Wilshire Center/Koreatown
Green Building Retrofit Program
Presented by :
Caroline Sim
Doug Nordham, P.E.
Gary Russell, AIA
Christine Magar, AIA, LEED AP
David Hodgins, LEED AP
March 3, 2011
CRA/LA
Arup
WCBIC
Greenform
Clinton Climate Initiative
• Introductions of Program Team
• Program Goals and Objectives
• Program Process and Steps
• Opportunities and Benefits for Participants
• Case Studies and Examples
• How Do You Get Started?
Agenda
• Doug Nordham, P.E. , Arup
– Program Manager
• Gary Russell, AIA, WCBIC
– Community Liaison
• Christine Magar, AIA, LEED AP, Greenform
– Sustainability Consulting
• David Hodgins, LEED AP, Clinton Climate Initiative
– Financial Strategy
Program Team Members
Did you know?
Buildings in the U.S. account for -
40%
of U.S. primary energy
consumption
72%
of U.S. electricity
consumption
40%
of U.S. GHG emissions
generation
48%
Including building construction
and embodied energy
Goals and Objectives
Why are existing buildings an important
part of energy and carbon reduction?
“And with 50-70% of existing buildings expected to still be in use in 2050,
reducing energy demand by retrofitting existing stock will be a key policy
instrument.”
Mark Watts, Clinton Climate Initiative
“As newer net zero buildings come on line, existing building stock will find it
more difficult to compete with these new, more resource efficient buildings.
They need to adapt, or they could become obsolete.”
Dr. Jean Rogers, Nick Offer. “High Performing Property Portfolios.” A2 Magazine Issue 7: 18-19. Arup
Goals and Objectives
The Program Goals include the following:
•WCBID Cool District Program target of 80% Carbon reduction by 2050
•Provide FREE building energy assessments to eligible building owners
•Through the assessments, identify the feasible energy reduction projects
and package those that will provide less than a 3 year payback
•Work with potential Energy Project Lenders to bring “packaged” financing
options to the building owners
•Create an ongoing Program structure that will last for several years and
be self-funding and sustaining
Goals and Objectives
Why provide FREE Building Energy Assessments?
A Lawrence Berkeley National Lab study of 60 buildings of different types
showed that:
• Over 50% had control problems
• 40% had HVAC equipment problems
• 15% had missing equipment
• 25% had BAS with economizers, VFDs, and advanced applications that
were simply not operating correctly.
Savings from Energy Assessments
• Value of Energy Savings: $0.11 ‐ $0.72/sq. ft.
• Value of Non‐Energy Savings: $0.10 ‐ $0.45/sq. ft.
Source: Assoc. of State Energy Research Technology Internships and US Department of Energy
Goals and Objectives
Building Energy Assessments – The Process
Preliminary
Assessment
Review of
Opportunities
Investment
Grade Audit
Financing and
Design
Project
Implementation
A Building Energy Assessment is a structured process that
identifies viable and beneficial energy reduction/management
opportunities within a particular facility.
Building Energy Assessments:
Aligning Goals with Information
Preliminary
Assessment
Information Sources
Building
Operations &
Maintenance
Budget
Energy
Usage
Data
Staff &
Tenant
Discussion
Goals
Building
Management
Systems
Building
Documents
Capital
Replacement
Budget
Identify Viable
EE Measures
Improving
Operations &
Maintenance
Reduced
Operating
Cost
Improving
Existing
Assets
Reduce
Energy &
Carbon
Upgrade
Building
Systems
Improve
Tenant
Comfort
Review
Opportunities
Investment
Grade Audit
Financing &
Design
Project
Implementation
What’s Included in a Building Energy Assessment?
•Review building utility bills
•Conduct site walkthough and equipment inventory
•Identify potential energy efficiency measures
•Calculate energy and cost savings
• Analyze economics and return on investment
• Consider incentives and tax credit opportunities
• Determine measure costs and economics
Program Process and Steps
Typical Building Energy Assessment Results
ENERGY BASELINE
ENERGY USE
SCHEDULING/ENABLING
CONTROLS PROBLEMS
ECONOMIZER/OUTSIDE AIR LOADS
EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS
PLANT OPTIMIZATION
SYSTEM / ZONE OPTIMIZATION
TOTAL ENERGY SAVINGS
(Average 25-35%)
Reference LBNL
IMPLEMENTATION COST
Program Process and Steps
Typical Building Energy Assessment Results
ENERGY BASELINE
RETURN ON
INVESTMENT
avg = 3 Years
ENERGY USE
SCHEDULING/ENABLING
CONTROLS PROBLEMS
ECONOMIZER/OUTSIDE AIR LOADS
EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS
PLANT OPTIMIZATION
SYSTEM / ZONE OPTIMIZATION
TOTAL ENERGY SAVINGS
(Average 25-35%)
Reference LBNL
IMPLEMENTATION COST
Program Process and Steps
DIMINISHING
RETURNS
Building Energy Assessments – The Process
Go forward with EE Projects?
Preliminary
Assessment
Review of
Opportunities
Investment
Grade Audit
Program Process and Steps
Financing and
Design
Project
Implementation
Energy Project Financing
Preliminary
Assessment
• What is It?
• What can we typically finance?
• What types of financing are available?
• Considerations and risks
• Typical Results
Review
Opportunities
Investment
Grade Audit
Financing &
Design
Project
Implementation
Program Process & Steps
• What is it for?
– Approach for financing capital cost of energy efficiency
retrofit projects
• How does it work?
– Energy cost savings provide a cashflow to repay the loan
• What to Finance?
– Energy Efficiency Measures (can include water)
• What types available?
–
–
–
–
–
Grants
Incentives (especially utility and State)
Banks/Lenders
Energy Service Companies
Self-Funded
Energy Project Financing
Types of Energy Project Funding
• Grants – typically lower amounts to fund pilots,
research, or seed money – limited with great effort
• Incentives – Typically retroactive from Utilities, and
Local, State, and Federal Government tax breaks
• Self-Funding – Savings from early investments that
have quickest payback (< 1 yr) fund additional
efficiency investments
• Bank/Lender Funding – Borrow money at standard
interest rates to invest in energy measures
• ESCO – Loans money for investment, manages
implementation, paid for by energy savings
Energy Project Financing
Typical Savings with Energy Efficiency Investments
Self Funded $25M Investment @ 25 - 35% Savings
100
Annual Utility Cost ($million)
90
80
70
Cumulative EE Savings
Business as Usual
Energy Efficient Cost
Series3
Efficiency Savings Investment
$75 Million Cumulative
Savings in 13 Years
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Years
Energy Project Financing
8
9
10
11
12
13
ESCOs (Energy Service Companies)
• One stop shop for funding and implementation
• Contract based, with payments and profit from utility
cost savings
• Traditionally focused on “low hanging fruit”
• Early ESCO (90s) contracts were heavily slanted
towards ESCO and along with above tendency
created a poor impression and reduced savings
• ESCO work with the government has forced contracts
to be more fair
• Pro-active third party audits and consulting can also
improve ESCO results
Energy Project Financing
Energy Efficiency Benefits for the Building Owner
• Extended Equipment Life----Lower Repair and Maintenance Costs
• Increased Thermal Comfort----for (happier) Tenants
• Improved Indoor Air Quality----for (happier) Tenants
• Reduced Operating/Energy Costs
Energy demand reduction
• Increased Safety/Reduced Liability
Efficient supply
•Greater Building/Asset Value
•Pre-requisite to Renewable Energy
Owner Opportunities and Benefits
Renewable
energy
Case Study: UCSF Mt Zion Research Center
Arup’s energy consultants reduced energy usage at UCSF’s
most energy intensive research laboratory, bringing it into line
with similar facilities and saving $354,573 per year, a 36%
reduction in annual energy costs, and a simple project
payback of 0.6 years. Awarded UC’s “best practice” award in
2009.
Total Cost/Benefit
Energy Savings - $354,573
Implementation Cost - $710,000
Simple Payback – 0.6 years
after incentives
Case Study
CO2 Reduction
Electricity and Natural gas
reduction by 29%
Case Study: Time Equities, Inc. – Audit
Arup’s energy audit for Time Equities, Inc. highlights how
improving energy efficiency not only reduces a building’s
operational costs but also enables corporations to achieve their
sustainability related goals, such as reducing their carbon
footprint.
Total Cost/Benefit
Energy Savings - $295,000
Simple Payback – Less than 5
years
Case Study
CO2 Reduction
Annual reduction in CO2
emissions is estimated at 1,165
klbs. Per year, a 40% reduction.
Case Study: Pfizer Global R&D Campus
Arup’s energy consultants conducted a major energy assessment
for Pfizer. As a result of the study, Arup identified and managed
implementation of energy efficiency measures, resulting in
savings of over $1 million per year with a simple payback period
of less than 6 months and reduction of 5,000 tons of CO2
annually.
Total Cost/Benefit
Energy Savings - $1,023,913
Implementation Cost - $380,500
Simple Payback – 0.38 years
Case Study
CO2 Reduction
5,000 Tons of CO2 reduced
annually
20% energy reduction
How do you get started?
1. Contact WCBID or Arup to request your FREE
Building Energy Assessment
2. If your building is selected, we’ll schedule a
meeting and site visit with you
3. We’ll evaluate your building and then meet to
discuss results and future options
4. If appropriate, conduct the IGA.
5. Arrange Project Financing
6. Install energy efficiency measures
7. Receive cost savings and other benefits!
Next Steps
Discussion and Questions
THANK YOU
Caroline Sim
Doug Nordham
Gary Russell
Christine Magar
David Hodgins
CRA/LA – 213.368.0651 – csim@cra.lacity.org
Arup – 310.578.4400 – douglas.nordham@arup.com
WCBIC – 213.487.7003 – gary@wilshirecenter.com
Greenform – 323.464.2002 – cmagar@greenform.net
Clinton Climate Initiative - dhodgins@clintonfoundation.org