SUSTAINABILITY Easter Regional Conference Energy & Environment - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
COST-EFFECTIVE SUSTAINABILITY Easter Regional Conference Energy & Environment Committee 7/29/2019 Presented by Charlie Szoradi 1 Contents: Background Insights from Overseas Energy Saving LED Lighting Controlled
Easter Regional Conference
Presented by
Charlie Szoradi
1
COST-EFFECTIVE
Energy & Environment Committee – 7/29/2019
2
Contents:
3
Charlie Szoradi - Background
Architect and Energy Professional with three decades of focus on cost-effective sustainability
Masters of Architecture - 1993 Architecture BS - 1989
4
Insights from Overseas
Author of Learn From Looking
In 2010, Independence LED Lighting moved its manufacturing from China to Southeastern Pennsylvania.
One of the first BAA Complaint Producers:
JOBS
6
Energy Saving LED Lighting
Example: Custom Engineered for State Correctional Facilities (No Glass or Aluminum that can be “weaponized”)
15 Watt LED tube vs 32 Watt Fluorescent tube
Energy Savings
Annual Savings: $8 Installed Cost: $16 Payback Time: 2 Years Longevity: 5 to 15 years
(subject to amount of daily use)
2017 Market Tipping Point: LED Crosses Over Other Lighting
% of Total Market
Incandescent = Filament Lights LFL = Linear Fluorescent Tubes CFL = Compact Fluorescent Lights LED = Light Emitting Diodes Source: McKinsey Global Lighting Market Model; McKinsey Global Lighting Professionals Consumer Survey
It’s time to change your remaining lights to LEDs
7
2017 2019
2019 Payback Under 2 Years
8
Lumens / Watt and $ Dollars
2019 Payback Performance: LEDs Deliver Favorable Returns
Efficiency has increased and cost has decreased. Future improvements are significantly less dramatic moving forward than over the past 10 years.
Mindset Challenges:
A) “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” B) “If we wait, LEDs are getting cheaper and better.” C) “We don’t have a budget for LEDs.”
Solutions for States:
A) The maintenance cost is more expensive to wait. B) Offer more Requests for Proposals (RFPs) to see the technology improvements and lower costs. C) Ask for Performance Contracting with $0 upfront costs and payments on the savings.
9
The following sample Case Studies demonstrate the proven results.
U.S. Average: Only 15% of lights have been changed to LEDs
The Case Studies demonstrate the proven results
The Case Studies demonstrate the proven results
The Case Studies demonstrate the proven results
+ -
LEDs for Controlled Environment Agriculture
Indoor Farming:
LED Grow Lights Renewable Power Smart Sensors / IoT DC Microgrids Aquaponics
In 2019, the Energy Intelligence Center launched on the Northeast Corridor with technology initiated and proven in India.
10 years of proven Air Conditioning Algorithm Optimization
JOBS
16
Air Conditioning Optimization
having any downtime, or costing anything up front. Payments are on the savings. The ALGORITHM integrates with existing Building Management Systems (BMS) and is like “tuning” the air pressure on your car tires to maximize fuel efficiency.
Target Optimization Baseline 0.980 kW/TR
(Sample ability to review optimization on/off/on, Zamil DCP, Middle East)
CASE STUDY: District Cooling Plant
kW / TR (Ton of Refrigeration) With Optimization With Optimization Without Optimization
Daily Savings: .186 kW/TR = 46,027 kWh Daily Savings at $.04 / kWh: $1,841 Annualized Savings: $672,000 (Comparison 16.8 million kWh/yr at $.10/kWh = $1.68m) Energy Savings for this period: 17% (This facility has 25,000 Tons of chiller capacity)
kW/TR Savings: 18.5%
kW/TR Savings: 15.3%
kW/TR Excess Consumption 2%
Example of previous work by EIC’s CTO and CIO
(Sample of 9 ITC/Starwood Group Hotels – This one: Maurya in New Delhi, India)
CASE STUDY: LEED Platinum Hotel
Optimization impact in rising temperatures from March to May
Daily Savings: 2,275 kWh (Avg. across all three months) Daily Savings at $.09 / kWh: $204.75 (in spring e.g. March to May) Annualized Savings: $74,733 (higher with summer heat loads) Energy Savings for this period: 25% This is on an already LEED Platinum Hotel)
March 2012 4,381 kWh/day April 2012 6,754 kWh/day May 2012 8,586 kWh/day
May Savings: 3,742 kWh/day April Savings: 1,628 kWh/day March Savings: 1,457 kWh/day
Daily kWh Consumption
Example of previous work by EIC’s CTO and CIO
In 2018, SoMax BioEnergy brought the Food Waste to Fuel Technology from Germany to the US East Coast
20 years of proven Renewable Energy performance
JOBS
19
20
Hydrothermal Carbonization
The HTC “Reactor” is about the size of 40’ shipping container, and it is significantly more efficient than anaerobic digesters.
Trash to Treasure: Food waste as well as human and animal waste converts into electricity and fertilizer. (20% food waste in US)
(CNG = Compressed Natural Gas) (gge = gasoline gallon equivalent)
21
U.S. Cleantech Job Creation
Each of these examples of cleantech
lighting, air conditioning, and food waste to fuel
create tens of thousands of jobs that are technical as well as “Ripple Effect” jobs in sales, service, and support for Americans.
MADE in USA
22
Performance Contracting
Each of these technology categories come with financing that generates CASH FLOW POSITVE results.
CSG members can adopt new cleantech and lead by example.
23
For a digital copy of this presentation Contact: Charlie Szoradi CEO, Independence LED Lighting and the Energy Intelligence Center Charlie@IndependenceLED.com or Charlie@EICteam.com Direct: 610-551-5224
24
Start looking and learn from the looking, rather than looking for something.
Insights from Overseas
25
The following slides include a few sample sketches from 1,000s of drawings and 60,000 words
Learn from Looking book.
26
27
Community + City Life
28
Community + City Life
Public Transportation
29
Public Transportation
30
Local Micro-Manufacturing
31 31
Local Micro-Manufacturing
Single Family Residential Form Factor and Land Use
33 33
Single Family Residential Form Factor and Land Use
34
35
Sample LED Tech Trends: Innovation Across the Market
Deep Fin Aluminum for 24 x 7 Thermal Management Elevated Diodes for Enhanced Beam Angle Filament or Multiple Chip
(MCOB) for A19 360° Omni Directionality Replaceable Drivers for Modularity & Longevity Cavity Back BR30s + Ballast Compatible G24s for Recessed Fixtures
36
Core Commercial LED Products: Save 50% or MORE
96 Watts
20,000 Hour Life (7 years)
32 Watts
100,000 Hour Life (30 + years) Great for Light Harvesting For Troffers, before buying Ballast Compatible A, B, or A/B LED Tubes consider LED STRIP KITS with External Drivers
Dimming: Typically NO
Change Ballast to LED Driver
Dimming: Typically YES
37
38 Analysis / Fixture Existing Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Tubes Tubes Tubes Strip Kit
Description 2'x4' Troffer w/ (3) T8 4' fluorescent tubes at 32 watts each (3) Type A 4' LED Tubes "ballast compatible" at 14 watts each (3) Type A/B 4' Hybrid LED Tubes "ballast compatible" and "direct wire" options at 12 watts each (2) 4' LED strips with (Magnetic) backing and self tapping screws + external driver at 16 watts per strip Watts 96 42 36 32 Directional Lumens 4,608 5,250 5,040 4,700 Annual Electricity Cost $35.94 $15.72 $13.48 $11.98 Annual Electricity Savings N/A $20.22 $22.46 $23.96 LED equipment cost N/A $30.00 $39.00 $44.00 Paybacktime in years N/A 1.5 1.7 1.8 Warranty in years 3 5 10 10
Savings over Warranty $202.18 $224.64 $239.62
Dimming for Light Harvesting NO NO NO YES Data variables for calculations Weekly hours of illumination 60 Annual hours of illumination 3,120 Cost / kWh $0.12
Compare Performance
Ask your supplier/service provider for a Savings Analysis by Fixture
Key Considerations: Optics
WIDE
Look for LEDs that maximize the light
you need it most. Save money by wasting less energy and review fixture cost relative to useable
NARROW
39
Key Considerations: Photometrics
Look at usable light (foot candles) vs volume of light (lumens)
40
F o r L E D L i g h t i n g a n d a d d i t i o n a l e n e r g y s a v i n g s
41
42
Electricity is moved efficiently with Alternating Current (AC)
However, we’re wasting power with AC inside of buildings.
Key Considerations: Look at our Alternating Current System
Status Quo
AC Grid AC Bus DC storage
AC
DC
Common Building Loads (80%DC)
AC
DC
DC AC
AC
DC
AC
DC
AC
DC
AC
DC
AC
Typical Conversion Loss
DC
AC
4% to 8% Loss 2% to 10% loss 4% to 8% Loss 4% - 8% 4% to 8% Loss 12% to 20% loss 15% to 20% loss 3% to 10% loss
V F D43
Key Considerations: Direct Current Options
Microgrid Approach
AC Grid DC Bus DC storage
DC DC
DC / Semiconductor Based Loads DC
DC
3% to 5% loss 2% to 5% loss
AC DC
DC
AC DC
DC
2% to 5% loss 0% to 2% loss 3% to 6% loss 3% to 6% loss
V F D0% loss
AC DC
DC
1% to 5% loss
44
Key Considerations: Performance Results
Energy Use Loss avg. with AC Loss avg. with DC Net SAVINGS avg. with Direct Current Air Conditioning: (6%) (0%) 6% Lighting: (16%) (4.5%) 11.5% Computers: (17.5%) (4.5%) 13%
(6.5%) (3%) 3.5%
Lighting Example: Lighting typically accounts for about 25% of commercial energy use. 11.5% savings with Direct Current lighting on 25% = 2.8% property savings. LED lights cut consumptions by 50%, making half of 25% = 12.5% property savings. 12.5% + 2.8% = 15.3% Total Savings for a property that retrofits with LED Direct Current lighting.
45
Highlight Presentation
Energy Optimization for Commercial Cooling and Refrigeration www.EnergyIntelligenceCenter.com Contact: Charlie Szoradi, CEO Charlie@EICteam.com Direct: 610-551-5224
46
47
1: Property Owners and Managers face many choices when it comes to intelligent and cost-effective energy savings. 2: Climate control is typically the largest consumer of electricity, accounting for 40% - 60% of commercial building electricity consumption. 3: Upgrading commercial air conditioning and refrigeration systems has been expensive to date. Problems to Solve:
48
Cost-Effective Solutions: 1: Our latest patent pending technology along with optional support services optimize chillers and cooling systems to create efficiencies without impacting thermostat settings and without generating any downtime or upfront costs. 2: We are pleased to offer ways to generate 15% to 40% savings without changing any of the cooling equipment. 3: We integrate with existing Building Management Systems (BMS) and Building Automation Systems (BAS) as well as provide optimization for facilities that do not have BMS/BAS.
We provide a family of optimization technology and services to meet the needs of a diverse range of facilities
49
PROVEN RESULTS: Optimization Highlights
Property Types (included below to show range of Installed Cooling Capacity from 200 to 25,000 Tons) Installed Cooling Capacity (Tons) Pre-Optimization Annual Electricity Consumption for Cooling (kWh/Year) Energy SAVINGS (kWh/Year) Cost / kWh Cost SAVINGS ($/Year) % SAVINGS District Cooling Plant 25,000 80,000,000 16,800,000 $0.04 $672,000 21.0% Office Building 1,800 1,000,000 200,000 $0.12 $24,000 20.0% Dairy 500 3,300,000 800,000 $0.09 $68,000 24.2% Golf and Beach Club 200 2,500,000 1,000,000 $0.08 $80,000 40.0% LEED Platinum Hotels for ITC/Starwood Group: Hotel 1: 1,680 3,100,000 930,000 $0.09 $85,846 30.0% Hotel 2: 2,000 3,972,413 834,122 $0.13 $107,794 21.0% Hotel 3: 900 2,430,000 558,636 $0.13 $72,193 23.0% Hotel 4: 700 2,100,000 500,000 $0.13 $64,615 23.8% Hotel 5: 800 2,211,665 637,147 $0.11 $72,537 28.8% Hotel 6: 750 1,508,558 346,873 $0.09 $32,019 23.0% Hotel 7: 900 1,604,360 270,005 $0.09 $24,924 16.8% Hotel 8: 1,200 3,175,310 598,859 $0.10 $59,886 18.9% Hotel 9: 600 1,590,739 452,670 $0.09 $41,785 28.5%
Totals for these projects with the Average % Savings: 23,928,311 1,405,599 24.5%
Performance Counts: Examples of projects implemented by the Energy Intelligence Center's Chief Technology Officer and Chief Programming Officer since 2011 across facilities with chillers including: Trane, Carrier, York, and McQuay
50
Daily kWh Consumption
Daily Savings: 1,065 kWh Daily Savings at $.08 / kWh: $85.20 (in spring e.g. May) Annualized Savings: $31,098 (higher with summer heat loads) Energy Savings for this period: 40%
(Sample month in Florida at John’s Island Club + new programming for Phase 2)
CASE STUDY: Golf and Beach Club
Without Optimization With Optimization
1,498 kWh/day
Example of previous work by EIC’s CTO and CIO
CASE STUDY: Luxury Hotel
(Sample optimization starting in fall and running through early winter)
Daily Savings: 6,509 kWh Daily Savings at $.09 / kWh: $585.81 (in Fall/Winter) Annualized Savings: $213,820 (higher with summer heat loads) Energy Savings for this period: 45%
Daily kWh Consumption
7,664 kWh/day
Without Optimization With Optimization Without Optimization With Optimization
Example of previous work by EIC’s CTO and CIO
(Sample increases in efficiency as temperatures rise)
CASE STUDY: Energy use relative to outside temperature
Daily Savings: 500 kWh to 4,000 kWh Daily Savings at $.10 / kWh: $50 to $400 (facility with four 420 Ton chillers) Annualized Savings: $18,250 to $146,000 Energy Savings for this period: 12% to 28% (subject to outside temperature)
Chart Title
w/Algorithm w/out AlgorithmDaily kWh Consumption
10,000 kWh/day 14,000 kWh/day 4,000 kWh/day 3,500 kWh/day
70° 80° 90° 100°
Example of previous work by EIC’s CTO and CIO
54
Sample On-Site Optimization
The following example is for a 700,000 sq ft Hospital in Baltimore, MD (April 2019)
55
Chiller (Status Quo) Pre-Optimization
56
Sample Optimization Measure Increase the Cooling Tower (CT) fan speed (26.2 Hz) to reduce the Condenser Water Entry Temperature (CWET). The small increase in energy cost creates a larger reduction in the chiller energy consumption.
57
RESULTS: Chiller Post-Optimization
58
RESULTS: Data
Increase in Cooling Tower (CT) fan speed caused decrease in Condenser Water Entry Temperature (CWET) which in turn reduced the power consumption by 22% net.
Note: To determine CT Fan kW consumption at 40 addition Hz, we use the industry max of 60 Hz and 18 kW to start the calculations. Formula 1: (Old Hz/Max Hz)³ x Max Power = Old Power (26.2 Hz / 60 Hz)³ x 18 kW = 1.49 kW Formula 2: (New Speed/Old Speed)³ x Old Power = New Power (40 Hz / 26.2 Hz)³ x 1.49 kW = 5.3 kW
176 kW 133 kW 43 kW 18 kW 1.49 kW 5.30 kW 3.81 kW 39.49 22% For the same Chiller TONs of 388 Net Saving of Power at Spot CT Fan kW @ 60 Hz CT Fan kW @ 26.2 Hz CT Fan kW @ 40 Hz Increase in CT fan kW Chiller kW @ 28.2 Hz of CT Fan Speed Chiller kW @ 40 Hz of CT Fan Speed Chiller Power reduction er at S @ 26.2 Hz kW
59
Energy Intelligence Center https://energyintelligencecenter.com/ Red = Min. for Assessment Chief Technology Officer: Sri Chari sri@EICteam.com 414-350-1618 Contact to return Data Sheet: Charlie Szoradi charlie@EICteam.com 610-551-5224 Sales Channel Partner: Initial Data Collection Date: Prospective Customer Company / website Facility Name Facility Type Location Prospective Customer Contact Name: Contact Title: Contact email: Contact Tel: Process Cooling: Yes/No Building Cooling: Yes/No Refrigeration: Yes/No Other: ______________ DATA ITEM UNITS AMOUNT Annual Hours of operation Hours Annual electricity consumption kWhOur solution starts with data collection via this
Sheet, and we provide a Level 1 Savings Assessment at
Optimization: kW/Ton Relative to CWET & Chiller Loading
kW / TR (Ton of Refrigeration)
CWET 85° F CWET 75° F CWET 65° F .90 .80 .70 .60 .50 .40 .30 .20 .10 .00
(Sample efficiency measure) We reduce Condenser Water Entry Temperature (CWET) to the lowest permissible level within ambient conditions. This reduces the outlet pressure of the compressor, which reduces the compressor’s energy consumption. In addition, we provide many other measures, such as balancing chiller loads across multiple chillers, per manufacturer’s specifications, to lower the kW /TR. Lower CWET and Lower % Chiller Loading = Lower kW / TR for ENERGY SAVINGS Lower CWET
= Examples lowest energy consumption at designated CWET and Chiller Loading
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Example of previous work by EIC’s CTO and CIO
Lower % Chiller Loading
61
OUR 5 STEP PROCESS
The length of each phase is subject to the complexity of the cooling system.
The weeks below are based on averages from prior projects.
Development Time for Steps 1 through 5 = (approx 12 weeks) 3 months Post-Optimization Customer Utility Bill Review before First Payment: 3 months Upon Customer Satisfaction: Monthly savings share payment plan commences
Existing Condition Optimization Begins
Data Collection via Data Sheet Savings Assessment Level 1 Report Site Visit for Investment Grade Audit + Performance Agreement Custom Programming Development, based on “Go” from Customer Implementation and on-site Testing
1 week 1 week 2 we 6 weeks 2 weeks
62
EXECUTIVE TEAM
The Energy Intelligence Center’s Executive Team includes the three founding partners, who are each seasoned energy professionals. Charles A. Szoradi (Charlie), Sridharan Raghavachari (Sri), and D.S. Ravishankar (Ravi) share the vision to provide cost-effective energy optimization. They each bring multiple decades of experience within their areas of focus.
Bios: https://energyintelligencecenter.com/about-us/executive-team/
Sri Chari Charlie Szoradi D.S. Ravishankar Hands on for major projects
63
Charlie Szoradi
Ch ief Exe cutiv e O ffic er
Master of Architecture
ARCHITECT Focus: Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Design Years of Experience: 26+ Projects Completed: 100+ Speaking Engagements: 50+
64
Regional Engineering College (REC) > National Institute of Technology (NIT) Tiruchirappalli
Com Compressed Ai Air Ene Energy Ma Management Con Controller Cen Central l Coo Cooli ling & Cir Circulation Ene nergy Management Co Controll ller
Mul ultiple US S Patents s Granted and and Pen ending
MECHANICAL ENGINEER Focus: Energy Efficiency for Commercial & Industrial facilities Years of Experience: 46+ Projects Completed: 80+ C&I Energy Audits: 600+
Sri Chari
Pr e sid ent a n d Ch ief Technology O f f ic er
65
University of Karnataka, India
Founder an and Ma Managing Part artner
Fluid Con Controls an and Systems, Ban Bangalo lore, , In India sin ince 1994 1994 Gl Global Alli lliance Part artner
ELECTRICAL ENGINEER Focus: Control and Automation Years of Experience: 37+ Automation Projects: 500+ Energy Efficiency Projects: 18+
D.S. Ravishankar
Ch ief Im plem entation O f f icer
Commercial & Industrial End to End Control Solutions
66
Sustainable Smart House
Finished Kitchen / Family Room looking south west
68
SSi 4.0: Solar PV and Thermal Tank System for Radiant Floors, Domestic Hot Water, Electricity and Heat Pumps
69
70
Measurement is the Key to Management Look for “green” initiatives that have the fastest payback for customers. The ROI % on the following tables is based on Annual Savings / Added Cost
71
72
73