120 likes | 237 Views
Results from Retrocommissioning in the Air National Guard 2011 GreenGov Symposium Oct. 31 ‐ Nov. 2, 2011 | Washington Hilton • Washington, DC. Jerry Bauers National Director of Commissioning Sebesta. Peter K. Dahl , Ph.D. , LEE D A P BD+C O+M Sustainability Specialist Sebesta.
E N D
Results from Retrocommissioning in the Air National Guard 2011 GreenGov Symposium Oct. 31 ‐ Nov. 2, 2011 | Washington Hilton • Washington, DC Jerry Bauers National Director of Commissioning Sebesta Peter K. Dahl, Ph.D., LEED APBD+C O+MSustainabilitySpecialistSebesta Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
The Challenge • Mandated energy/water savings • Maintenance backlog • Operations team • Achieve savings – not just recommended • How many energy audits do you have sitting on your shelf? and Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
The RetroCx Process • Documentationreview • Siteinvestigation • Onsite interviews • Building walkthroughs • Baseline fieldmeasurements • CFR(expectations forperformance) • Implementation • Functionalperformancetesting • Sensorverificationandcalibration • TABsurvey • Quickfixes • Report results Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
ExistingConditions Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
Investigation LEED-EB EAp1 L EED-EB E A p 1 • Systems and equipment assessment • Energy analysis • Performance measurements (Flow, temps, power, etc.) • Recommendations: Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
Implementation • Approve and implement quick fixes • Operations team / CETSC/ RCx agent • Test and balance air and water systems • Commission results • Quantify energy saving impacts LEED-EB EAc2.1 LEED-EB EAc2.2 L EED-EB L EED-EB E A c2.1 E A c2.2 Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
Results from Fargo,Hector Field • 121 recommendations in 4 buildings • 94 implemented, 27 deferred • 20 have direct energy impacts • Cost for implementation: $3,675 • Immediate annual savings: $15,514 • Annually avoiding: 46,046 kWh, 12,127 therms • Follow‐on implementation contract • Energy savings/comfort improvements/operational savings Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
Ideal Buildingfor RetroCx • Facility has high EUI – poor performance • Chronic equipment breakdowns • No major renovations are planned Pursuingthirdparty ratings: Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
Keysto Success • Develop trust with operations team • Knowledge exchange and support from consultant to make their job easier • Allocate funds for implementation • RCx agent responsibility • Training through partnership • Create lasting improvements Achieve immediate operational benefits from improved performance and reduce the maintenance backlog Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
Questions ThankYou Jerry Bauers National Director of Commissioning Sebesta jbauers@sebesta.com Peter K. Dahl, Ph.D., LEED APBD+C O+MSustainabilitySpecialistSebesta pdahl@sebesta.com Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
Results Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011
Results Session 4: Unique Challenges to Retrofitting Green Facilities | November 1, 2011