Center Harbor
Municipal Buildings
A Comprehensive Energy Plan for the Future
Prepared by: The Jordan Institute as part of its GSE2 Program
November 18, 2009
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
(603) 235-4561
The Jordan Institute, Inc.
49 North Main Street, 2nd Floor
Concord, NH 03301
(603) 226-1009
Center Harbor Municipal Buildings
Energy Assessment Report
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................................................2
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................4
Facility Description.............................................................................................................................................6
Existing Energy Consumption .................................................................................................................8
Building Benchmarking ................................................................................................................................. 11
No / Low Cost Initiatives.........................................................................................................................13
Energy Efficiency Measures for Future Consideration.....................................................................15
Energy Efficiency Measures Not Recommended..............................................................................16
Recommended Energy Efficiency Measures......................................................................................16
Municipal Building ..............................................................................................................................18
Library ....................................................................................................................................................25
Highway Dept.............................................................................................................................................. 27
Recap of Energy Use Reduction & Energy Cost Avoidance ..........................................................30
Summary of Financial Analysis.............................................................................................................32
Funding and Financing Options for Project Implementation ............................................................... 33
Environmental Impact..................................................................................................................................... 36
Next Steps..................................................................................................................................................37
Appendix A – The GSE2 Financial Modeling Report
Appendix B – EEM Budget Estimates
Appendix C – Oversight Contract
Disclaimer: This report is delivered without any warranties, expressed or implied. This report
contains information about the Center Harbor Municipal Buildings only and is based upon our
observations and upon information which we received from Town officials. No estimation of
utility and/or government incentive programs is included in this report; these should be
researched and sought during design of the implementation phase. The Jordan Institute has
used care, its best professional judgment, and the services of qualified vendors and subcontractors to research and prepare this report, and we believe we are presenting an accurate and
complete assessment of your buildings and the opportunities they present for energy
improvements. But The Jordan Institute shall not be liable for any inaccuracies in this report, for
any damages that may result from the implementation of measures recommended in this report,
or discrepancies between the avoided energy cost estimates listed in this report and those which
the school actually realizes from the implementation of the outlined plan.
Confidentiality Restrictions: This report contains data and information that have been submitted as
part of an Agreement between The Jordan Institute and the Town of Center Harbor and is
provided in full confidence. The recipient shall have a limited right as set forth in the Agreement
to disclose the data herein, but only as expressed in a forthcoming Agreement for installation of
the energy measures.
Executive Summary
The Jordan Institute (TJI) has been contracted to analyze the opportunities for energy
conservation and efficiency improvements at three Center Harbor Municipal Buildings. Over the
past few months, a team of consultants, contractors, and TJI personnel has developed a
comprehensive energy plan for the Town to follow in order to cost-effectively reduce the energy
consumption and carbon footprint of these buildings.
In doing so, many Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs) have been studied. Our evaluation has
produced a list, starting with no-cost measures, moving to those with a favorable return on
investment which we feel should be pursued – both urgently and over the longer term – and
finally those EEMs not recommended. This report is a presentation of our findings.
TJI evaluated many viable measures and, with this report, is recommending that certain solution
steps be implemented in order to reduce the energy consumption and improve the energy
efficiency at the three Center Harbor Municipal Buildings.
The list of the EEMs is below, and a more detailed description of these measures is included in
the body of this report. The projected capital cost and savings appear in the breakdown
following the complete descriptions of the EEMs. A full financial model with paybacks is
included as Appendix A. All predicted costs and savings listed here are estimations to be used as
a guide for planning and for moving toward the implementation process, where the numbers will
be refined and become more specific as a result of actual bids, etc.
IMMEDIATE NO/LOW COST INITIATIVES
!
Institute a computer scheduling protocol that requires monitor and CPU shutdown.
!
Encourage the use of task lighting to enable overhead lighting reductions.
!
Shut and lock windows during the heating season.
!
Reduce thermostat settings by 3 degrees during heating season.
!
Add low-flow aeration devices to all faucets.
!
Move vending machine.
RECOMMENDED EEMs
!
Air Sealing / Additional Shell Insulation
!
Glazing & Door Improvements
!
Lighting & Lighting Control Upgrades
!
Appliance Upgrades
!
Heating System Upgrades
!
Mechanical Control Upgrades
!
Renewable Energy Systems
MEASURES NOT CURRENTLY BEING RECOMMENDED
!
Biomass
!
Highway Department Insulation
!
Ground Source Heat Pumps
!
Propane Fired Combined Heat and Power Unit
ENERGY USE REDUCTION AND COST AVOIDANCE
The results of our analysis indicate that by following this energy plan, the energy use reductions
and energy cost avoidance listed below can be achieved:
RECOMMENDED EEMS
MUNICIPAL
BUILDING
LIBRARY
HIGHWAY
DEPT.
% ENERGY USE REDUCTION
49.0%
9.2%
13.6%
% ENERGY COST AVOIDANCE
67.6%
7.8%
16.0%
$271,690
$48,315
$25,810
CAPITAL INVESTMENT
The capital investment will become more precise in the course of a bidding process, during the
implementation phase. This figure also depends upon timely implementation.
Please see our financial modeling and analysis (Appendix A) for a complete presentation of costs
and benefits related to this project.
TJI recognizes the Town of Center Harbor’s desire to be a leader in energy efficiency and green,
environmentally sound, practices. Those aims align perfectly with the TJI mission and we are
fully prepared to help you achieve your goals. This report outlines our recommendations to get
you there.
Introduction
The Jordan Institute (TJI) is a New Hampshire non-profit organization with principal offices at 49
N. Main Street, Concord, NH 03301. We work to implement significant climate change solutions
by reducing energy use in buildings. According to the US-EPA, investing in measures that will
reduce energy use is the fastest, most cost-effective strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
And greenhouse gas emissions from buildings account for well over half of all such emissions in this
country – 59% in the rural state of New Hampshire. Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs) for
buildings are available immediately, at reasonable cost, and yield tremendous gains in building
performance. Furthermore, and more important to your bottom line, they help control the operational
costs of your buildings.
TJI is an independent, mission-driven organization, governed by a Board of Directors. We represent
no product lines. We sell nothing but our energy conservation and efficiency services. We seek to
fill an “honest broker,” third-party role, serving much like an energy department for our clients,
aiming for high value, long-term results in energy demand reduction and energy supply alternatives
that will contribute to the mitigation of global climate change while improving the comfort,
productivity, and cost-effectiveness of buildings.
TJI was founded in 1995 with a bequest from a Seacoast New Hampshire area couple eager to see an
organization working to enhance the quality of life through strategic activities at the intersection of
the economy, the environment, and public health. Over the years, TJI has moved in a natural
progression from award-winning work in environmental planning and the importance of thoughtful,
low-impact land development to our current focus on forcefully addressing global climate change by
significantly reducing fossil fuel use and the consequent greenhouse gas emissions from buildings.
To address the reduction of greenhouse gasses through available EEMs, TJI has established the
Granite State Energy Efficiency Program (GSE2). GSE2 is a comprehensive program to plan,
implement, and evaluate energy performance improvements in all major building sectors and to
expand funding options to achieve energy savings. GSE2 tackles major barriers to improved energy
performance of buildings: lack of know-how, lack of organizational focus, lack of up-front capital,
and inability to aggregate projects to produce energy-saving action on a large scale. The GSE2
Program Manager is Gary O’Connell.
For the Center Harbor Municipal Buildings the TJI in-house team of building professionals has
partnered with contractors and vendors who specialize in the wide variety of strategies available to
make buildings more energy efficient. That collaboration has resulted in this comprehensive analysis
of your buildings’ needs and opportunities.
The findings and recommendations from our team of experts have been reviewed by the TJI
project team and the most promising suggested upgrades have been entered into our energy
modeling calculator, with their estimated costs going into our financial modeling software. This
report summarizes the results of that process. Not all evaluated measures/costs are recommended.
Facilities
Building Descriptions
The Municipal Building, housing Town Offices
and the Police and Fire Departments, was built in
1969. It also serves as a small meeting space for
town-related business. It is a 7,077 square foot
masonry building on an uninsulated concrete slab,
with low-pitched roof angles, large glass roll-up
doors for the fire equipment, and a history of an
inadequate thermal barrier between the inside and
the outside.
The Library was built in 1910 using quarried stone, masonry, and wood framing, and it is now on
the National Register of Historic Places. It is a 2,010 square foot single-level neo-classical
construction with a dome. There is a basement with an uninsulated foundation that is used
regularly for storage which also includes a small staff break room. The roof is slate, and there are
two fireplaces which are exposed but no longer in use. The building has had a full window
upgrade consistent with historic guidelines, but the windows are now fixed in place and cannot be
opened.
The Highway Department building was built in 1987. It is a pre-engineered structure on an
uninsulated slab, with a metal roof. It was built by the Trapper Brown Corporation on a site
some distance from the main part of Town. The building is divided into three use areas: One,
about 3,000 square feet, provides conditioned space for parking and servicing of large Town
trucks and other equipment; another, about 1,200 square feet, serves as a conditioned bay for
parking and maintaining one of the Town’s fire trucks; and the last, about 3,000 square feet, is an
unconditioned warehouse area for storing seasonal and other equipment. The total square footage
of the building is about 7,200 square feet, with about 4,200 of that being conditioned space.
There are a total of six large roll-up overhead doors in the building.
Existing Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment
Heat for the Municipal Building is provided by two oil-fired boilers which run in series. Heat is
distributed by hot water piping to coils in ceiling mounted fan units. The fire station has 5 such
heaters (Modine-style fan and coil units) near the ceiling and the office spaces get forced hot air
through duct work in both the floor and ceiling. Air conditioning is supplied to the Town Offices
by a compressor outside in the back, and a window unit is employed for the Police Department
office. There is also a window AC unit in the Fire Chief’s office but it is located in a window that
opens to the interior of the rest of the building and is said never to be used. Domestic hot water for
the building comes off the heating system and does not run in the summer time to save fuel.
Heat for the Library is supplied by a new Dunkirk oil-fired steam boiler, installed in 2007.
Supplemental heat, when needed on the coldest winter days, comes from a Mr. Slim electric
“split” system installed over the front door. This equipment also provides cooling in the summer.
Domestic hot water requirements in the Library are minimal, supplied by a small electric tank in
the basement. There is no mechanical ventilation in the building and the windows cannot – by
design – be opened; fresh air enters the building only when doors are opened.
The Highway Department building is heated by two original equipment propane-fired Dayton
heaters, each running at about 80% efficiency. The larger unit serves the municipal garage space
from a mezzanine above the work floor. And the fire department bay has a smaller similar unit
which operates independently. This equipment is controlled manually, including a night set-back
option. The building also contains three small electric resistance baseboard strip heaters with
knob-style thermostats. There is one in both the office space and the bathroom space of the
municipal garage, and one in the bathroom of the fire department bay. Domestic hot water for the
Highway Department garage building comes from a State Select 19.9 gallon electric water heater,
supplying wash rooms in both the garage area and the fire department bay. The entire building is
insulated – both the conditioned and the unconditioned spaces – with about two inches of
fiberglass batting. The unconditioned space is said to seldom
drop below freezing.
Existing Maintenance Issues
In the Library there is a weekly requirement that someone
manually drain the steam boiler condensate line of about 2 to
3 cups of water – until it runs clear. This is done to prevent
sludge build up in the steam distribution system and to
prevent deterioration of the piping. The Library also requires
two dehumidifiers in the basement to remove excess humidity
in the warmer months.
Existing Energy Consumption
The U.S. Department of Energy tracks the breakdown of energy usage in eighteen different
building categories via their Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS). The
survey is conducted every four years. This information is available on a regional basis and New
England is listed within the data. It should be noted that the CBECS data used to create the graph
below is based on 2003 responses to the survey (2007 data is not yet published).
To review this data you can visit the following site and view File 17:
www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs/cbecs2003/public use 2003/cbecspudata2003.html
Within the New England region, the typical public order and safety and public assembly facilities
consume energy in the manner displayed in Figure 1, which also shows actual energy
consumption of Center Harbor Municipal Buildings for comparison. TJI personnel created
Figure 1 using the CBECS data found in File 17.
Figure 1: Energy Use Breakdown Comparisons
Center
Harbor:
68% Heating
7.65% Hot Water
Municipal
Offices
7.2% Lighting
5.8% Ventilation
3.6% Cooling
.7% Computers
.7% Refrigeration
.2% Office
.7% Cooking
5.1% Misc.
Center
Harbor:
77% Heating
1.4% Hot Water
3.4% Lighting
8.4% Ventilation
Library
5.9% Cooling
.2% Computers
.4% Refrigeration
.1% Office
.4% Cooking
3% Misc.
Center
Harbor:
78% Heating
1.04% Hot Water
11.5% Lighting
Highway
Dept
2.6% Ventilation
0% Cooling
0% Computers
.9% Refrigeration
0% Office
0% Cooking
6.2% Misc.
The above usage profile (adjusted slightly and allocated to your building’s energy history)
has produced Figure 2 below:
Figure 2:
Energy Use Breakdown by
Type Usage
Energy Use Breakdown by Cost
24%
Electric
Municipal
53%
Electric
47% Oil
76% Oil
22% Electric
33% Electric
Library
78% Oil
67% Oil
21% Electric
35% Electric
Highway
Dept
79% Propane
65% Propane
Building Benchmarking
A building’s energy use is displayed as annual Energy
Use Intensity (EUI), the sum of all energy consumption
using British Thermal Units per square foot (BTU/SF)
per year. Because the numbers get so large, EUI is
often expressed as thousands of BTU/SF, or
kBTU/SF, an industry-wide recognized unit. There are
two types of EUI, source and site. Source EUI refers to
all energy consumed at the facility being analyzed plus
the energy required to provide generation and
transmission. Site EUI refers solely to the energy
consumed at the facility. For the purpose of comparison
across buildings, we have chosen source EUI because
that is the unit of measurement adopted by the
Department of Energy’s CBECS reporting.
The second pertinent value is Cost Use Intensity (CUI), the sum of all energy costs expressed
in dollars per square foot ($/SF) annually. This is also an industry-wide recognized value.
Here are the benchmark numbers for the three Center Harbor municipal buildings using
2008/2009 energy use and cost data provided by Town officials:
Municipal Building
EUI = 142.1kBTU/SF
CUI= $2.42/SF
SF= 7,077
Library
EUI= 145.2kBTU/SF
CUI= $3.50/SF
SF= 2,010
Highway Department
EUI= 130.0kBTU/SF
CUI= $2.93/SF
SF= 4,200
Although many factors driving a building’s CUI are linked to current unit prices and market
conditions, the building's EUI is a value which The Jordan Institute’s experienced staff can
significantly help to reduce. The numbers above provide the “benchmark” against which to
measure those reductions.
For building benchmarking and to help us compare building performance against other similar
buildings, TJI uses a statistically representative building model, also created from the CBECS
responses. In New England, CBECS covered 252,000 buildings. Using the responses from
the survey, the graph below was created by the Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National
Laboratory for making building energy performance comparisons. For a more in-depth explanation
of building benchmarking go to: http://eber.ed.ornl.gov/benchmark/bldgtype.htm
The three graphs below were created by Oak Ridge National Laboratory using CBECS data. We
have added the yellow arrow in each case to locate the Center Harbor buildings along the range
of buildings to which they are being compared:
No-Cost / Low-Cost Initiatives
There are a few Energy Efficiency Initiatives that will cost the Town of Center Harbor little to no
money to implement. It is important to encourage staff and occupants of these buildings to change
their behavior slightly – which is not easy – but such efforts will produce energy savings without
any other investment. For this reason, The Jordan Institute feels compelled to list these initiatives
as part of this analysis. By training the building’s occupants to alter a few simple routines, energy
can be saved regardless of equipment upgrades. These No-Cost /Low-Cost Initiatives are:
! Computer Settings: An easy way to reduce plug load and thus electricity use is to turn off all
computers at night and when not in use for extended periods of time.
Since computers are in use more hours per day than they used to be, power management is
important to saving energy. ENERGY STAR® power management features place computers
(CPU, hard drive, etc.) into a low-power ‘sleep mode’ after a designated period of inactivity. Lowpower modes for computers reduce the spinning of the hard disk, which decreases power
consumption. Simply hitting a key on the keyboard or moving the mouse awakens the computer in
a matter of seconds. For information on power management or procurement specs, visit these two
good web resources: www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=power_mgt.pr_power_management &
www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=find_a_product.showProductGroup&pgw_code=CO
" Task Lighting: To reduce electric demands from lighting, task lighting should be
encouraged, where appropriate. A task lighting initiative would encourage building occupants to
shut-off the ceiling mounted lighting and to depend on task lighting (portable desk lamps,
workstation under-shelf lighting, etc.) to provide the illumination they may need whenever
possible. Providing task lighting devices for spaces appropriate to their use may entail a small
expense if task lights do not presently exist.
A related item is the need, noted in both the Municipal Building and the Library, to replace
existing incandescent light bulbs with appropriate compact fluorescent bulbs.
# Reduce Drafts: For ventilation systems to work effectively, and to prevent air infiltration,
shut and lock the windows. This practice is successful during both the heating and cooling
seasons. All window manufacturers list infiltration values based upon locked sash conditions, not
just shut. A shut but not locked condition allows unwanted air infiltration, especially if the sash is
left ajar for extended periods. Again, regardless of the quality of the window units, this practice
saves energy.
$ Thermostat Setback (3°F+/-): To reduce demands from the heating source, thermostat
settings can be cut back by 3°F when outside temperature allows. Studies have shown that when
the average outside temperature is above 38°F, a slight adjustment down on interior temperature
settings does not influence comfort. Over an eight-hour workday this practice can produce a
noticeable energy use reduction. It is suggested that the staff perform a test to see if comfort level
is greatly affected. www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=power_mgt.pr_power_management &
www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=find a product.showProductGroup&pgw code=CO
% Low Flow Plumbing Devices: We recommend adding flow-restricting aeration devices
to all faucets. This will reduce both the amount of water which must be purchased for the
building and the sewer charges to take it away.
& Vending Machine: We recommend moving the vending machine in front of the Municipal
Building to the rear of the building. This will reduce the cooling load of the vending machine, as it
will be out of direct sunlight.
' Controls: Thermostat to control ceiling fans in the Highway Department Garage:
We
recommend that a thermostat be installed at the ceiling to turn the ceiling fans on when the
temperature reaches a pre-set level and would provide a benefit below if circulated. This
thermostat could be over-ridden in the summertime.
The Library is also equipped with an antiquated thermostat and the installation of a digital
programmable unit with night setback capabilities is recommended.
( LED Exit Signs: All exit signs in town buildings should be upgraded to LED technologies.
Measures for Future Consideration
! Point of use domestic hot water heaters for the Highway Department and Municipal
Building.
Domestic hot water (DHW) in the Municipal Building is currently derived with a heat exchanger
from the hot water produced to heat the building. In the months when the heating system is not
operating, there is no DHW in the building. There is very little hot water required in the
Municipal Building – hand washing and a small amount of dish washing accounting for most of it
– so we recognize the hesitation to provide year-round DHW. However, code requirements for a
public building like this may mean that the situation should be addressed. And certainly the
convenience and well-being of fire and police personnel returning to the building after a job
argues for year-round hot water. We recommend the installation of a small point of use electric
hot water heating system to provide year-round hot water to the bathrooms. This could most
easily be accomplished during the work anticipated in the heating system upgrade of the building,
but may understandably be postponed until maintenance of the plumbing system can include it.
DHW in the Highway Garage is currently provided by a small electrically heated storage tank. It
seems to be working, is used relatively little, and does not meet the cost/benefit test for
replacement. But we suggest when replacement time comes that consideration be given to using a
small point of use electric (or propane, since there is a propane supply already at the building)
water heating system that would supply the bathrooms.
" Appliances: When it is time for replacement of new appliances for any of the buildings,
Energy Star models should be selected, as they are more efficient that traditional models.
Measures Not Recommended At This Time
! Biomass-fired district heating plant for the Municipal Building and the Town Library.
Our evaluation of a pellet boiler solution was not viable due to the small load of the Municipal
building alone. We considered tying the Library into the system however, distribution renovations
did not help to make this measure economically feasible. This option should be revisited if the
plans to create a third building on the site materialize.
" Additional insulation in the Highway Department Garage.
We considered the addition of
rigid foam board insulation to the inside of both the wall and ceiling areas of the conditioned
spaces in the Highway Department Garage, but the expense was larger than could be justified by
the savings to be gained. Energy use in the garage is relatively small already and payback time for
measures to improve thermal performance will only be shortened by the rising of fuel prices. At
some point in the future, adding more insulation to this building will make economic sense, but
not yet.
# Ground Source Heat Pumps. We found this measure to be an expensive retro fit requiring
new piping in the Library and Fire Station section of the Municipal building. As well as the
currently low air conditioning demand and lack of hot water demand year round.
$ Combine Heat and Power. We looked into a propane system as natural gas is not available in
the area. Similar to Ground Source Heat Pumps, distribution retrofit combined with low air
conditioning and domestic hot water demands, this measure was not feasible.
Recommended Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs)
The following EEM descriptions, projected costs, and resulting energy savings are the result of
TJI’s work with qualified consultants and contractors who have studied your building. At
implementation, these prequalified contractors will provide the most competent installation of
their unique scope of work. The costs and savings shown in the following tables are
approximations and are expected to be refined and sharpened during the implementation phase.
A breakdown of the energy savings and investment costs generated by these measures can be
found following each of the EEM descriptions. Please note that the specific tables following each
EEM description display energy savings in kBTUs. The descriptions of the suggested EEMs are
presented below in detail.
A note about air sealing and insulation:
Critical to any successful building envelope upgrade is an analysis to determine the effectiveness
of existing barriers to air leakage. This process of identifying and measuring air leakage in a
building is done using two very distinct but complementary procedures: blower door testing and
infrared imaging – or, when the temperature differential between inside and outside is low, the use
of theatrical fog – to make the location of unwanted air infiltration visible.
The first step in blower door testing is to create a pressure difference between the interior of the
building and the outside so that unwanted air movement through the leaks can be detected. This
pressure difference is created using large depressurization fans properly installed, calibrated, and
sealed into various entrances throughout the building.
Using appropriate metering techniques, blower-door testing will uncover how much infiltration is
occurring in a building. The test result is presented in cubic feet per minute per square foot of
building shell area at 50 Pascals of pressure. Most buildings in the United States are tested at the
same level of pressure (50 Pascals) as a means of comparison.
To reduce the amount of air leakage and to improve the thermal effectiveness of a building’s shell,
we regularly propose the strategic use of air sealing and additional insulation in the building,
based on the findings of the blower door and related tests. Air sealing is the process of creating a
continuous seal at the building perimeter in order to eliminate infiltration of unwanted air. This is
a process which has a major impact on both the heating and cooling load of a building.
Air sealing is not insulating, however. Air sealing is strictly intended to stop the air flow through
the building’s shell. Air sealing addresses heat loss due to infiltration and convection, whereas
adding insulation addresses heat loss due to conduction. Sometimes the application of a spray
foam material can provide an air seal and appropriate additional insulation, as well as a moisture
barrier in certain installations.
The Recommendations
After considerable analysis, comparison, and consultation with vendors and contractors familiar
with a number of possible energy efficiency technologies, TJI is proposing the EEMs summarized
in Table C, below, for the Center Harbor buildings:
TABLE 1 – Energy Efficiency Measure by Location
EEMs
EEM 1
EEM 2
EEM 3
EEM 4
EEM 5
EEM 6
Description
Air Sealing / Additional Shell Insulation
Glazing & Door Improvements
Lighting & Lighting Controls Upgrade
Heating and Ventilating System Upgrades
Mechanical Control Upgrades
Upgrades to Renewable Energy Systems
Muni
Bldg
x
x
x
x
x
x
Library
x
x
x
Highway
Garage
x
x
x
MUNICIPAL BUILDING (Police and Fire Departments, Town Offices)
! Air Sealing and Insulation in the Municipal Building
Current Shell Conditions at the Municipal Building
1) In the Fire Station, the header area above the overhead doors and the vertical I-beams
between the overhead doors are both uninsulated and conducting considerable heat to the
outside on cold days.
2) The gable ends (east and west) of the Fire Station are large uninsulated wall areas
constructed of concrete block with a brick exterior facing. Each gable end has a narrow
mezzanine area which extends into the Fire Station space at a second floor level. Each of
these mezzanine areas is now used for storage, but access up a vertical ladder attached to the
wall makes use difficult and infrequent.
3) The north and east walls of the Meeting room at the Town Office – or east – end of the
Municipal Building are also relatively large uninsulated wall areas and, like the gable end
walls in the Fire Station, they too are constructed of concrete block with a brick exterior
facing. These walls are losing heat to the outside via conduction, radiation, and direct gaps
in the construction at the roof line. The length of recessed fluorescent lighting at the wallto–roof transition on the north wall of the Mead meeting room is not providing sufficient
functional lighting to warrant its continued use.
4) The entire north-facing roof section of the building, from the sheathing out, contains very
little insulation and has apparently not been upgraded during the life of the building.
5) The blower door test and the infrared camera images reveal that the Municipal Building has
air leakage and heat loss problems at most of the structural transitions: wall corners, wall-toroof junctions, etc.
Proposed Shell Solutions for the Municipal Building
1) Both the header area over the roll-up doors and the I-beams between the roll-up doors
should be covered with closed-cell spray foam on the inside, to insulate them and reduce
heat loss due to conduction to the outside.
2) The mezzanine areas at the gable ends of the Fire Station should be thoroughly air sealed
and insulated to minimize heat loss out of the building that is now occurring via conduction,
radiation, and direct gaps to the outside at the seams. The cavities in the concrete block
should be filled with spray foam. The seams at the wall to roof transition should be caulked
and sealed. And the interior face of the concrete block in these mezzanine areas should be
completely covered with a 2 inch layer of rigid foam insulating board, thoroughly sealed at
the seams between boards, and followed by strapping and a fire-rated gypsum board
finishing layer over the whole wall.
3) In the Cary Mead meeting room at the east end of the Municipal Building, the north and
east walls should be treated much the same as the gable end walls in #2 above. The cavities
in the concrete block should be filled with spray foam. The seams at the wall to roof
transition should be caulked and sealed. And the interior face of the concrete block should
be completely covered with a 2 inch layer of rigid foam insulating board, thoroughly sealed
at the seams between boards, and followed by strapping and a fire-rated gypsum board
finishing layer over the entirety of each wall area. As part of this upgrade to the insulation
and air sealing of the space, the recessed lighting at the wall-to-roof transition on the north
wall of the room needs to be removed.
4) Improvements to the north-facing roof section of the Municipal Building should include:
removal of the current roofing material down to the sheathing, the addition of 2 inches of
rigid foam insulating board with an insulating value of about R-10, the placement of a new
layer of sheathing on top of the insulating board, the placement of a layer of bituthene on the
new sheathing, and completed with a layer of asphalt shingles.
5) We propose that exterior transitions from brick to clapboard be sealed, as well as all wall-toroof transitions around the building.
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 1 – Air Sealing
& Insulation Upgrades is as follows:
EEM 1 – AIR SEALING & ADDED INSULATION
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
$ 2 6 ,4 8 5
Baseline Data
1st Year Savings Percent Savings
905
2.00%
$181
525
15.00%
$1,210
TOTAL ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
76,539
11.88%
TOTAL ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
$1,390
8.13%
IRR
7.81%
NPV $ 11,910
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
13.7 years
Annual Electricity Usage
Annual Electricity Cost
Annual Fuel Oil Usage
Annual Fuel Oil Cost
"
kWh / Yr
$$ / Yr
gallons / Yr
$$ / Yr
45,291
$9,035
3,498
$8,065
644,253
$17,100
Glazing and Door Upgrades at the Municipal Building
Current Glazing and Door Conditions at the Municipal Building
1) All exterior doors, hinged and overhead, would benefit from careful weather-stripping to
restrict unwanted heat loss.
2) The overhead door on the north side of the Municipal Building is old, ill-fitting, the source
of considerable heat loss from the building, and in need of replacement.
Proposed Solutions for Glazing and Door Opportunities at the Municipal Building
1) We propose that all exterior doors, both the hinged and the overhead types, be carefully
weather-stripped and tightened up to reduce unwanted heat loss and cold air infiltration.
2) We propose to have the one overhead door on the north, or back, side of the Municipal
Building replaced with a modern insulated and well-sealed overhead door. This
replacement, while no longer presenting a glass appearance, will provide better energy
performance and will not detract from the uniform glass appearance of the front of the
building.
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 2 – Glazing &
Door Upgrades is as follows:
EEM 2 – GLAZING & DOOR IMPROVEMENTS
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
$ 3 ,2 6 5 Adj. Baseline Data 1st Year Savings Percent Savings
453
1.00%
$90
Annual Fuel Oil Usage
gallons / Yr
179
6.00%
Annual Fuel Oil Cost
$$ / Yr
$412
ADJUSTED ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
26,536
4.67%
ADJUSTED ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
$502
3.19%
IRR
20.06%
NPV $ 10,598
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
5.8 years
Annual Electricity Usage
Annual Electricity Cost
#
kWh / Yr
$$ / Yr
45,291
$8,854
2,973
$6,855
567,714
$15,710
Lighting and Lighting Controls in the Municipal Building
Current Lighting Conditions in the Municipal Building
1) The Municipal Building has undergone a lighting upgrade recently, but it did not include
the Fire Station. The high bay lighting in the Fire Station is still old and inefficient T-12
technology.
Proposed Lighting Solutions for the Municipal Building
1) The old T-12 lighting in the Fire Station should be replaced with high efficiency T-5
fixtures and lamps. These fixtures should be lowered so that the lights hang about 15 feet
above the floor, allowing clearance for the overhead roll-up doors to open unobstructed.
And thought should be given to the on-off switching for these fixtures. T-5 lamps are more
efficient than T-12s and will save energy simply in the substitution of the latter for the
former – but additional savings can be gained by wiring and switching the fixtures so that
different combinations of bulbs are energized depending on the lighting requirements of
the task taking place in the space. And we recommend the addition of a daylight
harvesting sensor to automatically turn the overhead lights on and off depending on the
lumens being received through the overhead doors and other glazed openings.
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 3 – Lighting &
Lighting Controls Upgrades is as follows:
EEM 3 – LIGHTING & LIGHTING CONTROLS
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
$ 1 1 ,5 0 0 Adj. Baseline Data 1st Year Savings Percent Savings
4,530
10.00%
Annual Electricity Cost
$$ / Yr
$904
Annual Fuel Oil Usage
gallons / Yr
-28
-1.00%
Annual Fuel Oil Cost
$$ / Yr
($64)
ADJUSTED ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
11,541
2.13%
ADJUSTED ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
$839
5.52%
IRR
10.74%
NPV $ 11,678
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
10.7 years
Annual Electricity Usage
$
kWh / Yr
45,291
$8,764
2,795
$6,444
541,178
$15,208
Heating and Ventilating System Upgrades at the Municipal Building
Current Heating and Ventilating System Conditions at the Municipal Building
1) The Municipal Building is currently heated using two oil-fired Utica boilers, each rated at
an output of 231,000 BTUs/hr. They produce hot water which circulates to fan coils where
the warmed air is blown into the conditioned space. The two boilers are redundant,
operating alternately so that the accumulated hours on each boiler are always about the
same. They may, if necessary, operate at the same time on very cold days, but each is
large enough on its own to provide the needed heat for the space under most weather
conditions. The boilers are, however, about 13 years old and operating at an efficiency
level of between 81 and 83% - not high enough to meet current industry standards and far
below the value associated with high performance buildings.
Proposed Heating and Ventilating System Solutions for the Municipal Building
1) We recommend that the two current oil-fired boilers in the Municipal Building be replaced
with two high efficiency modulating and condensing oil-fired boilers placed in the same
location. This state of the art equipment, in combination with the shell upgrades
recommended earlier in this report, will provide much more efficient use of the fuel
purchased by the Town and will add reliability and ease of maintenance for the personnel
responsible for its operation.
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 4 - Heating &
Ventilation System Upgrades is as follows:
EEM 4 – HEATING & VENTILATION SYSTEM UPGRADES
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
$ 4 0 ,8 7 5 Adj. Baseline Data 1st Year Savings
Percent Savings
0
0.00%
$0
452
16.00%
$1,041
ADJUSTED ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
63,228
11.96%
ADJUSTED ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
$1,041
7.27%
IRR
2.69%
NPV $
(12,116)
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
22.3 years
Annual Electricity Usage
kWh / Yr
Annual Electricity Cost
Annual Fuel Oil Usage
Annual Fuel Oil Cost
$$ / Yr
kWh / Yr
$$ / Yr
%
45,291
$7,816
2,823
$6,508
528,869
$14,324
Mechanical Control System Upgrades at the Municipal Building
Current Condition of Mechanical Controls at the Municipal Building
1) The heating systems in the Municipal Building are currently managed using a Tekmar
Controls system. It is a basic system which provides some automation but is dated and in
need of upgrading.
Proposed Solutions for Mechanical Controls in the Municipal Building
1) We recommend upgrading the current Tekmar Controls to include more automation in the
areas of night use set-back, outdoor temperature reset, and optimal start/stop features. In
order to optimize the controls investment, we also recommend that consideration be given
to tying the Library in to this mechanical control system, so that both buildings may be
monitored and managed from a single location
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 5 – Mechanical
Control Upgrades is as follows:
EEM 5 – MECHANICAL CONTROLS UPGRADES
Energ y R elated Inv es tm ent
Electricity Usage
$1,970 Adj. Baseline Data 1st Year Savings Percent Savings
kWh / Yr
Annual Electricity Cost
$$ / Yr
Annual Fuel Oil Usage
Annual Fuel Oil Cost
kWh / Yr
$$ / Yr
ADJUSTED ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
ADJUSTED ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
45,291
$7,816
2,371
$5,467
465,641
$13,283
IRR
NPV
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
$
225
2.00%
$45
47
2.00%
$109
7,411
1.59%
$154
1.16%
11.44%
2,291
10.1 years
&
Upgrades to Renewable Energy Systems at the Municipal Building
Current Use of Renewable Energy Systems at the Municipal Building
1) The Municipal Building is oriented on its site so that its front faces in a southerly direction,
allowing for utilization of passive solar heating. The building designers did take some
advantage of this by placing large glazed areas on this face of the building. The overhead
doors in the Fire Department section, for instance, are largely made of glass and do allow a
good deal of sunshine to penetrate into the inside of the building, warming the floor and
other objects, which then release that heat after the sun has moved on.
Proposed Renewable Energy Technology Solution at the Municipal Building
1) We explored a number of renewable energy strategies for the Center Harbor buildings and
after economic analysis we have concluded that the best option is to install an array of
photovoltaic (PV) cells on the south-facing roof of the Municipal Building. We
recommend a grid-tied 39 KW PV system. This system would be flush-mounted, with the
array divided into subsections to allow room for service walkways. The system would
consist of 170 solar electric panels, each rated at 230 watts. The panels would cover 2,855
square feet of available roof space. The 39 KW system size is large enough to produce
power in excess of that required by the Municipal Building and the Library together, which
means that Center Harbor will be sending some power back to the grid and reducing its
electric bill by that amount each month.
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 6 – Renewable
Energy Technologies is as follows:
EEM 6 – RENEWABLE ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
$ 1 8 8 ,0 4 0 Adj. Baseline Data
Annual Electricity Cost
kWh / Yr
$$ / Yr
45,291
$7,771
458,230
$13,128
1st Year Savings
Percent Savings
38,045
84.00%
$7,590
ADJUSTED ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
129,810
28.33%
ADJUSTED ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
$7,590
57.81%
IRR
5.78%
NPV $
21,575
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
16.5 years
Annual Electricity Usage
LIBRARY
! Air Sealing and Insulation in the Library
Current Shell Conditions at the Library
1) The roof system has been insulated at the ceiling level loosely with fiberglass insulation.
2) Most of the windows in the Library have been upgraded to reduce heat loss in the building,
but that upgrade has made those windows inoperable – they do not open. That means that
the counter weights hanging in cavities on either side of those windows are no longer
needed and have probably been removed, leaving the empty cavities.
Air sealing and
insulating of the band joist in the basement, 2’ from the exterior wall of the entire
basement.
3) Both of the fireplaces are no longer in use and have been closed.
4) There are two attic access hatches located in storage closets.
5) Considerable air passage from the basement to the first floor which was evident during the
blower door test.
Proposed Shell Solutions at the Library
1) Upgrade the cold roof, pull back the fiberglass insulation and add 1” of foam insulation at
the ceiling, cover with existing fiberglass insulation.
2) Foam the weight cavity of the fixed windows.
3) Insulate around both of the fireplaces at the ceiling level in the attic space.
4) It is proposed to insulation and air seal both of the hatches by adding 2” of rigid board to
the interior walls of the hatch area and create an insulated hatch door with an air sealed
hatch door and closing mechanism.
5) In the storage closet it was noticed that there were holes in the sheetrock creating an
opening to the basement. Patch and seal holes in the sheetrock allowing air to infiltrate
from the basement to the main level. In addition to patching the small holes, it is
recommended to air seal and insulate the band joists in the basement area/floor of the main
level with foam insulation. The area to be insulated will be around the perimeter of the
building extending 2’ into the basement ceiling/main level floor.
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 1 – Air Sealing
& Insulation Upgrades is as follows:
EEM 1 – AIR SEALING & ADDED INSULATION
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
Annual Electricity Usage
Annual Electricity Cost
$ 1 3 ,8 0 0
Baseline Data
122
1.00%
$23
Annual Fuel Oil Usage
gallons / Yr
76
7.00%
Annual Fuel Oil Cost
$$ / Yr
$332
TOTAL ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
11,022
5.71%
TOTAL ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
$355
5.05%
IRR
2.74%
NPV $
(3,999)
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
22.1 years
kWh / Yr
$$ / Yr
12,215
$2,285
1,082
$4,743
193,158
$7,028
1st Year Savings Percent Savings
" Glazing and Door Upgrades at the Library
Current Glazing and Door Conditions at the Library
1) The Library’s exterior doors, as well as the door from the Librarian’s office to the
basement and the rear exit, exhibit a lack of air sealing, allowing significant exchange of
air with the outside.
2) Originally the windows operated by a rope system with weights and pulleys. No longer in
use there is a dead air space allowing for infiltration.
Proposed Glazing and Door Solutions for the Library
1) All of the doors named above should be carefully weather-stripped to minimize leakage of
air around them.
2) Foam the weigh cavities of the windows.
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 2 – Glazing &
Door Upgrades is as follows:
EEM 2 – GLAZING & DOOR IMPROVEMENTS
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
$ 3 9 0 Adj. Baseline Data 1st Year Savings Percent Savings
122
1.00%
$23
Annual Fuel Oil Usage
gallons / Yr
40
4.00%
Annual Fuel Oil Cost
$$ / Yr
$177
ADJUSTED ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
6,056
3.33%
ADJUSTED ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
$199
2.99%
IRR
56.13%
NPV $
5,117
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
1.9 years
Annual Electricity Usage
Annual Electricity Cost
$
kWh / Yr
$$ / Yr
12,215
$2,262
1,006
$4,411
182,136
$6,673
Heating and Ventilating System Upgrades at the Library
Current Condition of the Heating and Ventilating System at the Library
1) The heating system in the Library is an oil-fired steam boiler, installed less than 2 years
ago. It does not require attention at this time UNLESS the Town chooses to create a
central, district heating system to serve the Library and the Municipal Building as well as
the anticipated police station nearby. In that case, substantial changes to the Library’s
steam heating system would be required to make it compatible with the hydronic
technology likely to be utilized by the district plant.
2) Air quality is currently compromised by excess humidity in the basement, a lack of
mechanical ventilation, and the inability to open most of the windows in the building.
Proposed Solutions for the Heating and Ventilating System in the Library
1) There are no solution scenarios for the Library heating system unless the Town chooses to
build a district heating system to supply all of the municipal buildings, in which case the
Library’s current steam system would need alteration to utilize hot water from the central
system.
2) To address the air quality issues in the Library, we recommend the installation of a
properly sized energy recovery ventilator (ERV) in the basement, with vent and return
ducts serving both the basement and the first floor. ERVs address dehumidification and
provision of fresh air. In the Center Harbor Library, an ERV would make the current
dehumidifiers unnecessary in the basement, while providing controlled and pre-heated
fresh air to the first floor.
An analysis of the added energy consumption (shown as a negative savings) from EEM 4 –
Heating & Ventilating Upgrades is as follows:
EEM 4 – HEATING & VENTILATION SYSTEM UPGRADES
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
$ 3 2 ,1 7 5 Adj. Baseline Data 1st Year Savings
Percent Savings
-488
-4.00%
-$91
Annual Fuel Oil Usage
kWh / Yr
0
0.00%
Annual Fuel Oil Cost
$$ / Yr
$0
ADJUSTED ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
-1,665
-0.95%
ADJUSTED ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
-$91
-1.41%
IRR
n/a
NPV $
(34,696)
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
0.0 years
Annual Electricity Usage
Annual Electricity Cost
kWh / Yr
$$ / Yr
12,215
$2,239
966
$4,234
176,080
$6,474
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT GARAGE
"
Glazing and Door Upgrades for the Highway Department Garage
Current Glazing and Door Conditions at the Highway Department Garage
1) There are four existing overhead doors which open into the conditioned space of the
Highway Department Garage, three into the Highway Department portion, and one into the
Fire Department portion. These four doors could all be improved by the installation of
proper weather-stripping to address unwanted air infiltration and heat loss. The hinged
access doors are also in need of weather-stripping and sealing.
Proposed Glazing and Door Upgrades at the Highway Department Garage
1) We recommend that all doors, both overhead and hinged, which open into a conditioned
portion of the Highway Department Garage, including the Fire Department’s portion,
should be properly weather-stripped and sealed to minimize unwanted air infiltration and
heat loss.
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 2 – Glazing &
Door Upgrades is as follows:
EEM 2 – GLAZING & DOOR IMPROVEMENTS
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
$ 1 6 ,6 0 0 Adj. Baseline Data 1st Year Savings Percent Savings
4,708
20.00%
Annual Electricity Cost
$$ / Yr
$909
Annual Propane Usage
gallons / Yr
-65
-2.00%
Annual Propane Cost
$$ / Yr
-$172
ADJUSTED ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
10,077
2.65%
ADJUSTED ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
$736
5.60%
IRR
6.48%
NPV $
3,737
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
15.5 years
Annual Electricity Usage
#
kWh / Yr
23,543
$4,544
3,261
$8,606
380,341
$13,150
Lighting and Lighting Control Upgrades at the Highway Department Garage
Current Lighting and Lighting Control Conditions at the Highway Department Garage
1) Lighting inside the two conditioned spaces in this building is currently entirely by artificial
means. When the overhead doors are down, daylight cannot enter the building. As a
result, electricity must be used to light the space, even mid-day on a sunny but cold day.
2) The current night lighting for the building is provided by two exterior “street” style lights
which are located indoors and which are left on all the time to overcome the darkness upon
entering the building day or night.
3) The interior lighting is now provided by high pressure sodium lamps, also an outdated and
inefficient technology for the uses to which it is being put in this building.
4) The unconditioned storage and warehouse space to the rear of the Highway Garage gets
only episodic use. One person can now enter, turn on the overhead lights, and then leave
without turning those lights off and they may remain energized for many hours before the
next person comes along and remembers to turn them off.
Proposed Lighting and Lighting Control Solutions for the Highway Department Garage
1) To provide some daylight to the Highway Garage space (the Fire Department does not
have the occupancy time to justify its inclusion here), and to reduce the need for artificial
lighting use during daytime occupancy, we recommend the installation of 4 Day Star
skylights evenly spaced around the roof of this section of the building.
2) We recommend replacing the current indoor “street” lights with two compact fluorescent
spot lights wired to a motion sensor placed just inside the main entry door.
3) We recommend that the current high pressure sodium lamps which are lighting the interior
of the Highway Department’s conditioned space be removed and replaced with high
efficiency T-5 fluorescent fixtures and lamps. The fixtures should be suspended from the
ceiling at a height which places them just above the overhead doors when they are in the
“up” position, and, for the ones toward the front of the space, in a location between the
overhead doors so that their light is not blocked when the doors are up.
4) In the unconditioned warehouse space, we recommend that a motion sensor be added that
would turn the existing lighting on and off with use. The sensor could, of course, be overridden with a standard switch if necessary.
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 3 – Lighting &
Lighting Controls is as follows:
EEM 3 – LIGHTING & LIGHTING CONTROLS
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
$ 6 ,3 5 0 Adj. Baseline Data 1st Year Savings Percent Savings
1,648
7.00%
$318
Annual Propane Usage
gallons / Yr
0
0.00%
Annual Propane Cost
$$ / Yr
$0
ADJUSTED ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
5,630
1.52%
ADJUSTED ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
$318
2.56%
IRR
7.43%
NPV $
2,433
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
14.2 years
Annual Electricity Usage
Annual Electricity Cost
$
kWh / Yr
$$ / Yr
23,543
$3,635
0
$0
370,264
$12,414
Heating and Ventilating System Upgrades for the Highway Department Garage
Current Heating and Ventilating System Conditions at the Highway Department Garage
1) The conditioned garage space for the Highway Department is currently heated by a
propane-fired 1986 Dayton space heating unit rated at 250,000 BTUs/hr and located on a
ceiling deck over the office area to the rear of the garage working space. This heating unit
is original equipment in the building and has reached the end of its useful, cost-effective
life. It is currently operating at about 80% efficiency, well below the current industry
standard.
2) The high bay nature of the building lends itself to heat stratification, leaving a lot of usable
heat too high in the space to contribute to comfortable conditions on the floor.
Proposed Heating and Ventilating Solutions for the Highway Department Garage
1) We recommend replacing the current propane-fired Dayton heater with a new, energy
efficient unit sized to meet the demands of the space after implementation of the insulation
upgrade proposed in EEM 1, above.
2) We recommend that the heat stratification problem in the garage space be addressed with
the installation of thermostats to control the existing ceiling fans. The fans would be set to
come on when the temperature of the air near the ceiling reached a level which would
benefit occupants on the floor, and would provide an air mixing function, to keep the
building’s internal temperatures approximately equalized.
A summary of the predicted savings and capital investment of implementing EEM 4 – Heating &
Ventilation Upgrades is as follows:
EEM 4 – HEATING & VENTILATION SYSTEM UPGRADES
Energ y R elated I nv es tm ent
$ 2 ,8 6 0 Adj. Baseline Data 1st Year Savings
Percent Savings
0
0.00%
$0
Annual Propane Usage
kWh / Yr
452
12.00%
Annual Propane Cost
$$ / Yr
$1,041
ADJUSTED ENERGY USAGE (kBTU/Year)
63,228
17.34%
ADJUSTED ENERGY COST ($$/Year)
$1,041
8.61%
IRR
41.40%
NPV $
25,899
INFLATION ADJUSTED PAYBACK
2.6 years
Annual Electricity Usage
kWh / Yr
Annual Electricity Cost
$$ / Yr
23,543
$3,317
2,927
$8,671
364,634
$12,096
Recap of Energy Use Reduction & Energy Cost Avoidance
The energy use reduction produced by the energy efficiency measures listed within this report
were presented independently; however they are now presented as a package with savings
displayed in actual energy units (not BTUs) annually. The tables below analyze each measures
affect on the current electrical load (kWh), fuel oil (gallons) and propane (gallons).
Municipal Building Results:
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Baseline Annual Energy Usage
(kWh)
(gallons)
EEM
45,291
3,498
MEASURE DESCRIPTION
EEM1
Air Sealing & Insulation
905
525
EEM2
Glazing & Door Upgrades
453
179
EEM3
Lighting & Lighting Control Upgra
4,530
-28
EEM4
Appliance Upgrades
225
0
EEM7
Renewable Energy Upgrades
0
452
6,113
1,127
Electricity
Fuel Oil
Total Project
Predicted Energy Reduction
Baseline Annual Energy Cost
EEM
MEASURE DESCRIPTION
($$)
($$)
$9,035
$8,065
$181
$1,210
$90
$412
$904
-$64
EEM1
Air Sealing & Insulation
EEM2
Glazing & Door Upgrades
EEM3
Lighting & Lighting Control Upgra
EEM4
Appliance Upgrades
$45
$0
EEM7
Renewable Energy Upgrades
$0
$1,041
$1,219
$2,598
Total Project
Predicted Energy Cost
Library Results:
Electricity
Fuel Oil
(kWh)
(gallons)
12,215
1,082
Baseline Annual Energy Usage
EEM
MEASURE DESCRIPTION
EEM1
Air Sealing & Insulation
122
76
EEM2
Glazing & Door Upgrades
122
40
EEM5
Heating System & Ventilation Upgrades
-488
0
EEM6
Mechanical Controls
122
15
-123
131
Electricity
Fuel Oil
($$)
($$)
Total Project
Predicted Energy Reduction
Baseline Annual Energy Cost
$2,285
$4,743
EEM1
Air Sealing & Insulation
$23
$332
EEM2
Glazing & Door Upgrades
$23
$177
EEM5
Heating System & Ventilation Upgrades
-$91
$0
EEM6
Mechanical Controls
$23
$0
-$23
$509
EEM
MEASURE DESCRIPTION
Total Project
Predicted Energy Cost Avoidance
Highway Department Results
Electricity
Propane
Baseline Annual Energy Usage
(kWh)
(gallons)
EEM
23,543
3,261
0
0
MEASURE DESCRIPTION
EEM1
Air Sealing & Insulation
EEM2
Glazing & Door Upgrades
4,708
-65
EEM3
Lighting & Lighting Control Upgra
1,648
0
6,356
-65
Electricity
Propane
($$)
($$)
$4,544
$8,606
$0
0
Total Project
Predicted Energy Reduction
Baseline Annual Energy Cost
EEM
MEASURE DESCRIPTION
EEM1
Air Sealing & Insulation
EEM2
Glazing & Door Upgrades
$909
-172
EEM3
Lighting & Lighting Control Upgra
$318
0
$1,227
-$172
Total Project
Predicted Energy Cost
Summary of Financial Analysis
Municipal Building:
Gross Capital Investment
Avoided End-of-Life / Maintenance Investment
Net Energy Eficiency Capital Investment
$339,250
$67,560
$271,690
Energy Rate Inflation
5.0%
Cost of Capital
5.0%
Expected Equipment Lifespan (years)
Inflation Adjusted Payback (years)
Net Present Value
Expected Internal Rate of Return
30
7
$423,481
15.6%
Library:
Gross Capital Investment
Avoided End-of-Life / Maintenance Investment
Net Energy Eficiency Capital Investment
$48,315
$0
$48,315
Energy Rate Inflation
5.0%
Cost of Capital
5.0%
Expected Equipment Lifespan (years)
30
Inflation Adjusted Payback (years)
24
Net Present Value
Expected Internal Rate of Return
-$18,495
2.0%
Highway Department:
Gross Capital Investment
Avoided End-of-Life / Maintenance Investment
Net Energy Eficiency Capital Investment
$27,010
$1,200
$25,810
Energy Rate Inflation
5.0%
Cost of Capital
5.0%
Expected Equipment Lifespan (years)
Inflation Adjusted Payback (years)
Net Present Value
Expected Internal Rate of Return
30
5
$88,616
21.1%
Funding and Financing Options for Project Implementation
Implementing the energy efficiency and renewable energy measures recommended in this report
can save the Town of Center Harbor and its taxpayers significant sums in avoided energy costs
over time, and can yield operating cost savings and productivity improvements as well. While
some utility, state, and other programs can defray the Town's share of capital costs, the Town will
likely need to pay some part of those costs and recoup its investment from future energy cost
savings. It should be possible to finance the Town's share of costs in a manner that will yield
positive cash flow.
The following discussion first covers funding and financing opportunities for implementing
energy efficiency measures and then addresses opportunities for renewable energy and combined
heat and power measures.
Energy Efficiency Measures
Funding (Cost-Sharing) Sources
The New Hampshire Electric Cooperative CORE efficiency programs, as enhanced this year by an
award of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Fund (Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, or
RGGI) monies from the NH Public Utilities Commission, help pay for lighting and other
efficiency measures in customer buildings. NHEC offers both "prescriptive" or formula-based
incentives for lighting and "custom" incentives for some HVAC and other measures. Competitive
funding programs discussed below will likely expect the Town to have taken advantage of "offthe-shelf" utility program funding. The Town's first step therefore should be to determine through
discussion with the utility the scope and level of incentives NHEC will pay. As discussed below,
NHEC may also invest in renewable energy measures.
The other major sources of funding for energy efficiency measures are two upcoming competitive
grant programs, both of which will likely announce funding rounds in early 2010. The first is a
competitive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant program that will be administered
by the state Office of Energy and Planning through a yet-to-be-named program manager. The
program will provide approximately $9 million in grants to municipalities for building retrofits
and other eligible activities. The maximum grant will be $400,000. No announcement has been
made yet, so further details are unavailable. Because the US Department of Energy requires these
funds to be provided to municipalities by March 13, 2010, the Town should be prepared to submit
an application on short notice by January.
Another potential source of funding for efficiency measures is the Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Reduction Fund administered by Public Utilities Commission with Regional Greenhouse Gas
Initiative auction proceeds. The PUC has indicated it will next solicit proposals under this
program at the beginning of next year. Although the timing of this solicitation is somewhat less
certain, the program provides another reason to set priorities and develop information likely to be
required in a grant application by early January.
Financing Options
To finance its share of project costs, the Town has as many as five options. First, the NHEC
SmartStart Program provides zero-interest financing. Due to its low cost, the related need to apply
for incentives from NHEC, and potential applicability to a broad range of the energy efficiency
measures discussed in this report, the scope and level of available SmartStart financing should be
investigated first.
Second, the Town could use a municipal lease finance agreement with a bank or other financial
institution. Lease finance agreements resemble the SmartStart finance agreements used by New
Hampshire utilities. They are a standard source of financing for energy service company (ESCO)
performance contract projects but are available for energy efficiency projects undertaken by other
contractors as well. Municipal lease finance agreements generally have somewhat higher rates
than bonds, but significantly lower transaction costs. Thus, for small- to medium-size projects,
their overall cost can be lower than that of bonds. A lease finance agreement itself would require
approval of the Board of Selectmen but not Town Meeting; appropriation of payments under the
agreement would then require annual approval by Town Meeting as part of the budget process.
Third, the Community Development Finance Authority will be administering a municipal loan
program with Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Funds. CDFA has not yet announced a
schedule, application process, or terms, but will likely do so in the near future.
Fourth, the Town could use tax-exempt municipal bond proceeds. The Town could take part in a
New Hampshire Municipal Bond Bank bond issue or, conceivably, issue its own bond. Either
would require Town Meeting approval unless the Town happens to have outstanding unutilized
authorization. The cost of a stand-alone Town bond issue for the amount the Town will likely
need to finance could make this an inferior option.
Finally, the Town may be able to access allocations of federally authorized Qualified Energy
Conservation Bonds. Because the federal government pays 70 percent of the interest on those socalled tax credit bonds, the cost to a municipality is lower than that of a conventional tax-exempt
municipal bond even though the overall rate for QECBs is higher than the rate for municipal
bonds. QECBs were first authorized by the Troubled Asset Relief Program legislation in 2008
and American Reinvestment and Recovery Act in 2009. The first and current New Hampshire
QECB allocation is $13.7 million, which has been apportioned to various parts of the state.
Renewable Energy and Combined Heat and Power Measures
Funding (Cost-Sharing) Sources
Various external sources of funding support are available for renewable energy and combined heat
and power measures. Tax credits represent a major form of support for these measures but are
available only to private entities. In the case of solar photovoltaic installations, the commonly
used way for a municipality or non-profit entity to capture those tax credits is through an
arrangement in which a private third party leases the space where the PVs are installed and enters
into a power purchase agreement with the host building owner. Because the federal tax credit for
PVs and other qualifying renewable energy measures is in an amount equal to 30 percent of the
capital cost and is accompanied by depreciation and potentially other tax benefits, third-party
owner-operator arrangements can have significantly superior economics. They enable a
municipality to avoid up-front capital costs and lock in long-term electricity rates at levels in the
range of current rates with escalation factors that tend to be lower than likely future inflation in
utility rates.
The federal tax credit for combined heat and power is set at a lower level. Although third-party
CHP owner-operator arrangements are less widely available in the market, they still warrant
investigation. At least one New England CHP firm enters into these arrangements with hosts who
are not taxpayers. Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, third-party owneroperators are currently able to receive grants in lieu of the tax credits. The size of the solar PV
installation discussed in this report is such that fewer third-party owner-operator offerings will be
available than would be the case if the installation were larger.
An alternative to a lease and power purchase agreement with a private owner-operator may be
partial or full investment by NHEC in the PV array or CHP installation. Under state legislation
enacted in 2008 (SB 451), electric utilities are authorized to invest in forms of small-scale
distributed generation that include both solar PVs and CHP. Utilities are now developing and
seeking PUC approval for proposals to use this authority for the first time.
If the Town partnered with either a private third-party owner-operator or NHEC, external sources
of support for renewable energy would be accessed by the other party. The primary current form
of support would come through sales of renewable energy credits. Current REC prices are not a
reliable indication of future prices: a major change in the Massachusetts Renewable Portfolio
Standard, involving the creation of a solar RPS quota and a new solar renewable energy credit or
"S-REC", is currently underway and will significantly affect regional market prices for RECs in
the coming year. A potential future form of support for PV installations of less than 100 kW in
size is the state PUC-administered Renewable Energy Portfolio standard program. (The program
is currently limited to small residential installations.)
To the extent the Town does not partner with a third party, it will need to assemble a funding
package that, in the case of solar PVs, would include REC sales and NHEC rebates. In addition,
some competitive grant sources will be available for solar PV, geothermal and/or CHP measures.
Such measures may be eligible under the competitive Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block
Grant program that will be launched by the state Office of Energy and Planning at the beginning
of 2010, mentioned above. OEP has indicated that it also intends to fund an expanded Renewable
Energy Program through the PUC with $581 K in State Energy Program funds, supplementing the
amount available under the state RPS fund mentioned above.
Financing Options
Financing options for renewable energy measures include some of those discussed above as
options for energy efficiency measures. They include lease finance agreements, Municipal Bond
Bank or Town bond issues, and federal tax-credit bonds – in the case of renewable energy
measures, Clean Renewable Energy Bonds. (The existing federal loan guarantee program,
administered by the US Department of Energy, is not a form of support that it would be feasible to
access for installations of the comparatively small size under consideration by the Town.) The
CDFA municipal loan program mentioned above may include CHP within the scope of eligible
projects. Financing possibilities involving NHEC warrant investigation in discussions with the
utility concerning possible investment under SB 451 or rebates.
Environmental Impact
The reduced energy consumption figures to be realized as a result of this project have been reentered into the Portfolio Manager software available on the EPA Energy Star website. The
following breakdown of the impact is as follows:
Environmental Impact Municipal Building
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Direct GHG Emissions
(on site)
Indirect GHG
Emissions (off site)
TOTAL
Currently
35.68 mTon CO²
19.20 mTon CO²
54.88 mTon CO²
Projected
23.71 mTon CO²
.39 mTon CO²
24.10 mTon CO²
Reduction
33.5%
98%
56%
Environmental Impact Library
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Direct GHG Emissions
(on site)
Indirect GHG
Emissions (off site)
TOTAL
Currently
11.05 mTon CO²
5.22 mTon CO²
16.26 mTon CO²
Projected
9.70 mTon CO²
5.23 mTon CO²
14.93 mTon CO²
Reduction
12%
-.19%
8%
Environmental Impact Highway Department
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Direct GHG Emissions
(on site)
Indirect GHG
Emissions (off site)
TOTAL
Currently
17.39 mTon CO²
10.02 mTon CO²
27.41 mTon CO²
Projected
17.03 mTon CO²
7.29 mTon CO²
24.32 mTon CO²
Reduction
2%
27%
11%
The EEMs that address reducing thermal demands in the building produce the most significant
decrease in CO2 emissions from the building. Indirect emissions refer to greenhouse gas emissions
that occur off site, not at your facility. This refers to electric generation and transmission related
emissions. During generation and transmission of the electricity that is consumed at your facility,
greenhouse gases are emitted.
Next Steps
With the completion of this detailed energy analysis of three Center Harbor buildings, the Town
of Center Harbor must now consider how to move forward and begin to take advantage of energy
saving opportunities presented in this report.
It is our judgment that in order to achieve the energy savings outlined in the final report, it is
essential that careful professional attention be paid to proper design and installation of the selected
Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs). The Jordan Institute is prepared to provide professional
oversight and commissioning services during the implementation phase of your projects and have
included a standard contract to do so in Appendix C.
As a non-profit firm dedicated to improving energy use in the built environment, The Jordan
Institute is committed to representing the owner’s best interests and to ensuring that the most costeffective approaches to achieving energy efficiency are utilized. The buildings owned by the
Town of Center Harbor are among its most important physical assets, with significant implications
for the annual budget, for long-term planning, and for the well-being and productivity of Town
employees and citizens. We believe it is time to move ahead in a planned but aggressive way to
reduce the use of fossil fuels in, and the emission of green house gases from, your buildings, and
to set an example for your business and residential constituents.
Some thoughts on weighing renovation and upgrades on the current Municipal Building against
the option of constructing a new municipal police, fire, and office complex nearby
The Jordan Institute has spent considerable time reviewing the information we collected in order
to prepare this report. Our results are fully reported in this document. While savings of both
energy and money are possible in the Center Harbor buildings we investigated, those savings are
at the low end of the range we have seen as compared to other similar buildings around the state.
We believe that a thorough analysis of the cost to “start fresh” with a new high-performance
municipal services building should be carefully compared to the costs associated with renovating
and upgrading the current Municipal Building.
Of course this observation is in reference to the Municipal Building only. However, certain
synergies may be incorporated such as a ‘campus’ district heating plant for the three buildings.
We do not know how this comparison might come out, or how it would be affected by the overlay
of other Town projects and concerns. But we suggest that such an analysis be done before dollars
are committed to renovation and upgrade projects which may not provide the most value for the
amount of the investment.
Appendix A: GSE2 Financial Modeling Report
6
5
4
$248,040
$60,000
$67,560
19,607
2,324
2,371
2,823
2,795
2,973
3,498
Pre-EEM Usage
(gallons)
98.0%
$181
$9,035
Savings
New
Current
18,432
2,324
2,324
2,371
2,823
2,795
2,973
Post-EEM
Usage
(gallons)
Fuel Oil
1,174
-
47
452
(28)
179
525
(Gallons)
Fuel Oil
Savings
Fuel Oil
3,498 Gallons
$8,065
$2.31 ($/gal.)
Total Avoided Cost
ENERGY COSTIMPACT
$8,854
$7,590
$45
$-
$904
$90
$181
Total Avoided Cost
49.0%
Total Avoided Usage
98%
84.00%
0.50%
0.00%
10.00%
1.00%
2.00%
(%)
Elec $$
Savings
$8,854
New
Electricity
44,383
38,045
225
-
4,530
453
905
(kWh)
Savings
Electricity
Savings
315,832
272,654
7,246
45,066
45,291
40,761
44,838
44,386
Post-EEM
Usage (kWh)
328,421
317,037
45,291
45,291
45,291
45,291
45,291
45,291
Pre-EEM Usage
(kWh)
New
315,832
129,810
7,411
63,228
11,541
26,536
76,539
KBTU
Savings
Savings
$271,690
$188,040
$1,970
$40,875
$11,055
$3,265
$26,485
Energy
Investment
Cost
Electricity
45,291 kWh
$9,035
$0.1995 ($/kWh)
Current
Current
All Current Energy Types (kBTU)
ENERGY USE IMPACT
$339,250
$0
$0
$40,875
$1,970
$7,560
$18,615
$0
$0
Estim. Rebates
/ Grants
ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Baseline Energy Usage:
Baseline Annual Energy Cost:
Baseline Unit Cost:
644,253
Total Project
Renewable Energy Upgrades
Mechanical Controls
Lighting & Lighting Control
Upgrades
Heating System & Ventilation
Upgrades
$3,265
3
$26,485
Air Sealing & Insulation
Glazing & Door Upgrades
Estimated
Capital
Investment
1
Proposed
Improvements
Assumptions:
Center Harbor Municipal Building
FINANCIAL MODELING RESULTS
2
EEM
Num.
Project Title:
$2,707
$5,358
$8,065
$2,707
$-
$109
$1,041
$(64)
$412
$1,210
33.6%
34%
0.00%
2.00%
16.00%
-1.00%
6.00%
15.00%
(%)
Fuel Oil $$
Savings
$11,561
$7,590
$154
$1,041
$839
$502
$1,390
Savings
Energy Cost
Savings
New
Current
Total
$11,561
$7,590
$154
$1,041
$839
$502
$1,390
Total Savings
23.5
24.8
12.8
39.3
13.2
6.5
19.1
Simple Pay
Back
OVERALL RESULTS
Total Avoided Cost
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Savings
O&M
644,252.9 kBTU
$17,100
Total Energy
67.6%
$11,561
$5,539
$17,100
15.6%
5.78%
11.44%
2.69%
11.12%
20.06%
7.81%
INTERNAL RATE
OF RETURN
7
5
Baseline Energy Usage:
Baseline Annual Energy Cost:
Baseline Unit Cost:
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
All Current Energy Types (kBTU)
9.2%
17,858
-
(1,665)
6,056
11,022
193,158
175,299
17,858
$48,315
$0
$32,175
$390
$13,800
ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Energy
Estim. Rebates
Investment KBTU Savings
/ Grants
Cost
ENERGY USE IMPACT
$48,315
$0
Current
New
Savings
Total Avoided Usage
Total Project
Renewable Energy Efforts
$32,175
$390
Glazing & Door Upgrades
2
Heating System & Ventilation
Upgrades
$13,800
Estimated
Capital
Investment
Air Sealing & Insulation
Proposed
Improvements
Assumptions:
Center Harbor Library
1
EEM
Num.
Project Title:
85,628
12,215
12,703
12,093
12,093
Post-EEM
Usage (kWh)
Electricity
-123
-
(488)
122
122
(kWh)
Savings
Electricity
Current
New
Savings
Total Avoided Cost
85,505
12,215
12,215
12,215
12,215
Pre-EEM
Usage (kWh)
Electricity
12,215 kWh
$2,285
$0.1871 ($/kWh)
6,903
951
966
1,006
1,082
Pre-EEM
Usage
(gallons)
$2,285
$2,308
$(23)
6,773
951
966
966
1,006
Post-EEM
Usage
(gallons)
Fuel Oil
131
-
-
40
76
(Gallons)
Savings
Fuel Oil
Current
New
Savings
Total Avoided Cost
ENERGY COSTIMPACT
-$23
$-
$(91)
$23
$23
-1.0%
-1%
0.00%
-4.00%
1.00%
1.00%
(%)
Elec $$
Savings
Fuel Oil
1,082 Gallons
$4,743
$4.38 ($/gal.)
$4,743
$4,171
$572
$572
$-
$-
$177
$332
12.1%
12%
0.00%
0.00%
4.00%
7.00%
(%)
Fuel Oil $$
Savings
$549
$0
-$91
$199
$355
Savings
Energy Cost
Total
$549
$-
$(91)
$199
$355
Total Savings
88.0
0.0
-352.5
2.0
38.9
Simple Pay
Back
OVERALL RESULTS
Current
New
Savings
Total Avoided Cost
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Savings
O&M
193,157.6 kBTU
$7,028
Total Energy
7.8%
$7,028
$6,479
$549
2.0%
n/a
n/a
56.13%
2.74%
INTERNAL RATE
OF RETURN
$1,200
$0
$1,200
$0
All Current Energy Types (kBTU)
Current
New
Savings
Total Avoided Usage
Baseline Energy Usage:
Baseline Annual Energy Cost:
Baseline Unit Cost:
13.6%
51,771
36,064
5,630
10,077
380,341
328,570
51,771
$25,810
$2,860
$6,350
$16,600
ENERGY EFFICIENCY MEASURES
Energy
Estim. Rebates
Investment KBTU Savings
/ Grants
Cost
ENERGY USE IMPACT
$27,010
$2,860
Total Project
$7,550
Heating System & Ventilation
Upgrades
3
5
$16,600
Lighting & Lighting Control
Upgrades
Estimated
Capital
Investment
Glazing & Door Upgrades
Proposed
Improvements
Assumptions:
Center Harbor Highway Dept. Building
2
EEM
Num.
Project Title:
17,187
23,543
21,895
18,835
Post-EEM
Usage (kWh)
Electricity
6,356
-
1,648
4,708
(kWh)
(%)
$22,355
3,326
3,326
3,261
Pre-EEM
Usage
(gallons)
$4,544
$3,317
$1,227
Propane
$22,021
2,927
3,326
3,326
Post-EEM
Usage
(gallons)
Propane
$334
399
-
(65)
(Gallons)
0.00%
-2.00%
(%)
$8,606
$7,725
$881
$881
$1,053
$-
$(172)
Propane $$
Savings
10.2%
10%
12.00%
Savings
Propane
3,261 Gallons
$8,606
$2.64 ($/gal.)
Current
New
Savings
Total Avoided Cost
ENERGY COSTIMPACT
$1,227
$-
$318
$909
Elec $$
Savings
27.0%
27%
0.00%
7.00%
20.00%
Savings
Electricity
Current
New
Savings
Total Avoided Cost
23,543
23,543
23,543
23,543
Pre-EEM
Usage (kWh)
Electricity
23,543 kWh
$4,544
$0.1930 ($/kWh)
$2,108
$1,053
$318
$736
Savings
Energy Cost
Total
$2,108
$1,053
$318
$736
Total Savings
12.2
2.7
20.0
22.5
Simple Pay
Back
OVERALL RESULTS
Current
New
Savings
Total Avoided Cost
$0
$0
$0
$0
Savings
O&M
380,340.7 kBTU
$13,150
Total Energy
16.0%
$13,150
$11,042
$2,108
21.1%
n/a
7.43%
6.48%
INTERNAL RATE
OF RETURN
Appendix B: EEM Budget Estimates
Municipal Budget Estimates
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03301
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
DATE
ESTIMATE #
November 18, 2009
1 of 6
DESCRIPTION
Insulate:
The headers at overhead doors,
Vertical columns between the overhead doors
The block walls in the Fire Station (East and West walls) and Meeting Room (North and East wall)
Back roof with 2" of rigid insulation, finish with new sheathing, Ice and Water Shield, and asphalt shingles
Air Sealing at roof to wall connections and wood to brick connections
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Air Sealing and Added Insulation
1 Air Sealing and Insulation
$
23,998.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
$
161.00
Contingency
$
2,326.00
TOTAL $
26,485.00
$
52,700.00
Add Alternate
1 Installation of a new Viessmann Single Boiler Plant as described above
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03301
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
DATE
ESTIMATE #
November 18, 2009
2 of 6
DESCRIPTION
Weather-stripping on all overhead doors (3) and exterior door back doors
New insulated overhead door at rear of building
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Glazing and Door Upgrades
$
2,924.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
$
22.00
Contingency
$
TOTAL $
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
319.00
3,265.00
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03304
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
DATE
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
ESTIMATE #
3 of 6
November 18, 2009
DESCRIPTION
Install T-5 fixtures over the Fire Station bays and daylight harvesting controls
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Lighting and Lighting Controls
$
16,867.00
$
113.00
$
1,635.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
Contingency
TOTAL $
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
18,615.00
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03304
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
DATE
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
ESTIMATE #
4 of 6
November 18, 2009
DESCRIPTION
Demo and remove two existing boilers
Install two high efficiency condensing boilers (oil fired)
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Heating System Upgrade
$
37,036.00
$
249.00
$
3,590.00
TOTAL $
40,875.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
Contingency
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03304
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
DATE
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
ESTIMATE #
5 of 6
November 18, 2009
DESCRIPTION
Upgrade TekMar Controls to include additional controls for night setback and outdoor reset
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Mechanical Controls
$
1,785.00
$
12.00
$
173.00
TOTAL $
1,970.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
Contingency
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03304
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
DATE
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
ESTIMATE #
6 of 6
November 18, 2009
DESCRIPTION
Install new 39kW Solar Photovoltaic on Fire Station front roof
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Renewable Energy Source
$
224,743.00
$
1,511.00
$
21,786.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
Contingency
TOTAL $ 248,040.00
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
Library Budget Estimates
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03301
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
DATE
ESTIMATE #
November 18, 2009
1 of 3
DESCRIPTION
Air Seal ceiling plane in the attic space with closed cell foam, replace existing iberglass batt insulation
Air Seal and Insulate the band joists in the basement, extending 2' from exterior walls into the basement ceiling
Insulate the weight cavities of the windows
Insulate attic hatches and access areas
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Air Sealing and Added Insulation
$
12,517.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
$
133.00
Contingency
$
1,150.00
TOTAL $
13,800.00
$
52,700.00
Add Alternate
1 Installation of a new Viessmann Single Boiler Plant as described above
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03301
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
DATE
ESTIMATE #
November 18, 2009
2 of 3
DESCRIPTION
Weather-stripping exterior door (including door to basement)
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Glazing and Door Upgrades
$
356.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
$
2.00
Contingency
$
TOTAL $
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
32.00
390.00
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03304
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
DATE
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
ESTIMATE #
3 of 3
November 18, 2009
DESCRIPTION
Distribution system recommissioning - Steam trap survey and clean
Energy Recovery Ventilator with dehumidification
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Heating and Ventilation
$
29,308.00
$
186.00
$
2,681.00
TOTAL $
32,175.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
Contingency
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
Highway Department Budget Estimates
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03301
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
DATE
ESTIMATE #
November 18, 2009
1 of 3
DESCRIPTION
Weather-strip overhead doors
Install 4 DayStar skylights over Highway Department conditioned bays
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Glazing and Door Upgrades
$
15,420.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
$
77.00
Contingency
$
TOTAL $
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
1,103.00
16,600.00
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03301
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
DATE
ESTIMATE #
November 18, 2009
2 of 3
DESCRIPTION
Replace sodium fixtures with T-5 lighting fixtures and install daylight sensor controls
Replace indoor street lights (night lights) with CFL spots and occupancy sensors
Install occupancy sensors in unconditioned Highway Department space
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Lighting and Lighting Controls
$
6,877.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
$
44.00
Contingency
$
TOTAL $
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
629.00
7,550.00
The Jordan Institute
49 North Main Street, Concord, NH 03304
Tel: 603-226-1009 Fax: 603-226-0042
www.jordaninstitute.org
CUSTOMER/ADDRESS
DATE
Town of Center Harbor
36 Main Street
Center Harbor, NH 03226
ESTIMATE #
3 of 3
November 18, 2009
DESCRIPTION
Replace boiler with newer model in the conditioned Highway Department space
BUDGET PRICING
TOTAL
Heating
$
2,605.00
$
17.00
$
238.00
TOTAL $
2,860.00
Additional Items
M & V Prep Work
Contingency
This is a non binding estimate. Actual building conditions will determine the final customer quote.
Appendix C: Oversight Contract
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
Between
The Jordan Institute, Inc. and Town of Center Harbor
For
A DETAILED ASSESSMENT AND FEASIBILITY STUDY ANALYZING
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CLEAN ENERGY IMPROVEMENTS (“The Project”)
THIS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into as of the ____________ day of
______________, 2009, by and between THE JORDAN INSTITUTE, INC., a New Hampshire
not-for-profit corporation with its principal office and place of business at 49 North Main St.
Concord, New Hampshire 03301 (“Jordan”), and Town of Center Harbor, located at 36 Main
Street Center Harbor, NH 03226. The parties hereto hereby agree as follows:
1.
Description of Services. Jordan shall perform for Town of Center Harbor the
services described in Schedule A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the “Services” or the
“Work”). Jordan will perform the Services with data provided by Town of Center Harbor. If
the Project is for multiple buildings and energy history is not specific to each building, Town of
Center Harbor will need to provide an estimation of energy usage.
2.
Fee. Town of Center Harbor shall pay Jordan for the Services the fee described in
Schedule A attached hereto (the “Fee” or “Fees”). Payment of any income or other taxes which
may be due upon Jordan’s compensation from Town of Center Harbor shall be Jordan’s
responsibility, and Town of Center Harbor shall not withhold any amounts from Jordan’s
compensation for this purpose. Jordan will bill Town of Center Harbor monthly for Work
completed.
3.
Expenses. Town of Center Harbor shall pay Jordan for Expenses as described in
Schedule A attached hereto. Upon execution of this Agreement, Jordan will submit a
Project/invoicing schedule which will become part of this Agreement.
4.
Term. This Agreement is effective as of the date hereof and shall continue for the
period described in Schedule A attached hereto unless earlier terminated pursuant to Section 12
hereof. Upon delivery of the Final Assessment Report, prepared by Jordan, the Town of Center
Harbor will have 10 days to review Jordan’s findings and request clarifications. Jordan will
have 10 days to respond to requested clarifications. At this time, the balance of the Fee will be
invoiced.
5.
Force Majeure. If either party is prevented from complying, either totally or in
part, with any of the terms or provisions of this Agreement by reason of fire, flood, storm,
strike, lockout or other labor trouble, riot, war, rebellion, accident, terrorist acts or other acts of
God, then upon written notice to the other party, the requirements of this Agreement, or the
affected provisions hereof to the extent affected, shall be suspended during the period of such
disability. During such period, the party not prevented from complying as aforesaid may seek
to have its needs (which would otherwise be met hereunder) met by or through third parties
without liability hereunder. The party prevented from complying shall make all reasonable
efforts to remove such disability within 30 days of giving such notice.
6.
Limitation on Liability. IN NO EVENT SHALL JORDAN BE LIABLE TO Town
of Center Harbor OR ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION ,
LOSS OF PROFIT OR GOODWILL, FOR ANY MATTER ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO
THIS AGREEMENT AND / OR ITS SUBJECT MATTER, WHETHER SUCH LIABILITY IS
ASSERTED ON THE BASIS OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE. Town of Center Harbor
UNDERSTANDS AND AGREES THAT ANY LIABILITY OF JORDAN REGARDING THE
SERVICES SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF THE FEES ACTUALLY
RECEIVED BY JORDAN IN CONNECTION WITH THE SERVICES.
7.
Jordan’s Warranties; Disclaimer. Jordan represents and warrants to, and agrees
that Jordan has and will have full power and authority to enter into, and fully to perform, this
Agreement and that no agreement or understanding with any other person, firm, or corporation
exists or will exist which would interfere with Jordan’s obligations hereunder. Jordan further
represents and warrants that the disclosure to Town of Center Harbor of any information by
Jordan in connection with the Services does not contravene any confidentiality obligation
Jordan may have to any third party.
EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY STATED HEREIN ABOVE, JORDAN MAKES NO OTHER
WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY
IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND/OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE, CONCERNING THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER
WARRANTY WITH RESPECT TO THE QUALITY OR ACCURACY OF THE SERVICES.
8.
Notices. Any notice given hereunder shall be in writing and delivered in person
or mailed by certified or registered mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the appropriate party as
set forth in the preamble hereof. Either party may change its address to receive notice by giving
written notice of such change to the other party.
9.
Changes in the Work. Changes in the Work may be accomplished after
execution of this Agreement, and without invalidating this Agreement, by Change Order,
Construction Change Directive or order for a minor change in the Work, subject to the
limitations set forth in this Section 9 and elsewhere in the Agreement Documents. A Change
Order shall be based upon agreement among the Owner, Construction Manager, Architect,
Contractor, and Jordan; a Construction Change Directive requires agreement by the Owner,
Construction Manager and Architect and may or may not be agreed to by the Contractor; an
order for a minor change in the Work may be issued by the Architect alone. Changes in the
Work shall be performed under applicable provisions of the Contract Documents, and
Contractor shall proceed promptly, unless otherwise provided in the Change Order,
Construction Change Directive or order for a minor change in the Work. If unit prices are stated
in the Agreement Documents or subsequently agreed upon, and if quantities originally
contemplated are so changed in a proposed Change Order or Construction Change Directive
that application of such unit prices to quantities of Work proposed will cause substantial
inequity to the Owner or Contractor, the applicable unit prices shall be equitably adjusted.
10.
Independent Contractor. This Agreement shall not give rise to a partnership,
agency or other relationship between the parties, except as otherwise provided herein. All
activities by Jordan under the terms of this Agreement shall be carried on by Jordan as an
independent contractor and not as an agent for or employee of Town of Center Harbor.
11.
Assignment. Jordan acknowledges that the Services to be provided to Town of
Center Harbor are unique and personal. Accordingly, Jordan may not assign any of its rights or
delegate any of its duties or obligations under this Agreement to another party without the
prior consent of Town of Center Harbor. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of their
respective successors, assigns and affiliates.
12.
Termination.
(a) Either party may immediately terminate this Agreement if a Default (as defined
below) by the other party has occurred and is continuing by giving written notice
thereof to the defaulting party. Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, the
termination of this Agreement shall not relieve the parties of any obligation accruing
with respect to this Agreement prior to such termination. The term “Default” shall
mean any of the following events:
(1)
failure by a party to comply with or to perform in all material
respects any provision of this Agreement and continuance of such failure
for ten (10) days after notice thereof to such party; or
(2)
any warranty or representation made by a party in this
Agreement is breached or is false or misleading in any material respect.
(b) Town of Center Harbor may terminate this Agreement with sixty (60) days written
notice to Jordan should the Services no longer be required as a result of Town of
Center Harbor canceling the Project due to not being able to raise sufficient funds to
complete the project. Should such termination occur, Jordan shall provide Town of
Center Harbor with a final invoice for any incurred Fees up to the value of the total
Agreement as defined in Schedule A attached hereto.
13.
Merger; Amendment. This Agreement, together with Schedule A attached
hereto, constitutes the entire agreement and understanding between the parties regarding the
subject matter hereof, and merges all prior discussions, proposals, and agreements between
them relating thereto. No waiver, modification or amendment to this Agreement shall be valid
unless in writing and signed by the parties hereto.
14.
No Waiver. No failure or delay on the part of either party in the exercise of any
right, power or remedy under this Agreement shall operate as a waiver thereof; nor shall any
single or partial exercise of any right, power or remedy preclude other or further exercise
thereof, or the exercise of any other right, power or remedy.
15.
Indemnification. Jordan shall indemnify Town of Center Harbor from and
against any damages, claims, or expenses arising out of Jordan’s breach of this Agreement or
from Jordan’s negligent acts or omissions outside the scope of this Agreement. Town of Center
Harbor shall indemnify Jordan from and against any damages, claims or expenses arising out of
Town of Center Harbor breach of this Agreement or arising out of claims or actions by third
parties against Jordan by virtue of its performance of this Agreement.
16.
Publicity. Subject to the prior approval of the other party, which approval shall
not be unreasonably withheld, either party may make the terms of this Agreement and the
relationship of the parties hereunder public via press releases, seminars, case studies, web sites,
or through other media.
17.
Headings. Section headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and
shall not affect the interpretation of any provision of this Agreement.
18.
Governing Law; Severability; etc. This Agreement shall be governed by and
construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New Hampshire. Whenever possible,
each provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted in such manner as to be effective and
valid under applicable law, but if any provision of this Agreement shall be prohibited by or
invalid under applicable law, such provision shall be ineffective to the extent of such
prohibition of invalidity, without invalidating the remainder of such provision or the remaining
provisions of this Agreement. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts,
each of which shall be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement by their
respective authorized representatives as of the date first above written.
THE JORDAN INSTITUTE, INC.
By:
Typed Name: D. Dickinson Henry, Jr.
Town of Center Harbor
By:
Typed Name: (Contact)
Title: Executive Director
Title:
Date:
Date:
(Contacts Title)
Schedule A: Oversight Services
Town of Center Harbor understands and agrees that Jordan will be providing oversight
through the design and construction process of the project, acting on behalf of the owners,
Town of Center Harbor. Selected consultants/trades peoples, will supply the following services
and work in conjunction with Jordan to achieve maximum performance.
The expected deliverables of oversight services are:
Oversight of Design/Development Phase
! Design and specify selected Energy Efficiency Measures (EEM)
! Value engineering
! Life-cycle cost analysis
! Constructability reviews
Oversight of Procurement Phase
! Preparing bid documents
! Review of bids/proposals received
! Coordinate final contracts between Town of Center Harbor and trades peoples
Oversight of Construction Phase
! Coordinate with project team members
! Attendance at Owner/Architect/Contractor meetings, as required
! Make periodic site visits to monitor progress of energy related work
! Monitor quality of energy related work
! Request blower door tests when required
! Monitor adherence to the contract documents
! Monitor commissioning
Oversight of Construction Closeout Phase
! Punch list development of energy related items
! Project closeout support
! Request final blower door test
Fees
Jordan will perform the Services listed above for X% above the cost of implementation in order
to ensure that the measures as outlined in Jordan’s Facility Assessment Report, dated (XX),
achieve their optimum performance, plus reasonable reimbursables.
Jordan will work in regular communication with Town of Center Harbor to be aware of the
needs and expectations of Project personnel.
The parties will negotiate separately the scope of Work.
49 North Main Street, 2nd Floor
Concord, NH 03301
603-226-1009
www.jordaninstitute.org
Download PDF