an absorption chiller, then residual “warm” exhaust gas goes to dryer line
Integrated Utilities Solutions (A FEW OF THE HIGH POINTS DEVELOPED) ¢ Chiller cools seal water for vacuum pumps, cutting power from 7400 HP to 4800 HP (data provided by the vacuum pump manufacturer) at equal vacuum capacity ¢ Waste heat from chiller (thermal input plus heat from the water) preheats additional dryer line makeup air
Additional Cost-Saving Ideas (A FEW MORE SELECTED OPPORTUNITIES) ¢ Preheat RO input water with compressor waste heat (increased capacity, reduced membrane pressure drop) ¢ Reclaim energy from dryer lines to further preheat inlet air after turbine & chiller preheat input and before burner ¢ Convert open tank process CHW to closedloop piping system w/ variable-flow to reduce baseline head losses and pipe corrosion pressure drop
Additional Cost-Saving Ideas (A FEW MORE SELECTED OPPORTUNITIES) ¢ Convert steam heating system to HTHW, eliminate trap maintenance expense, standby heat loss, plus water and energy losses from flash tanks. ¢ Increased Compressed Air storage, tightly regulated air pressure in mains, and load controls to free up compressors ¢ Reduce air volume of major Air Handlers to minimize reheat and lower fan HP (and energy costs)
The Opportunity • • Over 8 MW of electrical power eliminated 40% of steam demand replaced No reduction in plant capacity Adequate utilities reduction and offset to allow 50% plant capacity growth without upgrading the utility infrastructure • $9, 100, 000 annual utility savings (37%) • $12, 700, 000 cost (17 -month SPB) • 87, 500, 000 Tons of CO 2 Saved Annually
Case Study #2 New School Construction
Project Description New High School Remodel and Expand Middle School New Elementary School Upgrade/Renovate Primary School Construction Budget– $46, 000 Utility Systems Budget - $ 15, 000 Projected Utility Cost Increase - $ 560, 000 / yr (Added to Existing Utility Costs of $ 870, 000)
New School Construction Value Engineering Design Review Utility Systems Design Recommend Alternate Designs for Reductions in First Cost, Utility Cost, and Maintenance & Operation Savings Net Present Value computed over planned 40 -year Life 72 Total Recommendations 54 “Unique” Choices (some were alternatives) 46 Selected for Implementation
Value Engineering Design Review LIGHTING SYSTEM Highlights ¢ Ceiling lay-in fixtures, rather than suspended or wallmounted (lower cost, more efficient so fewer required, and 50% of heat direct to return for smaller fans and less air supply) ¢ 2 x 4 fixtures, rather than 2 x 2 (less expensive, more efficient so fewer required. 2 x 2 lamps cost over 500% of 2 x 4 lamps) ¢ Minimize “can” lights (low quality light, lamps cost 800% more per lumen, expensive, hard to maintain) Capital Savings- $ 648, 300 Utility Savings- $ 56, 600 (including HVAC) Net Present Value of Savings- $ 3, 393, 500
Value Engineering Design Review HVAC SYSTEM Highlights ¢ ¢ ¢ Install ROUND, versus rectangular ductwork (less, and lighter, metal so costs less, more efficient so lower fan power, and easier to insulate) Eliminate return air ductwork (don’t need to insulate supply ducts, better energy recovery, plus lower space cooling load that reduces fan energy) Eliminate supply air duct silencers by using higher grade air handling units (less total expense, lower fan energy, and reduced structural requirements) Capital Savings- $ 549, 700 Utility Savings- $ 61, 200 Net Present Value of Savings- $ 3, 252, 700
Value Engineering Design Review VENTILATION AIR Highlights ¢ ¢ Design exhaust rates and ventilation air systems to match occupancy and recover energy from all exhaust air (less expensive central system, more efficient so lower energy required, and better internal environment) Control ventilation, exhaust (plus lighting and room temperature settings) with occupancy sensors (reduced energy usage and cost) Capital Savings- $ 624, 800 Utility Savings- $ 53, 900 Net Present Value of Savings- $ 4, 426, 500
Value Engineering Design Review CHILLER & CHW SYSTEM Highlights ¢ Install “Ice Bank” thermal storage system to downsize base chiller & transfer electric use Off-Peak. 300 Ton peak load reduction and chiller downsizing, plus “free cooling” in winter and early spring because ice made naturally. ¢ 30 F CHW temp difference vs. standard 10 -16 F (less flow, so smaller piping, pumps and lower energy costs) Capital Savings- $ 295, 300 Utility Savings- $ 62, 400 Net Present Value of Savings- $ 3, 046, 700
New School Construction Value Engineering Design Review Results of Selected Recommendations (Not all of selected recommendations discussed) Capital Costs- $ 3, 045, 200 Saved Utility Costs- $ 252, 700/year Saved (Equal to 4 teachers’ salaries) Net Present Value- $ 16, 173, 000 Study Cost- $ 150, 000 (free, based on capital savings)
Case Study #3 Large Office HVAC Upgrade
Existing Conditions Commercial Office Building, built in 1984 l Height- 29 Floors l Total Gross Area- 600, 000 Sq. Ft. l Typical Floor Area- 25, 000 Sq. Ft. l 3 -story, street-level atrium Lobby l 6 stories of underground parking l
Original Mechanical System Central Plant located in roof-level penthouse CHILLED WATER COOLING (2) 800 -ton electric centrifugal chillers l (2) 800 -ton cross flow design cooling towers l OUTSIDE AIR SUPPLY (1) Vane-Axial, belt-driven supply fan l Central Shaft vertical supply duct riser l (1) 443 k. W, multi-stage electric duct heater l
Original Mechanical System INDIVIDUAL FLOOR HVAC SYSTEMS l Central Air Handler with CHW cooling coil at each floor- dedicated fresh air intake l Dual-Duct Design- fresh air and return air are mixed, then sent thru cooling coil or bypass and out to mixing boxes l Duct-mounted Electric Heat / Reheat coils in each zone’s mixing box w/ multi-stage controls
Project Goals n n n Improve indoor air qualitymaximize amount of outdoor air delivered to the occupants Reduce operating expenses Meet leasing requirements (fresh air per occupant standards) on a floor-by-floor basis
Ventilation System Upgrade Challenges ¢ Original Outdoor Air supply fan capacity Performance was below original specifications (designed for 41, 000 CFM vs. 37, 500 CFM actual) l Reverse airflow required for atrium smoke removal l ¢ Vertical outdoor air distribution duct could not be re-sized for additional air flow needs ¢ Owner required that no changes could be made to exterior building appearance
Solutions Implemented ¢ Maximize the total amount of Outdoor Air delivered to the building Increase fan motor from 30 HP to 50 HP and increase fan speed to meet new requirements ¢ Reduce operating costs of the facility Install psychometric (heat and moisture) energy recovery wheel in ducts between toilet exhaust air riser and the outside air make-up distribution riser
Solutions Implemented ¢ Meet the leasing requirements by floor Replace individual floor outdoor air dampers with a new combination air-flow measuring station & damper assembly Air quantities sent to each floor based on programmed quantity of occupants and on scheduled occupancy periods (with override capability for after-hours work)
Project Results o 18% increase in total outside air volume (from 37, 500 CFM to 44, 500 CFM) o Floor-by-floor outside air quantities now match area ventilation requirements Minimum- 600 CFM, maximum- 3, 600 CFM n Based on “population” survey by building management n Facility operating costs reduced by 28% o Indoor (winter) humidity levels increased o
Project Results (cont’d) Tenant complaints of static shock (and related issues) eliminated o Chiller loads reduced and HVAC system performing more effectively o Outside air now tracking actual occupant density loading n Energy recovery wheel reduces ventilation air load to only 35% of “original”, although total outside air supplied is 18% greater n
Conclusions Ø New “smart” ventilation system delivers outside air quantities to match the actual occupancy requirements of any space, any time. Ø “Simple” (only one moving part) energy recovery unit enabled outside air to be increased (improving indoor air quality) while reducing the HVAC system operating cost and fixing a low humidity operating problem.
Case Study #4 Commercial Laundry Plant
CURRENT ISSUES Significant Water / Sewer Usage l l l 98% Process Related BOD, TSS levels often cause surcharge Limits to new Plant Locations due to high usage Process Steam Boiler Operates Continuously l l Plants run 2 or 3 shifts / day for 5 days / week Normal steam loads well below peak boiler capacity High On-Peak Power Costs l l Several Large HP Process Motors High-Tonnage Rooftop Air Conditioners Significant Natural Gas Costs l SEASONAL- Tracks weather and water temperatures
SOLUTION CONCEPTS INTEGRATED BUILDING DESIGN (The Building is Part of the Process) Integrated design allows smaller “foot print” (lower cost) ¢ Active biological filtration system treating “warm” wastewater (24/7 system operation supporting ¢ 5 -day process load) Over 95% of process waste water will be fully recycled l Rain water / snow provide make-up water for “blow down” and drier evaporation (smaller storm l drains and retention ponds)
SOLUTION CONCEPTS INTEGRATED BUILDING DESIGN (The Building is Part of the Process) ¢ Floor-Level Supply from single, central HVAC unit with 100% outside air for process makeup. l Entire plant will now be “cooled”, plus cleaner, better indoor air quality. Air will stagnate and rise as it is warmed by bodies, process, and lighting and “puddle” near roof for intake to dryers (vs. current direct outdoor air intake to dryers). ¢ Minimal l wall and roof insulation Heating & Cooling energy from process utility byproducts.
SOLUTION CONCEPTS INTEGRATED UTILITIES DESIGN (Fully Incorporated & Dedicated to the Process) Packaged Micro Turbine Generators matched to PROCESS LOADS (with some reserve capacity) that will run only to support the Process ¢ Waste Heat from Generators drives absorption chiller that extracts heat from process (and space if required) ¢ Waste Heat from chiller heats process water ¢ (and space or make-up air if required)
SOLUTION CONCEPTS INTEGRATED UTILITIES DESIGN (cont’d) (Fully Incorporated & Dedicated to the Process) ¢ Residual Heat from Generator Exhaust is fed to dryer intakes (since it is gas-fired & clean, just like dryer burners) Building has only minimal, base load electrical feed (backed up by generators) ¢ Micro Turbine intake air drawn from warm “pool” near roof, capturing low-grade building & process heat ¢ Dryer waste heat recovered (including some latent ¢ heat)
SOLUTION CONCEPTS INTEGRATED UTILITIES DESIGN (cont’d) ¢ Packaged Propane/Air Back-up Fuel Plant (allowing use of interruptible natural gas supply for better utility cost control) Generators allow use of interruptible electric supply (for better utility cost control) ¢ Electric Heat used to produce process steam on demand (eliminating stand-by losses, plus reduced ¢ maintenance) ¢ Generators will also operate “on-demand” for space heating (or back-up electricity) during “off-hours” operation
Indicated Results • TOTAL facility cost will be very close to current “standard” design package • No reduction in plant capacity • 98% of process water “use” eliminated, including sewer and special surcharges • No restrictions to plant site selection • Nearly 60% reduction in utilities costs • Over 70% of annual CO 2 releases saved
The TRUE VALUE of Using “Low-Efficiency” Components o MUCH LOWER Base Cost (often about 50% of higher-efficiency components) o Proven Technology o Simpler, More Reliable o Design easier to understand o Easier to maintain and/or Replace
The TRUE VALUE of Using “Low-Efficiency” Components Proper evaluation of actual utility system requirements and a full understanding of component operating limits is necessary to facilitate effective integration of “Low -Efficiency” components into “High. Efficiency” utility systems
Maximize Value High Performance Buildings offers direct, quantifiable benefits. NEW DESIGN • 20% or more SAVINGS on utility system construction costs with up to 50% lower operating costs RETROFIT • 25% - 50% LOWER utility operating costs, often with paybacks of 2 -years or less Either “VALUE” approach results in substantially lower environmental pollutant (CO 2, etc. ) releases