Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
ENERGY PERFORMANCE
Citation preview
2011
Energy Solutions
Energy Performance Contracting
in the
European Union
2011
Energy Solutions
1. Introduction
2. EPC Business Model & Contract Types
3. Provision of Financing
4. Contracts
5. Financial Guarantees
6. Procuring an Energy Performance Contract
7. Determining energy savings – M&V
8. EPC Best Practice ‐ Case Studies
Contents
2011
Energy Solutions
1. Introduction Why should Buildings reduce Energy and Carbon Emissions? It is now widely recognised that climate change is probably the most serious threat to life, our health, and our wellbeing. Unless we all take effective action now and take serious action to reduce carbon emissions, millions of people around the world will suffer hunger, water shortages and coastal flooding as the climate changes. Non‐domestic buildings tend generally to be large with a range of significant impacts on the environment, of which energy consumption and associated carbon emissions are considered to be amongst the most important. As a result, they have a national and international imperative to act in order to make a real difference and to set an important example. There is also a strong financial incentive to address climate change. The Stern Review5 concluded that the benefits of strong, early and coordinated action against climate change far outweigh the economic costs of doing nothing. Coupled with the significant cost of energy in most buildings, which is forecast to continue to rise, ‘doing nothing’ is no longer an option.
ESCOs ‐ the right choice for integrated energy solutions across a building portfolio Energy Service Companies (ESCOs) have been operating within the energy sector for many years and recognise the challenges that organizations face and the need for change. With the technology, expertise and proven solutions to help develop a strategy outlining the most effective path to improvement, they take a comprehensive view of a building’s carbon footprint, identify the areas where improvements can be made and implement practical, engineered solutions to reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions. The benefits are immediate, including reduced costs, improved building comfort and legislative compliance. A number of ESCOs can guarantee the results and take on the performance risk, funding the improvements from the savings they deliver. This solution is termed ‘Energy Performance Contracting’ and while it has been implemented with great success in a number of EU member states, based on this success, it is currently gaining great interest and traction across Europe.
2011
Energy Solutions
2. EPC Business Model & Contract Types
What is an Energy Performance Contract (EPC)? An EPC overcomes the need for upfront capital investment. Rather, it guarantees future savings in energy demand to finance practical, engineered plant improvements. It is an innovative way of bringing about change and reducing risk ‐ of overcoming a lack of in‐house technical skills, resources and budget. An EPC enables an organisation to:
Reduce the financial risks associated with energy consumption
Utilise ESCO design, implementation and finance resources to improve the energy efficiency of buildings
Conduct a detailed energy audit to identify where and how much energy demand can be reduced
Reap guaranteed cost savings. Energy savings are guaranteed by the ESCO. In the unlikely event of the agreed savings not being delivered, the ESCO makes up the difference. Usually, any additional saving above that guaranteed is left to the customer to keep but shared savings model as described in the diagram below can also be employed.
Critically, EPCs are without risk to the customer. Working with an experienced ESCO ensures that savings are measured, verified and guaranteed. The guarantee, in effect, transfers all technical and operational risks to the ESCO. It also ensures that change happens. Independent research shows that whilst energy surveys are commonplace, very few measures are actually implemented. That’s a lot of lost cost saving opportunity gone forever. Added to that, working with an ESCO provides organizations with access to additional and skilled resources to implement energy efficient solutions. ESCO experts can help plan and budget for capital improvements by taking a whole facility approach as shown in the diagram below. In addition, smart, web‐based energy monitoring and reporting tools can be utilized to not only understand where and to what degree energy is being consumed but to monitor the improvements the retrofit program delivers.
A total facility approachLighting rep lacement,
control systems & LED s
On-Site Technical Resource Management
C hiller upgrade/replacement & absorption cooling
BuildingManagement Systems
Zonetemperature
contro l
Boiler upgrades, contro lsCombined Heat & Power
VSD motor control
Ventilation fans
H igh efficiency motors
Voltage reduction
Damper control
Plug loadmanagement
So lar gainminimization
A programme approach accessing over 250 energy conservation measures
2011
Energy Solutions
Contract Types The illustrations with descriptions below clarify the relationships and risk allocations among the ESCO, customer and lender/financing institution in the two major performance contracting models: shared savings and guaranteed savings. (Source: Berlin Energy Agency) Shared Savings Under a shared savings contract the cost savings are split for a pre determined length of time in accordance with a pre arranged percentage: there is no ‘standard’ split as this depends on the cost of the project, the length of the contract and the risks taken by the ESCO and the consumer. Source: Dreessen 2003a
Under a Shared Savings contract, the cost savings are split by a percentage for a pre‐determined length of time. There is no ‘standard’ split as this depends on the cost of the project, the length of the contract and the risks taken by the ESCO and the consumer. Guaranteed Savings Under a guaranteed savings contract the ESCO guarantees a certain level of energy savings and in this way shields the client from any performance risk. Source: Dreessen 2003a
An important difference to note between the guaranteed and shared savings models is that in the guaranteed model, the performance guarantee is the level of energy saved, while in the shared savings model it is the cost of energy saved (and credit risk taken on behalf of the ESCO). Most ESCOs prefer to use the guaranteed savings model. Under a guaranteed savings contract the ESCO guarantees a certain level of energy consumption savings and in this way shields the client from any performance risk. The ESCO does this under a guaranteed savings contract by assuming the entire design, installation and savings performance risks. However, the ESCO does not assume the credit risk of repayment of the programme costs by the customer. A key advantage of this model is that it provides the lowest financing cost because it limits the risks of the finance institutions to their area of expertise, which is assessing and handling the customer’s credit risk. The customer repays the loan and assumes the investment repayment risk. However, due to the guarantee, if the energy consumption savings are not enough to cover debt service, then the ESCO has to cover the difference. If savings exceed the guaranteed level, generally the customer keeps these. In the developed EPC market in the US, the guaranteed savings model evolved from the shared savings model in response to customer’s desire to significantly reduce interest costs in exchange for accepting more risk due
2011
Energy Solutions
to their increased comfort with energy savings technologies. This was dependant on a market that included experienced ESCOs able to demonstrate a depth of experience and success in the implementation of energy savings programmes. The primary benefit of the guaranteed savings model is that its reduced financing cost enables a lot more project investment to be made for the same debt service level. The public sector normally prefers this structure in order to maximize the amount of infrastructure investment made in its facilities from an Energy Performance Contract. Although the shared savings model is still in use, developed EPC markets tend to end up embracing the guaranteed savings model for the reasons described above. The table below summarizes and compares the main performance based energy services contractual vehicles.
Low. The goal is purely cost savings related to energy. Scope of work and services are not clearly defined and at the descretion of the ESCO
Assumes performance and customer credit risk
Value of payments is linked to energy prices
The ESCO guarantees the performance related to cost of energy saved throughout the contract life
High. ESCO’s primary focus and incentive is for energy cost savings with technical operation requirements as secondary
Implementation of technical improvements to provide cost savings associated with the overall energy bill
ESCO
SHARED SAVINGS
Payment is at a fixed rate/tariff without any energy performance (efficiency) requirements
Directly related to the energy savings achievedPayment
Usually does not assume tech risk (energy efficiency) neither financial risk
Assumes technical design, implementation and performance guarantee risks
Contractor’s risk
The ESC may have incentives related to energy use reduction, but without assuming any risk in case the expected efficiency is not reached
The ESCO guarantees the performance related to the level of energy savedthroughout the contract life
Energy efficiency guarantee
Low. An specific energy bill reduction is stablished (in euros, not in kWh). Usually the contract does not take into account the measurement of the energy efficiency
High. The energy efficiency is measured before and after (throughout the contract life) of ECMs implementation typically following IPMVP “International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol” (www.evoworld.org)
Energy efficiency improvement transparency
Low. Limited to the central energy plant (boilers, chillers, etc.) without regard to demand-side equipment (AHUs, building envelope, space htg, lighting, ...)
High. Comprehensive and detailed approach via Invest-ment Grade Audits-IGA covering both on-site energy conversion and demand side
Energy savings potential
Supply a set of energy services via the outsourcing of the central energy plant (primary energy conversion equipment) providing heating and/or cooling to the end-use equipment
Implementation of technical measures (ECM’s) with ongoing M&V services to provide guaranteed energy savings (kWh)
Key characteristics
Energy Supply Service Company ESCOAgent
ENERGY SUPPLY CONTRACTING (ESC)
ENERGY PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING (EPC)
Low. The goal is purely cost savings related to energy. Scope of work and services are not clearly defined and at the descretion of the ESCO
Assumes performance and customer credit risk
Value of payments is linked to energy prices
The ESCO guarantees the performance related to cost of energy saved throughout the contract life
High. ESCO’s primary focus and incentive is for energy cost savings with technical operation requirements as secondary
Implementation of technical improvements to provide cost savings associated with the overall energy bill
ESCO
SHARED SAVINGS
Payment is at a fixed rate/tariff without any energy performance (efficiency) requirements
Directly related to the energy savings achievedPayment
Usually does not assume tech risk (energy efficiency) neither financial risk
Assumes technical design, implementation and performance guarantee risks
Contractor’s risk
The ESC may have incentives related to energy use reduction, but without assuming any risk in case the expected efficiency is not reached
The ESCO guarantees the performance related to the level of energy savedthroughout the contract life
Energy efficiency guarantee
Low. An specific energy bill reduction is stablished (in euros, not in kWh). Usually the contract does not take into account the measurement of the energy efficiency
High. The energy efficiency is measured before and after (throughout the contract life) of ECMs implementation typically following IPMVP “International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol” (www.evoworld.org)
Energy efficiency improvement transparency
Low. Limited to the central energy plant (boilers, chillers, etc.) without regard to demand-side equipment (AHUs, building envelope, space htg, lighting, ...)
High. Comprehensive and detailed approach via Invest-ment Grade Audits-IGA covering both on-site energy conversion and demand side
Energy savings potential
Supply a set of energy services via the outsourcing of the central energy plant (primary energy conversion equipment) providing heating and/or cooling to the end-use equipment
Implementation of technical measures (ECM’s) with ongoing M&V services to provide guaranteed energy savings (kWh)
Key characteristics
Energy Supply Service Company ESCOAgent
ENERGY SUPPLY CONTRACTING (ESC)
ENERGY PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING (EPC)
Comparison Table of Energy Contract Types
2011
Energy Solutions
3. Provision of Financing Sources of financing energy efficiency projects are:
o Third Party Financing o ESCO financing o Energy‐user/Customer Funding Source
Third‐party financing* is simply debt financing whereby the Customer sources the project financing through a third party (e.g. a financing institution) and not from internal funds of the Customer or the ESCO. The objective is for the ESCO to provide guaranteed savings that covers the debt repayment for the required contract term (i.e., a positive cash flow). The guaranteed energy savings provided by the ESCO reduces the repayment risk of the bank, which has a positive influence on the interest rate. Naturally, this is in addition to the base requirements of the bank based on size and credit history of the Customer. ESCO Financing refers to financing with internal funds of the ESCO and may involve use of its own capital or funding through other debt or lease instruments. ESCO rarely use equity for financing, as this option limits their capability of implementing projects on a sustainable basis. Energy‐user/customer financing usually involves financing with internal funds of the user/customer backed by an energy savings guarantee provided by the ESCO (for instance, a university can use its endowment fund to finance an energy project, in which the energy savings are guaranteed by an ESCO). Energy‐user/customer Funding Source may also be associated with borrowing, but it comes from the Customer’s internal Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) budget and existing lines of credit. * ‐ The interest costs during the construction design and installation are included as part of the project financing agreement.
It must be clearly stated that different countries apply various financial and accounting conditions and instruments that need to be adhered to and the above is merely an overview of the main types associated with EPC. Therefore parties seeking financing need to first inquire as to the country‐specific conditions based on the specific vehicles available. One of the primary benefits for using an Energy Performance Contract is that it provides a ‘freed‐up’ source of revenue from the customer organisation’s operational budget (i.e., utility bills and O&M expenses) that, through greater energy efficiency, could significantly enhance the operation of buildings. An EPC uses the energy inefficiency that currently exists across the organisation’s buildings and utilises this to pay for the energy retrofit improvement programme. The ESCO will also look to access any available grants or government loans, but via finance partners pay for all the capital improvements required to deliver the identified energy savings. Alternatively, the customer can provide the financing and manage risk by solely accessing the ESCO’s energy savings guarantee. There is no commitment until contract closure. Up until that time, the customer may walk away without obligation apart from covering the costs of the energy audit & design activities completed to date. Following contract closure (order acceptance) with agreement of the measurement & verification plan and financing, installation and commissioning proceeds. No payments are required until the project installation is completed, then they begin for the duration of the EPC as regular, linear payments as shown on the diagram below.
2011
Energy Solutions
Smooth, Linear/Equal payments
Smooth Cash flow – Peace of Mind
Month
Linear Full-Service Payment
OrderAcceptance
Shipment
Commissioning
Completion
C ustomer Co sts for duration o f EPC
Project duration: 6-12 months
Service Programme
2011
Energy Solutions
4. Contracts Eurocontract The Eurocontract was developed by the Berlin Energy Agency as a European Intelligent Energy funded project. It sought to develop two standard contract structures for EPC. Is the Eurocontract structure suitable for deployment across the EU? Whilst the structure is robust, throughout the contract it refers to German Industry Standard terms and conditions for construction and public tendering rules as well as other German standards. In order to be used, the contract would have to be redrafted to work in the local member states, complying with local laws.
5. Financial Guarantees The financial guarantee is based upon a detailed Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) list describing the baseline (as‐is) and post‐implementation consumption, in kilowatt‐hours (kWh), with the difference being the resulting energy savings. The changes or adjustments to the baseline conditions such as weather, energy tariffs, operational changes, etc. are the responsibility of the Customer. The kWh savings are demonstrated via the IPMVP (refer to Chapter 7. Determining Energy Savings).
6. Procuring an EPC Framework Agreements The use of a framework agreement offers many advantages over a normal contract. Not least, if it chooses to do so a public sector organisation such as a Local Authority could establish itself as a ‘central purchasing body’ procuring these services for or on behalf of other authorities having the same requirements. This achieves both economies of scale and streamlines the procurement process since it is only the award of the original framework agreement itself that must be commenced with an OJEU contract notice and follow a fully compliant award procedure. The subsequent call off energy performance contracts which would be made by the Authority and other users, do not require a further OJEU process, but simply need to follow the procedure set out in the framework itself. Under the Public Procurement Rules applicable across the whole of the EU, the term “framework agreement” is now used to refer to agreements, where, in essence, the parties and the main terms on which a proposed contract will be awarded have been formally agreed in writing but where there is no obligation on the purchaser to purchase at all. It is only when a call‐off contract is formally entered into that an enforceable contract comes in to existence. A framework approach then allows for circumstances in which for example an Authority sets up the framework for a number of users in its area such as schools. The schools are able to call‐
2011
Energy Solutions
off the services as and when they need them but under the terms already established. Their procurement burden is minimised. The schools also have the comfort of knowing that the service is there if they want it but there is no obligation on them to award a call‐off. Framework agreements fall within the definition set out in local Member State Contracts Regulations and for example may only be entered in to for a maximum period of 4 years(UK) save where there are exceptional circumstances justifying a longer contract period. Whilst the framework itself has an express limit to its term, there is generally no such express maximum applicable to call‐off energy performance contracts (EPCs) made under the framework. These must, however, be awarded in a way that does not distort competition. But provided there are objectively justifiable reasons for it, a call‐off EPC may lawfully be entered in to for a period longer than that of the framework agreement under which it was awarded. Accordingly, a call‐off EPC could be entered into for say 7 to 10 years in circumstances where its framework agreement was for a period of no more than 4 years. The European Commission and the European Court of Justice will only permit a framework agreement itself to be awarded for more than 4 years where there are external factors making it necessary. One example of such external factors may be that the supplier will only be able to achieve a return on investment by means of a framework agreement of say 5 to 7 years. We consider that flexibility on this point is best achieved in terms of the length of call‐off EPC both in policy/compliance terms and in terms of tailoring the agreement to the specifics of the EPC. Framework agreements have long been used in the UK but were only recently recognised by the European Union. One of their practical benefits is that once a framework has been set up in accordance with the Public Procurement Rules, any of the purchasing bodies originally identified in the framework agreement can then call off EPCs from the supplier (or suppliers) as their needs arise. They can do this without the need for an additional OJEU contract notice or pre‐qualification stage but they must award it in accordance with the terms of the framework agreement. Where there is a multi‐supplier framework it is common‐place for mini‐competitions to be held by the proposed purchaser. But these are streamlined and usually very quick competitions, resulting in significant cost savings both to supplier and purchaser.
Contract Award Process There are currently four contract award procedures falling under EU public procurement regulations. These are Open, Restricted, Competitive Dialogue and Negotiated. The Open and Restricted are the procedures of first choice and contracting public sector organisations must consider using these first. Only if they are not available can they move on to consider use of the other procedures.
If a contracting public sector organisation is looking for innovative solutions to reduce energy consumption and is unable to define the technical means capable of satisfying its needs or specifying the legal or financial make‐up of the project (or both) then the proposed contract may be regarded as a ‘particularly complex contract’. As an EPC is a wide‐ranging, programme based solution that encompasses many technological and potentially behavioural solutions, it most often falls under this description. This will justify the use of the Competitive Dialogue award procedure when procuring an EPC. The EPC procurement process using the Competitive Dialogue procedure, which complies with current EU public procurement legislation is summarised in the diagram below. It incorporates the framework structure described above.
2011
Energy Solutions
EU compliant EPC procurement process
7. Determining Energy Savings A Measurement and Verification (M&V) Plan is required to determine the savings achieved by the implementation of an Energy Efficiency Programme. ESCOs in the European Association of ESCOs (eu. ESCO) have adopted the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) as their preferred guideline to write the M&V Plan within the Energy Performance Contracts. IPMVP is not only the most known M&V protocol around the world, but it is also the most prestigious within the international technical community. The M&V Plan, which has to be reviewed and accepted by the customer prior to project implementation, becomes part of the energy performance contract’s terms and defines the measurements and computations to determine payments or demonstrate compliance with a guaranteed level of performance. Savings cannot be directly measured, since they represent the absence of energy use. The most accepted approach to energy savings is the Avoided Energy Use formulation. Under this approach, the energy savings are the reduction in energy use that occurred in the reporting period, relative to what would have been
Delivery
Install & maintain ECMsMeasurement & Verification
of savings
Competitive Dialogue EPC Procurement Process
OJEU Notice issuedPQQ sent to
biddersPQQ
evaluation
Invitation toshort listed bidders
sent out by Authority
Initial Qualificationfrom interested
parties
Initial Assessmentby Authority
Reduce to three bidders
Preliminary proposalsfrom shortlisted
parties
Dialogue
Clarify/Specify
NegotiateFrameworkAgreement
Evaluate & ClarifyAuthority selectssuccessful ESCO
STANDSTILL PERIOD(Typically 10 days)
Submit & Present Investment
Grade Proposal
Investment GradeAudit(s)
Contract
Process repeatsProcess repeatsfor next tranche of for next tranche of
buildingsbuildings
Interview &Presentation
PurposePurposeTo find out about ESCO’sproposed approach-Engineering-Financing-Contract-Organisation-Project Management-References-Measurement &verification methods-Innovative ideas
Prelim Proposal ActionsPrelim Proposal Actions-Establish selection criteria-Preliminary audit results of representative buildings-Identify potential savings-Types of energy conservation measures-How installed & commissioned-Approx value-Estimated contract duration-Rates for engineering audit-Draft Framework Agreement
IGPIGP-Identify energy conservation measures-Detail design-Finalise finance-Agree guarantee details-Finalise contract term
Selection of first tranche of buildings
Preliminary energy audit of representative buildings
Business caseapproved
2011
Energy Solutions
occurred if the facility had been equipped and operated as it was in the baseline period but under reporting period operating conditions. The second term of this equation is known as the adjusted‐baseline energy consumption and the adjustments to the baseline accounts for the changes in the parameters that have measurable impact on the energy use.
Figure 1. Savings are determined by comparing measured use or demand before and after implementation of a programme, making suitable adjustments for changes in conditions.
In contrast, if the conditions used as the basis for adjustment are other than those of the reporting period the savings are then Normalized. In this document we will assume the Avoided Energy Use formulation as it is the most commonly applied in Energy Efficiency Programmes. There are two main techniques to determine savings, depending whether the purpose of the customer is measuring Energy Conservation Measures (ECMs) or facility performance. In the first case, Options A and B represent the Retrofit Isolation technique which narrows the measurement boundary to focus only on the systems or equipment of a particular ECM. While under Option A we only measure the key parameters affecting energy use and estimate the rest, Option B requires measuring all parameters affecting consumption. On the other hand, Options C and D represent the Whole Facility approach. In Option C the measurement is done at facility level while Option D allows the use of simulation techniques to determine the savings. The following chart summarizes all M&V Options considered in the IPMVP protocol.
IPMVP Option How Savings Are
Calculated Typical Applications
A. Retrofit Isolation: Key Parameter Measurement Savings are determined by field measurement of the key performance parameter(s) which define the energy use of the ECM’s affected system(s) and/or the success of the project.
Engineering calculationof baseline and reporting period energy from: o short‐term or continuous measurements
A lighting retrofit where power draw is the key performance parameter that is measured periodically. Estimate operating hours
2011
Energy Solutions
IPMVP Option How Savings Are
Calculated Typical Applications
Measurement frequency ranges from short‐term to continuous, depending on the expected variations in the measured parameter, and the length of the reporting period. Parameters not selected for field measurement are estimated. Estimates can based on historical data, manufacturer’s specifications, or engineering judgment. Documentation of the source or justification of the estimated parameter is required. The plausible savings error arising from estimation rather than measurement is evaluated.
of key operatingparameter(s); and o estimated values. Routine and non‐routine adjustments as required.
of the lights based on building schedules and occupant behavior.
B. Retrofit Isolation: All Parameter MeasurementSavings are determined by field measurement of the energy use of the ECM‐affected system. Measurement frequency ranges from short‐term to continuous, depending on the expected variations in the savings and the length of the reporting period.
Short‐term orContinuous measurements of baseline and reporting period energy, and/or engineering computations using measurements of proxies of energy use. Routine and non‐routine adjustments as required.
Application of a variable speed drive and controls to a motor to adjust pump flow. Measure electric power with a kW meter installed on the electrical supply to the motor, which reads the power every minute. In the baseline period this meter is in place for a week to verify constant loading. The meter is in place throughout the reporting period to track variations in power use.
C. Whole Facility Savings are determined by measuring energy use at the whole facility or sub‐facility level. Continuous measurements of the entire facility’s energy use are taken throughout the reporting period.
Analysis of whole facility baseline and reporting period (utility) meter data. Routine adjustments as required, using techniques such as simple comparison or regression analysis. Non‐routine adjustments as required.
Multifaceted energy management program affecting many systems in a facility. Measure energy use with the gas and electric utility meters for a twelve month baseline period and throughout the reporting period.
D. Calibrated Simulation Savings are determined through simulation of the energy use of the whole facility, or of a sub‐facility. Simulation routines are demonstrated to adequately model actual energy performance measured in the facility. This Option usually requires considerable skill in calibrated simulation.
Energy use simulation,calibrated with hourly or monthly utility billing data. (Energy end use metering may be used to help refine input data.)
Multifaceted energymanagement program affecting many systems in a facility but where no meter existed in the baseline period. Energy use measurements, after installation of gas and electric meters, are used to calibrate a simulation. Baseline energy use,
2011
Energy Solutions
IPMVP Option How Savings Are
Calculated Typical Applications
determined using the calibrated simulation, is compared to a simulation of reporting period energy use.
ESCOs that can successfully implement an EPC have a large amount of experience in the Measurement and Verification processes and techniques and can thoroughly prepare and execute the unique M&V Plan every project deserves. From choosing the most suitable M&V Option for each ECM to design a professional savings report, passing for establishing the baseline model and gathering energy and operating data from the reporting period, to mention a few M&V activities, every task in the M&V process is deeply analyzed and reviewed by the ESCO’s energy experts team in order to produce an accurate, consistent and cost‐effective M&V reporting process to reliably determine actual savings out of the Energy Efficiency Programme.
Examplesof b
est p
ractices
provid
edby m
ember
compan
ies
м.
IƻƴŜȅǿŜƭƭ
2011
Energy Solutions
8. EPC Best Practice Customer organizations:
– Transport for London (UK) – Gwent NHS Trust (now Aneurin Bevan Health Board) (UK) – Lievensberg Hospitals (NL) – Atrium Hospital Complex, Heerlen (NL) – St Elisabeth Hospital, Herten (DE) – Klinikum Landshut, Landshut (DE)
2011
Energy Solutions
The Customer Transport for London (TFL), United Kingdom
The Challenge 25% Carbon reduction target
Complex and fragmented building mix across 22 buildings
Capital funding issues
Solution (Phase 1, May’09) Replaced lighting and controls
Upgraded TFL’s Building Energy Management controls
Improved TFL’s building fabrics
Installed on‐site CHP integrated energy system
Fitted solar thermal hot water system
The Benefits Reduced TFL’s gas consumption by 20% and electricity use by 25%
Guaranteed energy savings of £770k per annum
As a result of these energy solutions, TFL witnessed a carbon dioxide reduction of 3,650 tonnes per annum
Case Studies
2011
Energy Solutions
The Customer Gwent NHS Trust (Aneurin Bevan Health Board), Wales
3 Acute hospitals & 20 community hospitals serving 600,000 people in South Wales
Royal Gwent Hospital: > 800 beds, 15 operating theatres
£5.9m annual utility bill ‐ 3rd highest spend item after staff & drugs
The Challenge
Ageing infrastructure Capital funding issues Backlog maintenance running into £millions
CO2 reduction targets
Solution 15 & 25 year Energy Performance Contracts
Capital provision of £6.5m
Guaranteed savings of £1,137,600 pa
Installed our unique on‐site CHP integrated energy system with absorption chiller 9000 LED lighting retrofit 2 x 600kw standby generators
LV distribution panels
Complete Building Management System upgrade
The Benefits Reduced costs of £1.5m pa ‐ £400k > guarantee
CO2 reduction of 54,000 tonnes
Improved equipment reliability
Improved comfort conditions for patients, staff & visitors
ESCO staff embedded part of Trust team
Pro‐active energy management culture
Programme of future planned improvements
NHS Best Practice Award for Energy Efficiency
2011
Energy Solutions
The Customer Lievensberg Hospitals, the Netherlands Serving the Brabant, Tholen and St. Philips country and the surrounding region, Lievensberg Hospital comprises 367 beds along with a day care facility. The hospital employs over 100 medical specialist and 1,600 co‐workers and provides a wide range of primary and specialist healthcare services. The annual turnover of patients goes beyond 160,000
The Challenge Lievensberg had renovated their building several years previously and felt there was scope for
improvement in energy efficiency. Moreover, they were looking for a solution that would enable them to streamline costs at the same time enhance facility management. They wanted a partner with new innovative ideas and solutions.
Lack of resources & budgetary constraints needed for necessary improvements
Solution During the implementation of Phase 1, Honeywell focused at reducing the bottom‐line impact associated
with energy consumption, costs and improving the energy efficiency of Lievensberg’s facilities through our design, implementation and financing capabilities.
A heat pump was installed that provided cooling during summer and simultaneously in winter provided heat to the Air Handling Units (AHU).
CHP unit to help recover waste heat for electricity generation
Honeywell Energy Manager, an advanced energy information application that integrates with other building applications was installed
The Benefits Honeywell Energy Manager allows Lievensberg to view and control energy use in the facilities across
hospital, and provides the hospital with an improved process for monitoring, validating and optimizing energy consumption.
Phase 2 included the renovation and optimisation of the AHU. The flexible finance option offered by Honeywell enabled Lievensberg to transfer the savings made from phase 1 to be invested in phase 2.
Lievensberg was able to build a Green image and contributed in its effort in reduction of CO2 and achieving its environmental target.
Third party finance through Honeywell by provided a cash flow neutral solution without the need for upfront capital. There was no budget needed for modernisation of the technical installation.
2011
Energy Solutions
The Customer
Atrium Hospital Complex ,the Netherlands The Atrium complex spans three sites ‐ Heerlen, Brunssum and Kerkrade – with 1, 230 beds under the care of 170 medical specialists and167 interns. Almost 30,000 operations and 20,000 consultations a year are performed across the three locations.
The Challenge Despite recent installation of a new, state of‐the‐art ‘trigen’ production unit for the provision of electricity,
hot/chilled water and steam, Atrium’s utility costs continued to rise. The Hospital needed to get a view of what energy they were using and where and use this information to optimize plant operation and reduce costs.
Solution The Honeywell solution uses Honeywell Enterprise Buildings IntegratorTM to integrate many different
factors to ensure optimal utility management without detracting from hospital comfort levels.
The partnership sees Honeywell automated control technology bring about better utility management at the Atrium Hospital complex. This energy efficiency stems from sophisticated computer modeling which ensures an optimal utility mix in 48 hour ‘bites’. A smart weather forecasting tool pulls 48‐hour weather forecasts from the Internet. This data is combined with historical information to anticipate likely energy demand over the forthcoming two days. Decision support tools – statistical models – balance expected demand with the cost of gas and electricity supply over the same period.
The Honeywell solution gives the customer the flexibility to capitalise on changing market conditions; to take advantage of fluctuating utility prices, new energy sources, changing weather patterns and internal demand profiles. Atrium’s improved energy efficiency is supported by a heat exchanger, also masterminded by Honeywell control technology. Flue gases from the boiler are recovered and the heat, rather than being wasted, is used to generate hot water.
The Benefits Honeywell is delivering a 10% saving on the hospital’s annual energy bill
Says Facility Manager Andre Dumont, “Honeywell’s solution gives me a complete picture the information I need to make better decisions, and to make them more quickly. This ability to respond to changing external conditions takes internal FM productivity to a higher level.”
2011
Energy Solutions
Recent European Healthcare Customers St. Elisabeth‐Hospital, Herten, Germany € 1.54 million plus 6 years service contract for Maintenance and M&V Scope:
- Replacement of the current, 1977, Air Handling Units with new high efficiency units with VSDs, heat recovery system etc.
- Completely new Honeywell Building Automation System: From EBI, to controllers to field devices Contract signed in December, 2010 Klinikum Landshut, Landshut, Germany €2.6 million plus maintenance service contract Scope:
- New Honeywell EBI Building Automation System, new DDC‐Controls (XL 5000) - Wood Chip Boiler incl. construction of new boiler house - Replacement of fans and motors on Air Handling Units
н. Sie
mens
© S
iemen
s AG
2010. All rig
hts reserved
Maxim
ize Efficien
cy!
Success S
tories
Building Technologies / B
AU
BA
U_M
aster_3.1©
Siem
ens A
G 2010. A
ll righ
ts reservedO
ctober 2010P
age 2
Bu
ildin
g A
uto
matio
n
A m
ajor player in the energy efficiency business
16.2 TW
h saved(equals the am
ount of a nuclear power plant,
Brokdorf, G
ER
in the year 2009)
€915 m
total saving achieved for customers
9.2 m
tons CO
2 reduction (approx. annual C
O2 em
issions of Vienna1))
Ach
ievemen
ts1)
EU
comm
ission com
mended B
uilding Technologies for out-standing achievem
ents in support of its G
reen-B
uilding program
1) based on figures from the European G
reen City Index, A research project by the Econom
ist Intelligence Unit, sponsored by Siem
ens, 2009
Eu
rop
ean E
nerg
y Service A
ward
win
ner 2006, 2007, 2008 an
d 2009
Green
Bu
ildin
g E
nd
orser A
ward
2008
Building Technologies / B
AU
BA
U_M
aster_3.1©
Siem
ens A
G 2010. A
ll righ
ts reservedO
ctober 2010P
age 3
Siem
ens w
ins first G
reenB
uild
ing
En
do
rser Aw
ard
Success S
tory BA
U (2008)
Pro
ject / site
Siem
ens
solu
tion
E
nergy efficiency in buildings is core business activity of B
uilding Technologies Division of S
iemens
S
pecialized in energy-saving and resource-conserving solutions in building autom
ation and services to reduce energy consum
ption in buildings w
orldwide
E
nergy Saving P
erformance C
ontracts guarantee energy savings w
ith zero budget impact
Cu
stom
er b
enefit
S
iemens helps com
panies achieve Partner status
Facility im
provements that increase com
fort with
zero budget impact
S
iemens E
nergy Services m
onitoring and controlling ensure guaranteed energy savings
Ch
alleng
es
B
uilding sector accounts for more than 40%
of energy dem
and in Europe
Im
proving energy efficiency of heating and cooling buildings constitutes one of largest potential sources of energy savings
S
iemens com
mitted to supporting
GreenB
uilding incentive plan from
beginning
Encourages building ow
ners/users to becom
e GreenB
uilding partners
Helps building ow
ners/users im
plement G
reenBuilding
recomm
endations
Building Technologies / B
AU
BA
U_M
aster_3.1©
Siem
ens A
G 2010. A
ll righ
ts reservedO
ctober 2010P
age 4
Brig
ittenau
Sw
imm
ing
Po
ol, V
ienn
aE
U B
est Energy S
ervice Project 2007
Pro
ject / site
Siem
ens
solu
tion
E
nergy Saving P
erformance C
ontracting with
guaranteed savings based on facility improvem
ent m
easures
Solar collectors for heating pool w
ater
Ability to recover heat from
pool water
Im
proved water flow
controlled by chlorine content
Refurbished w
ater treatment system
s with
water-saving fittings
N
ew condensing boiler
N
ew building m
anagement system
Cu
stom
er b
enefit
E
nergy used to heat pool reduced by 66%; w
aterconsum
ption reduced by 45%
€200,000 annual energy savings while im
proving com
fort; zero budget impact and guaranteed savings
C
ase study in civic responsibility for sustainability
Ch
alleng
es
25-year-old city sw
imm
ing pool faced rising energy costs to heat w
ater, run ventilation system and
dehumidify interior
W
ater was heated by inefficient district heating
system that w
asted energy
B
rigittenau indoor swim
ming pool,
Vienna: Green S
wim
ming P
ool
CO
2 reduction: 600 tons annually
Siem
ens won 2007 energy-saving
award from
European E
nergy S
ervice Initiative
Building Technologies / B
AU
BA
U_M
aster_3.1©
Siem
ens A
G 2010. A
ll righ
ts reservedO
ctober 2010P
age 5
Un
iCred
it Gro
up
, Milan
oE
U B
est Energy S
ervice Project 2008
Pro
ject / site
Siem
ens
solu
tion
E
nergy Saving P
erformance C
ontracting with
guaranteed savings based on facility improvem
ent m
easures
Central cooling plant and technology of its
mechanical and electrical com
ponents
Motors and heating/cooling pum
ps
Replaced four aged cooling units
R
eengineered cooling and heating systems
R
efurbished air conditioning and ventilation systems
Cu
stom
er b
enefit
C
O2 reduction: 2,800 tons annually
€460,000 annual energy savings w
hile improving air
quality and increasing comfort; zero budget im
pact
Siem
ens Energy S
ervices monitoring and controlling
ensure guaranteed energy savings
Ch
alleng
es
M
ilan headquarters houses 1,250 employees and
data center serving all UniC
redit companies
D
ata center’s cooling systems are vitally
important to U
niCredit’s ongoing business operations
UniC
redit Group M
ilano: two 90,000 m
2
glass-façade buildingsS
ix-year amortization for €2.2 m
illion in new
energy systems; installed
during normal business hours
Siem
ens won 2008 energy-saving
award from
European E
nergy S
ervice Initiative
Building Technologies / B
AU
BA
U_M
aster_3.1©
Siem
ens A
G 2010. A
ll righ
ts reservedO
ctober 2010P
age 6
Un
iversity of A
rt, Berlin
, Germ
any
EU
Green building P
artner
Ch
alleng
es
Facts an
d fig
ures
Cu
stom
er b
enefit
S
tate of the art Building M
anagement S
ystem and
mechanical H
VAC
equipment w
ithout the need of an ow
n financial investment
P
ayback and Cost reduction through energy savings
€236,000 p.a.
Siem
ens
solu
tion
E
nergy Saving P
erformance C
ontracting
Building A
utomation system
H
VAC
equipment and distribution
H
ot water processing
Lighting
B
uilt 1880 –1975
52,000 m
2
27%
energy savings (4,680 MW
h/a)
1,100 t CO
2 per year
EU
GreenB
uilding Partner
E
xploit the maxim
um energy efficiency m
easures w
ith low investm
ent needs for such an old building
Building Technologies / B
AU
BA
U_M
aster_3.1©
Siem
ens A
G 2010. A
ll righ
ts reservedO
ctober 2010P
age 7
City o
f Berlin
, Germ
any
Energy saving partnership
Hig
hlig
hts
Siem
ens
solu
tion
E
nergy managem
ent system
H
eat generation / distribution
Air-conditioning &
ventilation
Water technology
C
ontrol, monitoring, m
aintenance
Cu
stom
er b
enefit
M
odernization of plants without further capital
expenditures
Quality assurance and budget reduction
R
egular consumption and em
issions reports
Realization of environm
ental policy goals
Ch
alleng
es
In 1995, Berlin launched an energy-saving strategy
with the obligation to reduce C
O2 em
issions
164 buildings across the city
P
rior energy costs: 17.2 m €
/ year
Reduction of C
O2 em
issions by 25%
per year (corresponding 16,200 tons of C
O2 )
A
nnual energy cost savings: 2,848 m
illion Euros
Building Technologies / B
AU
BA
U_M
aster_3.1©
Siem
ens A
G 2010. A
ll righ
ts reservedO
ctober 2010P
age 8
Clin
ical Cen
ter Brem
erhaven
-Rein
kenh
eide, G
erman
yR
eference for life cycle managem
ent
Pro
ject / site
Siem
ens
solu
tion
120 m
easures led to 25% energy savings
N
ew building autom
ation system
New
air conditioning and ventilation system
Optim
ized heating systems, new
heat-recovery system
, load-demand heat supply, upgrades to
heating circuit control system
E
nergy-efficiency improvem
ents to steam and
water supply
Innovative cooling absorption and screw
chillers
Cu
stom
er b
enefit
P
rimary energy savings of m
ore than 25% earned
‘BU
ND
Gütesiegel' aw
ard in 2008
Improved com
fort with zero budget im
pact
Siem
ens Energy S
ervices monitoring and controlling
ensure guaranteed energy savings
Ch
alleng
es
A
nnual energy costs were €2.1 m
illion in 2004
Health reform
, intensifying competition dem
anded profitability
Brem
en Energy C
onsensus climate protection
agency helped pursue energy performance
contracting
M
aximum
care hospital with 700+
beds, opened in 1976
CO
2 reduction: 4,130 tons annually
Guaranteed energy savings:
€520,000 annually
Facility improvem
ents implem
ented during norm
al business hours
Building Technologies / B
AU
BA
U_M
aster_3.1©
Siem
ens A
G 2010. A
ll righ
ts reservedO
ctober 2010P
age 9
Green
Ho
spital: S
t. Josep
h K
ranken
hau
s, Berlin
BU
ND
Gütesiegel in 2010
Ch
alleng
es
Facts an
d fig
ures
Cu
stom
er b
enefit
G
uaranteed savings of €273,000/a (26%
)
Operating safety through m
odernization and optim
ization
Financing and saving guarantee through perform
ance contracting
Sustainability through w
arranty, energy managem
ent and perennial contract
R
eimbursem
ent of investments through P
FC
B
UN
D G
ütesiegel in 2010
Siem
ens
solu
tion
S
tate-of-the-art building managem
ent system that
monitors and controls
R
efurbishment and new
heating, cooling and air conditioning system
s, air pressure, lightning, new
installation of BA
CS
, introduction of Energy
Monitoring and C
ontrolling
O
ptimizing w
arm w
ater treatment,
decentralized supply and hydraulic treatm
ent
Contract 15 years
C
O2 reduction of 1,300 t/a
D
esigned to demonstrate as developm
ent m
odel for health facilities in sustainability and environm
ental responsibility
о. Sch
neider Ele
ctric
Best practice cases –
EP
C cases
1. Municipality of N
yköping, Sw
eden
2. City of Ö
rebro, Sw
eden
3. Sw
edish University of A
gricultural Sciences (S
LU)
4. Municipality of H
ollola, Finland
5. Municipality of M
iddelfart, Denm
ark
6. University of S
heffield, UK
Municipality of N
yköping, Sw
eden(P
ub
lic b
uild
ing
s, s
cho
ols
, care
ce
nte
rs e
tc.)
●M
otivation for engaging in EP
C
–Y
ears of budget decline in the municipality resulted in
poor maintenance, higher energ
y consumption and
increased cost of unplanned maintenance
–G
ain better control and performance tracking of
facilities
–D
evelop a competent and goal-driven organisation
●R
esults
–N
ew
structure for more efficient operations and
maintenance
–Low
ered energy consum
ption
–A
ctive technical administration
–Increased com
petence in-house
–A
ppointment of a specialist
●P
roject Highlights
–C
omprehensive B
MS
system installed
–C
ontinuous optimization of operations
–Lim
ited operating hours and temperatures
–Increased functionality and upgrade of the
technical level of installations
–P
ressure controlled circulating pumps
–O
ccupancy controls
–B
alancing heating system
–Local presence of S
chneider Electric
–C
ompetence and know
ledge transfer to staff
–Increased status
–C
reating an attractive workplace
–Increased focus on energy consum
ption
–N
ew w
ork routines ensure efficient use
of resour ces
PROJECT FACTS
NUMBER OF
PROPERTIES
12
3
AREA
Ap
pro
x. 2
57
00
0 m
2
SAVINGS POTENTIAL
17
%
PROJECT SCOPE
73
MS
EK
(€7
,9M
)
PAY-OFF TIME
Ap
pro
x. 1
1 y
ea
rs
FINANCING
Th
ird p
arty
fina
ncin
g
IMPLEMENTATION
2 y
ea
rs
City of Ö
rebro, Sw
eden
●M
otivation for engaging in EP
C–
High and increasing operational expenditures have
r esulted in reduced ability to perform needed
maintenance
–P
ossibilities to get energy efficiency grants from the
government
–P
olitical goal to eliminate oil dependency and decrease
greenhouse gas emissions
–O
pportunity to empow
er staff in energy, maintenance
and operations
–N
eed to improve the standard of services and system
s to provide good indoor clim
ate in the facilities.
●B
enefits for Örebro
–P
ositive effect on the financial result
–A
round 30% of the investm
ents are financed through governm
ent grants
–F
ulfilled energy certification legislation
–R
educed operational expenditures for reactive m
aintenan ce
–Increased cost control
–Large environm
ental benefits through reduced greenhouse gas em
issions
–Increased com
petence of in-house staff
–P
latform for continuous im
provement of the
organizations operation and maintenance w
ork.
●P
roject Highlights
–E
nergy conservation measures in the
municipality’s facilities:
–S
chools, Pre-S
chools
–Leisure centers and S
tadiums
–S
wim
ming pools
–S
ervice & cultural facilities
–O
ffices
–T
echnical upgrades of:
–H
eating systems
–V
entilation systems
–B
uilding Energy M
anagement S
ystems
and metering equipm
ent
–H
eat pumps
–Lighting
–W
ater conservation measures
–A
comprehensive train
ing program w
hich includes m
ore than 60 people within E
states D
epartment
Bild
re
fere
ns
PROJECT FACTS
NUMBER OF
PROPERTIES
Ap
pro
x. 1
00
AREA
42
0 0
00
m2
SAVINGS POTENTIAL
26
%
PROJECT SCOPE
15
6 M
SE
K (€
17
M)
PAY-OFF
Ap
pro
x. 9
ye
ars
FINANCING
Mu
nic
ipa
lity lo
an
Gra
nts
from
go
ve
rnm
en
t
IMPLEMENTATION
2,5
ye
ars
Sw
edish University of
Agricultural S
ciences (SLU
)●
Motivation for engaging in E
PC
–U
tilize ow
n produced renewable energy sources (grain ,
wheat, w
ood chips, pellets)
–B
etter control of heating costs
–R
eplace outdated oil based heating plant
–C
ontributes to the university's educational program
–T
he project is a step on the wa
y to achieving SLU
’s long-term
strategy in creating a sustainable use of
natural resources
●R
esults–
Energy expenditures reduced b
y 73%
–C
omplete conversion of oil-based and direct electric
heating
–Low
ered CO
2 emission of 1 400 tonnes per year
–Im
proved cost control
–Increased com
petence of in-house staff
–B
etter flexibility in use of facilities
–Individual tenant billing system
–A
platform for sustainable use of resources
●S
cope–
Kungsäng ens
farm, 18 500 m
2, 17 buildings
–F
unbo-Lövstafarm
, 17 200 m2, buildings dating from
1717 and onw
ards
–B
läckhornet, research station for pigs and poultry.
●P
roject Highlights
–Installation of tw
o fuel flexible bio heating plants
–B
io plant 1: 1,4 MW
–B
io plant 2: 1,8 MW
–Installation of 3 km
heating culvert duct
–Longest culvert duct 1,5km
–40 new
control panels/ outstations
–U
tility meters installed
–Installation of w
et heating system
–V
entilations system heating converted
from electric to w
et system
–C
omprehensive B
MS
system installed
–N
ew air handling plant w
ith heat recovery
–C
ompetence developm
ent of staff
–T
ools and methods for a m
ore effective energy m
anagement
PROJECT FACTS
TYPE OF FACILITIES
-O
the
r, r ese
arc
h, g
ara
ge
-T
ea
ch
ing
an
d T
rain
ing
-
Offic
e-
Re
sid
en
tial
AREA
30
00
0 m
2
SAVINGS POTENTIAL
70
% (3
,5 M
SE
K/y
ea
r)
PROJECT SCOPE
49
MS
EK
(€5
,3M
)
PAY-OFF
11
Ye
ars
FINANCING
Se
lf fina
nce
d
IMPLEMENTATION
12
mo
nth
s
Bild
re
fere
ns
Municipality of H
ollola, Finland
●M
otivation for engaging in EP
C–
Increasing heating costs–
Desire to replace fossil fuel based heating system
–P
oor indoor air quality in parts of the buildings –
Major challenges to control energy consum
ption and i ndoor conditions at sw
imm
ing hall–
Need to replace out-dated B
uilding Energy M
anagement
System
s–
Increasing maintenance costs in certain buildings
●R
esults–
Reduced energy consum
ption by
–2000 M
Wh oil
–1345 M
Wh heat
–376 M
Wh electricity
–1780 m
3of w
ater –
Reduction of C
O2 em
ission with 1177 tonnes/ year
–F
ulfillmentof E
SD
claim, total annual reduction 11 %
–E
limination of m
oisture stress in ice rink and swim
ming hall
–D
epletion of air draughts and improvem
ent of indoor air quality,
–A
chievement of suitable w
ater tem
perature in baby pool
●P
roject Highlights
–Installation of m
ore renewable heating
system:
–w
ood chip furnaces
–w
ood pellet boiler
–ground source heating pum
ps
–D
esign and implem
entation of new
heating radiator network
–R
enovation of ceiling structure
–vapor barriers and therm
al insulation of ice rink ceiling w
ere com
pletely rehabilitated
–A
dding of tin roof underlay
–C
onversion of condensation based cooling system
from direct to indirect,
–D
esign and implem
entation of condensing heat recovery system
–C
onnecting the water cleaning system
to heat recovery system
–Installation air curtain fans to reduce heat loss
–T
raining of in-house maintenance staff
PROJECT FACTS
NUMBER OF
PROPERTIES
10
SAVINGS POTENTIAL
€1
37
00
0 y
ea
r
PROJECT SCOPE
€1
,45
M
PAY-OFF
10
Ye
ars
FINANCING
Se
lf fina
nce
d
IMPLEMENTATION
Sta
rted
20
07
Bild
refe
ren
s
Municipality of M
iddelfart, Denm
ark (P
ub
lic b
uild
ing
s, s
cho
ols
, da
y c
are
ce
nte
rs e
tc.)
●M
otivation for engaging in EP
C–
Reduce the m
unicipality's energy usage
–N
eed to break trend with increasing am
ount of r eactive m
aintenance in the municipalities buildings
–Lack of in-house resources to carry out a large scale energ
y conservation project
–O
pportunity to implem
ent a big project with
significant savings potential in only 24 months
–E
nsure a better indoor climate w
herever possible
–Im
plement a bigger energy and property project
without having to burden the m
unicipality budgets
●R
esults –
Higher standard of the technical equipm
ent
–R
eduction of the energy consum
ption
–Increased property value
–C
entralised control of the different properties energy usage
–A
facility staff with im
prove skills regarding energy
optimiz ation
PROJECT FACTS
NUMBER OF
FACILITIES
98
AREA
Ap
pro
x. 1
90
00
0 m
2
SAVING POTENTIAL
21
%
PROJECT SCOPE
44
MD
KK
(€5
,0 M
)
PAY-OFF TIME
Ap
pro
x. 1
0 y
ea
rs
FINANCING
Th
ird p
arty
fina
ncin
g
IMPLEMENTATION
1,5
ye
ars
●P
roject highlights
–C
omprehe nsive B
MS
system installed
–IT
-based control of the heating system,
ventilation and lightning
–W
ater saving initiatives
–D
emand controlled ventilation
–Im
plementation of H
eat recovery ventilation system
s
–O
ptimization of operating hours and
temperatures
–Im
plementation of new
modern
ventilation systems in properties that had
no ventilation before in order to improve
indoor climate and protect building from
“sickness”
Ejb
y S
ch
oo
l
University of S
heffield, UK
●M
otivation for engaging in EP
C
–T
he University of S
heffield had made a huge
investmen t in developing its estate prior to the
partnership. Prim
arily channeled into new buildings
–T
his had led to significant under-investment in the
retained estate
–R
esulting in a need substantial investment in the
estate at a time w
here budgets were under huge
pressure
●R
esults
–A
more sustainable U
niversity
–Im
proved indoor performance
–Long term
quality and fitness for purpose
–R
eduction of operational and utility costs
–B
etter quality and reliability of the services provided
by E
states
–S
ignificant reduction in the risk of Legionella outbreak
–R
emov al of R
22 Chiller system
–M
inimising risk for the U
niversity
●P
roject Highlights
–R
efurbishment of:
–A
ir handling Units,
–H
eating distributions circuits
–D
istrict heat stations
–Install autom
atic water treatm
ent to all major
heating s ystems
–R
eplace large chilled water system
–Install w
ater temperature m
onitoring
–Im
prove lighting efficiency and control
–Install m
etering and provide automatic M
&T
–Incorporate all above into B
uilding
Managem
ent System
–R
eview strategies and re-com
mission
systems
–T
raining and competency transfer through
joint act ivities
–C
ampaign to increase aw
areness of
efficiency and waste throughout the
University
PROJECT FACTS
NUMBER OF
PROPERTIES
38
AREA
Ap
pro
x. 1
20
00
0 m
2
SAVINGS POTENTIAL
20
%
PROJECT SCOPE
£3
,8M
(€4
,4M
)
PAY-OFF TIME
Ap
pro
x. y
ea
rs
FINANCING
Se
lf fina
nce
d
IMPLEMENTATION
2 y
ea
rs
Good
practice exam
ples
Öreb
ro Mu
nicip
ality
Schneid
er Electric
Swed
en | 2
010‐04‐14
Thesoleresp
onsib
ilityfortheconten
tofthispublica
tionlies
with
theauthors.
Itdoes
notnecessa
rilyreflect
the
opinionoftheEuropeanCommunities.
TheEuropeanCommissio
nis
notresp
onsib
leforanyuse
thatmaybe
madeoftheinform
atio
ncontained
therein
.
2| 2
5.09.2009
Facility and In
itial Situatio
n(1/6)
Facility: Municipality
Schools, education, sport facilities, office buildings,
swim
ming halls, senior living
97 Buildings
420.000 m2
Initial situation:H
igh energy costs and climbing w
ith negativeenvironm
ental impact.
Use of fossil fuel and direct electricity for heating.
3| 2
5.09.2009
Goals an
d M
easu
res
(2/6)
Goals of building ow
ner:C
hange the negative trend of increasing energy cost and emergency
maintenance
work.
Reduce the energy cost and environm
ental impact.
Becom
e on of the leading municipalities in S
weden.
Guaranteed energy savings balance the capital risk for Ö
rebro.
Measures (selection):Ventilation recoveryC
ontrollsInsulationW
oodpellets boilers and district heating systems
Ground source heatpum
psE
ducation E
nergy managem
ent
4| 2
5.09.2009
Busin
ess M
odel:
(3/6)
EP
C
3 phases: N
o.1, is Detailed E
nergy Analysis (D
EA
) of the buildings, deciding measures
and calculating the savings and pay back time.
No.2, is installation and education.
No.3, is G
uaranteeing and Project follow
up (G&
P) the calculated savings.
2. In
stallation
3. G
&P
1. D
EA
5| 2
5.09.2009
Contracts an
d Cash
Flows
(4/6)
Contractu
al relationships:
The cu
stomer h
ave a frame agreem
ent co
nsists o
f 3 parts:
Frame agreem
ent an
d part 1
(DEA
) are sign sim
ultan
eous.
ESCO delivers th
e DEA
and issu
e a guaran
tee and a p
rice for th
e installatio
n as p
art 1.
Custo
mer d
ecision point to
contin
ue with
part 2
and 3.
Installatio
n an
d gu
arantee are sign
simultan
eous.
Frame agre
emen
t
DEA
Installatio
nG&P
Cash
flows:
Part 1 is p
aid when
ESCO delivers th
e result o
f the D
EA.
Part 2 has p
rogress p
aymen
t.Part 3
is a service and su
pport agreem
ent p
aid quarterly
.
6| 2
5.09.2009
Facts(5/6)
Total investm
ent costs: €14.000.000
Installation tim
e 2,5 years
One com
pany takes full complete responsibility and guarantee the
savings.
Energy savings: 26%
C
O2 reduction: 36%
N
ox reduction: 24%
Imm
ediately positive impact on earnings
7| 2
5.09.2009
Lesso
ns Le
arned, In
novatio
ns an
d Client’s A
dvan
tages
(6/6)
1.C
omm
unication and co-operation is crucial.
2.The project have got the m
unicipality to be much m
ore energy savings focused.
3.E
ducation of customer organization in energy thinking and how
to optim
ize building performance.
п. Jo
hnson Contro
ls
Jewish
Museum
–B
erlinE
nergysavings: 26%
Germ
anA
rmy
–D
iezE
nergysavings: 49%
Germ
anA
rmy
–A
ulenbachE
nergysavings: 69%
Germ
an A
rmy –
Au
lenb
ach
Train
ing
Cam
p●
115 buildings, 80 000m2
●M
easures with top priority:
Biom
ass boilers, CH
P, C
ontrols, lighting retrofit (internal, external), energy m
etering, water.
●G
uaranteed energy savings of 723,000 E
UR
per year (69% cost
savings versus baseline) and reduction of 76%
of GH
G
emissions.
●10 years E
PC
Germ
an A
rmy -
Diez
Med
ical coo
rdin
ation
center
●34 buildings, 35 000m
2
●M
ain energy savings measures:
Biom
ass boiler, Gas C
HP
, Controls,
lighting retrofit●
Guaranteed energy savings of
230,000 EU
R per year (49%
cost savings versus baseline) and reduction of 50%
of GH
G em
issions ●
10 years EP
C
Jewish
Mu
seum
-B
erlin
Mu
seum
●M
ix of oldand m
odern buildings by fam
ousarchitectD
aniel Libeskind●
Main energy savings m
easures: renovation of the building autom
ation system
, innovative LED
lighting, ventilation, air hum
idification optim
ized and ensured by environm
entally friendly district heat●
Guaranteed energy savings of
165,000 EU
R per year (26%
cost savings versus baseline) and reduction of 31%
of GH
G em
issions ●
10 years EP
C
