IHG Green Engage-Solutions-Issued Feb 1 2011

IHG Green Engage/Solutions

Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

AcknowledgementsGreen Engage/Solu ons is our comprehensive onlinesustainability system. It tells our hotels what they cando to be a ‘green’ hotel and gives them the means toconserve resources and save money – by measuring,managing and repor ng on their hotel energy, waterand waste consump on, as well as their communityimpacts.

This metric has been reviewed and endorsed,both internally to IHG and by external third partyorganisa ons. Actual IHG hotel data has been used inthe technical analysis which informed items includedin this nal dra , and feedback from ini al users hasbeen incorporated. Many thanks go to those who havecontributed and collaborated in the evolu on of thissystem making it such a success and industry gamechanger.

Ques ons can be directed to the CSR team in Denham,UK.

3 Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Table of Contents

Introduction iProcess iiCredit Category Overview ivImpact Chart Users Guide viEnergy Savings viiNew Hotels Certi ication Levels ixNew Hotels Checklist xiExisting Hotels Certi ication Levels xiiExisting Hotels Checklist xiv

Action Groups 1-72 Operations and Process 1-10 Energy 11-24 Building Envelope 25-30 Mechanical 31-42 Water 43-51 Waste 52-57 Products and Materials 58-65 Site 66-72Glossary 73-78

APPENDIX A: Existing Hotels Energy AnalysisAPPENDIX B: New Hotels Energy AnalysisAPPENDIX C: LEED Documentation

i Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

PurposeThe purpose of this guide is to iden fy appropriatesustainable building criteria, technologies andopera onal guidelines for IHG hotels – this is our greenbaseline. This work builds on our measurement e orts(IHG Green Measure) by guiding our e ort to reducewhat we have measured.

Our green base line is made ac onable via theprerequisite ac ons enumerated in this guide.Sustainable design and opera ons provides safer,healthier, more comfortable hotels with reducedenvironmental, cost and societal impacts.

Designing and opera ng a hotel to be sustainabledemonstrates a strong commitment to our guests, theenvironment and the future of the planet.

De inition of SustainabilitySustainability is about planning for the long term. Thismeans balancing environmental, economic, and socialdemands.

Corporate ResponsibilityThis is about how companies respond to thesustainability challenge and how this response impactsthe top and bo om line.

Action Groups (AGS)In order to achieve the sustainability goals for futureresort/ hotels, eight di erent categories of “ac ongroups” have been iden ed.

These categories are:• Site• Water

• Products & Materials• Waste• Building Envelope• Mechanical• Electrical• Opera on & Process

This guideline describes and recommends various designand opera on strategies and technologies for each ofthese categories.

The intent of each Ac on Group is to a empt to complywith one or more of the following:

• Reduce energy consump on• Reduce water consump on• Reduce carbon footprint• Improve guest health and comfort• Reduce opera ng and maintenance costs• Raise guest and sta awareness of sustainabledevelopment

The issue of how best to manage energy costs hasalso been addressed in the development of IHG GreenEngage/Solu ons. These ac ons are covered in theenergy sec on in the appendix of the guide. The guideadjusts the ac ons to di erent clima c regions.

The four climates considered are: Hot-Humid, Arid,Temperate and Cold-Alpine. Each Ac on Group isanalysed for its climate appropriateness and sustainablebuilding performance.

iIntroduction i

TEXT PENDING FROM IHGdemonstrates a strong commitment to our guests, thedemonstrates a strong commitment to our guests, theenvironment and the future of the planet.environment and the future of the planet.

• Reduce carbon footprint• Reduce carbon footprint• Improve guest health and comfort• Improve guest health and comfort• Reduce opera ng and maintenance costs• Reduce opera ng and maintenance costs• Raise guest and sta awareness of sustainable• Raise guest and sta awareness of sustainable

ii Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Process ii

TEXT PENDING FROM IHGTEXT PENDING FROM IHGTEXT PENDING FROM IHGTEXT PENDING FROM IHGTEXT PENDING FROM IHGTEXT PENDING FROM IHGTEXT PENDING FROM IHGTEXT PENDING FROM IHG

iii Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Process iii

TEXT PENDING FROM IHG

iv Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

OPERATIONS & PROCESSESHotel and hospitality opera ons can be very resource intensive. The prac ces and systems set in place to improve hotel opera ons andmaintenance are an immediate and public way to exhibit a hotel’s commitment to the environment.

ENERGYE cient electrical systems in a hotel o er many opportuni es to reduce opera ng costs and capture measurable reduc ons to environmentalimpact. Most saving achieved through ligh ng design also improve the enjoyment and comfort of spaces.

BUILDING ENVELOPEThe building envelope is the interface between the indoor and outdoor environments. A properly designed envelope helps to maintain the desiredindoor condi ons and may permit the use of natural ven la on, passive hea ng, and day-ligh ng.

MECHANICALGuest comfort, opera ng costs and many global environmental impacts are all dependant on a hotel’s mechanical systems. Op mum results areachieved when the e cient systems are chosen and designed to work in harmony with the other building systems and components.

WATERResponsibili es and opportuni es exist with all water that passes through a building and site. Economic and Environmental indicators favour thelowest possible man-made changes to the natural hydrological-cycle.

WASTEConstruc on and demoli on ac vi es contribute signi cant volume to land lls and incinerators that could be avoided with proper management.Diver ng this waste can reduce disposal fees and transporta on consequences.

PRODUCTS & MATERIALSMaterials selected for sustainable buildings should have appropriate performance, durability and environmental proper es. Material selec on cana ect issues ranging from our planet’s resources to occupant comfort and health.

SITEA hotel’s loca on a ects commu ng op ons, local ecosystems, building energy e ciency and much more. Proper site selec on should be givenappropriate considera on at the beginning of a project as it will a ect many down-stream decisions.

Credit Category Overview iv

v Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

New HotelsIHG Green Engage/Solu ons outlines Prerequisite Ac onsand Credited Ac ons in all eight of the Credit Categories.There are 70 available Prerequisite Ac ons and 162available Credited Ac ons. To meet the requirements ofIHG Green Engage/Solu ons – New Hotels project teamswill need to achieve 55 - 70 - 85 points depending on theLevel of cer ca on they wish to pursue.

Level 1 Cer ca on (55 points) - Requires project teamsto achieve all (55) of the Level 1 Prerequisite Ac ons andis the minimum level of cer ca on a project can pursue.

Level 2 Cer ca on (70 points) - Requires projects teamsto achieve both the Level 1 Prerequisite Ac ons (55) aswell as the Level 2 Prerequisite Ac ons (15) for a total of70 Prerequisites.

Level 3 Cer ca on (85 points) - Requires project teamsto achieve all of the Level 1 and 2 Prerequisite Ac ons(70). In addi on teams should select an addi onal 15Credited Ac ons from any of the remaining 162 points inthe eight Ac on Groups.

Existing HotelsIHG Green Engage/Solu ons outlines PrerequisiteAc ons and Credited Ac ons in all eight of the CreditCategories. There are 50 available Prerequisite Ac onsand 124 available points. To meet the requirements ofIHG Green Engage/Solu ons – Exis ng Hotels projectteams will need to achieve 40 - 50 - 60 points dependingon the Level of cer ca on they wish to pursue.

Level 1 Cer ca on (40 points) - Requires project teamsto achieve all (40) of the Level 1 Prerequisite Ac ons andis the minimum level of cer ca on a project can pursue.

Level 2 Cer ca on (50 points) - Requires projects teamsto achieve both the Level 1 Prerequisite Ac ons (40) aswell as the Level 2 Prerequisite Ac ons (10) for a total of50 Prerequisites.

Level 3 Cer ca on (60 points) - Requires project teamsto achieve all of the Level 1 and 2 Prerequisite Ac ons(50). In addi on teams should select an addi onal 10Credited Ac ons from any of the remaining 124 points inthe eight Ac on Groups.

Credit Category Overview v

vi Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Impact Chart Users Guide

ENERGY Represents the energyconserved and energygenerated by that measure atthe hotel

Li le or no energysavings

Minimal energysavings

Moderate energysavings

Signi cant energysavings

WASTE Represents the amount ofwaste the measure generatesand the reuse or recyclability ofthe measure at the hotel

Li le or no impact onwaste reducing waste

stream

Minimal impact onreducing waste stream

Moderate impact onreducing waste stream

Signi cant impact onreducing waste stream

WATER Represents the water resourceslikely to be a ected (consumed/saved) as a result of themeasure at the hotel

Li le or no potablewater savings

Minimal potablewater savings

Moderate potablewater savings

Signi cant potablewater savings

CARBON Represents the CO2 equivalentemissions associated with eachmeasure directly or indirectlyduring the life me of themeasure at the hotel

Li le or no carbonemissions reduc on

Minimal carbonemissions reduc on

Moderate carbonemissions reduc on

Signi cant carbonemissions reduc on

AFFORDABILITY Represents the capitalinvestment, opera on andmaintenance costs and paybackfor the hotel

High cost; poten allylong payback period

High cost; paybackperiod towards the

end of life me

Low cost; quickpayback

Very low cost; instantpayback

CONSUMER Represents how the measurea ects the health and comfortof the hotel guest/visitor Li le or no e ect for

the hotel guest/visitor

Minimal posi vee ect for the hotel

guest/visitor

Moderate posi vee ect for the hotel

guest/visitor

Signi cant posi vee ect for the hotel

guest/visitor

vi

vii Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Green Engage/Solu ons for New Hotels is intended toshape the design of more sustainable hotels, by lookingat a wide range of issues including water use, wastemanagement, products and materials, guest comfort,and par cularly energy use.

Even though brand standards guide in the developmentof a new hotel, there remain a number of decisionsto be made about the building and the systems to beput inside it - decisions that can signi cantly impactthe energy e ciency of the hotel, impac ng not only rst costs, but also the short and long term opera ng

costs of a property. The appendix of Green Engage/Solu ons has been developed to help hotels weigh thechoices which o en seem confusing or overly technicaland allow development teams to make the right designchoices for their building type and climate.

Obviously a hotel in Siberia has to consider di erentfactors than a hotel in An gua, and to address thisGreen Engage/Solu ons has a set of Energy Chartswhich contain guidelines covering all aspects of hoteldesign, providing a prescrip ve path for achievingenergy savings of up to 25% over typical new hotelenergy use. The predicted savings for each climate zoneare summarised to the right.

The appendix also contains Calcula on Sheets, whichshow in detail the cost and savings of speci c designop ons, such as one type of HVAC system over another,in four di erent climate zones. These sheets, which arebased on the results of extensive “energy modelling”(computer simula on of hotel energy use), are designedto allow those looking for even greater savings to quicklyand easily weigh up which op on makes the most sense.

Hot-Humid Climates

Of the more than 100 Ac on Items outlined in GreenEngage/Solu ons, the biggest energy saving measures inthis climate are improved insula on, a dedicated centraloutside air unit and demand ven la on.

Overall, a hotel in a hot humid climate can performbetween 15% and 25% be er than a modelled baselinehotel.

Arid ClimatesOf the more than 100 Ac on Items outlined in GreenEngage/Solu ons, the biggest energy saving measures inthis climate are improved insula on, a dedicated centraloutside air unit and demand ven la on.

Overall, a hotel in an arid climate can perform between15% and 25% be er than a modelled baseline hotel.

Temperate ClimatesDue to the variability of this climate, there are a widerange of energy saving measures which can signi cantlyreduce energy use, in par cular the use of economisermode and energy recovery.

Overall, a hotel in a temperate climate can performbetween 20% and 25% be er than a modelled baselinehotel.

Cold-Alpine Climates

Of the more than 100 Ac on Items outlined in GreenEngage/Solu ons, the biggest energy saving measures inthis climate are improved glazing, improved insula on,demand ven la on, and economiser mode.

Overall, a hotel in a cold climate can perform between20% and 25% be er than a modelled baseline hotel.

viiNew Hotel Energy Savings

viii Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Making an exis ng hotel more sustainable is obviouslyvery di erent from designing a sustainable hotelfrom scratch. In most cases it isn't sensible to rip outthe windows or completely replace or redesign theair condi oning systems. Instead, you have to makethe most of what is already there. Or in some casesmake improvements to the stu that is about to bereplaced anyway (televisions, refrigerators, etc). GreenEngage/Solu ons for Exis ng Hotels is focused oncombining common sense and best prac ce with fairlyminor improvements that, added together, can have asigni cant impact on how your hotel performs and yourbo om line.

The appendix of Green Engage/Solu ons has beendeveloped to help General Managers and their GreenTeams weigh the choices which o en seem confusingor overly technical and allow them to make the rightchoices for their hotel and climate. To do this, an energyanalysis of exis ng hotels is included, which outlines theimprovement that an “average” IHG hotel can achieveby going through the Green Engage/Solu ons process.

This analysis was done by building an “energy model”(a computer simula on of a typical hotel) and usingactual IHG hotels energy usage data. Calcula on Sheetshave been developed for every Level 1 and Level 2Prerequisite Ac on. This allows hotel managers to lookat the cost and bene t of these ac ons individually, aswell as look at the overall a ect of reaching Level 1 orLevel 2 Cer ca on on. These results are summarised tothe right.

Hot-Humid Climates

Level 1 Cer ca on can reduce energy consump onby 24%. Level 2 Cer ca on can reduce energyconsump on by 25%.

Arid Climates

Level 1 Cer ca on can reduce energy consump onby 22%. Level 2 Cer ca on can reduce energyconsump on by 23%.

Temperate ClimatesLevel 1 Cer ca on can reduce energy consump onby 20%. Level 2 Cer ca on can reduce energyconsump on by 22%.

Cold-Alpine ClimatesLevel 1 Cer ca on can reduce energy consump onby 17%. Level 2 Cer ca on can reduce energyconsump on by 19%.

viiiExisting Hotel Energy Savings

ix Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

IHG Green Engage/Solu ons outlines Level 1Prerequisite Ac ons, Level 2 Prerequisite Ac ons andCredited Ac ons in all eight of the Credit Categories.There are 70 available Prerequisite Ac ons and 162available Credited Ac ons. To meet the requirements ofIHG Green Engage/Solu ons – New Hotels project teamswill need to achieve 55 - 70 - 85 points depending on theLevel of cer ca on they wish to pursue.

Level 1 Certi ication - 55 pointsOperations & ProcessesO-01 Ban Smoking on the Property

O-01 Develop Cleaning Policy and Fee for Roomswhere Smoking has Occurred

O-02 Green Sta Orienta on & Educa on

O-02 Develop Sta Ac ve Green Team

O-03 Guest Conserva on Educa on

O-03 Green Holiday Agenda and Guides

O-04 Green Cleaning Materials

O-04 Training for Green Prac ces

O-04 Towel/Sheet Program

O-04 IHG Welcome Mats

O-08 IHG HR Human Rights Training

O-09 Hazardous Material Audit

O-09 Appropriate Segrega on, Storage and Disposalof Hazardous Materials

EnergyE-01 Adopt IHG Energy BMPs Document

E-01 Develop Sequence of Opera ons

E-01 Develop Building Opera ng Plan

E-01 Develop Systems Narra ve

E-01 Preventa ve Maintenance

E-02 Meter Whole Building Energy Use

E-02 Enrol In Green Measure

E-07 Energy E cient Appliances

E-07 Energy E cient Televisions


E-08 Pipe Insula on

E-08 Boiler E ciency

E-09 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in GuestRooms

E-09 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Circula onSpaces

E-09 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Back ofHouse Spaces

E-10 Occupancy Sensors in O ces

E-10 Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decora veFixtures

E-11 Timing Controls on all Up and Facade Ligh ng

Building EnvelopeB-01 Low-E Glazing

B-02 Meet ASHRAE Recommenda ons for ClimateZone

B-03 Roof System Selec on

B-04 Install Weatherstripping on all Guest RoomWindows

MechanicalM-01 Verify Minimum Outdoor Air Rates

M-03 No Through the Wall Heat Pumps (PTACs)

M-03 No 2-Pipe Fan Coil Units with Electric Heat

M-06 No CFCs in HVAC and Refrigera on Systems

M-07 Airside Economisers on Central AHUs

M-09 100% of Guest Rooms have 4°F DeadbandThermostats

M-11 Variable Frequency Drives

M-11 NEMA Premium E ciency Motors

WaterW-01 Meet WHO Drinking Water Quality Standards

W-02 Enrol In Green Measure

W-02 Meter Whole Building Water Use

W-03 Meet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow Rates

WasteG-01 Enrol In Green Measure

G-02 Adopt IHG Solid Waste Management Policy

G-02 Provide Recycling Storage Area

Products & MaterialsP-01 Adopt IHG Sustainable Purchasing Policy

P-01 Standardised Speci ca on for Green Materials

P-02 Low or No VOC Paint

P-02 Low or No VOC Adhesives

SiteS-01 Erosion & Sedimenta on Control During

Construc on and Landscaping

ixNew Hotels Certi ication Levels

x Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Level 2 Certi ication - 70 pointsThere are an addi onal 15 points required at achieveLevel 2 Cer ca on

Energy

E-03 Meet Minimum Energy PerformanceRequirements

E-04 Commissioning Plan

E-05 Install Central Building Management System(BMS)

E-05 Monitor BMS

E-06 Provide Guest Room Master Switching

E-09 Reduce Ligh ng Power Densi es

Building EnvelopeB-01 Op mised Window to Wall Ra o

B-04 Use of Outdoor Air to Minimise In ltra on

MechanicalM-01 Installa on of Central AHU for Fresh Air

M-08 Ven la on Air Heat Recovery

M-09 100% of Public Areas have 4°F Deadbandthrough BMS

WasteG-01 Conduct a Waste Stream Audit

G-03 Construc on Waste Management Plan

SiteS-01 Adopt IHG Sustainable Building Exterior and

Hardscape Management Plan

S-01 Adopt IHG Sustainable Integrated PestManagement, Erosion Control and LandscapeManagement Plan

Level 3 Certi ication - 85 pointsMeet all of the Prerequisite Ac ons and achieve 15points through self selected Credited Ac ons

xNew Hotels Certi ication Levels

xi Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Opera ons & Processes 33P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

O-01 Smoke-Free Hotel 2

O-02 Sta Training and Awareness 2

O-03 Guest/Public Educa on 3

O-04 Green Housekeeping Productsand Prac ces

6

O-05 Sustainable Event Management 6

O-06 Food and Beverage 5

O-07 Sustainable Terms andCondi ons with Business Partners

3

O-08 Suppor ng Communi es 4

O-09 On-Site Hazard/EnvironmentalImpact Analysis

2

Energy 47P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

E-01 O&M Best ManagementPrac ce (BMPs)

5

E-02 Energy Metering and Sub-Metering

5

E-03 Energy PerformanceBenchmarking

3

E-04 Building Energy SystemCommissioning

4

E-05 Building Management System(BMS)

4

E-06 Guest Room Master Switching 3

E-07 Energy E cient Appliances 3

E-08 Hot Water Contribu on toEnergy Reduc on

4

E-09 Energy E cient Ligh ng 5

E-10 Ligh ng Systems Controls 6

E-11 Reduce Light Pollu on 2

E-12 Low Energy Systems 3

Building Envelope 26P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

B-01 Op mise Dayligh ng Design 7

B-02 Op mise Façade Design 5

B-03 Cool Roo ng Systems 3

B-04 Air In ltra on Reduc onMeasures

6

B-05 Acous c Isola on 5

Mechanical 28P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

M-01 Fresh Air Delivery 5

M-02 Natural Ven la on 1

M-03 Guest Room HVAC EquipmentSelec on

3

M-04 Water Cooled Chiller 1

M-05 Addi onal HVAC Strategies 2

M-06 Refrigerant Management 2

M-07 Economiser Modes 2

M-08 Heat Recovery 2

M-09 4 Degree Deadband 2

M-10 Enhanced HVAC Guest RoomControls & CO2 Monitoring

6

M-11 Motor Energy E ciency 2

Water 31P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

W-01 Drinking Water Quality 5

W-02 Water Metering and Sub-Metering

3

W-03 Water E cient Fixtures 6

W-04 Water E cient Appliances andSystems

5

W-05 Reduce Irriga on Demand 3

W-06 Manage Stormwater 2

W-07 Water Collec on, Treatment &Re-Use System

3

W-08 Ozone Water Treatment/Chemical Reduc on

4

Waste 16P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

G-01 Establish a Waste Benchmark 2

G-02 Manage Ongoing Waste 6

G-03 Reuse and Dona on ofConstruc on and FF&E Materials

4

G-04 Material Supplier PackagingReduc on and Removal Policy

2

G-05 Manage Site and Food Waste 2

Products & Materials 31P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

P-01 Eco-Embedded MaterialsSpeci ca on

3

P-02 Low-Emi ng Finish Materials 6

P-03 Recycled and RecyclableMaterials

5

P-04 Regionally Manufactured/Regionally Sourced Materials

4

P-05 Rapidly Renewable/SustainableHarvested Materials

4

P-06 Design for Material Reduc onand Flexibility of Spaces

4

P-07 Mold/Contaminant ResistantMaterials and Processes

5

Site 20P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

S-01 Environmentally Sensi ve SiteManagement

3

S-02 Des na on Protec on 3

S-03 Building Si ng 2

S-04 Ecology and Landscaping 4

S-05 Reduce Auto Use Impact 4

S-06 Parking 4

xiNew Hotels Scorecard

xii Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

IHG Green Engage/Solu ons outlines Level 1Prerequisite Ac ons, Level 2 Prerequisite Ac ons andCredited Ac ons in all eight of the Credit Categories.There are 50 available Prerequisite Ac ons and 124available Credited Ac ons. To meet the requirementsof IHG Green Engage/Solu ons – Exis ng Hotels projectteams will need to achieve 40 - 50 - 60 points dependingon the Level of cer ca on they wish to pursue.

Level 1 Certi ication - 40 pointsOperations & ProcessesO-01 Ban Smoking on the Property

O-01 Develop Cleaning Policy and Fee for Roomswhere Smoking has Occurred

O-02 Green Sta Orienta on & Educa on

O-02 Develop Sta Ac ve Green Team

O-03 Guest Conserva on Educa on

O-03 Green Holiday Agenda and Guides

O-04 Green Cleaning Materials

O-04 Training for Green Prac ces


O-04 IHG Welcome Mats

O-08 IHG HR Human Rights Training

O-09 Hazardous Material Audit

O-09 Appropriate Segrega on, Storage and Disposalof Hazardous Materials

EnergyE-01 Adopt IHG Energy BMPs Document

E-01 Develop Sequence of Opera ons

E-01 Develop Building Opera ng Plan

E-01 Develop Systems Narra ve

E-01 Preventa ve Maintenance

E-02 Meter Whole Building Energy Use

E-02 Par cipate in Green Measure


E-07 Energy E cient Televisions

E-07 Energy E cient Refrigerators

E-09 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in GuestRooms

E-09 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Circula onSpaces

E-09 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Back ofHouse Spaces

E-10 Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decora veFixtures

Building EnvelopeB-04 Install Weatherstripping on all Guest Room

Windows

MechanicalM-01 Verify Minimum Outdoor Air Rates

M-06 No CFCs in HVAC and Refrigera on Systems

M-09 100% of Guest Rooms have 4°F DeadbandThermostats

WaterW-01 Meet WHO Drinking Water Quality Standards

W-02 Par cipate in Green Measure

W-03 Meet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow Rates

WasteG-01 Par cipate in Green Measure

G-02 Adopt IHG Solid Waste Management Policy

G-02 Provide Recycling Storage Area

Products & MaterialsP-01 Adopt IHG Sustainable Purchasing Policy

P-02 Low or No VOC Paint

P-02 Low or No VOC Adhesives

xiiExisting Hotels Certi ication Levels

xiii Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Level 2 Certi ication - 50 pointsThere are an addi onal 10 points required at achieveLevel 2 Cer ca on

Energy

E-03 Meet Minimum Energy PerformanceRequirements

E-04 Commissioning Plan

E-08 Pipe Insula on

E-10 Occupancy Sensors in O ces

MechanicalM-11 Variable Frequency Drives

M-11 NEMA Premium E ciency Motors

WaterW-02 Meter Whole Building Water Use

WasteG-01 Conduct a Waste Stream Audit

SiteS-01 Adopt IHG Sustainable Building Exterior and

Hardscape Management Plan

S-01 Adopt IHG Sustainable Integrated PestManagement, Erosion Control and LandscapeManagement Plan

Level 3 Certi ication - 60 pointsMeet all of the Prerequisite Ac ons and achieve 10points through self selected Credited Ac ons

xiiiExisting Hotels Certi ication Levels

xiv Green Engage/SolutionsIssued on February 1, 2011

Existing Hotels Scorecard xivOpera ons & Processes 33P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

O-01 Smoke-Free Hotel 2

O-02 Sta Training and Awareness 2

O-03 Guest/Public Educa on 3

O-04 Green Housekeeping Productsand Prac ces

6

O-05 Sustainable Event Management 6

O-06 Food and Beverage 5

O-07 Sustainable Terms andCondi ons with Business Partners

3

O-08 Suppor ng Communi es 4

O-09 On-Site Hazard/EnvironmentalImpact Analysis

2

Energy 46P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

E-01 O&M Best ManagementPrac ce (BMPs)

5


5

E-03 Energy PerformanceBenchmarking

3

E-04 Building Energy SystemCommissioning

3

E-05 Building Management System(BMS)

4

E-06 Guest Room Master Switching 3

E-07 Energy E cient Appliances 3

E-08 Hot Water Contribu on toEnergy Reduc on

4

E-09 Energy E cient Ligh ng 5

E-10 Ligh ng Systems Controls 6

E-11 Reduce Light Pollu on 2

E-12 Low Energy Systems 3

Building Envelope 8P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

B-01 Op mise Dayligh ng Design 4

B-02 Op mise Façade Design 0

B-03 Cool Roo ng Systems 3

B-04 Air In ltra on Reduc onMeasures

1

B-05 Acous c Isola on 0

Mechanical 21P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

M-01 Fresh Air Delivery 1

M-02 Natural Ven la on 1

M-03 Guest Room HVAC EquipmentSelec on

3

M-04 Water Cooled Chiller 1

M-05 Addi onal HVAC Strategies 2

M-06 Refrigerant Management 2

M-07 Economiser Modes 2

M-08 Heat Recovery 2

M-09 4 Degree Deadband 2

M-10 Enhanced HVAC Guest RoomControls & CO2 Monitoring

3

M-11 Motor Energy E ciency 2

Water 29P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

W-01 Drinking Water Quality 4


3

W-03 Water E cient Fixtures 6

W-04 Water E cient Appliances andSystems

5

W-05 Reduce Irriga on Demand 3

W-06 Manage Stormwater 1

W-07 Water Collec on, Treatment &Re-Use System

3


4

Waste 13P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

G-01 Establish a Waste Benchmark 2

G-02 Manage Ongoing Waste 6

G-03 Reuse and Dona on ofConstruc on and FF&E Materials

1

G-04 Material Supplier PackagingReduc on and Removal Policy

2

G-05 Manage Site and Food Waste 2

Products & Materials 15P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

P-01 Eco-Embedded MaterialsSpeci ca on

2

P-02 Low-Emi ng Finish Materials 6

P-03 Recycled and RecyclableMaterials

3

P-04 Regionally Manufactured/Regionally Sourced Materials

1

P-05 Rapidly Renewable/SustainableHarvested Materials

2

P-06 Design for Material Reduc onand Flexibility of Spaces

0

P-07 Mold/Contaminant ResistantMaterials and Processes

1

Site 9P1 P2 CA Ac on Group Pts

S-01 Environmentally Sensi ve SiteManagement

2

S-02 Des na on Protec on 1

S-03 Building Si ng 0

S-04 Ecology and Landscaping 2

S-05 Reduce Auto Use Impact 3

S-06 Parking 1


The success of a sustainable building relies on bothsustainable design and sustainable opera ons. Establishingand maintaining an environment conducive to properopera ons starts with building energy commissioningwhere the intent of the building is documented alongwith design decisions so that opera ng personal canmake decisions consistent with the original system intent.Sustainable opera ons con nues through occupancy bymaintaining green housekeeping, facilita ng recycling,educa ng occupants and verifying and documen ngenergy performance.

Opera onal measures secure the investments madeduring the design phase. They are cri cal to achievingthe payback that drove design decisions. However,opera ons relies on human behaviour, which is typicallyharder to predict and control than mechanical systems.A transparent and sustained management commitmentcan help secure employee commitment towardssustainable opera ons.

O-01 Smoke-Free Hotel

O-02 Staff Training and Awareness

O-03 Guest/Public Education

O-04 Green Housekeeping Products & Practices

O-05 Sustainable Event Management

O-06 Food and Beverage

O-07 Sustainable Terms and Conditions withBusiness Partners

O-08 Supporting Communities

O-09 On-site Hazard/Environmental ImpactAnalysis

O-01 to O-09Operations and Processes Action Groups


Action Group Impact:Energy

Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Considerations:

New HotelsAll new hotels commi ed to gaining Green Engage/Solu ons cer ca on should ban smoking on theproperty. As a disincen ve, the hotel should have apolicy of ning guests who disregard this policy.

Exis ng HotelsHotels which currently have smoking areas should ensuresepara on from non-smoking areas through physicalbarriers and separate HVAC systems. These proper esshould develop a phase-out plan and run an educa onprogram to inform guests of this change of policy.

Advantages:Less odour migra on; Be er indoor air quality.

Disadvantages:Poten al guest dissa sfac on in regions where indoorsmoking is acceptable

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-03

Narrative:

Indoor air quality is crucial in achieving a healthyenvironment. In many municipali es, smoking is notallowed in public places to protect the health of others. Insome areas of the world smoke-free hotels are the norm,whereas in others hotel guest expecta ons dictate thatsmoking rooms are made available. The disadvantage ofallowing guests to smoke is that smoking in hotel roomscreates discomfort for non-smoking guests. Smokingrooms need more fresh air and ven la on than non-smoking rooms, so there is also an increased energy use.

Where banning of smoking is not feasible, all designatedsmoking areas should be separated with walls that goup to structure and doors that close, and independentven la on systems so smoke cannot migrate to non-smoking areas. The HVAC system must provide higherexhaust and outdoor air rates in these rooms to dilutepar culates. Room-type air condi oning units should notbe used in smoking areas as they recycle the room air.

O-01Smoke-Free Hotel

IHG Green Engage/Solutions NH EH

Level 1 Prerequisites

1 Ban Smoking on the Property

1 Develop Cleaning Policy and Fee forRooms where Smoking has Occurred

Total Available Points 2 2

LEED® EQp2



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

assessing current prac ces, areas for advancementsshould be iden ed and disseminated to all sta . If theappropriate monitoring equipment is not available inthe facility, managers should be trained on alterna vemethods, such as analysing u lity bills and meters, toassess performance.

Advantages:Reduced opera ng cost; More cohesive sta educa on;Enhanced employee pride.

Disadvantages:Requires more involved management; Increased trainingcosts.

References:Green Lodging News: Hotel Schoolswww.greenlodgingnews.com/hotelschools.aspx

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-04, O-05, O-06, O-07, O-08, S-05

Narrative:

Many of the sustainable measures put in place by thedesign and construc on teams are only e ec ve if theyare properly implemented by the sta and buildingoperators. Green housekeeping programs, sustainableevent management and general facili es managementwill all require ini al orienta on and on-going educa on.Hotel sta that typically experience higher turnoverrates are o en the key posi ons carrying out the edictsof a sustainability management plan. For this reasoncomprehensive training plans with clear instruc onson how to implement sustainable strategies should bedeveloped along with orienta on and con nued trainingschedules.

Sta should be introduced to the hotel’s sustainabilityini a ves to understand the purpose and goals of greenhotel management strategies. O ering incen ves for bestperformance may prove to be an e ec ve training tool.If working with an interna onal sta , printed orienta on/reference materials and training sessions should betranslated into the dominant na ve languages.

Considerations:New HotelsNewly opened hotels should train all sta about theunique green features and develop a program todisseminate this informa on to all future incoming sta .Facili es managers should be educated on how to monitorbuilding energy and make proper adjustments to op miseperformance. If the project is being commissioned, stashould be instructed on how to support commissioningauthori es.

Exis ng HotelsProjects can make many environmental improvements bychanging sta behaviour product use procedures. A er

O-02Staff Training and Awareness



1 Green Sta Orienta on & Educa onAll new sta members to par cipate inIHG Green Aware Program

1 Develop Sta Ac ve Green Team


http://www.greenlodgingnews.com/hotelschools.aspx



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Guest/Public Education O-03

Considerations:New HotelsNew facili es could enhance guest involvement byproviding real- me metering to monitor energy use,water use and provide feedback from any alterna veenergy or rainwater collec on equipment.

Exis ng HotelsExis ng projects should engage guests by o eringpar cipatory conserva on programs, encouragingsustainable tourism and highligh ng conserva onprac ces that can be con nued at home.

Advantages:Enhances brand image; Posi ve marke ng tool; Reducesenergy cost, Reduces laundering needs.

Disadvantages:

None.

References:Energy,Inc: The Energy Detec vewww.theenergydetec ve.com/about-ted

“Green” Hotels Associa on: Catalogwww.greenhotels.com/catalog/printed.htm

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-01, O-04, O-05, O-08, S-02

Narrative:

Guiding guest behaviour is a crucial element to e ec velyimplemen ng many conserva ons measures. Signage,literature and helpful front of house sta can all calla en on to the green e orts of the facility and encourageguests to par cipate.

Promo ng local sustainable shops, ac vi es andalterna ve means of transport encourages the guests’environmentally conscious choices to permeate into thesurrounding economy.

Providing guests with feedback on their energy andresource usage in a friendly informa ve manner can alsoencourage self-correc ve ac on.

Making guests aware of measures implemented at thehotel will also educate them on conserva on prac cesthey can con nue at home.


Level 1 Prerequisite

1 Guest Conserva on Educa onDevelop a guest educa on program thatincludes signage and literature explaininggreen hotel features and conserva on ps for hotel and home

1 Green Holiday Agenda and GuidesProvide guest with informa on on localgreen o erings and environmentallypreferable ways to reach des na ons

Credited Actions

1 Consumer Behaviour FeedbackProvide meters in rooms and/or energy/water consump on informa on on bills


LEED® IOc1.3

http://www.greenhotels.com/catalog/printed.htm



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Narrative:

Some of the tradi onal cleaning products used in hotelscontain ingredients that are toxic or hazardous. Manycontain vola le organic compounds (VOCs) which againcan be toxic and also act as an irritant to sensi ve people.The aim of green cleaning is to reduce the risk of chemicalexposure to janitorial sta along with guests at the hotel.There are a range of levels of green cleaning that could beimplemented by a hotel operator.

Proper sta training and guest awareness are some ofthe most cost e ec ve means or conserving resources.Sta should be encouraged to subs tute reusablesupplies for disposables as much as possible and trainedto understand the towel and sheet program.

Products should be compliant with a standard such asthat contained in the California Code of Regula ons whichsets VOC limits for a range of product groups. Anotherstandard is the Green Seal 37 standard which lists actualproducts from a range of manufacturers.

The Carpet and Rug Ins tute developed a voluntarystandard for tes ng vacuum cleaners to ensure thatthey work e ciency and contain the dust that they areextrac ng from the carpet.

Considerations:New HotelsAll housekeeping sta and procurement agents should betrained to purchase or use green cleaning products.

Exis ng HotelsMost of the green products work as well as conven onalcleaning products but they may need to be useddi erently. A training schedule should be set up for stato ensure they are up to date with the products andmethods being used. This can also improve the health ofcleaning sta as well as reducing worker safety liabilityissues.

Advantages:

Li le or no cost di erence when compared to conven onalcleaning methods; Could poten ally make guests staymore enjoyable due to be er indoor environment; Saferfor both guests and sta .

Disadvantages:Addi onal training may be required for housekeepingsta .

References:IHG Green Cleaning Policy

California Environmental Protec on Agency: AirResources Boardwww.arb.ca.gov/testmeth/cptm/cptm.htm

Green Sealwww.greenseal.org/ ndaproduct/index.cfm

The Carpet and Rug Ins tutewww.carpet-rug.com/commercial-customers/cleaning-and-maintenance/seal-of-approval-products/vacuums.cfm

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-01, O-02, O-09, W-08, S-01

O-04Green Housekeeping Products and Practices



1 Green Cleaning MaterialsUse non-toxic cleaning products

1 Training for Green Prac cesAll housekeeping sta to receive regulartraining on use and handling of greencleaning products

1 Towel/Sheet ProgramImplement towel/sheet laundryconserva on program

1 IHG Welcome MatsProvide IHG brand-speci ed welcomemats on all public entry points. Minimum10 feet in total length

Credited Actions

1 E cient Use of Cleaning MaterialsDevelop program to supply reusablecleaning products and train sta onproper use & minimising waste

1 CRI High E ciency Vacuum Cleaners


LEED® EQp3, EQc3.3 & EQc3.5

http://www.arb.ca.gov/testmeth/cptm/cptm.htm

http://www.greenseal.org/

http://www.carpet-rug.com/commercial-customers/cleaning-



Credited Actions

1 Recycling/Compost ProgramPackaging/event materials & literature/food & beverages

1 Reduc on of ConsumablesWashable/reusable catering dish/ atware, table linens, bulk dispensers

1 Local CateringSeek catering ingredients originate within80 kilometres (50 miles) of hotel

1 Environmentally Preferable EventMaterialsRecycled content, non-toxic inks,compostable

1 Avoid Printed MaterialsInstall screens with event schedule/curricula

1 Educa on/Marke ng of Green Op onsDevelop green mee ng packages, educatesta /a endees on using/implemen nggreen programs


O-05Sustainable Event Management

Considerations:

New HotelsBuilding management systems should be designed toallow for exibility of uses in spaces. Occupancy sensingcontrols should be incorporated wherever possible.

Exis ng HotelsEvent management sta should incorporate greenmee ng op ons into event packages and researchfacili es capable of accep ng recyclable/compostableevent waste. Sta should be trained on how to executethese opera ons. Green event op ons should be properlymarketed to event clients.

Advantages:

Increases venue visibility and desirability to prospec veevent clients, Could reduce some opera ng costs.

Disadvantages:Green event materials and addi onal catering servicesmay increase costs in some areas.

References:EcoSpeakers.com: Green Event Planning Resourceswww.ecospeakers.com/foreventmgrs/greenevents

Other Relevant Action Groups:

O-02, O-06, G-01, P-01, P-03, P-04

Narrative:

Events are generally huge material and energy consumersand produce large amounts of waste. Increasingly, groupsare favouring venues that o er sustainable managementprac ces for their events and mee ngs. A comprehensivegreen event o ering, at a minimum, includes recyclingprograms to handle packaging, event materials and food& beverage waste. Event managers should also considergreen catering op ons by reducing use of disposablewares, purchasing sustainable food (organic, local, fairtrade) and menu planning to reduce waste. Wheredisposable materials must be used, preference should begiven to those with high recycled content and/or otherenvironmentally preferable characteris cs (non-toxicinks, biodegradable/compostable, made from rapidlyrenewable materials, cer ed sustainably harvested,produced with alterna ve energy).

The exible nature of room popula on and use for eventsrequires dynamic designs and systems in order to avoidexcessively sized spaces and energy consump on. Eventspaces and mee ng rooms should have mo on detectorsand dynamic monitoring to allow for fast adjustments ofenvironmental controls.


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

http://www.ecospeakers.com/foreventmgrs/greenevents



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordabilityConsumer

Minor Major

O-06Food and Beverage


Credited Actions

1 Menu Planning to Prevent WasteDevelop & implement a menu planningpolicy

1 Bulk DispensersProvide bulk food, beverage andcondiments dispensers whenever possible

1 Purchase Local, Organic, Fair Trade FoodDevelop sustainable food purchasingpolicy with possible suppliers iden ed

1 Par cipate in Green RestaurantCer ca on Program

1 Food Dona on ProgramDevelop & implement a excess fooddona on plan with possible recipientsiden ed


Narrative:

The hospitality industry is a large consumer of food andbeverage products through in-house restaurants, cateringand guest room services. By engaging suppliers throughpurchasing agreements, sustainable food resource chainsare reinforced and stabilised.

Sustainable food and beverage sources include locallyproduced, fairly traded and organic ingredients. Menuplanning reduces excess food waste and re ects theseasonally available ingredients. Materials are conservedby o ering op ons in bulk dispensers rather thanindividual packages. Green restaurant programs validatee orts to use environmentally responsible products.

Educa on of food service sta is crucial to ensuring thatpolicies are understood and properly implemented.

Considerations:New HotelsKitchen equipment should be selected to allow for anyunique storage/staging needs for seasonal food use.Consider including a greenhouse or se ng aside sitearea for gardens to o set catering needs. Considerincorpora ng a compos ng area near the kitchen forlocal distribu on or use on landscaping.

Exis ng HotelsFood service sta should be trained on green restaurantmanagement and food selec on. Exis ng contracts withfood suppliers should be adapted to include organic, localand fair trade products. Local farms should be surveyedto determine if local products can be subs tuted. Fooddona on programs should be set up, where applicable.

Advantages:

Enhances brand image; Posi ve marke ng tool; Providesfresher, healthier food to guests.

Disadvantages:Seasonal food supplies may be limited in some regions;Organic food can be more expensive.

References:Green Restaurant Associa on: Dine Greenwww.dinegreen.com

Slow Foodwww.slowfood.com

FairTrade Cer edTM: TransFair USAwww.transfairusa.org

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-02, G-04, G-05

http://www.dinegreen.com/

http://www.slowfood.com/

http://www.transfairusa.org/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Narrative:

Sustainable business prac ces and corporateresponsibility is shaped by the rela onships formed withsuppliers and partners. Business partners should bechosen based on the degree to which they support thesocial and environmental goals adopted by IHG.

Hotels should look for opportuni es to work closelywith product and service providers to iden fy areas forimprovement. In areas where certain greener technologiesor services are limited, hotels should consider developingagreements that foster improvements to locally availableproducts and businesses. Opportuni es might include:

• Developing educa on and training programs withlocal service contractors – such as landscape or pestmanagement providers

• Networking suppliers with local resources to drivegreen market transforma on in local economies

The measures encouraged include:

• Sourcing products which are responsible in theirmanufacture, use and disposal

• Reviewing all the products and services purchasedand iden fying where more responsible alterna ves areavailable.

• Integrate sustainable criteria into your purchasingpolicy and procedures

• Encourage local businesses to source locally whenpossible•

Considerations:New HotelsInclude sustainable products and prac ces in construc ondocuments or procurement contracts. Contractors and

building material suppliers with the most sustainablebusiness prac ces should be incen vised or favoured.Design and construc on teams should carefully assessa ordable products and services available in the areaand iden fy gaps in availability. Hotels should considercrea ng alliances throughout the IHG brand to furtherleverage in uence.

Exis ng HotelsCurrent and future service and supply contracts should bereviewed and revised for sustainable business prac cesas they are renewed. Purchases for maintenance andrenova ons should be massed to increase producttransforma on poten al

Advantages:Requiring partners to review their prac ces will increasequality checks and accountability; Creates posi vemarket change in some underserved areas; Standardspeci ca ons increase product/service selec ons andreduce cost/need for customisa on.

Disadvantages:Product and service availability may be limited in someareas and may increase lead mes; Increased learningcurve may increase costs; Requires more e ort/inputfrom owners.

References:IHG Procurement Policy

The IHG business code of conduct and suppor ngpolicies on Merlin

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-02, G-04, P-01

O-07Sustainable Terms and Conditions with Business Partners


Credited Actions

1 Sustainable Terms and Condi ons forBusiness PartnersCreate sample language to include incontracts, review contracts & documentsfor opportuni es to include sustainablemeasures

1 Encourage Product Innova onImplement policy of collabora ngwith manufacturers to develop moresustainable product

1 Cost/E ciency Op misa on BundleSustainable product purchases for costand quality control




Waste

Water

Carbon


Minor Major

O-08Supporting Communities



1 IHG HR Human Rights TrainingThree sta including GM shall havereviewed the HR policy online

Credited Actions

1 Support Community/CulturalPreserva on ProjectsDevelop & implement plan

1 Par cipate in Local Career TrainingProgramDevelop & implement plan

1 Encourage Investment in Local EconomyDevelop & implement plan


Narrative:

The local culture and communi es that de ne ades na on are o en one of a hospitality establishment’sgreatest assets. Hospitality establishments should set aposi ve example to their communi es by not par cipa ngin unlawful exploita on of labour, women or children.Sta should receive training on how to recognise andresolve these sensi ve situa ons.

Giving back to the area’s community through in-kinddona ons and volunteer programs will enhance theestablishment’s reputa on and encourage a posi verela onship with local residents. Programs should bedeveloped that support the economic vitality of the areawhile maintaining its unique character and diversity.Local services and labour should be used where everpossible and trained to be er prepare them for careeradvancement.

Considerations:

New HotelsContractors selected should support fair labour prac cesand agree to meet minimum safety and wage standardsfor all workers. Project may be able to extend the scopeof construc on to strengthen infrastructure in nearby,underserved areas.

Exis ng HotelsSta should be trained to properly address fair labourand exploita on issues. Cultural preserva on projectscan be supported through corporate dona ons or stavolunteer drives. Local workforce enhancement shouldbe considered when developing employment andtraining strategies. Consider o ering conference roomsfor training/educa on opportuni es for communitymembers during o -seasons.

Advantages:Enhances brand image; Posi ve marke ng tool; Enhancesdes na on loca ons and economies.

Disadvantages:None.

References:Interna onal Tourism Partnershipwww.tourismpartnership.org/Publica ons/EMH.html

IHG Winning Waysh p://ihgpal.com/ihgwinningways.htm

Interna onal Business Leaders Forum: Youth CareerIni a vewww.youthcareerini a ve.org

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-02, O-03

http://www.tourismpartnership.org/Publica



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

O-09On-site Hazard/Environmental Impact Analysis



1 Hazardous Material AuditAudit all chemicals used at the hotelfacility and current disposal procedures

1 Appropriate Segrega on, Storage andDisposal of Hazardous MaterialsProvide appropriate and segregatedstorage for hazardous materials, Use ahazardous waste materials contractor todispose of hazardous waste.


Narrative:

A hazardous waste audit tracks the amount of hazardouswaste generated, increases the safety of personnel andensures the Hotel’s compliance with environmentalregula ons. A manifest sheet describes the types ofhazardous waste located at the facility.

The hazardous chemicals must be labelled and storedin areas separa ng corrosive, ammable and acidicsubstances. Containers should be properly sealed andprevent of any releases. Material Safety Data Sheets(MSDS) should be available for any hazardous substancelocated in the vicinity of the chemicals. An appropriatecollec on company, hauler and disposal facility mustbe proposed with chain of custody form included. Landdisposal of hazardous chemicals should be prohibited.

Considerations:

New HotelsAny paints, paint thinners, oils, cleaning products(excluding “green” cleaning products, ba eries,pes cides, herbicides, fungicides, uorescent lights, lightballasts and anything else considered hazardous shouldbe considered hazardous waste and properly stored.

Exis ng HotelsAny chemicals stored and/or used should be properlylabelled and documented. See New Hotels.

Advantages:Reduce expenses associated with storage, pickup anddisposal of hazardous waste; Reduce possibility ofaccident.

Disadvantages:Costs of disposing/recycling hazardous waste isexpensive.

References:US EPA: Reducing Risk from Wastewww.epa.gov/epawaste/inforesources/pubs/trifold.pdf

ECHA website - European Chemicals Agencyh p://echa.europa.eu/

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-04, W-08, P-01, P-02

http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/inforesources/pubs/trifold.pdf


E-01 O&M Best Management Prac ces (BMPs)


E-03 Energy Performance Benchmarking

E-04 Building Energy System Commissioning

E-05 Building Management System (BMS)

E-06 Guest Room Master Switching


E-08 Hot Water Contribu on to Energy Reduc on

E-09 Energy E cient Ligh ng

E-10 Ligh ng System Controls

E-11 Reduce Light Pollu on

E-12 Low Energy Systems

Electrical consump on is one of the most costlyaspects of hotel management from both a nancialand environmental standpoint. With careful design,it is possible to minimise this load without diminishingthe well being of guests and sta . This can be achievedthrough the use of:

• E cient ligh ng design

• Energy saving products

• On-site power genera on

• E ec ve energy controls and management

Coordinated electrical design should be pursued forhotels. Use of energy e cient products, ligh ng controlsystems, dayligh ng, and renewable energy can allcontribute. The building should be commissioned andon-site power genera on should be researched to see ifit is applicable to the project. Good electrical and ligh ngprac ces can save money, provide a more comfortableenvironment for guests, and reduce carbon emissions.

Energy E-01 to E-12



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Adopt IHG Energy BMPs Document

1 Develop Sequence of Opera ons

1 Develop Building Opera ng Plan

1 Develop Systems Narra ve

1 Preventa ve MaintenanceComplete and document quarterly QCpreventa ve maintenance inspec on


LEED® EAp1

E-01O&M Best Management Practices (BMPs)

Narrative:

The energy e ciency of a building is dependant notonly on the various mechanical and electrical systemsthat are in place, but how these systems are used bythe occupants. Improving building systems opera ons iso en a fast, low-cost way to signi cantly reduce energyconsump on. Development of a sequence of opera onsand building opera ng plan forces hotel operators todescribe and understand how various systems work andinteract. Combined with a preventa ve maintenanceprogram, this ensures than systems are opera ng theway they were designed to and allows poten al problemsand ine ciencies to be iden ed and corrected.

IHG’s Energy Best Management Prac ces (BMPs)Document contains a comprehensive list of strategies forimproving opera onal energy e ciency.

Considerations:

New HotelsA sequence of opera ons and building opera ng planare developed during construc on documenta on, andshould be stored and understood by hotel management.The preventa ve maintenance program should beadopted as soon as the hotel is occupied.

Exis ng HotelsIf the hotel does not have a sequence of opera ons,building opera ng plan, or systems narra ve, these canbe dra ed using the templates below.

Advantages:Poten ally large energy savings for li le capitalinvestment; Improved understanding of the buildingsystems can improve condi ons for workers and guests;Preventa ve maintenance reduces cost and down meassociated with the failure of mechanical and electricalequipment.

Disadvantages:Development of new plans is me intensive and mayrequire training or assistance from an engineer.

References:IHG Energy BMPs Document

Sample Sequence of Opera ons Document

Sample Building Opera ng Plan

Sample Systems Narra ve

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-04



Waste

WaterCarbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Narrative:

Metering equipment and other consump onmeasurement procedures should be used to quan fysystem performance and energy. Hotels shall be requiredto keep accurate documented records and measurementsof all energy consump on.

The metering procedures also enable veri ca on of theperformance of credited ac ons over me to ensuresavings are maintained. Results can be used to tunebuilding systems for improved con nuous performanceand to assist in energy use evalua on for future hotels.Sites can be compared against each other to iden fy thee ec veness of credited ac ons implemented at onehotel versus another.

Sub-metering can be installed for ligh ng, boilers, steam,gas, power, water piping and other u li es.

Considerations:New HotelsThe hotel owner needs to decide what to do with themetering data before installa on. A meter at the sourcelevel (a meter for the en re building from the u lity)should always be installed. Feedback on energy andwater usage should be provided through the Hotel’sGreen Engage program. Meters should be installed for alife me above 20 years.

Exis ng HotelsIn exis ng hotels, iden fying and targe ng areas of highconsump on and greatest poten al for energy savingswill reduce costs of a new metering system. Exis ngmeters shall be regularly checked to ensure calibra onwithin manufacturer’s tolerances and intervals. Thisdata shall be entered into an online monitoring andcalcula on tool via Green Measure which shall produceoutputs that allow the hotel to assess its performanceagainst previous years and compare performance with

other hotels. Hotels shall be required to keep accuratedocumented records and measurements of all energyconsump on for a minimum of ve years for veri ca onof past online entries.

All installed meters must be calibrated to manufacturer’srequirements and be included as part of a documentedequipment maintenance schedule. Other fuelmeasurement procedures such as dips ck measurementfrom fuel oil tanks should have a brief method statementdescribing how values (e.g. volumes) are calculated andthe proposed program of intervals between readings.

Advantages:Long term energy and water savings; Opera ons andmaintenance trouble shoo ng; Iden fy problemsbefore failure and down me; Provides data source fordecision making; Iden fy peak shaving opportuni es;Enables performance contrac ng; Measurement andveri ca on.

Disadvantages:Added capital cost; Time required for record keepingand data entry. Requires advanced training or outsidecontracts for data interpreta on if feeding back to acentral system.

References:Interna onal Performance Measurement & Veri ca onProtocol (IPMVP) Volume III: Concepts and Op ons forDetermining Energy Savings in New Construc on, April,2003

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-03, E-05, W-02, G-01



1 Meter Whole Building Energy UseInstall meters for all energy u li esand ensure all meters are calibrated tomanufacturer’s recommenda ons

1 Enrol In Green MeasureBegin uploading monthly u lity data toGreen Measure and keep documenta onrecords of all fuel bills, measurementcalcula ons and deliveries.

1 Par cipate in Green MeasureUpload a minimum of 12 months ofu lity data to Green Measure and keepdocumenta on records of all fuel bills,measurement calcula ons and deliveries

Credited Actions

1 Provide Sub-Meters for each Zone

1 Provide Sub-Meters on 10% Sample ofIndividual Zones

1 Provide Sub-Meters on 20% Sample ofIndividual Zones


LEED® EAp2, EAc1 & EAc3.2

E-02Energy Metering and Sub-Metering


Narrative:Hotel energy management is about tracking energyperformance and iden fying opportuni es forimprovement. This relates not only to past performancebut also how current performance compares with otherbuildings of a similar type. A concise and standardizedsystem of energy monitoring and performance evalua onis important to allow this to happen.

Many of the systems designed into a project o er asigni cant return on investment; however, this canonly be ensured if the systems are being monitored foracceptable performance. Environmental targets shouldbe clearly detailed in an Environmental ManagementPlan. Correc ve ac ons should be developed for sta tofollow when targets or benchmarks are not met.

Projects should be metered to allow for isola on ofsystem performance. Facili es managers should developmonitoring plans that include performance comparisonsagainst projected savings and/or similar building typedatabases. When goals are not met, measurable shortand long term targets for improvement should beestablished.

There are many areas with environmental standards wellbelow others. If developing projects in one of these areasmanagers should work with IHG and the local communityto improve environmental standards in the local area.

Considerations:New HotelsSet performance benchmarks during design usingexpecta ons from energy models or building databases.This may be done by using energy models to calculatepredicted energy performance and then comparingthis with a baseline building’s energy performance tothe latest version of ASHRAE 90.1 (2007) Appendix Gstandards. The energy improvement of the proposedbuilding against the baseline building can be used tocalculate achievement of minimum performance targets.

Upon comple on and occupancy, monitoring plans andenrolment in the Green Measure online system will helpdetermine if projects are mee ng these goals. Designingbuilding management systems or system sub-meteringwill assist data collec on.

Exis ng HotelsMetered and measured energy consump on data shallbe entered into Green Measure, which benchmarks thisdata against hotels across the IHG por olio and calculateswhether the hotel meets Green Engage/Solu ons’sminimum performance requirements. It also allowsmanagers to track performance against a number ofother parameters including historical trends and energyconsumed per guest night.

Hotels that do not meet the minimum requirements mayconsider implemen ng other Green Engage/Solu onsac on groups to improve performance. These mayinclude capital improvements outlined in the Energy,Building Envelope or Mechanical sec ons, or opera onalimprovements found in the Opera ons & Processessec on.

Advantages:Decreased opera ng costs; Increased performance/longevity of equipment.

Disadvantages:Increased costs of metering equipment.

References:IHG CSR in a boxh p://eetdnews.lbl.gov/nl10/IPMVP.html


E-03Energy Performance BenchmarkingIHG Green Engage/Solutions NH EH


1 Meet Minimum Energy PerformanceRequirementsMeet minimum requirement as calculatedusing online tool through Green Measureor through energy modelling at designstage.

Credited Actions

1 Collec on and Use of Meter Informa onAgainst Na onal Databases and OtherHotelsResearch relevant databases, comparebuilding performance annually andpresent results to IHG.

1 Exceed Minimum Energy PerformanceRequirementsExceed minimum requirement ascalculated using online tool throughGreen Measure or through energymodelling at design stage for new hotels.


LEED® EAp2 & EAc1


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Commissioning PlanAdopt plan for commissioning, retro-commissioning or recommissioning

Credited Actions1 Conduct Energy Audit

Have a third party conduct an energyaudit of the hotel, including a siteassessment and energy breakdown.

1 Perform CommissioningPerform commissioning of new hotel priorto occupancy, and of exis ng hotel atleast every three years.

1 Start Commissioning in Mid-Design Phase


Narrative:

The commissioning process is a series of steps thatoccur during both the design and construc on life of abuilding and even following occupancy. The aim of thisprocess is to ensure rstly that buildings are designedin a way that enables them to be commissionable andmeet the building owner’s requirements for the building.Addi onally, commissioning ensures that a buildingsenergy consuming systems are purchased, installed andare opera ng as the designer intended them to. Thecommissioning process can have a signi cant impact onthe whole life energy of a building. The embodied energyassociated with construc ng a building are small whencompared with the opera onal energy and embodiedenergy required to replace, upgrade and modify interiorsof buildings throughout their life. This is par cularlyrelevant to hotel resorts because they undergo re- tsapproximately every eight years, due to con nued wearon the building interiors.

Implemen ng commissioning steps into the early stagesof a hotel life can iden fy and prevent energy waste overthe remainder of its life.

Considerations:New HotelsConsidera on should be given to the ming ofcommissioning in construc on. Commissioning realisesgreatest savings and catches the most system de ciencieswhen the process is started early. NOTE: The LEED ra ngsystem has speci c requirements for commissioningwhich are me sensi ve star ng in mid design.

Exis ng HotelsRetro-commissioning can provide immense savings forexis ng facili es whether construc on, renova ons orupgrades are scheduled. Once retro-commissioning hasbeen complete, the resul ng documenta on can be usedannually to re-check systems performance and con nuedsavings and e cient opera on.

Advantages:Energy savings or preventa ve energy losses; Reduc onin maintenance or replacement costs; Baselinedocumenta on for building opera on.

Disadvantages:Addi onal cost for third party commissioning agent;Percep on the commissioning is di cult and hard toschedule.

References:Building Commissioning Associa onwww.bcxa.org

ASHRAE Procedures for Commercial Building EnergyAuditswww.ashrae.org


E-04Building Energy System Commissioning

http://www.bcxa.org/

http://www.ashrae.org/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Narrative:

Building Management Systems (BMSs) are commonlyemployed in modern hotels to allow centralizedmonitoring and control of the building’s mechanical andelectrical systems. Sensors and actuators are incorporatedinto the ven la on, ligh ng, power, hea ng, cooling, hotwater, security and re systems and linked to a centralizedcomputer. From there, so ware programs are used tomonitor and control the systems according to the desiredparameters . This Direct Digital Control (DDC) technologyenables building management systems to co-operate onprogrammed schedules and to use weather condi ons topredica vely maintain desired thermal comfort, ligh ng,and services ( re, security, etc) while minimising energyconsump on. DDC can alert sta to faulty equipmentor out-of-tolerance condi ons with the use of systemalarms allowing maintenance work to be carried outbefore any serious guest disrup on or remedial costsoccur. Alterna vely, stand alone controllers have limitedinterconnec vity and control exibility.

Considerations:New HotelsA system can be installed in hotels to recognise whenguests leave their room and save energy during these mes. A central monitoring system can be installed

as stand alone on a room by room basis, but are moree ec ve, par cularly for larger hotels, when theyreport back to a central loca on. This can enable stato monitor the status of rooms including occupancy,energy consump on, maintenance issues (such as faultyequipment), security issues and can be used to generatetrends of room usage sta s cs that can be useful in futureplanning for housekeeping, maintenance and other sta .Automated adjustments could be made for hea ng andcooling when guests check in and out.

Exis ng HotelsWireless BMS systems are available for installa on onselec ve equipment at exis ng facili es. These systemsare expensive to install but exible.

Advantages:Can save a signi cant amount of energy (greater than20%); Allows for trending and long term monitoring ofhotel use which can assist in planning for maintenance,future expansion and reducing costs; Maintains op mumenvironment for guests; Wireless systems can be used in exible conference rooms/exhibi on halls.

Disadvantages:Cost premium depending on the level of sophis ca on;Maintenance sta may be hesitant to adopt system;Mo on sensors may be perceived as invasive by guests.

References:Inncom Interna onalwww.inncom.com

DBS Lodging Technologies, LLC: Entergizewww.entergize.net/index.php

Minxon Hotel Technology Inc.www.minxon.us

LTC Enterprises, LLCwww.lodgingtechnology.com

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-02, E-06, M-10

E-05Building Management System (BMS)


Level 2 Prerequisites1 Install Central Building Management

System (BMS)

1 Monitor BMSProduce quarterly reports to ensure BMSand connected systems are performingcorrectly

Credited Actions1 Install Central Building Management

System (BMS)

1 Monitor BMSProduce quarterly reports to ensure BMSand connected systems are performingcorrectly

1 Connect Primary Meters to BMS

1 Connect Sub-Meters to BMS


http://www.inncom.com/

http://www.entergize.net/index.php

http://www.minxon.us/

http://www.lodgingtechnology.com/



Waste

Water

Carbon


Minor Major

Narrative:

Popular in Europe and Asia, these systems are nowstar ng to appear in the US market. The systems recognisewhen guests leave their rooms and save energy duringthese mes. The system can detect “Occupied” and“Unoccupied” modes by using either mo on detectors ora key card holder at the door that the guests leave theirkeys in when they are in the room.

The following sequence of opera ons could be applicabledependant on how advanced the installed guest roomcontrol system is.

• Guest removes card and exits room or is no longerdetected by mo on sensor.

• A er a prede ned period (eg 1 minute), room goes into“Unoccupied” mode.

• Electrical outlets power down with the excep on ofone or two designated for charging guest laptops, mobilephones, etc.

• Ligh ng turns o which saves electrical power and alsoreduces unwanted heat in the room.

• Curtains could close to cut out solar gains hea ng upthe room.

• HVAC either turns o or sets back the temperaturecontrol of the room. Outdoor air temperature sensorscan be used to help make this decision.

• Outside air ow to the room and exhaust air ow fromthe bathroom can damper down.

• No ca on of empty room goes back to centralsystem.

• Display outside of door can no fy housekeeping stathat the room is now unoccupied if desired.

• When guest returns, the opposite happens.

These systems can be installed as stand alone on a roomby room basis, but are more e ec ve, par cularly forlarger hotels, when they report back to a central loca on.This can enable sta to monitor the status of roomsincluding occupancy, energy consump on, maintenanceissues (such as faulty equipment), and can be used togenerate trends of room usage sta s cs that can beuseful in future planning for housekeeping, maintenanceand other sta .

Considerations:New HotelsThe e ciency of the system is maximised by linking it toligh ng, electrical, HVAC and metering systems.

Exis ng HotelsAs this links with so many systems, it is most easilyimplemented early in the design phase and may bedi cult to retro t to exis ng hotels.

Advantages:Can save a signi cant amount of energy – some sourcessay this could be in excess of 20%; Allows for trendingand long term monitoring of hotel use which can assist inplanning for maintenance and reducing costs.

Disadvantages:Cost premium – somewhere in the order of $400 perroom depending on the level of sophis ca on; Mo onsensors may be perceived as invasive by guests.

E-06Guest Room Master Switching



1 Provide Guest Room Master SwitchingFor at least 20% of guest rooms

Credited Actions

1 Provide Guest Room Master SwitchingFor at least 20% of guest rooms

1 Connect Guest Room Master Switchingto BMS

1 Trend and Report Informa on fromSystem Monthly


References:Inncom Interna onalwww.inncom.com

DBS Lodging Technologieswww.entergize.net/index.php


Other Relevant Action Groups:E-05, E-10






Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Energy E cient AppliancesAll appliances outside of guest rooms(dishwashers, dryers, etc) shall be EnergyStar, EU Energy Label A, or the equivalentlocal standard, rated

1 Energy E cient TelevisionsAll televisions shall be Energy Star, EUEnergy Label A, or the equivalent localstandard, rated

1 Energy E cient Guest Room RefrigeratorsAll guest room refrigerators shall beEnergy Star, EU Energy Label A, or theequivalent local standard, rated


Narrative:

Energy e cient products use less energy and water, savemoney, and help protect the environment. The US EPAcer es energy e cient products with the Energy Starlabel. Products in more than 50 categories are eligible forEnergy Star, the full list is at EPA’s Energy Star website.Other regions use their own standard for energy e cientproducts including Australia and Europe.

Considerations:New Hotels

For the hotel, energy e cient dishwashers, clotheswashers, dryers, ice machines, refrigerators, watercoolers, freezers, ovens, computers, copier/fax machines,vending machines, exit signs, roof products, furnaces,heat pumps, boilers and central air condi oners could beinstalled.

Guest rooms could include energy e cient clock radios,ceiling fans, televisions, DVD players, refrigerators, androom air condi oners.

Exis ng HotelsMany of the exis ng appliances and products throughoutthe hotel could be upgraded to energy e cient appliancesand products.

Advantages:

Reduces energy cost and natural resources; Increasesguest sa sfac on; Can save 5-15% depending on whatappliances are used and the program of the hotel.

Disadvantages:In some markets availability may not be able to meetdemand, this could have schedule impacts.

References:US EPA: Energy Starwww.energystar.gov

US EPA: Energy Star Interna onal Partnerswww.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=partners.intl_implementa on

Europe's Energy Portal: EU Energy Labelh p://www.energy.eu/focus/energy-label.php

Other Relevant Action Groups:W-04

E-07Energy Ef icient Appliances

http://www.energystar.gov/

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=partners.intl_



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Narrative:

Pipe insula on reduces heat loss or heat gain in pipes.

Solar thermal captures the suns energy for use in spacehea ng and domes c hot water. Low, medium and hightemperature systems can be selected to meet the end-use requirements. Boilers should operate with electroniccontrol systems monitoring oxygen to minimise excessair. Wherever possible traps shall be purchased withinthe steam-using devices, with all other traps and drip legtraps provided as necessary in the piping design. Watercooling chillers reject heat (compressor heat) through itscooling towers. The heat could be recovered and usedfor domes c hot water, which could poten ally leadto energy savings. Two types of chiller heat recoveryunits are condensers (single and split) and templi ers.A single condenser heat recovery chiller is selectedto operate exi ng contender water at 105°F - 110°F.Split loop units use one loop to reject heat to a coolingtower, while the other loop is used to collect heat for thebuilding. Templi ers can recover low grade heat from thecondenser (centrifugal or reciproca ng compressor) andconvert it to high grade heat (140°F - 160°F).

Considerations:New HotelsUse insula on wrap, breglass insula on strips, orpolyethylene or neoprene foam pipe sleeves aroundpipes. Blowdown heat recovery systems should beconsidered to improve boiler e ciency. Solar collectorsshould be south facing and inclined to the azimuthangle of the site. O en these sigh ng condi ons canbe ful lled in a loca on that is also prominently visible.Heat recovery is recommended for buildings (especiallyhotels) with balanced cooling and heat loads (24 hour hotwater buildings, total installed heat rejec on capacity ofwater-cooled systems exceeds 6 million Btu/h and designservice water hea ng load exceeds 1 million Btu/h).

Exis ng HotelsReplacing or upgrading an exis ng boiler is a cost e ec vemeasure to reducing water hea ng costs. Repairing leaks,installa on of blowdown heat recovery systems andinsula ng the boilers are other e ciency improvementmeasures. Heat recovery units could be retro ed.

Advantages:Pipe insula on signi cantly reduces hea ng and coolingcosts; E cient boiler controls can reduce both energyand water consump on; Solar thermal is an a ordable,e cient renewable technology which requires minimalmaintenance and can replace or reduce the need forboiler or water heaters; Chiller heat recovery saveshea ng energy and can be ed onto exis ng watercooled chiller plants.

Disadvantages:

Solar thermal requires roof area and has a cost premium(incen ves are usually available); Chiller heat recoveryincreases complexity in chiller and increases cost; Whenrecovering heat, the chiller’s performance may decrease.

References:Thermomaxwww.thermomax-group.com

Ronald E. Jarnagin: Heat Recovery From Air Condi oningUnitswww.p2pays.org/ref%5C08/07362.pdf

ASHRAE: Chiller Heat Recovery Guidewww.ashrae.org

Other Relevant Action Groups:M-08, W-04

E-08Hot Water Contribution to Energy Reduction

IHG Green Engage/Solu ons NH EH


1 Pipe Insula onInsulate all hot and chilled water pipes

Level 2 Prerequisite1 Pipe Insula on

Insulate all hot and chilled water pipes

1 Boiler E ciencyInstall an electronic control system

Credited Actions1 Boiler E ciency

Install an electronic control system

1 Solar ThermalA minimum of 20% of hot water demandfrom solar thermal unit

1 Chiller Heat Recovery for Domes c HotWater UseInstall chiller heat recovery units fordomes c water if applicable


http://www.thermomax-group.com/

http://www.p2pays.org/ref%5C08/07362.pdf




Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Narrative:

Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFLs) are about 60%more e cient than the standard incandescent bulbsand available in a variety of shapes, sizes, and colourtemperatures to suit di erent applica ons. The overallquality of CFLs has also increased: however, special careshould be taken when selec ng CFLs as the quality andperformance varies. Like linear uorescent, CFLs haveballasts and while they are predominantly non-dimmableballasts, dimmable CFLs are also available. Op mised xture design, u lising a good balance of upligh ng

and downligh ng, is important to eliminate glare andenhance visual acuity.

A smaller version of the compact uorescent, cold cathodeCFLs are becoming more popular for accent ligh ng andelevator ligh ng in many hotels. They do not work wellfor general illumina on, but have very low e cacies andcome in a number of di erent colours.

There are many di erent incen ves for CFLs in newand retro t applica ons and they vary widely by state.Federal incen ves and tax credits are also available. Formore informa on visit: www.dsireusa.org.

LEDs boast e ciencies exceeding those of CFLs, howeverat present are not su ciently a ordable or exible inuse to jus fy general use. However, they are suitable ininstances such as exit ligh ng and reading lamps.

Considerations:New HotelsThe low capital costs and energy savings produced byCFLs jus fy their installa on for all general ligh ng. LEDsshould be considered for exit signs and other specialiseduses. Individual task ligh ng, either CFLs or LEDs, can alsobe used to supplement the ambient ligh ng. Ligh ng

power densi es can be further reduced through e cient xture design and u lisa on of natural ligh ng.

Exis ng HotelsAll incandescent bulbs should be replaced with CFLs.Fixture design should be reevaluated in all refurbishmentsto maximise the overall ligh ng e ciency.

Advantages:Fluorescent lights have longer life than standardincandescent bulbs (approximately 15,000 hours);Available in all sorts of shapes, sizes, colour temperatures,and dimming applica ons; Low capital costs and veryshort payback (typically less than 2 years); Op mised xture design can improve indoor environmental quality.

Disadvantages:Higher costs than standard incandescent and very highcost for dimming applica ons; CFLs contain mercury, ahazardous material.

References:US EPA: Energy Starwww.energystar.gov

The General Electric Companywww.geligh ng.com

The Illumina ng Engineering Societywww.iesna.org


E-09Energy Ef icient Lighting



1 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in GuestRooms

1 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps inCircula on Spaces

1 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Backof House Spaces


1 Reduce Ligh ng Power Densi esMaximum 9 W/m2 in Guest Rooms

Credited Actions

1 Reduce Ligh ng Power Densi esMaximum 9 W/m2 in Guest Rooms

1 High Performance Ligh ngUse LED or other high performance light ngs in guest rooms.


http://www.dsireusa.org./

http://www.energystar.gov/

http://www.iesna.org/



Waste

WaterCarbon


Minor Major



1 Occupancy Sensors in Corridors forDecora ve FixturesProvide occupancy sensors for ligh ngcontrol in all corridors

1 Occupancy Sensors in O cesProvide occupancy sensors for ligh ngcontrol in all o ces


1 Occupancy Sensors in O cesProvide occupancy sensors for ligh ngcontrol in all o ces

Credited Actions

1 Install Daylight Sensors in all PublicSpaces

1 Connect Daylight Sensors toGuest Room Master SwitchingInclude a daylight override in masterswitching system

1 Allow Daylight Sensors to ControlPerimeter Shades in Public Spaces

1 Occupancy Sensors in Mul -OccupancySpacesProvide occupancy sensors for ligh ngcontrol in all mul - occupancy spaces


Narrative:

Hotels typically waste signi cant energy unnecessarilyligh ng areas that either are already receiving adequatenatural daylight or are unoccupied. The installa onof daylight occupancy and sensors and controls caneliminate this wastage and reduce hotel opera ng costs.

Dayligh ng controls should be integrated with a buildingenvelope design that maximises dayligh ng. Thesesystems are used to reduce ar cial ligh ng levels whenadequate dayligh ng is available, through either on-oor dimming control of perimeter lights.

Occupancy sensors can also be used to automa cally shuto ligh ng to unoccupied spaces. These controls arepar cularly e ec ve for hotels, which typically have highspace occupancy diversity as people travel between theirrooms and various ac vi es. Occupancy sensors can beused in conjunc on with manual overrides to provide forhigh occupant control while maintaining a high degree ofenergy e ciency

Considerations:New HotelsThe use of photosensors in perimeter public spaceswill automa cally adjust light levels and reduce energyconsump on, but dimming controls and ballasts aremore expensive and will o en double the cost of theballast compared to a conven onal system. Simple on-o systems typically have a be er rate of return thandimming systems.

Layout and coverage pa ern are cri cal to properoccupancy control system func onality. A combina on ofscheduling devices and occupancy sensors can be usedto e ec vely limit the number of lights on a er regularlyoccupied hours in o ce and mul -occupancy spaces.

Types of occupancy sensors available including infrared,ultra-sonic, radio frequency, and dual technologies.

Exis ng HotelsDaylight controls are best used on the perimeter of ahotel near windows. Both dayligh ng and occupancycontrols may be incorporated into exis ng systems butcan have a higher cost and increase system complexity.

Advantages:Signi cant energy savings by reducing ar cial ligh nglevels, o en with a high return on investment; Moreuniform illumina on level; Reduced cooling load due toar cial light reduc on.

Disadvantages:Require proper placement of sensors and maintenance ofsystems to ensure lights do not switch o when daylightlevels are too low or when a space is occupied.

References:The Illumina ng Engineering Societywww.iesna.org

Lutron Electronics Company, Incwww.lutron.com

Legrand: Wa Stopperwww.wa stopper.com

Other Relevant Action Groups:

E-09, E-11, B-01, M-10

E-10Lighting Systems Controls


http://www.lutron.com/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Timing Controls on all Up and FacadeLigh ngShut the up and facade lights o betweenthe hours of 2am and 6am

Credited Actions

1 Timing Controls on all Up and FacadeLigh ngShut the up and facade lights o betweenthe hours of 2am and 6am

1 Install Full Cut-O Luminaires


Narrative:

Light pollu on is the result of excessive and ine cientuse of ar cial ligh ng. Forms of pollu on include lighttrespass, over-illumina on, glare, and sky glow. One ofthe main causes of light pollu on is over-illumina on.For this reason, exterior illuminance levels should bedesigned to the IESNA standards. Up to 30-40% ofexterior light might be cast into the night sky or o yoursite boundary.

The selec on of full cut o xtures prevents light beingunnecessarily emi ed above the horizontal plane. Thiselimina on of direct glare will improve site security byimproving visual acuity. In addi on to proper illuminanceligh ng controls should be u lised to ensure interiorligh ng is not on during unoccupied hours, allowing lightfrom windows to trespass beyond the building’s site.

Proper design could allow for the use of lower wa agelamps to produce the desired illumina on level.

Considerations:New HotelsDesign teams should consider the reduc on of thedensity of facade ligh ng, “Up” ligh ng landscaping andexcessive parking ligh ng. A simple strategy is to haveuse low intensity light sources and closer intervals tomost accurately direct the illumina on in the requiredarea. This strategy will both reduce the amount of energyconsumed for unnecessary light and reduce the amountof light trespass on to adjacent proper es

Exis ng HotelsThe removal and reloca on of permanent exteriorluminaires can be costly and should deferred un l acomplete renova on is scheduled. Operators shouldhowever, consider a power density calcula on to iden fy

opportuni es for energy savings and the reduc onof light trespass. For most exis ng hotels, signi cantsavings can be found in relamping xtures from a 400Wto a 250W High Pressure Sodium (PS) or Metal Halide(MH) with a ec ng safety or security.

Advantages:Energy savings from elimina ng wasted light that doesnot serve the useful purpose intended.

Disadvantages:A common misconcep on is that if the light source is notvisible, the area is not bright enough for the intendedtask. Ligh ng design must balance measured results withpercep on.

References:The Illumina ng Engineering Society of North Americawww.iesna.org


E-11Reduce Light Pollution



Narrative:Alterna ve/renewable energy is non-tradi onal fuelsources (tradi onal fuel = coal, oil, etc) that do not useup natural resources. Tradi onal alterna ve fuels for abuilding are wind, solar, biomass and geothermal.

Solar power uses the sun’s direct and di use radia onto ac vely generate electricity by means of photovoltaic(PV) cell. The three main types of PV cells currently inuse are Monocrystalline, (presently most e cient),polycrystalline and thin lm (cheapest but least e cient).PVs have been developed to integrate into buildings(BIPV) and some thin lm PVs are translucent and couldact as windows, while also genera ng energy.

Wind power can be generated using small horizontal orver cal axis wind turbines, which can be integrated intothe hotel structure or located elsewhere on the site.Wind turbines are only feasible on sites with signi cantwind resources, and operate at much lower e ciency inurban se ngs.

A geothermal power system o ers the opportunity touse the Earth’s natural thermal energy, stored in hot ormolten rock several kilometres below the surface, togenerate heat and or electricity.

Cogenera on (cogen) is the simultaneous produc onof heat and power from one fuel source. Electricity isgenerated by an engine spinning a generator. Wasteheat from the engine is captured and used to heat water.Depending on the system u lised, the e ciency ofgenera on may range from 24% to 40%. A er waste heat

is captured, the total e ciency of the process may rangefrom 50% to 70% or greater. The goal of cogenera on isto produce electricity and heat at a lower cost per unitand carbon footprint than can be achieved by purchasingelectricity and natural gas respec vely.

Biomass encompasses an array of fuels including,plant ma er, organic waste and sewage. Unlike manyrenewable energy technologies, biomass energy can bestored and consumed upon demand. Biomass can beconverted to electricity and heat through cogenera on,anaerobic diges on, gasi ca on and pyrolysis.

A ground source heat pump (GSHP) system usesthe earth as a thermal ba ery to heat and/or coolthe building at considerably higher e ciency thanconven onal hea ng and cooling systems. A typicalGSHP consists of a series of buried pipe loops ac ng asa closed loop ground heat exchanger, connected to anumber of reversible heat pumps. When compared to aconven onal water-cooled refrigerant circuit, the groundloop performs the func on of the condenser loop andheat rejec on plant, but rejects heat from the building tothe ground rather than the atmosphere. Such a systemalso works in reverse in winter, taking the place of a boilerto absorb heat from the ground to heat the building.Incen ves for such systems are available in some areas.See: www.geoexchange.org/incen ves/incen ves

A thermal energy storage system is used to reduce abuilding’s peak air condi oning load. Chillers run duringo -peak hours to cool a storage tank of water or ice.During peak hours, part of the cooling demand is metby circula ng uid through the storage tank, reducing

E-12Low Energy Systemsthe electrical demand and required cooling capacity ofthe chiller. This can reduce the strain on the electricalgrid and can produce considerable savings under someelectric pricing structures, such as Time of Use rates.While higher chiller e ciencies can be achieved due tolower outdoor temperatures at night, any savings areusually o set by system ine ciencies especially in icestorage.

Considerations:

New HotelsAlterna ve energy feasibility is dependent on site loca on.For wind, anemometers should be installed at least a yearbefore construc on to test wind resources at the actualsite. Small horizontal axis turbines do not integrate wellwithin urban environments, however there are severaltypes of ver cal axis turbines that have been made andcan be mounted in parking lots, on roofs, or integratedin the façade. Solar is not as loca on dependant butpayback will be be er in areas with high solar radia onvalues. Geothermal power genera on is only appropriateon sites which have high levels of geothermal ac vity.

Cogenera on should be considered where there is asigni cant heat load access to natural gas or biomass.The primary use for cogen heat in a hotel is space hea ngand cooling. Hea ng can be achieved through hot watersystems such as variable air volume with reheat. Coolingcan u lise heat in an absorp on chiller. Viability of cogensystems is highly dependent on primary fuel costs and thecost of electricity from the local u lity grid. The ability touse all recovered heat to displace hea ng energy is alsovery important to the system economics.

GSHPs can be an e cient approach for providing hea ngand cooling for a larger building with a high cost ofelectricity. Considera on should be given to ensurehea ng and cooling demands are equal to within 20%,or the imbalance in heat ow will cause performance todegrade over me.

http://www.geoexchange.org/incen



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions1 On-Site Electricity Genera on

Install a system to generate electricityon-site, including solar, wind, geothermalor cogenera on.

1 BiomassUse biomass as the primary fuel sourcefor an on-site generator.

1 Low Energy TechnologiesInstall a low energy system includingground source heat pumps or thermalstorage.


Thermal storage tanks are rela vely inexpensive andcompact. This system is most e ec ve when there is ahigh peak cooling demand and low o -peak demand.This is not a typical hotel pa ern. The savings dependson the electricity pricing structure, but may be as highas 10%.

Exis ng HotelsSolar and wind power can be added to addi onal facili es.A geothermal system is costly and requires altera ons toexis ng electrical and mechanical systems.Cogen is not recommended for exis ng facili es withoutaccess to natural gas or biomass. If the exis ng boilersystems and layout of the hotel permits easy replacementthen cogen might be advantageous and reduce hea ngcosts.

Ground source heat pump systems are costly to install inexis ng hotels as excava on of a signi cant amount ofland is necessary. They may also make exis ng boilersand chillers redundant.

Some chillers can support the addi on of a water-basedthermal energy storage system, though there will beaddi onal space requirements, temperature issues, andworking uid issues.

Advantages:Renewable energy systems are a highly visible signs ofsustainability; Can reduce opera ng costs through energygenera on; May qualify for signi cant incen ves.

Biomass and cogen plants can be shut down duringperiods of low energy demand, producing a a erelectrical demand curve that can bene t u li es and leadto decreased rate structures; Can be used as a primarysource of energy during a power outage.

Ground source heat pumps can deliver good energysavings; Can eliminate the need for cooling towers;Rela vely low maintenance.

Thermal energy storage can lower capital costs due to

smaller sized chiller; Lower energy costs under some ratestructures.

Disadvantages:In most cases renewables do not generate a viablepayback scenario to make them economically feasible.

Biomass and cogen plants create a signi cant amount ofnoise and would require sound a enua on if placed inthe development district; Requires a reliable fuel source.

GSHPs can cost up to $1000 per ton of cooling and do notwork well in climates where the hea ng load does notbalance the cooling load.

Capital cost of thermal energy storage tank may o setany savings.

References:U.S. DOE: Energy E ciency and Renewable Energywww.eere.energy.gov

European Renewable Energy Councilwww.erec.org/facts-and- gures.html

DSIRE: Database of State Incen ves for RenewableEnergy (DSIRE)www.dsireusa.org

Cogenera on Technologieswww.cogenera on.net/terms.htm

Other Relevant Action Groups:None

E-12Low Energy Systems

http://www.eere.energy.gov/

http://www.erec.org/facts-and-

http://www.dsireusa.org/


The building envelope is used to maintain occupantcomfort and regulate indoor environmental quality. Theenvelope consists of roofs, walls, windows, doors and oors.

In general, the following a ributes should be consideredfor each climate zone:

AridMaterials with high thermal mass are favoured, alongwith external insula on. Concrete, masonry and adobeare all suitable materials. Adequate thermal mass willabsorb solar heat during the day and release the heatat night. Finishes with high re ec vity and wall shadingshould be used to reduce solar gains. Use plants andother devices for external shading.

Hot-HumidMaterials with low thermal mass are favoured. In somecases, masonry is used because of its durability. Highre ec vity materials are suitable. Use plants and otherdevices to shade the building.

TemperateMaterials and construc on vary for speci c climatecondi ons and hea ng/cooling strategy.

Cold-AlpineGenerally, a conven onally heated building should nothave high thermal mass, as this can increase the merequired to meet thermal comfort condi ons. Howeverif solar hea ng will be used, a high thermal mass canbe advantageous. Envelopes with low in ltra on andop mised insula on are very e ec ve for this climate.

B-01 Op mise Dayligh ng Design

B-02 Op mise Façade Design

B-03 Cool Roo ng Systems

B-04 Air In ltra on Reduc on Measures

B-05 Acous c Isola on

Building Envelope Action Groups B-01 to B-05


Narrative:Windows provide a visual connec on with the outdoors,natural light and solar hea ng. Op mising glazingmaterials and window design can have a signi cantimpact on increasing building energy performance.

Use of low-E coa ngs and double-paned windows canimprove glazing thermal performance. A Low-E coa ngis a metal lm, which reduces the emissivity of glass (orthe “E” in low-E), and thus the amount of heat that is lostor gained (transmission). Windows manufactured withLow-E coa ngs typically cost 10%–15% more than regularwindows, but reduce energy transmission through awindow by 30%–50%.

The size and orienta on of windows must also beconsidered. Typical window to wall ra os range from20% to 50% and should be op mised for loca on.

Shading strategies should be considered in the designprocess. Op mally designed shading will allow sunlightpenetra on during hea ng periods and block it duringcooling periods.

To maximise energy savings, op mised dayligh ng designshould be combined with photo sensors linked to thear cial ligh ng in the building. The generally acceptedgoal for daylight, which is de ned by the BRE and theUSGBC, is to design for 75% of regularly occupied spacesto achieve 25 footcandles (250 lux) of illumina on fromdaylight on the task plane.

Considerations:New HotelsLow-E, double glazed windows may be applied to an en rehotel or to speci c orienta ons. This is most bene cial inextreme climates and in guest rooms with large windows.The shading design will depend on climate, la tude andbuilding layout. Shade plan ng should be considered

Exis ng HotelsReplacement of exis ng windows should be consideredwhen remodelling exis ng hotels 30 years or older.Installa on of shading devices in exis ng hotels is costlyand generally only appropriate in refurbishments. Interiorshading such as curtains can be used in other cases

Advantages:Improved comfort and indoor environmental quality dueto reduced solar heat gain and greater access to naturallight; Reduces hea ng and cooling equipment sizes alongwith running costs.

Disadvantages:Higher cost premium; Reduces useful winter solar heat.Shading may be challenging to incorporate into somearchitectural schemes.

References:AGT: Guide to Glazing, Finish Op ons and Performancewww.agtglazing.com/technical-binder/guide/index.php

Savannah Trims: Shu er Studiowww.shu erstudio.com

Illumina ng Engineering Society of North Americawww.iesna.org

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-10, B-02, M-02

B-01Optimise Daylighting Design


Waste

WaterCarbon


Minor Major



1 Low-E GlazingMaximum glazing assembly U-value of0.30


1 Op mised Window to Wall Ra oVision glass not to exceed 40%OR Provide external ver cal shadingthat extends 1.2 metres (4 feet)beyond exterior wall at each oorOR Provide energy model demonstra ngglass performance is equivalent to glazingrequirements outlined in appendix

Credited Actions

1 Low-E GlazingMaximum glazing assembly U-value of0.30

1 High Performance GlazingInstalla on of double glazed argon orkrypton lled units in all guest rooms

1 Sunpath AnalysisAnalysis of hotel to iden fy shadingopportuni es

1 Shading DesignDesign shading for 4 orienta ons basedon analysis results

1 Shade Plan ngsPlan ng as required by analysis

1 Allow for Natural Light in Corridors25 footcandles of natural light in at least75% of corridor spaces


http://www.agtglazing.com/technical-binder/guide/index.php



Narrative:

The façade design of a building not only determines itsexternal appearance, but can also have a large impact onenergy consump on. E cient design is dependent on anumber of factors, including climate and the building’smechanical systems.

Through analysis of energy savings and costs, wallinsula on can be op mised for any building and climate.Generally more insula on is desirable in climateswith extreme temperatures: hot, cold, or both. Incold climates, insula on reduces hea ng costs. In hotclimates, it minimises air condi oning costs. In temperateclimates where natural ven la on is appropriate, toomuch insula on may increase energy costs. Therefore,op misa on of insula on should be performed on aclimate by climate basis.

Thermally broken façade details can also be used, typicallyin cold climates, to reduce heat ow. A piece of insula ngmaterial is used to separate interior and exterior details,for example aluminium spacers in glass panels, therebyreducing heat ow across the panel.

Considerations:New HotelsClimate must be considered when designing façades. Invery cold climates, well insulated façades with thermallybroken details are most appropriate. In hot, aridclimates, green façades should be considered. In eachcase, the building’s façade and mechanical systems mustbe considered together.

Exis ng HotelsRetro ng of a di erent façade system is only appropriateif a major refurbishment is being undertaken, and thebuilding is greater than 30 years old . Installa on of

insula on in exis ng buildings is also far less cost e ec vethan for new construc on.

Advantages:Decreases energy losses through the building envelope;Maintains comfortable interior wall surfaces foroccupants by reducing radiant temperatures; Usingappropriate insula on levels and applying vapourbarriers to the warm side of the insula on reduces thepoten al for moisture damage; Increasing insula on canreduce hea ng and cooling plant and equipment sizes;Green façades lter air, provide natural cooling and arevisually pleasing; Double façades can reduce buildinghea ng loads and improve air quality by introducingmore outside air.

Disadvantages:Increasing façade thermal performance above stringentenergy code requirements is only appropriate in someclimates and does not necessarily have a high return oninvestment; Innova ve facades have high installa oncosts and long payback periods; Double façades onlysuitable with par cular air condi oning systems.

References:Owens Corningwww.owenscorning.com

John Manvillewww.jm.com

Other Relevant Action Groups:B-01, B-03, B-04

B-02Optimise Façade Design


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Meet ASHRAE Recommenda ons forClimate Zone

Credited Actions1 Exceed ASHRAE Recommenda ons for

Climate ZoneExcept in temperate climates wherenatural ven la on is being used

1 Use Environmentally Preferable Insula ngMaterialsAll insula ng materials used must benon-ozone deple ng/recycled materials/rapidly renewable materials/IAQ sensi ve

1 Thermally Broken Façade DetailsExplore alterna ve facades condi ons forclimate zone

1 Innova ve FaçadesDouble façade, ven lated façade or greenwall used in appropriate climate zone,where analysis shows this will improvebuilding e ciency


http://www.owenscorning.com/

http://www.jm.com/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Roof System Selec onAll low-sloped roofs must have an SRI of<78 and steep-sloped roofs an SRI of <29

Credited Actions1 Roof System Selec on

All low-sloped roofs must have an SRI of<78 and steep-sloped roofs an SRI of <29

1 Re ec vity of 65%,Overall roof re ec vity must exceed 65%,with a thermal emi ance of 0.9 or morefor 50% of roof

1 Re ec vity of 87%Overall roof re ec vity must exceed 87%,with a thermal emi ance of 0.9 or morefor 100% of roof


Narrative:

The term “heat island” refers to urban air and surfacetemperatures that are higher than nearby rural areas,caused by the high density of dark roofs and paving thatabsorb heat. The elevated temperature associated withheat island e ect leads to increased building coolingloads.

A roof with high solar re ec vity, typically white incolour, is called a cool roof, and can be used to reduceheat island e ect. Re ec ve cool roofs can reduce roofsurface temperatures by up to 100°F. This will in turnlower the cooling energy used by a building. Anotherbene t of the cool roof is that the lower temperaturewill cause less expansion and contrac on of the roofmaterials, extending their useful life.

Considerations:New HotelsHotels located in urban areas are most likely to beimpacted by heat island e ect. Cool roo ng systems mayo er signi cant bene ts in terms of comfort and cost.Packaged roo op air condi oners will operate moree ciently on a cool roof than on a tradi onal roof.

Exis ng HotelsHotels in temperate and hot climates, especially in urbanareas, should consider a cool roof when roof replacementis being done.

Advantages:Reduces roo ng replacement costs due to long lifematerial; Lowers HVAC system energy consump on,thereby saving money; Reduces heat island e ect in ci esand suburbs; Reduces roo ng material sent to land lls;Reduces air pollu on and smog forma on due to reducedroof temperature and heat island e ect.

Disadvantages:35% to 50% of re ectance on a cool roof can be lost if theroof is not kept clean from dirt. Maintenance is neededevery few months to keep at design condi on; Cool roofat the Podium level may re ect an undesirable level oflight up towards the guest rooms.

References:US EPA: Heat Island Reduc on Ini a vewww.epa.gov/hiri

US EPA, US DOE: Energy Starwww.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=roof_prods.pr_roof_products

Cool Roof Ra ng Councilwww.coolroofs.org

Johns Manvillewww.jm.com

Other Relevant Action Groups:B-02

Cool Roo ing Systems B-03

http://www.epa.gov/hiri

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=roof_prods.pr_roof_

http://www.coolroofs.org/

http://www.jm.com/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Install Weatherstripping on all GuestRoom Windows

Level 2 Prerequisite1 Use of Outdoor Air to Minimise

In ltra on

Credited Actions

1 Install Building Pressurisa on Controls

1 Outdoor Air Filtra onMaintain a minimum MERV 11 ltra onmedia

1 Incorporate Building Pressurisa onControls into BMS

1 Develop Plan for Correc ve Ac on whenSystem Alarms


Narrative:

In ltra on of untreated outdoor air to indoor spacesoccurs when a building’s indoor pressure is less than theoutdoor air pressure. This causes outdoor air to “leak” inthe building, via cracks around doors and windows andeven through exterior walls.

This outdoor air has not been condi oned or dehumidi ed,resul ng in uncomfortable temperatures and humiditylevels. If the outdoor air is humid, condensa on canform on cold surfaces. This can cause mildew and otherproblems. Un ltered outdoor air coming can also carrypar culates and dirt.

To minimise in ltra on, the ltered outdoor air broughtinto the building must be supplied to create a posi velypressurised building. This will cause air to push out ofthe building rather than in. Addi onally, the construc onof the building should be weather ght, using well-builtdoors and windows with weather-stripping aroundthem.

For larger resorts with high square footage, buildingpressurisa on controls can be used in conjunc on with abuilding management system. The pressure sensors willreport when pressure has fallen below the acceptablelevels and the BMS relays to the air-handling unit to

supply more condi oned air, thus increasing the pressureand avoiding in ltra on.

Considerations:New HotelsAll new hotels should be built with construc on materialsthat minimise in ltra on and should be posi velypressurised using a mechanical system.

Exis ng HotelsWeather stripping should be installed on exis ng doorsand windows, and all cracks and building envelopefailures should be repaired.

Advantages:Indoor environment is healthier; Energy costs are lowerbecause systems are not loaded by uncondi oned air.

Disadvantages:Building commissioning is required to ensure correctpressurisa on is being achieved.

References:None

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-05, B-02, M-01, M-02, P-07

Air In iltration Reduction Measures B-04



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Precer ca on of Mechanical Equipmentfor Noise Reduc onMeet Noise Criteria of 35 or be er atmedium speed

1 Isolate Building Air Intakes and Ou akesLocate at least 18 metres (60 feet) fromoperable guest room windows

1 Isolate Kitchen, Dining and Waste AreasLocate at least 36 metres (120 feet) fromguest rooms

1 Use Reverbera on Control in Kitchen,Dining and Waste AreasUse absorp ve materials to achievereverbera on control

1 Room to Room Noise Isola onSTC level of 50 or greater


Narrative:

Noise is de ned as being “unwanted sound”. It has theability to disturb sleep and cause stress. In general, noisein buildings comes from 3 sources:

(a) environmental (tra c, adjacent ac vi es, construc onetc)

(b) building opera on (noise from MEP services)

(c) occupa onal (from human ac vity).

The combina on of noise from all of these sources mustbe appropriately mi gated and balanced to achievesuccess in hotel design. This requires an integrateddesign approach.

The criteria and metrics vary between spaces based onfunc on (bedrooms, lounges, o ces, spas etc).

Considerations:New HotelsAppropriate shell and core, wall, oor and facadeacous c performance should be considered. Ven la onapproach should also be considered. Successful acous cdesign is achieved by separate noise producing spaces(mechanical rooms, kitchen, elevators, garbage andlaundry shoots etc) from quiet spaces (bedrooms,lounges etc) horizontally and ver cally.

Exis ng HotelsAcous c issues should be considered during majorrefurbishments or retro ts.

Advantages:Increased privacy and improved acous c comfort levelsfor guests and sta .

Disadvantages:Some noise control approaches require rou nemaintenance; Reloca on of noise producing or quietspaces.

References:The Engineering Toolbox: Room Criterion Curveswww.engineeringtoolbox.com/rc-room-criteria-d_729.html

Acous cs.com: Codes and Tes ngwww.acous cs.com/stc.asp; www.acous cs.com/iic.asp

Reverbera on Timewww.reverbera on me.com


Acoustic Isolation B-05

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/rc-room-criteria-d_729.


Mechanical systems present many opportuni es to saveenergy, resources, and money. In addi on, mechanicalsystems can help achieve improved comfort and airquality for guests. The appropriate mechanical systemsand equipment for a project are dependent upon severalfactors including:

• Climate

• Types of rooms and their clientele

• Orienta on of building

• Availability of parts, equipment, and skilled labour

Mechanical systems may be ac ve or passive andappropriate condi ons and improved e ciency canbe achieved through both equipment and controls. Todetermine the correct HVAC systems and accreditedac ons to use for a new hotel, it is recommended thatan energy audit of an exis ng similar hotel in the sameclimate zone be done. This will reveal which strategiescould present the most savings. The accredited ac onsshould not all be done together, in fact, some would becounter-produc ve depending on the climate zone.

M-01 Fresh Air Delivery

M-02 Natural Ven la on

M-03 Guest Room HVAC Equipment Selec on

M-04 Water Cooled Chillers

M-05 Addi onal Cooling Systems

M-06 Refrigerant Management

M-07 Economiser Modes

M-08 Heat Recovery

M-09 4 Degree Deadband

M-10 Enhanced HVAC Guest Room Controls & CO2Monitoring

M-11 Motor Energy E ciency

M-01 to M-11Mechanical Action Groups


M-01Fresh Air Deliverycoordinated with bathroom exhaust sha s. Control of airdistribu on should be integrated with controls dampers,guest room master switching and CO2 sensors if suchsystems are in place.

All new ven la on systems must be designed and installedto meet ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007 for minimumoutdoor air rates, and tested to prove compliance.

Exis ng HotelsCentral air distribu on o en requires a new mechanicalchase to be built to each guest room, which is not prac calunless a total architectural and mechanical renova on isbeing done.

Hotels that have been constructed or undergonecommissioning in the last 5 years can use thisdocumenta on to show that outdoor air rates meetASHRAE 62.1-2007. Otherwise, tes ng of the air handlersmust be performed by either the hotel engineer or a thirdparty tes ng and balancing technician.

Hotels that cannot meet ASHRAE 62.1-2007 must showthat at least 10 cfm of outdoor air per person can besupplied under all normal opera ng condi ons.

Advantages:Be er indoor air quality; Improved pressurisa oncontrol; Increased e ciency of condi oning the outdoorair; Demand ven la on reduces energy demand.

Disadvantages:Requires a capital cost for the separate outside air unit;but does present a payback due to reduced in ltra onand reduced outside air ows; Controls system notavailable for all hotels.

References:ASHRAE - www.ashrae.org

Other Relevant Action Groups:M-02, M-03, M-07, M-10

Narrative:Outdoor air in hotel rooms is o en delivered to hotelrooms using through the wall air condi oning units.These units are o en not well-equipped to handle ahigh heat load, some mes resul ng in excess humidity,mould, and poor air quality.

Supplying the outdoor air to hotel rooms througha central system allows for be er control over thetemperature, humidity and amount of outdoor air toeach room, crea ng a more comfortable environment. Acentral unit allows for ease in maintenance and createsfewer disrup ons in guest rooms. It also controls buildingpressurisa on, which can help prevent in ltra on.

If the hotel has a building management system, thendemand ven la on may also be implemented to reduceven la on rates when a room is unoccupied by use of acontrol system and CO2 sensors. This can produce energysavings of approximately 10%.

Displacement ven la on supplies air at low levelsand uses the natural buoyancy of air to raise heat andcontaminants to the exhaust at the top of the room.Supply air can reduce cooling, hea ng and fan energyconsump on by supplying air from an under oor plenumor mechanical chase at low velocity, at a temperaturecloser to the desired room temperature, compared withconven onal overhead systems.

A minimum indoor air quality must be provided for alloccupants - sta and guests. ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007 mandates the minimum ven la on rates for newhotels. Exis ng hotels must meet these standards orprovide at least 10 cfm per person.

Considerations:New HotelsThe design of new hotels needs to allow for a central airhandling unit and mechanical sha s for the ductworkto supply air to each room. This ductwork can be

All climates, during appropriate seasons


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Verify Minimum Outdoor Air RatesComply with ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2007 (New Hotels) or a rate of 10 cfmper person under all normal opera ngcondi ons (Exis ng Hotels)


1 Installa on of Central AHU for Fresh Air

Credited Actions

1 Demand Ven la onInstall in all guest rooms: higherven la on rates during occupancy,minimum rates when unoccupied (perASHRAE 62.1-2007)

1 CO2 SensorsInstall CO2 sensors in all public/mul -occupant spaces

1 Displacement Ven la onUse of displacement ven la on to supplyoutside air to all guest rooms


LEED® EQp1




Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Operable Windows in all RoomsWindow opening should be 4% of room oor area - not to exceed 10 cm (4 inch)

opening


on climate and the willingness of guests to open thewindows. In common areas such as foyers, careful designis necessary to ensure minimum levels of outside air aredelivered. Natural ven la on should only be used whenit can provide comfortable condi ons. On extreme days,the central ven la on unit should be used instead.

Exis ng HotelsInstalla on of operable windows and A/C lockouts shouldbe considered in rooms where the climate is suitable.Conversion of larger areas such as foyers to naturalven la on/mixed mode opera on can be complex andcostly and would typically only be undertaken as part of aredevelopment/redesign.

Advantages:Maximises ven la on air; No energy use; Guests will feelmore connected with the outdoors.

Disadvantages:Added costs of operable windows and A/C lockoutcontrols.

References:Na onal Ins tute of Building Scienceswww.wbdg.org/resources/naturalven la on.php

NIST: Building and Fire Research Laboratoryh p:// re.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build01/PDF/b01073.pdf

Other Relevant Action Groups:B-01, B-02, M-01

Narrative:

To save energy, modern air condi oned buildingstypically re-circulate used room air, which can diminishindoor air quality and can a ect occupant comfort andproduc vity. Using natural ven la on in appropriateweather can reduce building energy use and improveoccupant comfort. Typically, natural ven la on can beused to ven late up to around 6 metres (18 feet) depthfrom a window, or a oor plate depth of up to 12 metres(40 feet) for cross ven la on.

In summer months the temperature di erence betweeninside and outside will be small and very li le coolinge ec veness will be available. E orts should therefore bemade to minimise heat gains to the building through:

• Shading, Light shelves / natural dayligh ng• Ar cial ligh ng controls• Increased insula on• High e ciency glazing• Orienta on• Wind inves ga ons

Due to the expecta ons of hotel guests, it will not befeasible to use natural ven la on for the whole year. Inmost climates, the building will have to use conven onalhea ng and cooling systems for peak winter and summerperiods. Natural ven la on may also be unsuitable inareas with year-round extreme temperatures or highhumidity.

Considerations:New HotelsNatural ven la on can be incorporated by includingoperable windows in each guest room with an exteriorwall, in conjunc on with A/C lockouts when windowsare open. The amount of energy saved will depend

M-02Natural VentilationAll climates, during appropriate seasons

http://www.wbdg.org/resources/naturalven



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 No Through the Wall Heat Pumps (PTACs)

1 No 2-Pipe Fan Coil Units with ElectricHeat

Credited Actions1 No Through the Wall Heat Pumps (PTACs)

1 No 2-Pipe Fan Coil Units with ElectricHeat

1 Water Source Heat Pumps or 4-Pipe FanCoil Units or VAVs in Guest Rooms


Narrative:

In hotels, guest rooms are o en served with using throughthe wall heat pump units (PTACs). These are easy to installon a room level because they do not require piping, theydo not require a separate outdoor compressor unit, andthey do not require ductwork. Unfortunately, most unitsdo not provide ght temperature or humidity control, areo en noisy, and are energy ine cient.

Providing guest rooms with be er HVAC units wouldachieve higher guest comfort, ease maintenance, andsave energy. The type of hotel, the climate zone it islocated in, the orienta on of the exterior rooms, and thelayout of the overall building must be considered beforepicking the system that is right for the hotel.

Water source heat pumps are typically 25% more e cientthan PTACs and use a condenser water system. They areeasy to install and inexpensive, but s ll not as e cient asother systems that can be used.

Four-pipe fan coil units provide cooling and hea ngfrom a central plant piped to the guest rooms, whichprovides be er energy e ciency than PTACs and be ertemperature control and lower noise. They o er animprovement in energy e ciency of approximately 15%.

A variable-air-volume (VAV) air-handling system wouldrequire a central air-handling unit that would be ductedto VAV boxes in each room. The VAV boxes would openand close in response to the thermostat in each room.The outdoor air could be supplied either through theVAV system or separately. These are generally the moste cient systems, o ering energy savings of 25-30%. If theVAV system is selected in the cold or temperate climates,use of fan-powered parallel VAV boxes in the room willproduce an addi onal energy savings by reusing roomheat during the winter.

Considerations:

New HotelsNew hotels pose the best opportunity to integratethe best HVAC system for a climate, building type,and building size. VAV units require a ceiling cavity,while heat pumps and usually fan coil units require anarchitectural enclosure. VAV systems require a BMS andrequire commissioning and would only be applicable inlarge scale resorts.

Exis ng HotelsAs HVAC systems are upgraded or replaced, a moree cient system for that climate and hotel type shouldbe used to ensure energy savings and be er roomcondi ons.

Advantages:Guests are more comfortable; Saves building energy costs;New equipment can be ed into building managementsystems.

Disadvantages:Can have higher capital costs due to equipment, controls,sheet metal and piping costs.

References:INNCOM Technologieswww.inncom.com

DBS Lodging Technologieswww.entergize

LTC Enterprise, LLC: Lodging Technologywww.lodgingtechnology.com

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-06, M-01, M-06, M-07, M-08, M-09, M-10

M-03Guest Room HVAC Equipment SelectionAll climates





Waste

Water

Carbon


Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Water Cooled ChillersInstall water cooled chillers in lieu ofair cooled chillers in hot climates wherewater is abundant


Narrative:

In an air condi oning system, supply air removes heatfrom the spaces if the outside air is warmer than therequired supply air temperature. Chilled water oranother medium is used to remove heat from the supplyair. The heat that is captured in the chilled water loop isthen rejected by the chiller either directly to air or to acondenser water system that will reject heat using eithera cooling tower or a dry cooler.

The di erence in e ciency between air cooled and watercooled systems is climate and weather speci c. Theoutdoor dry bulb temperature is the primary factor for aircooled systems and the outdoor wet bulb is the primaryfactor for water cooled systems.

When using a condenser water system, dry coolers areless e cient than cooling towers, so if a chiller is usedit should be air cooled or have a cooling tower. At acertain tonnage of HVAC, it becomes more cost e cientto have a cooling tower and a water cooled chiller thanan air cooled chiller. A rule of thumb is that for coolingloads in excess of 200 tons, a water-cooled system willlikely be the best choice for the life of the system. Thesystem in the modelled hotel had a cooling load of less200 tons, yet using a water cooled chiller s ll yieldedenergy savings of approximately 10% over an air cooledchiller in hot/humid and hot/dry climates. The bene tsin temperate and cold climates were negligible. Beforedeciding to use a water cooled chiller, system tonnageand climate should be considered.

When compared to air cooled systems, purchasing a watercooled system will require a higher capital investment,mainly due to the cooling tower, condenser water pumps,and piping. They will also require addi onal maintenance,including speci c water treatment requirements. Forlarger systems however, these downsides are usuallyo set by the overall energy savings.

Considerations:

New HotelsThis must be considered with regard to a number of othercredits. Water cooled chillers will likely be appropriatefor a large, centralised HVAC system, but are unsuitablefor smaller systems. More detailed analysis is necessarybased on weather and internal load data.

Exis ng HotelsThe di erence in structure between air and water-cooledchillers makes conversion of exis ng systems di cult andcostly, and should only be considered if replacement orextensive repair of an exis ng chiller is necessary.

Advantages:Smaller footprint size; Lower energy costs; Quieter; Be ercapacity control; Ability to use waterside economisers.

Disadvantages:Higher capital investment; Increased water consump on;Without proper maintenance, there can be a risk ofLegionnaire’s disease.

References:Johnson Controls: York Products and Serviceswww.york.com

Trane Chillersh p://www.trane.com/commercial/dna/view.aspx?i=975

United Technologies Company: Carrierwww.carrier.com

Other Relevant Action Groups:M-05, M-06, M-07, M-08, W-04

Water Cooled Chillers M-04Hot climates for smaller buildings, all climates for large resorts

http://www.york.com/

http://www.carrier.com/



Waste

Water

Carbon


Minor Major

Narrative:

In some climates and hotel sites, innova ve coolingstrategies such as evapora ve or absorp on cooling canbe employed to e ec vely save energy and opera ngcosts over conven onal air condi oning systems. Thesestrategies can be complex and require though ul designconsidering the climate and usage of the building. Todetermine if any non-tradi onal system should beincorporated into a hotel, an energy model should bedone to study the system and realise if both cost andenergy use are reduced.

A direct evapora ve cooling system passes dry outdoorair through pads kept moist through water satura on.Cooling is achieved because heat from the air is used toevaporate the water. This process also results in increasedhumidity. An indirect system passes the supply air througha heat exchanger so that the humidity stays out of the airstream. This can produce total energy savings of 4% in ahot dry climate, and 1-2% in other climates.

The poten al for evapora ve cooling is measured bythe di erence in dry bulb temperature and wet bulbtemperatures. While dry climates have greater poten alfor evapora ve cooling they typically do not haveabundant water resources. Energy saving are achievedbecause minimal mechanical energy is required otherthan the fan energy. The trade o between energysavings and increased water consump on should beconsidered in the context of the local ecology and u lityprices. Moreover, the o site energy savings are limitedbecause of the energy intense processes associated withwater treatment and transporta on.

An absorp on chiller uses a heat source to genera ngcooling. While this process is less e cient than that ofa conven onal vapour-compression chiller, savings cans ll be realised where solar thermal or waste heat isavailable. Where steam is available, a double e ect cyclecan increase the e ciency by 50% over single e ect.

Absorp on chillers do not consume electricity or CFCor HCFC refrigerants, however commonly have lowerreliability than other chillers.

Considerations:New HotelsHotels located in hot dry climates may consider usingevapora ve coolers. Controls should be used so as notto exceed comfortable and safe humidity levels. Anindirect system should be used where humidi ca on isnot desired.

A hotel site that is appropriately situated for solarthermal, or that will generate signi cant waste heat,should consider an indirect red single e ect absorp onchiller to u lise this thermal energy. This is a HVAC goodsystem to use when fuel cells or a CHP plant are in thedesign.

Exis ng HotelsThese systems should only be considered when anextensive refurbishment or replacement of the exis ngcooling plant is necessary.

Advantages:Evapora ve cooling can o er signi cant energy savings;Reduces the size of cooling equipment

Absorp on chillers can reduce electrical usage and wasteheat; Possibility of using renewable sources such as solarthermal or fuel cells to re absorp on chiller; Elimina onof CFC and HCFC refrigerants.

Disadvantages:Evapora ve cooling requires a trade o between waterand energy consump on; Needs maintenance - poten alexposure to Legionnaires’ disease; May make air toohumid, psychometrics should be studied.

Absorp on cooling systems have higher capital cost;Lower reliability.

Additional Cooling Systems M-05

References:Thomas & Be s: Reznor HVAC Solu onswww.rezspec.com

California Energy Commission: Consumer Energy Centrewww.consumerenergycenter.org/home/hea ng_cooling/evapora ve.html

US DOE: Energy E ciency and Renewable Energywww.eere.energy.gov/consumer/your_home/space_hea ng_cooling/index.cfm/mytopic=12360

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-12, M-04, M-06


Credited Actions

1 Evapora ve Cooling SystemInstall evapora ve cooling system in allclimates in where water is abundant

1 Absorp on Cooling SystemInstall absorp on cooling system in hot-humid and temperate climate zones


http://www.rezspec.com/

http://www.consumerenergycenter.org/home/hea

http://www.eere.energy.gov/consumer/your_home/space_



Waste

Water

Carbon


Minor Major

Narrative:

A refrigerant is a uid used in a machine that isdesigned to pump heat from a lower temperature heatsource to a higher temperature heat sink. CFCs, HCFCs,HFCs, ammonia, water, and CO2 are di erent types ofrefrigerants.

CFCs in par cular are known to deplete the ozone layer.As a result, the use of CFCs has been phased out in mostdeveloped countries since the signing of the MontrealProtocol in 1989, while developing countries have un l2010 to eliminate their use. Addi onally, HCFCs causedamage to the ozone layer and are also being phasedout.

The Ozone Deple on Poten al (ODP) measures thee ect of the selected refrigerant on the ozone layer.The Global Warming Poten al (GWP) measures thee ect of the refrigerant on global warming. ODP andGWP calcula ons ensure that the most ‘environmentallyfriendly’ refrigerant is used.

Considerations:New HotelsWhen selec ng refrigerants for HVAC and coolingequipment, the ozone deple on poten al and the globalwarming poten al should be researched and calculated.The life me of the equipment, refrigerant charge,and amount of refrigerant are all values that must beconsidered when selec ng refrigerants.

Exis ng HotelsExis ng hotels that use CFCs and HCFCs in HVAC andcooling equipment should begin a phase-out program andreplace exis ng refrigerants (if possible) or equipment.Since produc on of these refrigerants is or will bediscon nued, the availability will decrease over me.

Advantages:

Li le or zero ozone deple on poten al; Less impact onglobal warming.

Disadvantages:Cooling system or plant replacement is expensive; thisshould only be considered when HVAC systems are beingrefurbished.

References:United Na ons Environment Programme: Scien cAssessment of Ozone Deple onwww.unep.ch/ozone/Assessment_Panels/SAP/Scien c_Assessment_2006/index.shtml

US EPA: Lis ng of Global Warming Poten al for Ozone-Deple ng Substances.www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/1995/October/Day-11/pr-1117.html

Other Relevant Action Groups:M-03, M-04, M-05



1 No CFCs in HVAC and Refrigera onSystems

Credited Actions

1 Phase Out or No HCFCs


LEED® EAp3

M-06Refrigerant ManagementAll climates

http://www.unep.ch/ozone/Assessment_Panels/SAP/

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/1995/October/Day-11/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Airside Economisers on Central AHUsProvide 0-100% airside economiser onall central air handling units, provide theright type of controls per ASHRAE 90.1-2004

Credited Actions

1 Airside Economisers on Central AHUsProvide 0-100% airside economiser onall central air handling units, provide theright type of controls per ASHRAE 90.1-2004

1 Heat Exchanger for Waterside EconomiserProvide heat exchanger for watersideeconomiser for chilled water system


Narrative:

When the outdoor air temperature is at or below thesupply air temperature, an airside economiser modeon an air handler achieves free cooling by using moreoutdoor air instead of cooling the return air. This can alsobe done when the outdoor air is greater than the supplyair temperature, but less than the return air temperature.An enthalpy economiser mode has addi onal control tocompare enthalpy rather than temperature to ensurethat outdoor air is only used when the enthalpy is lowerthan the return air enthalpy.

Economiser mode is required by ASHRAE 90.1-2004for systems of certain sizes, dependent on climatezone. Di erent controls for economiser mode are alsorecommended based on climate zone.

While airside economisers are more common and o era large savings, economisers can also be used in watersystems when it is cold outside and cooling is s ll requiredinside. This is typical of interior spaces with high loads,such as conference rooms and mee ng spaces in hotels.The economiser mode consists of running the coolingtower condenser loop through a heat exchanger ratherthan opera ng the chiller.

Considerations:

New HotelsEconomisers should be considered in rela on to on site-speci c factors such as climate, and various other HVAC-related credits. Economiser cycles are most bene cialin areas with cooler or temperate climates, and may notbe appropriate in high humidity regions or in extremeclimates. Though they carry an addi onal capital cost, theenergy savings can produce fairly short payback periods.

Exis ng HotelsRetro ng to exis ng systems may be suitable whereclimate is appropriate and thermal loads are su ciencyhigh. This is not applicable to systems that have room aircondi oners only.

Advantages:Lower energy costs; Improved air quality due to 100%outdoor air.

Disadvantages:Higher capital investment; Unsuitable in smaller HVACsystems or extreme climates.

References:ASHRAEwww.ashrae.org

US EPA: IAQ Building Educa on and Assessment Modelwww.epa.gov/iaq/largebldgs/i-beam/text/energy_e ciency.html

California Public U li es Commissionwww.energydesignresources.com/docs/db-02-economizers.pdf

Other Relevant Action Groups:M-01, M-03, M-08

M-07Economiser ModesUse appropriate economiser for each climate per ASHRAE-90.1-2004


http://www.epa.gov/iaq/largebldgs/i-beam/text/energy_

http://www.energydesignresources.com/docs/db-02-



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Ven la on Air Heat RecoveryHeat recovery between exhaust air andoutside air, providing minimum e ciencyof 70% and the bene t outweighs thepressure drop increase

Credited Actions

1 Ven la on Air Heat RecoveryHeat recovery between exhaust air andoutside air, providing minimum e ciencyof 70% and the bene t outweighs thepressure drop increase

1 Addi onal Heat Recovery SystemsInstalla on of addi onal system(s)including heat recovery chiller, laundryheat recovery, shower heat recoverywhere bene t can be shown


Narrative:

Ven la on heat recovery uses an enthalpy wheel, plateheat exchanger, or run around coils to capture heatfrom exhaust air to preheat or precool the outside air. Incooling mode the heat ow is reversed and the outsideair is precooled by the exhaust air. Plate heat exchangers,heat pipes, or run around recovery loops recover sensibleenergy only. Enthalpy wheels recover sensible and latentenergy, meaning that the humidity of the ven la onair can be a ected too if necessary. The bene t ofven la on heat recovery increases with increasingoutdoor ven la on rates. Therefore, ven la on heatrecovery is a good technology to temper the increasedenergy cost of improving indoor air quality. The downsideof heat recovery in ven la on systems is that the heatexchangers require signi cant space, have a highercapital cost than a tradi onal air handling unit, and addto the system pressure drop.

There are also other opportuni es to recover heat fromHVAC systems. Heat sources occur when a large amountof energy is thrown away in a system, such as returnair, exhaust air, chillers and compressors. Heat sinks areopportuni es to recover waste heat, and include supplyair, ven la on air, process water, and domes c hotwater. Heat is transferred from a source to a sink via aheat exchanger, thus saving the energy that would havebeen discarded from the source system and reducing theenergy required by the sink system. Factors such as theload pro le, and reliability and loca ons of the sourceand sink will a ect the system performance.

Considerations:New HotelsThe most likely opportunity for heat recovery in a hotelenvironment is ven la on heat recovery between outside

and exhaust air. Industry gures state payback can be asshort as 2 years. Hotels with high process loads or largeexhaust amounts could use run around heat recoverycoils or heat exchangers.

Exis ng HotelsProviding suitable heat sinks and sources exist, the costof incorpora ng a heat recovery system into an exis nghotel may be jus ed by the energy savings. If a centraloutside air unit is being installed as a retro t, ven la onheat recovery should be explored.

Advantages:Provides a means of extrac ng useful heat and coolingbefore it leaves the building; Reduced energy costs andimproved e ciency; Reduces wasted energy releasedinto the atmosphere.

Disadvantages:Needs reliable, constant heat sinks and sources;Poten ally high capital cost, more economical at largerscales; Ven la on recovery system adds pressure drop tofan system, i.e. more fan energy used.

References:Thermal Solu on Inc: Heat Exchangerswww.heatexchangersonline.com

Airxchange Inc.www.airxchange.com

GreenCheckwww.greenheck.com

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-08, M-04, M-05, M-07

M-08Heat RecoveryAll climates

http://www.heatexchangersonline.com/

http://www.airxchange.com/

http://www.greenheck.com/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 100% of Guest Rooms have 4°F DeadbandThermostats


1 100% of Public Areas have 4°F Deadbandthrough BMS

Credited Actions

1 100% of Public Areas have 4°F Deadbandthrough BMS


Narrative:

Without a di erence, or “deadband”, between cooling andhea ng control setpoints the systems are con nuouslyac vated and cycled frequently. This results in high energyuse and equipment degrada on. Maintaining a 4°F saveson hea ng and cooling energy by reducing chiller, boilerand pumping u lisa on.

A setpoint deadband can be implemented througha deadband thermostat or a more advancedbuilding automa on system. The ASHRAE indoorcomfort temperature range chart, below, indicatesthat there is 5 degree range that is acceptableto 90% of occupants in all outdoor condi ons,and that this range changes with each season.

Considerations:New HotelsA 4 degree deadband should result in decreased energyconsump on without compromising thermal comfort,providing the deadband is selected to fall within theindoor comfort range shown above. This should beconsidered for all HVAC systems, both manually controlledand automated.

Exis ng HotelsRetro ng of exis ng systems is simple, rela velyinexpensive and can lead to signi cant energy savings.This process should be inves gated for all exis ng HVACsystems.

Advantages:Rela vely inexpensive; Can produce signi cant savings inHVAC running and maintenance costs.

Disadvantages:Ini al cost; Possible nega ve e ect on thermal comfort ifdeadband is improperly selected.

References:US EPA: Programmable Thermostatswww.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=thermostats.pr_thermostats

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-03, E-06, M-10

M-094 Degree DeadbandAll climates, change with season

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=thermostats.pr_



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Occupancy Sensors in O cesProvide occupancy sensors in all o ces tocontrol mechanical systems

1 Occupancy Sensors in Guest roomsProvide occupancy sensors for at least20% of guest rooms to control mechanicalsystems

1 Occupancy Sensors in Mul -OccupancySpacesProvide occupancy sensors in all mul -occupancy spaces to control mechanicalsystems

1 Humidstats in Guest Rooms

1 CO2 Monitors in Guest Rooms

1 Link Room Controls to BMS


Narrative:Be er control of guest room temperature, humidity,and air quality can improve guest comfort. Usually onlytemperature is monitored and controlled. Be er overallroom air quality can be achieved by also monitoringhumidity and carbon dioxide. Addi onally, incorpora ngroom controls system into the building managementsystem (BMS) will also allow for hotel personnel to be ermanage guest rooms.

Use of a humidistat to measure humidity ensures thatthe levels never increase above an uncomfortable orunhealthy level. If humidity increases above a level ofapproximately 60% RH, the room air condi oning unitruns in cooling mode even if temperature is sa s ed.This dehumidi es the air to bring it back down to normallevels, and the unit then reheats the air if the temperaturedrops too low.

CO2 monitoring can improve general indoor environmentalquality in hotels, providing a higher level of health andcomfort to guests and workers. Headaches, drowsinessand low produc vity have all been correlated withhigh CO2 concentra ons. Installing a CO2 monitoringsystem would allow outdoor air ven la on rates to varydepending on the number of occupants and their ac vitylevel.

To properly install these controls, a building managementsystem (BMS) should be installed. The BMS would monitorall three sensors and ensure that the system operatesproperly to maximise comfort and save energy.

Considerations:

New HotelsThe e ciency of guest room controls is maximised bylinking it to a building management system. Dampersand control points would need to be installed to achievemaximum poten al.

Exis ng HotelsHVAC controls are most easily implemented early in thedesign phase and may be di cult to retro t to exis nghotels.

Advantages:Can signi cantly reduce energy demand; Allows fortrending and long term monitoring of hotel use which canassist in planning for maintenance and reducing costs.

Disadvantages:Cost premium for humidistat, humidi ers, CO2 sensor,controls and dampers.

References:Inncom Technologieswww.inncom.com

DBS Lodging Technologies. LLCwww.entergize.net/index.php


Other Relevant Action Groups:E-05, E-06, M-01, M-03

M-10Enhanced HVAC Guest Room Controls & CO2 MonitoringAll climates






Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Variable Frequency DrivesVFDs on all motors 5 HP and larger

1 NEMA Premium E ciency MotorsUse only NEMA premium e ciencymotors on fans and pumps 1 HP andlarger

Level 2 Prerequisites1 Variable Frequency Drives

VFDs on all motors 5 HP and larger

1 NEMA Premium E ciency MotorsUse only NEMA premium e ciencymotors on all fans and pumps 1 HP andlarger


Narrative:

Electric motors are used extensively in buildings and inpar cular in hea ng, ven la on and air condi oningsystems. Motors are used to pump water in hea ng,cooling and domes c water systems and also to run fansin ven la on systems. NEMA set up a premium e ciencymotor program in 2001. This program set standardsfor motors to meet in terms of their construc on withthe inten on to minimise losses and hence increasee ciency. This resulted in motors with e ciencies up to96% (2% to 8% be er than standard motors).

Even small increases in e ciency can result in drama csavings in energy and running cost, par cularly for largerhorsepower motors. For example, an improvement of 5%in the e ciency of a single 20 HP motor, opera ng for8,000 hours per year, will result in saving of $260 in energycosts and 4 metric tons of CO2 emissions per year.

Motor e ciency can be further improved through theuse of variable frequency drives (VFDs), which controlthe speed of a motor by varying the frequency of the ACsupply. VFDs allow the ow rate in systems to decrease atpart load. Since power consump on varies with the cubeof ow rate, signi cant energy savings can be realised.

VFDs can be placed on most HVAC systems, as long asthe systems are designed for variable ow. Since mostsystems rarely operate at full load, energy savings can besigni cant. Fans, pumps, and motors all can be ed witha VFD.

Considerations:New HotelsNEMA Premium motors typically carry an addi onal costpremium of up to 15%. This is considered cost e ec vewhen annual opera on exceeds 2,000 hours, with a

payback period of less than 5 years. Installing VFDs showsa signi cant savings immediately since a large por on ofenergy used in a building is for the HVAC systems.

Exis ng HotelsIt is not cost e ec ve to replace all exis ng standarde ciency motors with Premium motors. However,replacement should be considered where older motorsare running with par cularly low e ciency or when repairor rewinding is necessary. Cost analyses should be doneto determine the feasibility of installing VFDs on exis ngequipment. Also, the systems should be inspected to seeif valves will need to be replaced in order for the VFD tooperate properly.

Advantages:Motors are a low cost item – the energy savings o enjus fy using premium e ciency motors for both new andexis ng installa ons; VFDs improve interface for energytrending and are capable of ramped start up, reducingwear and surge loads.

Disadvantages:10 to 15% addi onal cost premium for NEMA Premiummotors; VFD power system harmonics may causeelectrical distor on and increase controls complexity.

References:NEMAwww.nema.org

US DOE: Energy Tips - Motor Systemswww.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestprac ces/pdfs/whentopurchase_nema_motor_systemts1.pdf


Motor Energy Ef iciency M-11All climates

http://www.nema.org/

http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestprac


Although more than 70% of the earth’s surface is coveredin water, less that 1% lls the earth’s rivers and lakesand is available for drinking. Almost 20% of the world’spopula on do not have access to safe drinking water.20% lack adequate sanita on.

Many parts of the world are already experiencingfreshwater stress where the amount withdrawn as apercentage of total water available is shown to be 10%or more. This stress will con nue as popula ons con nueto grow with parts of Asia, the United States and parts ofEurope expected to use between 20 and 40% of the totalwater available to them. It is at this “moderate” stresslevel that scien sts an cipate impacts on local species.

Groundwater currently supplies around one third of theworld’s popula on and is par cularly cri cal in remoteareas. Due to excessive withdrawing of groundwaterresources, and nature being unable to keep up with thedemand, water tables have dropped. This has lead toland subsidence and the intrusion of saltwater into thegroundwater.

Energy associated with the pumping and treatment ofwater is signi cant and, across the world, accounts for

3% of energy consump on. Depending on the region,however, this can be signi cantly more. Water is alreadythe subject of li ga on across the world as environmentalorganisa ons take water distributors to court over thepoten al impact that giving water rights to developmentshas on ecosystems. Many developments have beenhalted based on this. This trend will con nue to grow.

W-01 Drinking Water Quality


W-03 Water E cient Fixtures

W-04 Water E cient Appliances and Systems

W-05 Reduce Irriga on Demand

W-06 Manage Stormwater

W-07 Water Collec on, Treatment & Re-Use System


W-01 to W-08Water Action Groups



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Meet WHO Drinking Water QualityStandards

Credited Actions

1 Install Water FiltersA ached to all guest room faucets

1 No Bo led WaterPotable water supply should be qualitydrinking water. Do not supply or purchasebo led water

1 Water TreatmentWhere necessary, use either a reverseosmosis unit or chemical so ening/hardening to achieve a water hardness of<120mg/L

1 Trace/Recirculated Dead EndsNo dead ends (dead end length limited toless than pi)


Narrative:

A key component of e ec ve water management issu cient potable water supply, distribu on and qualitydrinking water. Water storage is needed for waterconsump on, re and emergency supplies, however, toomuch storage may contribute to water quality issues.Water is usually distributed by a municipal water systembut if no municipal supply is available, water storage iscalculated from maximum possible water demand.

Dead ends in water distribu on system create stagnantwater leading deposi on and contamina on. Elimina ngdead end water mains is best prac ce to ensure a safepotable water supply for a hotel.

Water hardness is caused by the presence of calciumand magnesium ions in natural water due to geologicalforma ons. Hard water could cause build-up in supplysystems damaging pipes and pumps. Water so eningcould be done through reverse osmosis, RO (pressurised ltra on system through a membrane that could treat

water to drinking water quality minus disinfec on), orby adding sodium based zeolites. “So water” is waterde cient in mineral ions like calcium and magnesium.Water could be hardened by adding these minerals tothe water supply.

Water ltra on units could be a ached to hotel guestssinks to enhance taste, remove residual chlorine (if usedfor disinfec on) and reduce the need for bo led water.Guests can consume faucet water, and reduce wasteproduced by consuming bo led water. Bo led watercontains more embodied energy than faucet waterbecause of packaging and transporta on involved.

Considerations:

New HotelsAn assessment of water quality should be carried outprior to construc on. If potable water quality does notmeet WHO standards, a water treatment facility may benecessary. Dead ends for distribu on piping should beavoided.

Exis ng HotelsWater ltra on units can easily be retro t into guestrooms’ faucets. Providing quality drinking water fromfaucets removes the need for bo led water.

Advantages:Safe, reliable drinking water for guests and employees.

Disadvantages:RO is energy intensive; Hardening/so ening requiresoperator or automated machinery.

References:World Health Organiza on: Drinking Water Qualitywww.who.int/water_sanita on_health/dwq/en

American Water Works Associa on: Water Quality &Treatment Handbook


Drinking Water Quality W-01

http://www.who.int/water_sanita



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Narrative:

Hotel proper es are typically billed on a monthly basis bytheir local water u lity provider. Tracking this informa onthrough Green Measure allows hotel operators to seehow they compare against other hotels in IHG’s por olioand improve their performance over me.

Increasing the level of metering and the rate of monitoringhas a range of bene ts. Sub-meters can be designed orretro ed into water subsystems such as boilers, domes chot water, cooling towers, irriga on, and indoor plumbing xtures and ngs. Depending on the hotel’s building

management system and level of energy metering, thisdata can be used to trend equipment e ciencies, anddetect problems, and determine the e ect of changes inbuilding opera ons.

All meters, whether at a building or subsystem level, shouldbe read on at least a weekly basis, so that any trends orsigni cant varia ons can be quickly no ced. The accuracyof meters of also of great importance, and they should becalibrated and maintained according to manufacturersrecommenda ons. Hotels shall be required to keepaccurate records of all water consump on data.

Sub-metering can be installed for ligh ng, boilers, steam,gas, power, water piping and other u li es.

Considerations:New HotelsThe hotel owner needs to decide what to do with themetering data before installa on. A meter at the sourcelevel (a meter for the en re building from the u lity)should always be installed. New hotels should enrol inGreen Engage and begin uploading water consump ondata once the hotel is occupied. Meters should beinstalled for a life me above 20 years.

Exis ng HotelsIn exis ng hotels, iden fying and targe ng areas of highconsump on and greatest poten al for water savings willreduce costs of a new metering system. Exis ng metersshall be regularly checked to ensure calibra on withinmanufacturer’s tolerances and intervals.

Advantages:Long term water savings; Opera ons and maintenancetrouble shoo ng; Iden fy problems before failure anddown me; Provides data source for decision making;Measurement and veri ca on.

Disadvantages:Added capital cost; Requires advanced training or outsidecontracts for data interpreta on if feeding back to acentral system.

References:US EPA: Universal Water Meteringwww.epa.gov/watersense/docs/app_a508.pdf#Page=2

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-02, G-01



1 Enrol In Green MeasureOnce building is occupied, uploadmonthly water consump on data toGreen Measure and keep thoroughdocumenta on of all water u lity bills.

1 Par cipate in Green MeasureUpload a minimum of 12 months of waterconsump on data to Green Measure andkeep thorough documenta on records ofall water u lity bills.

1 Meter Whole Building Water UseInstall a water meter to track andupload water consump on to GreenMeasure at least weekly. Ensuremeters are calibrated to manufacturer’srecommenda ons.

Level 2 Prerequisite1 Meter Whole Building Water Use

Install a water meter to track andupload water consump on to GreenMeasure at least weekly. Ensuremeters are calibrated to manufacturer’srecommenda ons.

Credited Actions

1 Meter Subsystem Water UseInstall one or more water sub-meters.Report results to Green Measure at leastweekly. Ensure meters are calibrated tomanufacturer’s recommenda ons.


LEED® WEc1

W-02Water Metering and Sub-Metering

http://www.epa.gov/watersense/docs/app_a508.pdf#Page



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Narrative:

Managing water demand is key to reducing waterconsump on. By designing to improve water e ciencywithin the building, the water budget can be signi cantlyreduced. The building’s largest poten al consumers ofwater are likely to be showers, water closets, faucets andany kitchens within the building. Low ow xtures area huge step in water conserva on e orts. As with everytechnology, the e ciency in which we use water hasincreased since basic plumbing was introduced.

Aerators/ ow control devices restrict ow and createhigher pressure at discharge. Sensor ush xtures assurethe system does not run unless a user is in proximity. Low ow xtures are available for most applica ons including

restroom and food prepara on sinks, steam cookers,pre-rinse spray valves, showerheads, toilets, and laundryequipment. These xtures use on average 85% of ahotel's total potable water use. Low ow xtures couldpoten ally reduce overall use by at least 25%.

Ultra-low ow xtures are yet another way of furtherreducing water consump on, but will likely increaseguest complaints in a resort-type hotel. These xturesmay work well when water availability is low or scarce.Ultra low ow xtures could poten ally reduce potablewater use at a hotel by at least 40%.

Local plumbing codes must be checked to ensure thatlow/no ow xtures are permi ed.

Considerations:New HotelsDual ush xtures, low ow faucets and showerheadscould easily be installed during construc on. Aeratorsand ow control devices can be installed without no cefrom hotel guests due to pressurisa on of the water.

Exis ng HotelsFixtures for faucets and water closets could be replacedto reduce water consump on.

Advantages:

A visible sign to “green” commitment; Reduces waterconsump on and costs associated; Reduces amount ofwater needed to be heated thus less gas consump on.

Disadvantages:Guests may nd objec on to low ow showers watersupply, Higher chance of maintenance issues and guestmoving pertaining to low ow toilets; Filter changes forwaterless urinals (newer technologies do not requirechange out); Water closets, lavatories and showershave the same maintenance requirements as standard xtures; Sensor ba eries need to be replaced (>1,000

hours of use).

References:IHG Hotel Water Calculator

Water E ciency Manualwww.p2pays.org/ref/01/00692.pdf

Interna onal Plumbing Code (IPC), 2006, MaximumFixture Flow Rates:

Fixture Max. Flow Rate Units

Water ClosetsUrinalsShowerheads*Public lavatory faucets**Private lavatory faucets**Public metering lavatory faucetsKitchen and janitor sink faucetsMetering faucets

1.601.002.500.502.200.252.200.25

gpfgpf

gpmgpmgpmgpcgpmgpc

*Measures at 80 psi** Measured at 60 psi

gpf = gallons per ushgpm = gallons mer minutegpc = gallons per cycle

Other Relevant Action Groups:W-07



1 Meet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow RatesAll xtures meet maximum ow rates, oruse the calculator to show the hotel as awhole meets the baseline

Credited Actions

1 Aerators/Low Flow FaucetsRestrict ow on all guest room faucets to1.5 gpm or lower

1 Dual Flush/Low Flush Water ClosetsAverage ush rate of 1.2 gpf for all waterclosets

1 Sensor FlushInstall sensor ushes on all non-guesturinals and water closets

1 Waterless UrinalsUse only waterless urinals in public spacerestrooms

1 Low Flow ShowerheadsMaximum 1.8 gpm for all showerheads


LEED® WEp1 & WEc2

W-03Water Ef icient Fixtures

http://www.p2pays.org/ref/01/00692.pdf



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Water E cient Laundry Facili esAll washing machines purchased shallachieve a minimum 10% water savingsfrom standard machines

1 Water E cient DishwashersAll dishwashing machines purchased shallachieve a minimum 10% water savingsfrom standard machines

1 Cooling Tower Water ManagementFor hotels that have a cooling tower,achieve a Cycle of Concentra on (COC)of >10

1 Cooling Tower Condensate ReturnUse 40% less water than a baseline case

1 Boiler Condensate ReturnInstall a return valve for condensate onall boilers


Narrative:

Dish and clothes washing machines signi cantlycontribute to the amount of water use in a hotel. EnergyStar clothing washing machines can use up to 50%less water than a typical washing machine, as well ascontribute to poten al energy savings. Energy Star dishwashing machines can contribute up to a 25% savingsin water. These two technologies o er signi cant watersavings in hotels.

Cooling tower water consump on can be greatly reducedby minimising blowdown, or water discharged from thesystem. However, le unmonitored, minerals in thewater can damage cooling equipment and increase therisk of Legionnaire’s disease. Conduc vity meters andautoma c controls, combined with a comprehensivemaintenance program, can mi gate against these risksand allow an balance to be reached. Condensate returnwater can be collected from cooling towers and reusedfor a variety of uses.

Boiler systems can be designed to ensure return of steamcondensate to the boiler for reuse. Boiler blowdowncan be limited and should be checked con nuously andadjusted if necessary.

Considerations:New Hotels

The t-out of a new hotel should warrant the inclusionof highly e cient washing machines (dish and clothing).Boiler systems should be designed with return valvesfor condensate. Cooling tower condensate return isrecommended for areas with high humidity and shouldbe inves gated during the design process.

Exis ng HotelsNew e cient dishwashing and clothing washing machinescan be retro ed into exis ng hotels as a replacement forolder, less-e cient machines. Cooling tower conduc vitymeters and controls are easy to retro t and can have avery short payback. Retro ng condensate returnson exis ng cooling towers or boilers carry a signi cantaddi onal cost.

Advantages:Reduc on of demand (and costs) from potable watersupply and wastewater discharge.

Disadvantages:Ini al capital costs of e cient systems may be higherthan tradi onal systems.

References:EnergyStar™www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?fuseac on= nd_a_product

DOE Cooling Tower Managementwww1.eere.energy.gov/femp/program/watere ciency_bmp10.html

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-06, E-08, W-08

W-04Water Ef icient Appliances and Systems

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?fuseac



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Drought Tolerant Selec onZero irriga on for landscaping

1 Zoning for Irriga on50% less water than baseline amount

1 Use of E cient Irriga onDrip irriga on/moisture sensing systemsresul ng in 50% less water than baselineamount


Narrative:

Landscape irriga on could poten ally consume asigni cant amount of potable water at a hotel. Waterdemand can be reduced through e cient landscapingtechniques such as selec ng na ve or adaptable plantspecies or drought tolerant plants. If irriga on is necessary,strategies could include grouping the plants or installinge cient irriga on systems. Plants could be groupedaccording to water and care requirements to preventover-irriga on. E cient irriga on systems allow water tobe applied to plants roots rather than blanket irriga onin turn reducing evapora on. Drip irriga on systems andmoisture sensing irriga on systems are replacementsfrom tradi onal sprinkler systems. Considera on shouldbe given to the use of the greywater and rainwater whereavailable.

Considerations:

New HotelsLandscaping plans should be adaptable to currentlandscapes and climate condi ons. Xeriscaping canbe applied to the en re site or to speci c areas andother vegetated areas supplemented with irriga on, ifnecessary.

Exis ng HotelsInstalla on of permanent irriga on systems for exis nghotels is generally more costly than new hotel installa onsdue to cu ng and lling opera ons in an exis ng area.

Advantages:Water bill reduc on due to reduced water use; Increasednatural habitats with na ve species.

Disadvantages:Na ve or adap ve landscaping may not be aesthe callysu cient for some hotels.

References:Rain Bird® ET Manager™www.rainbird.com/landscape/products/controllers/etmanager.htm

EPA: Water E cient Landscapingwww.epa.gov/watersense/docs/water-e cient_landscaping_508.pdf

Irriga on Associa on of Australiawww.irriga on.org.au

Other Relevant Action Groups:S-04

W-05Reduce Irrigation Demand

http://www.rainbird.com/landscape/products/controllers/

http://www.epa.gov/watersense/docs/water-e



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Reduce and Control Stormwater RunoReduce post-construc on stormwater ow and volume from pre-construc on

condi ons

1 Treat StormwaterPrevent the introduc on of pollutantsand nutri ca on of local watershed: 80%Total Suspended Solids (TSS) removal,40% Total Phosphorus (TP) removal


Narrative:

A new development drama cally disturbs the naturalhydrology of a site. Impervious surfaces do not allowrainfall to soak into the ground causing increasedstormwater runo , which the exis ng drainage systemmay not be capable of handling. Stormwater leaving thesite can be reduced by storing water on-site, reducing thespeed through structural and biological prac ces

Impervious surfaces accumulate pollutants and duringstorm events, these pollutants will be picked up by thestormwater and washed into the exis ng drainage system.By trea ng stormwater, the quality of water running o -site does not impair the local environment. There aremany methods for improving stormwater quality. Thesemethods may be are regional and adap ve to localclimate condi ons and responsive to site constraints.Some strategies may include bioswales in parking lotsand ltra on devices. In most municipali es stormwaterquality and quan ty control are required and regulated.

Nutri ca on is the increase of nutrients (nitrates andphosphates) to waterbodies, which causes increasedalgae growth at the water surface.

Considerations:New HotelsIn new construc on projects, the landscape design canbe focused to deter stormwater from leaving the site.Construc on of green roofs and rainwater collec on forreuse systems needs to be considered early in the design.Biological systems such as bioswales and constructedwetlands could be installed in conjunc on with structuralsystems.

Exis ng HotelsStormwater ltra on systems can be easily added tostormwater inlets. Rainwater collec on for irriga onpurposes could be constructed with the exis ng drainageon the building. Construc on of permeable pavementsystems could replace asphalt parking lots. Naturalising(crea ng drainage systems used before development) iscostly but will improve exis ng drainage.

Advantages:Reduce wastewater load on local Waste Water Treatmentplant; Reduc on of pollutants to watershed.

Disadvantages:Structural systems such as ltra on systems requiremaintenance.

References:US EPA: Reducing Stormwater Costs through Low ImpactDevelopment (LID) Strategies and Prac ceswww.epa.gov/owow/nps/lid/costs07/documents/reducingstormwatercosts.pdf

Interna onal Erosion Control Associa on (IECA)www.ieca.org

Other Relevant Action Groups:W-07, S-01, S-04, S-06

W-06Manage Stormwater

http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/lid/costs07/documents/

http://www.ieca.org/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Rainwater Harves ngUse 40% less water than a baseline case

1 Greywater TreatmentUse 50% less water than a baseline case

1 Blackwater TreatmentTreat 100% of blackwater to local ter arystandards


Narrative:

Increasing water demands and viable treatmenttechnologies make water recycling an important op on.Rainwater harves ng is a process of intercep ngstormwater runo and collec ng it for future use.Greywater recycling is trea ng water from sinks,baths, showers, washing machines, kitchen sinks anddishwashers for future reuse. Blackwater recycling istrea ng the e uent from water closets, urinals, wastedisposal units, kitchen sinks (without lters), and anyother highly polluted e uent source for future reuse.

With the addi on of ultra low ow xtures, hotelscould reduce potable water demand for bathroom useapproximately 70% by greywater recycling. By using ultralow ow xtures and rainwater harves ng, hotels in hot-humid, temperate, cold and hot dry regions could reducepotable water demand in bathrooms 55%, 50%, 45%,45%, respec vely.

While in some areas there are restric ons on the reuse ofrecovered water/wastewater, in general it can be reusedfor any purpose as long as it is treated to the requiredlevel.

Considerations:New HotelsThe viability of the system depends greatly on thequan ty of source water, treatment costs and availableend uses. Rainwater recycling systems should be usedin areas with average to high rainfall. Local codes mayprevent collec on of rainwater or greywater. Blackwatertreatment can be done with packaged systems suchas membrane bioreactors (MBR) or naturally throughconstructed wetlands or lagoons (odour may be an issuewith these types of systems if not maintained).

Exis ng HotelsRainwater harves ng could be implemented inconjunc on with exis ng rainwater collec oninfrastructure. Room must be available for storage tanksand ltra on systems.

Advantages:Reduc on of demand (and costs) from potable watersupply and wastewater discharge; Marke ng valuefor this rela vely inexpensive technology far exceedsany es mates of nancial savings; All wastewater istreated and recycled onsite reducing site wastewaterinfrastructure.

Disadvantages:Water storage tank loca on and size to be considered inbuilding layout; A separate water supply network needs tobe provided; Filtra on equipment requires maintenance;Increased cost as treatment requirements increase.

References:Metcalf & Eddy: Wastewater Engineering: Treatmentand Reuse

Design Manual: Constructed WetlandsTreatment of Municipal Wastewaterwww.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/pdf/Design_Manual2000.pdf

American Rainwater Catchment Systems Associa onwww.arcsa-usa.org

Other Relevant Action Groups:W-03, W-06

W-07Water Collection, Treatment and Re-Use System

http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/pdf/Design_

http://www.arcsa-usa.org/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Non-Toxic Detergents for LaundryUse only non-toxic detergents for laundry

1 Ozone Treatment for LaundryInstall ozone treatment laundry machines

1 Ozone Treatment of Aqua c Facili esInstall ozone treatment for pools

1 Ozone Treatment for Water FeaturesInstall ozone treatment for water features


Narrative:

Tradi onal laundry cleaning methods create high levels ofenergy, chemical waste and water consump on. Chlorineand other chemical based detergents are poten ally toxicto organisms when released to the environment andcould create toxic residuals when stored.

Ozone is a very powerful disinfectant and rapidly oxidisesdissolved impuri es without the produc on of residualsand noxious gases. Ozone allows for shorter wash cyclesresul ng in signi cant energy and water/sewer surchargesavings. Ozone disinfec on is recommended to replacechlorine in pool water and water features/fountains.Ozone disinfec on could be 10-20% water savings and60% - 80% water hea ng savings compared to chlorinedisinfec on.

Considerations:

New HotelsSpace must to be provided for ozone treatment systems.Linking the ozone treatment systems together will savecosts.

Exis ng HotelsRetro ng of exis ng clothing washing machines withozone treatment technology is rela vely simple providingsu cient space exists. Replacement of older machines isalso possible with limited addi onal cost.

Advantages:Energy and water savings; Be er disinfec on (comparedto chlorine systems) and no residuals; Reduced garmentwear-and-tear; Faster washing me for laundry, Nochemical fees and reduced labour.

Disadvantages:High ini al capital cost; Sta educa on; Requires spacefor ozone tank.

References:Ar Clean Ozone Laundry Systemswww.ar clean.com

California Urban Water Conserva on Council: Poten alBest Management Prac ces, On-Premise LaundryFacili esh p://www.cuwcc.org/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=7958

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-04, W-04

W-08Ozone Water Treatment/Chemical Reduction


G-01 Establish a Waste Benchmark

G-02 Manage Ongoing Waste

G-03 Reuse and Dona on of Construc on and FF&EMaterials

G-04 Material Supplier Packaging Reduc on andRemoval Policy

G-05 Manage Site and Food Waste

Waste disposal creates a myriad of environmentalproblems that may not be reversed for many genera ons.Carbon emissions from transporta on, habitat deple onfor land lls, airborne pollutants from trash incinera on,toxins leaching into water supplies and greenhousegas emissions from decomposi on are some of theenvironmental impacts of waste disposal. With 124million tons of construc on debris buried in land lls everyyear, waste reduc on programs o er many opportuni esfor carbon reduc on and habitat protec on.

Waste reduc on and diversion programs begin atconstruc on and con nue through to opera ons.Comprehensive programs should encompass the supplychain waste reduc on and recycling/reuse programs.Understanding a hotel’s waste stream contribu ons willpresent many opportuni es for reduc ons in land lledtrash as well as disposal fees.

Waste Action Groups G-01 to G-05




1 Enrol In Green MeasureOnce building is occupied, uploadmonthly waste consump on data toGreen Measure and keep thoroughdocumenta on of all water u lity bills.

1 Par cipate in Green MeasureUpload a minimum of 12 months of wasteconsump on data to Green Measure andkeep thorough documenta on records ofall water u lity bills.


1 Conduct a Waste Stream AuditFollow IHG Waste Stream AuditProcedures


LEED® MRc6

Narrative:

The rst step in towards the e ec ve management ofwaste is to understand the types and quan es of wastebeing generated.

Green Measure allows hotel operators to track and trendwaste leaving the site on a monthly basis. This datacan be used to benchmark the hotel against other IHGproper es and monitor the e ects of waste minimisa onstrategies.

For a more detailed picture, a hotel should conduct awaste audit. A waste stream audit is a process used toquan fy the amount and types of waste being generatedduring construc on, ongoing opera ons, or demoli on,as well as the treatment and disposal method of thewastes. By quan fying and understanding the wastetypes before construc on, the method for disposal andsavings could be made in terms of material orders andcost for current and future projects. Similarly, iden fyingrecyclables in the ongoing waste stream that are currentlygoing to land ll can lead to reduced waste hauling costs.Weight and volume play an important role regardingwaste audits. For example, if polystyrene is used inconstruc on, the weight of the material is less resul ng incheap pping fees (if not recycled). However the volumeof the material is large, resul ng in more truck loads.

Considerations:New HotelsA form should be created before any construc on projectspecifying the types of waste expected during demoli onand construc on (in weight or volume measurements)and the amount of waste salvaged, recycled and disposed.Receipts or chain of custody forms should be collected bythe construc on manager for all waste hauled o site.

Exis ng HotelsManagement should upload waste data to Green

Measure on a monthly basis. A waste audit should beconducted to establish the current level of recycling,establish a target level, and outline strategies to reach thistarget. Management should inquire about local wastemanagement resources to determine what recyclingservices are available and the associated costs.

Successful implementa on of recycling programs beginswith sta and guest educa on. Guest should be madeaware of how to par cipate in the measures that havebeen established by the facility. Sta should be trainedon separa on and storage policies for recyclables.

Facili es must also be in place to support this program.At a minimum, a hotel should have a central storage areato allow for waste separa on. Recycling bins throughoutthe hotel not only facilitate waste separa on but alsomake these e orts visible to hotel guests.

Advantages:May lead to reduced waste disposal costs in some areas.

Disadvantages:Waste stream audit requires sta training and labour orthe hiring of a third party; Changing the waste disposalmethods may require using addi onal waste removalcontractors.

References:IHG Waste Stream Audit Procedure

Harvard University: Recycling & Solid Waste Removalwww.uos.harvard.edu/fmo/recycling

Other Relevant Action Groups:E-02, W-02, G-02, G-03, G-05

G-01Establish a Waste Benchmark


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

http://www.uos.harvard.edu/fmo/recycling



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Adopt IHG Solid Waste ManagementPolicy

1 Provide Recycling Storage AreaSize area to sort/store paper, metal, glass,plas c & cardboard

Credited Actions

1 Provide Recycling BinsPlace recycling bins in the wastecollec on room in each hotel and allowfor the separa on of paper, plas c, glassand other recyclable materials

1 Recycle General WasteDivert at least 50% of total waste stream.Track and upload diversion rate to GreenMeasure.

1 Recycle Light BulbsRecycle all spent and broken light bulbscontaining mercury in accordance withthe EPA’s Universal Waste Rule

1 Recycle Used Ba eriesProvide a recycling bin in the wastecollec on and recycling room for portabledry-cell ba eries, including rechargeableba eries


LEED® MRp2, MRc7, MRc8 & MRc9

Narrative:

Once the types and quan es of waste being generated bya hotel have been established, a Solid Waste Management(SWM) policy should be adopted to ensure that this wasteis being handled properly. A SWM policy should addresshow hotel waste is to be handled, in par cular iden fyingopportuni es for waste reduc on, reuse and recycling.The recycling program should encompass paper, metal,glass, cardboard, plas c, light bulbs and ba eries.Strategies that should be explored include engaging arecycling agency, par cipa ng in company take-backprograms and par cipa ng in dona on programs.

Successful implementa on of recycling programs beginswith sta and guest educa on. Guest should be madeaware of how to par cipate in the measures that havebeen established by the facility. Sta should be trainedon separa on and storage policies for recyclables.

Facili es must also be in place to support this program.At a minimum, a hotel should have a central storage areato allow for waste separa on. Recycling bins throughoutthe hotel not only facilitate waste separa on but alsomake these e orts visible to hotel guests.

Considerations:New HotelsThe collec on and storage strategy for recyclables shouldbe considered for new hotels and used to inform thedesign of waste storage and pick-up areas.

Exis ng HotelsEnsure that exis ng collec on areas are adequately sized,and add or expand if necessary. The waste managementpolicy should be conveyed to sta and guests to ensure it isfollowed. This includes making bins accessible to all hotelsta including front desk sta , as well as housekeeping

and guests. Recycling rates should be tracked anduploaded on a monthly basis to Green Measure.

Advantages:Reduced burden on land ll; Reduced waste hauling costs;Improved visibility of environmental objec ves to hotelguests.

Disadvantages:Poten al addi onal labour costs in separa ng waste.

References:IHG Solid Waste Management Policy

Other Relevant Action Groups:G-01, G-03, G-05, O-06

G-02Manage Ongoing Waste




1 Construc on Waste Management PlanSubmit a Construc on WasteManagement Plan including weight orvolume of all poten al materials to bedemolished, recycled and disposed

Credited Actions

1 Construc on and Demoli onSalvage, reuse, recycle a minimum 50% ofconstruc on and demoli on debris

1 Deconstruc onDevelop a deconstruc on plan as partof the Construc on Waste ManagementPlan

1 FurnishingsReuse/recycle 10% of furnishings


Narrative:

Waste management is comprised of the 3 Rs (reduce,re-use and recycle), with waste reduc on resul ngin the largest economic and environmental bene ts(e.g. reduc on in GHG emissions) followed by re-use,recycling/compos ng, energy recovery and disposal asworst case. Resource and waste management shouldbe considered at each stage of the building from design,through to construc on, opera on, maintenance anddeconstruc on.

Carefully “deconstruc ng” a building instead ofdemolishing will allow be er reuse and recycling ofbuilding materials and equipment.

Considerations:New HotelsAn on-site staging area or the o -site hauler for eachwaste type should be considered prior to projectcommencement. Poten al waste that could be collectedand salvaged on a construc on includes: concrete,ceramics, metals, inert waste, liquids and oils, wood,plasterboard, packaging, plas cs, insula on, furniture. Ifspace permits, Construc on and Demoli on (C&D) wastecan be treated using mobile processing plant.

Exis ng HotelsDeconstruc on of an exis ng hotel and the poten alloca on of building materials and equipment should beplanned early in the design phase.

Advantages:Cost savings through reducing the quan ty of raw materialsthrough re-use and recycling and by reducing waste toland ll; Reducing the space required at proper es forthe storage of recyclables and waste; Improved marketsthrough increasing e ciency of resource use and throughpromo on of industrial symbiosis.

Disadvantages:

In some regional loca ons, coordina on and staging mayrequire addi onal management and scheduling.

References:Ins tute of Civil Engineers: Demoli on Protocolh p://www.ice.org.uk/knowledge/specialist_waste_board.asp

Addis & Schouten: Design for Deconstruc on: C607:Principles of Design to Facilitate Reuse and Recycling

Other Relevant Action Groups:G-01, G-02, G-04, P-06

G-03Reuse and Donation of Construction and FF&E Materials


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



Credited Actions

1 Incen ve Reduced PackagingAchieve 20% of total materials suppliedwithout packaging

1 Engage Packaging Take-Back/RecyclingProgramDevelop and enforce contract withsuppliers


Narrative:

Waste reduc on could be introduced into the procurementprocesses and incorporated into contracts for poten alsuppliers (waste management contractor, site sub-contractors, and design contractors). Procurementplays a large part in reducing construc on waste.Se ng criteria for procurement of sub-contractors willensure that only those with the right mindset for wasteminimisa on are employed. This can be done by makingwaste minimisa on and management an integral part ofthe tender process for designers, sub-contractors, wastemanagement contractors and materials suppliers. Wherepossible, materials should be procured on the basis oftheir durability, re-usability and recyclability and the useof hard-to-recycle materials such as composites shouldbe limited or even eliminated where possible.

Waste packaging can also be minimised throughprocurement by working with suppliers to rstlyminimise the amount required for protec on and then toini ate take-back schemes for packaging waste. Wherepackaging is essen al, encouraging the use of re-usableprotec on is a good compromise. Take-back schemes foro -cuts and other materials should also be encouraged.

Considerations:

New HotelsA hotel procurement policy should be in place to ensurethat the Construc on Manager is aware of minimisingpackaging, ensure supplier take-back and op miserecyclable packaging during construc on.

Exis ng HotelsAs with new hotels a procurement policy should bein place. There is also an opportunity to impact allrenova ons as well as transla ng this policy to on-goingopera ons. The reduc on of supplier packaging and theburden of hotel storage and removal of this packaging cancontribute to a signi cant reduc on in opera ng costs.

Advantages:Reduc on of waste and conserva on of natural resources;Reduc on in disposal fees.

Disadvantages:In some loca ons coordina on of suppliers may impactschedule or staging area. For exis ng hotels, oncesuppliers have been iden ed there may be increasedamount of oversight required by management un l staand suppliers have been trained on new protocol.

References:None

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-06, O-07, P-01

Material Supplier Packaging Reduction and Removal Policy G-04


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



Credited Actions

1 Manage Landscaping WasteDivert 50% of landscape waste throughmulching, compos ng or dona on

1 Manage Food WasteDivert 50% of food scraps throughcompos ng


Narrative:

Green space on a hotel site o ers bene ts both to hotelguests and the environment. However, such spaces canalso generate a substan al quan ty of clippings, whichis commonly discarded as trash. Rather than sendingthis waste to a land ll, it can be put to use on site, eitherdirectly for mulching or by rst being composted, thenused as a fer lizer.

Food scraps are also suitable for compos ng, so long asmeat scraps are rst removed. This should be consideredin hotels which have the space on-site for a centralcompos ng facility, and the green space to jus fy such afacility. Compost from food scraps is rich in nutrients andcan also be used as fer lizer on-site or donated for use ino -site areas.

Considerations:

New HotelsHotels with signi cant green space should allocate spacefor a central compos ng facility for site and food scrapwaste. Those with less space should implement a sitemanagement policy in which clippings are used formulching.

Exis ng HotelsThe development of a compos ng facility may be di cultfor exis ng hotels. However the use of clippings formulching is simple to implement and carries no capitalcost.

Advantages:Reduced burden on land ll; Reduced fer lizer costs;Environmentally bene cial to inorganic (synthe c)fer lizers.

Disadvantages:Sta ng requirements to sort waste and manage compost;Odour concerns.

References:IHG Sustainable Integrated Pest Management, ErosionControl and Landscape Management Plan

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-05, O-06, G-01, G-02, S-01

G-05Manage Site and Food Waste


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


These principles should be followed when consideringthe selec on of materials:

• Allow exibility in the design of the project

• Be suitable for any future modi ca ons that maybe necessary in the future - lowering future spacecon gura on change costs for example

• Promote the increased health and welfare of buildingoccupants.

• Improve the produc vity of occupants

• Save energy and embodied energy

• Be durable

• Reduce future maintenance costs for the life cycle offacility

New products are con nuing to enter the marketplace toaddress the items listed above as manufacturers respondto the demands of building owners and consumers.

A number of standards have now been developed formaterials. Some of these are listed below:

CarpetsCarpet and Rug Ins tute Indoor Air Quality Carpet Tes ngProgram | www.carpet-rug.com

PaintsGreen Seal Standard GS-11| www.greenseal.org

Sealants / Caulks / AdhesivesSouth Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

Rule #1168 | www.aqmd.gov

Wood ProductsForest Stewardship Council | www.fscus.org

ANSI A208.1 (for par cleboard) | www.web.ansi.org

Recycled ContentInterna onal Standard ISO 14021 1999 - Environmental

Labels and Declara ons | www.iso.org

P-01 Eco-Embedded Materials and Speci ca on

P-02 Low-Emi ng Finish Materials

P-03 Recycled and Recyclable Materials

P-04 Regionally Manufactured and/or RegionallySourced Materials

P-05 Rapidly Renewable/Sustainable HarvestedMaterials

P-06 Design for Material Reduc on and Flexibility ofSpaces

P-07 Mold/Contaminant Resistant Materials andProcess

Product and Materials Action Groups P-01 to P-07

http://www.carpet-rug.com/


http://www.aqmd.gov/

http://www.fscus.org/

http://www.web.ansi.org/

http://www.iso.org/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

P-01Eco-Embedded Materials Speci ication

Narrative:

Speci ca ons ensure a level on consistency throughoutbrands and are a way to determine the quality of aproduct which has been previously reviewed. Embeddingsustainability in to speci ca ons allows hotels a defaultlevel of sustainability which the hotel General Manager orOwner can be con dent will be applied in their property.

The follow criteria is widely used for construc onmaterials, ongoing consumables, and durable goods,in par cular high cost, high impact and high volumematerials such as carpet, paint, oor, wall board, casework, le, insula on, structural members, and windows.These criteria apply to new construc on, renova ons,and ongoing hotel opera ons.

•Local Availability: Locally extracted and manufacturedmaterials should be chosen where possible

•Rapidly renewable content: Materials that have agrowth cycle and can be harvested in less than 10 years,allow products to be manufactured without deple ngresources

•Recycled content: Recycled content materials are madefrom waste material from either a manufacturing processor consumer use

•Low toxicity: Products such as uorescent light bulbsand ba eries contain hazardous materials, howeverthere are products that contain lower levels of thesetoxins or are made to be reusable

•Durability: Materials that last longer with lessmaintenance use less embodied energy over their life

•Speed of assembly: Using materials that can beassembled more quickly can reduce energy requiredduring construc on

Considerations:

New HotelsDevelop speci ca ons that incorporate environmentalstandards. All contractors and subcontractors shouldbe educated on the use and importance of thesespeci ca ons.

Exis ng HotelsStandardised environmental materials speci ca onsshould be developed for ongoing consumables, durablegoods, mercury containing light bulbs, ba eries and to beincluded in all renova on specs.

Advantages:Possible reduced construc on cost; Possible increasedbuilding durability.

Disadvantages:Some products may have limited availability, higher costsand/or longer lead mes in some markets. Allow for theseconsidera ons in budget and construc on schedule.

References:IHG Sustainable Purchasing Policy

IHG Terms and Condi ons

BuildingGreen LLCwww.buildinggreen.com

Na onal Ins tute of Building Science: WBDGwww.wbdg.org/design/greenspec.php

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-07, G-04, P-02, P-03, P-04, P-05



1 Adopt IHG Sustainable Purchasing Policy

1 Standardised Speci ca on for GreenMaterialsDevelop speci ca ons for construc onmaterials using IHG Preferred SupplierList

Credited Actions

1 Standardised Speci ca on Language forProcurement of Regionally Speci c GreenMaterials


LEED® MRp1, MRc1 & MRc2.1

http://www.buildinggreen.com/

http://www.wbdg.org/design/greenspec.php



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



1 Low or No VOC PaintInterior Latex Flat: 50g/L; Non-Flat:150g/L

1 Low or No VOC AdhesivesMul purpose Construc on Adhesive:70g/L; Wood Floor Adhesive 100g/L;Robber Floor Adhesive 60g/L; CeramicTile Adhesives: 65g/L, Sub oor Adhesives:50g/L; Drywall & Panel Adhesives 50g/L

Credited Actions

1 Low or No VOC Coa ngsFloor Coa ng: 100g/L; Sealers: 250g/L;Stains: 250g/L

1 Low or No VOC Carpet SystemsIndoor Carpet and Carpet Pad: 50g/L;Carpet Fibers should meet CRI label orequivalent

1 Low or No VOC Hard Surface FlooringFloor Coa ng: 100g/L; Varnish: 350g/L;Lacquer: 550g/L

1 Composite Wood & Agri breNo added urea-formaldehyde


Narrative:

The quan ty of indoor air contaminants that areodorous, irrita ng and/or harmful have a high impacton the comfort and well-being of hotel guests, sta andinstallers. Materials that have a high impact on indoor airquality are adhesives and sealants, paints and coa ngs,carpet systems and ooring and composite wood &agri bre products.

For reference standards on low vola le-organic-compound (VOC) weights, refer to South Coast Air QualityManagement District Rules, Green Seal Standards andthe Green Label program, among others.

Considerations:New HotelsConsidera on should be made for the inclusion of low-emi ng materials into performance speci ca ons. Thereference web sites outlined on this Ac on Group havespeci c language and performance requirements whichcan be added as relevant on individual projects based onmaterials being used and building type

Exis ng HotelsEmissions diminish and chemicals present in themanufacturing process dry and air out. Therefore,exis ng projects should only pursue these points whenconsidering interior nish/millwork replacement andtouch-ups

Advantages:

Reduced ini al odour, reduc on in ush-out me,reduc on in hazardous materials for storage and control

Disadvantages:Possible longer lead me for availability in certain globalmarkets. Possible addi onal management required forthe review of acceptable tolerances for VOCs or trainingof appropriate “green labelled” products.

References:South Coast Quality Management Districtwww.aqmd.gov

Green Sealwww.greenseal.org

The Carpet and Rug Ins tutewww.carpet-rug.org

US EPA: Health Problems Caused By Vola le OrganicCompoundswww.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/hpguide.html#VOCs

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-09, P-01

P-02Low-Emitting Finish Materials

http://www.aqmd.gov/


http://www.carpet-rug.org/

http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/hpguide.html#VOCs



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Specify and Install Recycled Materials20% of total base building materials

1 Specify and Install Materials which canbe Recycled at End of Life10% of total base building materials

1 Specify and Install Recycled ContentCarpet Tile in Lieu of Broad Loom60% recycled content carpet le

1 Select Carpet Tile from a Manufacturerwith a Take Back ProgramPar cipate in program when renova ng

1 Specify and Install RecycledContent Furnishings5% of public space furniture


Narrative:

Using materials with recycled content reducesenvironmental impacts from extrac on and processingof virgin materials. As a global standard for recycledcontent, ISO 14021 1999- Environmental labels andDeclara ons can be used. Most projects will aim for10-20% of recycled content in materials based on totalmaterial cost in projects.

Recycled content can be both post-consumer such aswaste generated by households as well as pre-consumer,which entails material diverted from waste stream duringthe manufacturing process.

Recycled content can be found in a wide array of nishesand furniture such ceiling les, o ce chairs, and structuralelements such as concrete, engineered wood and steel.

Preference should be given to those products that canbe easily recycled at the end of their use such as steeland aluminium. Many furniture and ooring companiesprovide take-back and recycling programs. Performancespeci ca on language should outline inclusion formaximised recycled content and recyclability wherelocally available and economically feasible. Trackingrecycled content informa on from suppliers should beincorporated into contracts.

Considerations:New HotelsDesign teams should op mise the design to use recycledcontent construc on and nish materials. In most regionswhen incorporated early in design this can be done in acost neutral capacity.

Exis ng HotelsWhen purchasing new furniture and nish materials highrecycled content products should be selected.

Advantages:

Some manufacturers of materials with high recycledcontent have programs to take back the materials, ina renova on this could have a signi cant impact to thereduc on of construc on waste. Addi onally for itemssuch as carpet and ceiling le this may allow for thestorage of less replacement stock.

Many base building materials have a high recycledcontent by the nature of their composi on for examplesteel and glass.

Disadvantages:Product lead mes may need to be adjusted based onavailability in some markets.

References:MBDC: Cradle to Cradlewww.c2ccer ed.com

CalRecycle: Recycled-Content Product Directorywww.ciwmb.ca.gov/rcp


P-03Recycled and Recyclable Materials

http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/rcp



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Specify and Install RegionallyManufactured Materials20% of total base building materials

1 Specify and Install RegionallySourced and Manufactured Materials10% of total base building materials

1 Use Local Aggregate for Concrete Mix

1 Use Locally Manufactured Furniture inLobby and/or Lounge


Narrative:

Signi cant energy is consumed to transport buildingmaterials from their source to the site. Using regionallyextracted, processed, manufactured and/or recoveredmaterials supports the use of indigenous resourcesand reduces the environmental impact resul ng fromtransporta on. Within the sustainable construc onindustry, regional is commonly de ned as within 800kilometres (500 miles) of the project site. Use of regionallymanufactured materials requires a local site or regionalapproach. Most loca ons should have at minimum localgypsum board manufacturers, steel mills and concreteplants. In addi on, regional materials are o en adaptedto speci c local climate challenges that each project teammay be unaware of.

U lisa on of regional materials is a strategy whichalso provides a good way to demonstrate the project’scommitment to the community and local ar sans.

Considerations:New HotelsProject teams need to work to iden fy and determinelocal availability of materials and their rela onship tobuilding design. Incorpora ng regional materials earlyin design ensures a limited cost risk and may presentopportuni es for savings. It is also best if the designteam iden es the use of regional materials in thegeneral condi ons (division 1) of speci ca ons to clearlycommunicate to the contractor the targets for materialuse.

Exis ng HotelsRegional materials are not exclusively limited toconstruc on materials and general managers shouldreview and consider on-going suppliers and consumablegoods. Addi onally, during renova ons or scheduled

maintenance locally sourced and/or manufacturedproducts should be selected when purchasing/replacingnew furniture and nish materials.

Advantages:In des na on loca ons local or regional materials mayenhance the guest experience as well as showing supportfor the local community and heritage.

In many cases local materials are available on shorterno ce given their short haul me; this makes stagingand scheduling these materials easier for both new andexis ng hotels. A large por on of base building materialssuch as concrete, steel and glass are manufactured locally.Addi onally some recycled alterna ves to Portlandcement enhance concrete strength while reducingembodied energy

Disadvantages:Some markets may have limited op ons dependant onloca on. In these cases product lead mes may need tobe adjusted based on availability.

References:None


Regionally Manufactured/Regionally Sourced Materials P-04



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions

1 Specify and Install RapidlyRenewable Materials10% of total nish materials

1 Specify and Install SustainablyHarvested Rapidly Renewable Materials10% of total nish materials

1 Install Linoleum Flooring in Place of VinylTile or Sheet Flooring

1 Install Cork Flooring in Place of HardWood Flooring


Narrative:

Most building materials u lise nite raw resourcesor resources with long regenera on cycles. U lisingrapidly renewable materials that have less than tenyear harvest periods diminishes the ecological footprintof a building project. Common examples are bamboo,wool, co on ba insula on, agri bre, linoleum ooring,wheatboard, strawboard and cork. Wheatboard isan excellent replacement for par cle board. Rapidlyrenewable materials o en have a signi cant pricepremium, o en because they serve a niche market.Unfortunately, as demand increases some suppliers areo ering products that are the result of environmentallydetrimental agricultural prac ces—such as clearing oldgrowth forests to grow bamboo. When selec ng rapidlyrenewable products, it is important to choose productsfrom sustainable sources.

Considerations:

New HotelsRapidly renewable nishes, furniture and serviceproducts provide a great opportunity to demonstratethe company’s commitment to sustainability and thuseduca ng the sta and community. However, thedesire for visibility should not result in using renewablematerials even though they have high embodied energydue to distance travelled from their source (e.g. bamboofrom South Asia to United States).

Exis ng HotelsSustainably harvested rapidly renewable materials canbe found in a wide variety of products from fabric totoiletries. Interior renova ons also o er opportuni es toupgrade furniture and nishes to products with rapidlyrenewable content.

Advantages:Rapidly renewable materials are widely iden able assustainable materials and can improve public percep on.

Disadvantages:Lack of product availability or cost increase may limitop ons in some markets; Products that are long distanceimports and/or produced through environmentallydamaging prac ces would send a contradictorymessage.

References:Environ Biocomposites Mfg. LLCwww.environbiocomposites.com

Green Depotwww.greenmakersupply.com/pages/construc on_materials/110.php

Other Relevant Action Groups:P-01

P-05Rapidly Renewable/Sustainable Harvested Materials

http://www.environbiocomposites.com/

http://www.greenmakersupply.com/pages/construc



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major


Credited Actions1 Advanced Framing

Submit design demonstra ng reduc onin framing members and implementa onplan

1 Designing for Standard DimensionsSubmit design demonstra ng standarddimensions

1 Modular/Pre-Fab Construc onSubmit design demonstra ng use ofmodular and/or pre-fab systems inconstruc on

1 Flexibility of SpacesSubmit design and implementa on planfor mul ple uses of space


Narrative:

Designing for material reduc on can reduce the wastestream as well as the cost of a project. Using advancedframing prac ces, the overall number of framing membersis reduced and the depth of the members increased. Thistechnique uses less material waste and provides a largerwall cavity for increased insula on. Increased modularityand designing to u lise standard product dimensions willdecrease the amount of construc on waste generatedon-site and simplify construc on. Modular systems,such as structurally insulated panel systems, reduce theneed for on-site construc on decreasing me, costs anderrors.

All of these systems and techniques require increaseda en on to detail in design and planning. Further takingthe me to design in exibility of programs into spaceswill reduce the need for costly and disrup ve addi onsand renova ons in the future.

Considerations:

New HotelsCrea ng a standard design that can be easily adjusted to t the speci c site and climate characteris cs will reduce

the need for me intensive redesigns with each project.

Exis ng HotelsThese strategies do not apply to exis ng projects.

Advantages:Reduced material costs; Reduced construc on wastedisposal costs; Increased energy e ciency; Reduces theneed for future construc on

Disadvantages:Increased design e ort; Lack of exper se and/or materialsin some markets

References:Southface Energy Ins tutewww.southface.org/default-interior/Documents/awf-advanced_frame00-770.pdf

Structural Insulated Panel Associa onwww.sips.org

Other Relevant Action Groups:G-03

P-06Design for Material Reduction and Flexibility of Spaces

http://www.southface.org/default-interior/Documents/awf-

http://www.sips.org/



Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

Narrative:

Mold growth and contaminants in indoor environmentscan cause persistent problems from producing stainingand foul odours to serious respiratory illnesses. Removingand remedia ng contaminants a er it has been no cedcan be a very expensive process.

Mold will grow anywhere that excess moisture is present.The best way to combat mold growth is to controlthe moisture introduced to interior spaces. Duringconstruc on, the staging and storage of absorbentmaterials and air handling equipment is cri cal topreven ng the introduc on of contaminants. Deliveringand storing ducts covered and sealed will prevent dust anddebris from contamina ng the air handling equipment. Ifabsorbent materials do get wet, allowing thorough dryout before installa on will prevent future mold growth.

Proper envelope detailing and installa on will deterrain and humid air in ltra on and allow for full dry outwhen moisture is introduced. Vapour barriers/retardersshould be limited to use in the correct climate zones witha en on paid to how the walls will dry out. Using moldresistant materials will deter mold growth when smallamounts of moisture are present. Bathrooms, kitchensand other humid areas of the building should provide theappropriate automated exhaust op ons.

Considerations:New HotelsDesign teams should consider climate and movement ofmoisture through the envelope when crea ng details andwall construc ons. Construc on teams should create andimplement a Construc on Air Quality Management Plan.

Exis ng HotelsRegular inspec ons for leaks and condensa on buildup should be implemented and problems remediatedimmediately. When renova ng exis ng facili es,consider installing bathroom exhausts that vent to theoutside and replacing interior wall coverings with vapourpermeable nishes that allow walls to dry out.

Advantages:Increased durability of construc on materials; Odourreduc on; Increased guest sa sfac on; Less in ltra onreduces energy consump on

Disadvantages:Requires supervision during construc on; Can requireadded design exper se

References:Sheet Metal and Air Condi oning Contractor's Na onalAssocia onwww.smacna.org

US Environment Protec on Agencywww.epa.gov/iaq/schooldesign/controlling.html

Other Relevant Action Groups:B-04

P-07Mold/Contaminant Resistant Materials and Process


Credited Actions

1 Specify Mold Resistant ProductsSpecify mold resistant products whereappropriate

1 Moisture Resistant Details/DesignSpecify moisture resistant details whereappropriate

1 Spot ExhaustInstall spot exhausts in all bathrooms,kitchens and pool rooms

1 Envelope Dry OutAllow envelope to fully dry out beforeinstalling moisture barriers

1 Construc on Materials Storage/HandlingFollow a Construc on IAQ ManagementPlan


http://www.smacna.org/

http://www.epa.gov/iaq/schooldesign/controlling.html


S-01 Environmentally Sensi ve Site Management

S-02 Des na on Protec on

S-03 Building Si ng

S-04 Ecology and Landscaping

S-05 Reduce Auto Use Impact

S-06 Parking

According to the US EPA, developed land use in 2004 wasequal to around 108 million acres. This was an increase of24% over the previous 10 years. This trend is replicatedthroughout much of the world as popula ons grow andmigrate to urban areas of the world.

With this growth, land that could have been put toother uses is lost. These uses could include land forgrowing food, and diversi ed ecosystems. As paved areasgrow, rainwater is no longer a enuated at the point ofcontact with the ground and immediately runs o takingcontaminants and eroding soil. Waterways get polluted.

Developed land tends to consist of a high percentageof hardscape - such as parking areas and building roofs.These are heated by the sun during the day and re-emitthat heat at night which can raise local air temperatures.This can increase air condi oning loads for a building andalso impact insects and other wildlife.

A site should be chosen, designed, and constructed, tominimize the impacts listed above. The social impact ofthe site should also be considered along with the ease ofaccess to those working at the site.

S-01 to S-06Site Action Groups


S-01Environmentally Sensitive Site Management

Narrative:

The environmental implica ons of the management of ahotel site can be profound. O en chemicals used for pestcontrol, fer lising, cleaning walkways, or removing ice endup pollu ng the ground or waterways and a ec ng local ora and fauna. The implementa on of a comprehensive

site management plan can lessen this impact whilst alsoimproving condi ons for guests and workers by ensuringthat the frequency of site maintenance work is kept toa minimum and elimina ng poten al exposure to toxicsubstances.

The site management plans relate to the followingissues:

• Maintenance equipment

• Snow and ice removal

• Cleaning of building exterior and hardscapes

• Paints and sealants used on building exterior

• Outdoor pest management

• Erosion and sedimenta on control

• Compos ng or mulching of landscape waste

• Minimisa on of chemical fer liser use

Considerations:New HotelsA site management plan should be implemented at theonset of construc on to minimise the impact to thebuilding site. In par cular, an erosion and sedimenta oncontrol plan is necessary to control and minimise theintroduc on of silt and pollutants into the watershedduring rain events. Projects with new site or landscapingwork should follow the sugges ons in the referenced

stormwater pollu on protec on guidelines appropriateto the project site.

Exis ng HotelsReduc on in the use of toxic chemicals on the hotelsite is a low-cost measure that will deliver immediateenvironmental bene ts. Erosion and sedimenta oncontrol should be performed for all landscaping work.Mulching or compos ng of landscaping waste shouldbe done where possible to reduce waste hauling andfer lising costs.

Advantages:Low cost measures; Poten al to reduce expenditure onchemicals and equipment, and waste hauling; Minimisesrisk of exposure of toxic chemicals to hotel guests andworkers.

Disadvantages:Requires training and documenta on to implement andtrack; Some low-impact alterna ves are not suitable oravailable in all loca ons.

References:IHG Sustainable Building Exterior and HardscapeManagement Plan

IHG Sustainable Integrated Pest Management, ErosionControl and Landscape Management Plan

Other Relevant Action Groups:O-04, W-05, W-06, S-02, S-04



1 Erosion & Sedimenta on Control DuringConstruc on


1 Adopt IHG Sustainable Building Exteriorand Hardscape Management Plan

1 Adopt IHG Sustainable Integrated PestManagement, Erosion Control andLandscape Management Plan


LEED® SSc2 & SSc3


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



Credited Actions

1 Site Selec onAvoid prime parkland, farmland,proximity to wetlands and bodies ofwater, protected species habitat

1 Species & Habitat Protec onProvide wildlife corridors, ecologicalbu ers, restore na ve species

1 Habitat Educa onProvide guided tours, literature andsignage to inform guests of sensi vehabitat to avoid


Narrative:

Construc on and tourism can be very disrup ve to localecosystems and endanger the natural resources that makea loca on a desirable des na on. Whenever possible,choosing a building site that has already been disturbedand/or is not home to sensi ve species is the rst step toreducing the nega ve impact of increased human ac vityin an area. Landscape and site planning should protectna ve species with wetland bu ers, wildlife corridors andhabitat restora on. Trained tour guides and other meansof signage and visitor educa on should be employed tolimit damage to protected areas.

Considerations:

New HotelsLanguage explaining proper site prepara on andmaintenance should be included in speci ca ons. Allprojects could prac ce site and species protec onstar ng with a basic ecological audit that will inform sitedesign and use.

S-02Destination Protection

Exis ng HotelsConsidera on should be made for habitat restora onwhen designing new landscape features and guides and/or educa on for guests visi ng ecologically fragile areasshould be provided

Advantages:Reduces invasive species; lowers landscaping maintenancecosts; Creates a stronger sense of place; Preserves thenatural character of the des na on environment.

Disadvantages:Limits buildable site; Construc on erosion controlrequires oversight and maintenance.

References:

US EPA: Na onal Pollutant Discharge Elimina on System,Chapter 3www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/chap03_conguide.pdf

US EPA: NPDES, Stormwater Pollu on Preven on Guidewww.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sw_swppp_guide.pdf

Nature Servewww.natureserve.org/

Other Relevant Action Groups:S-01, S-04, S-05 Action Group Impact:

Energy

Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/chap03_conguide.pdf

http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sw_swppp_guide.pdf

http://www.natureserve.org/



Credited Actions

1 Op mised Solar Orienta onFace building within 30° of south (ornorth for southern hemisphere hotels)

1 Reduce Building FootprintLess than 50% of total site area


Narrative:

Well planned solar orienta on balances the need to blocksunlight from contribu ng to cooling loads and permitspenetra on for dayligh ng and solar hea ng. Orien ngthe building so that the longest facades are exposed tothe North and South with appropriate shading allowsthe project to take greatest advantage of available solarresources.

By designing the most e cient building footprint thatmeets occupancy and opera ng requirements resourcesare conserved during construc on and opera on ofthe facility. Building for possible expansion that is notul mately used only results in higher ini al capital costas well as higher facili es costs. Reducing the buildingfootprint also allows more of the site to be u lised forlandscaping and habitat restora on.

Considerations:

New HotelsWhen minimising the footprint of a project determinefunc ons, such as event parking or large mee nghalls, can be shared with neighbouring facili es orstacked. When op mising solar orienta on, incorporateappropriate horizontal and ver cal solar shading deviceson the exposed facades.

Exis ng HotelsExis ng projects may only pursue this ac on if expansionsare planned. When expansions are being planned, rstdetermine what neighbouring resources could be be eru lised in lieu of new construc on.

Advantages:Reduced opera ng costs; Reduced construc on costs

Disadvantages:Possible increased design costs

References:US DOE: Passive Solar Designwww1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/26015.pdf

Natural Resources Defence Council: From Principle toPrac ce, Choose a Sustainable Sitewww.nrdc.org/buildinggreen/strategies/site.asp

Other Relevant Action Groups:B-01, S-02, S-04

S-03Building Siting


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

http://www.nrdc.org/buildinggreen/strategies/site.asp



Credited Actions

1 Vegetated Open SpaceA minimum 75% of vegetated open space

1 Na ve/Adap ve SpeciesA minimum 50% of na ve or adap vevegeta on

1 Site Restora onGreen eld sites – limit site disturbancewith a site development plan includingrestora on of any disturbed vegeta on;previously developed – restore 50% of thesite area outside the building footprint

1 Maximise Open SpaceExceed local zoning open spacerequirements by a minimum 25%


Narrative:

Plan the building footprint, driveway and parking tomaximise open space and preserve local ecosystems.Green space should serve as a wildlife corridor and maybe used for recrea on or aesthe c gardens. Vegeta oncontributes signi cantly to other measures such asreduced heat island impact and stormwater control.Na ve vegeta on species adapt to the geography,hydrology, and climate of the region, require li le orno irriga on, minimal maintenance and require nofer lisers, pes cides and herbicides. Na ve vegeta onact as local habitats to animal species in the region andcreate biodiversity. Vegetated open space is cri cal tothreatened/endangered species.

If a site will be disturbed during construc on such as llingwetlands, vegeta on removal, soil compac on, then arestora on plan should be developed and the projectmust develop an Erosion and Sedimenta on ControlPlan based on the requirements in the IHG IntegratedPest Management, Erosion Control and LandscapeManagement Plan.. The restora on plan can iden fyareas not to be disturbed, as well as procedures to ensurethat the site is restored. The plan should illustrate the sitebefore construc on and the measures that will be takenduring and a er construc on to restore habitats.

Considerations:New HotelsDisturbance outside the building footprint should beminimised. An ecological disturbance should be mi gatedwith a site restora on plan including developing habitatsfor plant and animal species. Urban environmentsmay u lise plazas, courtyards, or even green roofs.Greenspaces in close proximity to the hotel may havesecure wireless internet access enabling sta to work

remotely. If there is su cient open space, a plant withhigh calori c value could be grown as a biofuel.

Exis ng HotelsInvasive and non-na ve species should be removed fromthe exis ng hotel grounds and replaced with na ve/adap ve species. Landscape maintenance prac cesshould minimize the use of chemicals, reduce theintroduc on of pollutants to stormwater runo andreduce waste.

Advantages:Na ve/adap ve species require li le or no water andless maintenance, open space for guests, visitors andemployees can use for recrea on

Disadvantages:Na ve/adap ve species require a higher capital cost thantradi onal grasses

References:Donald Harker, Landscape Restora on Handbook

Other Relevant Action Groups:W-05, W-06, S-01, S-02, S-03

S-04Ecology and Landscaping


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major



Credited Actions

1 Access to Public Transporta onWithin 180 metres (600 feet) distance ofpublic transporta on or hotel providedshu le or other

1 On-Site Alterna ve Transporta onRentalsProvide availability for Bicycles, Segway,Fuel-E cient Vehicles, for a total of 2%guest rooms

1 Employee Bicycling ProgramParking and shelter for bicycles for 10%of total shi sta

1 Shu le/Carpool ServicesCreate or provide a shu le or carpoolprogram for sta


Narrative:

The environmental impact of transporta on to and fromthe project can be signi cantly decreased with planningand programs that decrease single occupancy vehicleuse. Guests and employees will bene t from programsthat o er alterna ves to single occupancy vehicles.

Enabling employees and guests to u lise publictransporta on will lead to a reduc on in automobilepollu on, road development and parking requirements.O ering ameni es such as discounted or readily availabletransit cards can increase ridership in areas where masstransit is available. Fuel e cient shu les that serviceairports, train sta ons and mass transit sta ons canbe employed in remote loca ons to discourage singleoccupancy vehicle rental.

Biking instead of driving reduces pollu on, parkingrequirements, and provides a healthy alterna ve totra c. Providing bicycle and fuel-e cient vehicle rentalson-site will allow guest greater exibility while reducingcar usage.

Considerations:New HotelsBefore considering a poten al building or site loca on,the owner should thoroughly inves gate local bus, train,and light rail transporta on op ons. Parking plans shouldincorporate shu le and carpool drop-o areas as well asprovide ample secure bicycle storage for employees andguest rentals.

Exis ng HotelsAll projects can encourage employee use of alterna vetransporta on by giving preferen al parking to fuele cient vehicles and carpools, providing bike storageand showering facili es, par cipa ng in mass transit

discount fare programs and providing easy accessibilityto mass transit.

Guest alterna ve transporta ons programs, with on-siterentals, shu le services, maps and educa on, can beincorporated in part or in full depending on the loca on’sresources.

Advantages:Some countries - such as the UK - have government runtax break schemes available to employers to promote theuse of bicycles, exercise could also reduce health carecosts, Increased appeal and accessibility of the hotel.

Disadvantages:Depending on the local market, land use and value maybe higher near public transporta on, shu le services willincrease costs.

References:Average e ciencies for various transport modes:

Commuter Rail (Diesel): 0.475 l/100km (495 mpg) perpassenger

Bus: (Diesel): 0.653 l/100km (360 mpg) per passenger

Car: 6.53 l/100km (36 mpg) per passenger

American Council for Energy E cient Economy:Transporta on Programwww.aceee.org/transporta on/index.htm

US DOE: Fuel Economywww.fueleconomy.gov

Other Relevant Action Groups:S-02, S-06

S-05Reduce Auto Use Impact


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

http://www.aceee.org/transporta

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/



Credited Actions

1 Code Minimum/No Addi onal Parking

1 Parking Under ShadeShade 50% of parking areas with > 29 SRImaterials

1 Pervious/Permeable PavingMinimum 50% of surface area

1 Recycled Content PavingMinimum 50% of surface area


Narrative:

Large vehicle storage lots cause many other environmentalimpacts beyond simply suppor ng single occupancyvehicle use. Surface car parking lots limit the amount ofsite available for habitat and management of stormwater.These large impervious surfaces cause excessive runowhich causes ooding, erosion and the introduc onof pollutants into waterways. The dark surface of thepavement is also a major contributor to the urban heatisland e ect that changes the microclimate of areas. Heatislands are characterised by a thermal gradient betweendeveloped and undeveloped areas. Heat island impactcan be reduced by shading hardscape and using open gridpaving systems or paving material with a solar re ec veindex (SRI) greater than 29.

These environmental impacts can be reduced byminimising surface parking and selec ng environmentallypreferable materials.

Shading with exis ng trees can be an aesthe callypleasing op on that incurs no cost. Asphalt has a SRI of0 while new white concrete has an SRI of 86. If nancialor local circumstances provide no alterna ve to the useof asphalt, teams should consider the use of recycledasphalt where locally available and feasible. Pavingop ons that allow for increased stormwater in ltra oninclude pervious concrete, open grid pavers, gravel andstructural systems that allow for periodic parking ongrass.

Considerations:New HotelsRequired parking should be minimised through alterna vetransporta on programs, where applicable. Parking areashould be shaded with trees or placed under a structurewith a high albedo roof. Surface parking should providerainwater in ltra on through pervious paving materials.

Materials used to construct new parking should be lightcoloured and/or have high recycled content.

Exis ng HotelsProjects with exis ng parking spaces should not createaddi onal parking. Parking should be shaded with treesand/or resurfaced with a lighter coloured material, suchas white topping.

Advantages:Greater stormwater in ltra on will reduce strain oninfrastructure and need for deten on/reten on areas. Inhot climates providing covered parking areas will increasedriver comfort.

Disadvantages:Underground parking could cost signi cantly morethan surface parking. Pervious pavement materialsand experienced installers may not be available or mayincrease costs.

References:US Environmental Protec on Agency: Heat Island E ectwww.epa.gov/hea sld/resources/pdf/HIRIbrochure.pdf

Na onal Ready Mixed Concrete Associa on: PerviousConcrete Pavementwww.perviouspavement.org

Interlocking Concrete Pavement Ins tutewww.icpi.org/design/?gclid=CInP8K__95MCFQfNIgodAhkGWw

Other Relevant Action Groups:W-06, S-05

S-06Parking


Waste

Water

Carbon

A ordability

Consumer

Minor Major

http://www.epa.gov/hea

http://www.perviouspavement.org/

http://www.icpi.org/design/?gclid=CInP8K__95MCFQfNIgodA


A/C Lockout

A switch which automa cally turns a room’s aircondi oning unit o when a window is open.

Absorption CoolingA type of cooling process that uses a heat-ac vatedrefrigera on cycle. This means that the mean energysource for cooling can be a source of heat includingwaste heat, natural gas or biomass.

Agri ibre ProductsComposite panel products derived from recoveredagricultural waste bre. Sources include cereal strawand agricultural prunings, which are mixed with resins toproduce panel products.

Air Cooled ChillerA refrigera on device used for air condi oning thatrejects heat to air.

Air Handling Unit (AHU)A device used to condi on and circulate air as part ofbuilding’s HVAC system. Equipment includes a fan orblower, hea ng and/or cooling coils, controls, air ltersand possibly humidi ers.

AlbedoA measure of a material’s re ec vity, which ranges from0 (dark) to 1 (light).

ASHRAE 90.1-2004US energy standard which provides minimum energy-e ciency requirements for the design and construc onof new buildings and building systems. This code coversbuilding envelope construc on, HVAC, domes c hotwater and electrical systems.

Biofuel

Fuel such as methane produced from treated municipaland industrial waste or renewable biological resourcessuch as biomass.

BiomassPlant ma er such as trees, grasses, agricultural cropsor other biological material. It can provide a renewablesource of electrical power, fuel, or chemical feedstocks.

BioswaleA landscape element designed to channel surface runowater whilst removing silt and pollu on.

BlackwaterWastewater from toilets and kitchen sinks that containsorganic materials.

Blowdown Heat RecoveryBlowdown is the process of limi ng the concentra onof impuri es in steam boiler water through the periodicor con nuous removal of some of the water. A heatrecovery system can be added to recover the thermalenergy in this water that would otherwise be lost.

Building Management System (BMS)A computer-based control system installed in buildingsthat controls and monitors the building’s mechanicaland electrical equipment. Opera on of ven la on,ligh ng, and power systems is controlled based onmeasurements of variables such as space temperatureand humidity. Fire and security systems may also becontrolled.

Building EnvelopeThe exterior por ons of a building through which

Glossary

thermal energy is transferred between the building andits surroundings, including oors, walls, roofs and glazedareas.

Building FootprintThe area on a project site that is used by the buildingstructure. Parking lots, landscapes and other non-building facili es are excluded.

Carbon Dioxide (CO2)A greenhouse gas and indicator of ven la one ec veness inside buildings. CO2 concentra onsgreater than 540 ppm above outdoor CO2 condi onsare generally considered to be an indicator of poorbreathing air quality and inadequate ven la on.

Chloro luorocarbons (CFCs)Chemicals previously used as refrigerants butnow banned due to their damaging e ect on thestratospheric ozone layer. These chemicals are alsopotent greenhouse gases, in the order of 5,000 – 10,000 mes stronger than CO2.

CoGenAlso known as Combined Heat and Power (CHP). Thesimultaneous genera on of both electricity and usefulheat, typically on a building or campus level, through theuse of a heat engine or a power sta on.

CondensateRefers to steam that has been condensed back intowater in a steam hea ng system. This may be returnedto the boiler through condensate return lines.

Constructed WetlandAn engineered system designed to simulate natural


wetland func ons for water puri ca on. Constructedwetlands are essen ally treatment systems that removecontaminants from wastewater.

Daylight SensorA control which reads light levels in perimeter zones ofbuildings and switches o or dims ar cial ligh ng whenthere is su cient daylight.

DeadbandThe range of values around a setpoint where no ac onoccurs, preven ng a system from constantly ickering onand o .

Direct Digital Control (DDC)A system which uses a computer or microprocessor tomonitor and control variables such as temperature andair ow rates.

Double FaçadeA façade consis ng of a two layers or “skins”, separatedby a ven lated cavity.

Drip IrrigationA high-e ciency irriga on method in which water dripsto the soil from perforated tubes or emi ers.

Ecological BufferA zone or an area that serves not for any anthropogenicuse but as a conserved natural habitat where plants andanimals can thrive.

EconomiserA system designed to improve the HVAC e ciencywhen the outside air is su ciently cool. An airsideeconomiser allows an AHU to draw on outside air rather

than recircula ng air as a means of cooling the indoorspace. A waterside economiser uses water cooled by awet cooling tower to cool buildings without opera ng achiller.

Embodied EnergyThe total amount of energy involved in crea ng aproduct, including resource extrac on, transporta on,manufacturing and fabrica on.

Energy StarAn interna onal standard for energy e cient productsand buildings, run jointly by the U.S. EnvironmentalProtec on Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy.Devices carrying the Energy Star logo, such as computerproducts and peripherals, kitchen appliances, buildingsand other products, save 20%-30% on average in energyconsump on.

ErosionA combina on of processes in which materials of theearth’s surface are loosened, dissolved or worn away,and transported from one place to another by naturalagents.

Evaporative CoolingThe process of cooling air through the simpleevapora on of water.

Fan Coil Unit (FCU)A device used to control the temperature of a space. Itconsists of a hea ng and/or cooling coil and a fan.

FF&E MaterialsFurniture, xtures and equipment.

Glossary

FPP (Fan Powered Parallel)

A type of VAV system which can improve ven la one ciency of VAV systems in hea ng mode. The intakeof air from the AHU is reduced to a minimum and FPPboxes simply recirculate and heat the air within thespace.

Flush-Out TimeThe period during which a building’s air condi oningsystem runs at full capacity at the comple on ofconstruc on but before the building is occupied. This isintended to reduce the level of pollutants and irritants inthe air to acceptable levels.

Footcandle (fc)A measure of light falling on a given surface. Onefootcandle is equal to the quan ty of light falling on aone-square-foot area from a one candela light sourceat a distance of one foot. Footcandles can be measuredboth horizontally and ver cally by a footcandle or “lightmeter.”

FormaldehydeA naturally occurring VOC found in small amounts inanimals and plants, but carcinogenic and an irritantto most people when present in high concentra ons,causing headaches, dizziness, mental impairment, andother symptoms. Urea-formaldehyde is a combina onof urea and formaldehyde that is used in some glues andreadily decomposes at room temperature.

Full Cut Off LuminaireA light source designed to prevent light pollu on byemi ng no light above horizontal, and an intensityof less than 10% in the region of 80°-90° from thedownward ver cal axis.


F-value

The perimeter heat loss factor for slab-on-grade oors,expressed in Btu/h• •°F.

Geothermal PowerEnergy generated from heat stored in the earth, typicallyusing high temperature water or steam extracted fromdeep below the surface to drive turbines.

Green AwareIHG’s in-house training course, addressingenvironmentally responsible hotel opera on.

Green EngageIHG’s in-house global measurement tool, used to assessand benchmark water, energy and waste performanceof hotels.

Green FaçadeA façade which features vegeta on, typically climbingplants, growing directly on the surface or on speciallydesigned suppor ng structures.

Green ieldUndeveloped land or land that has not been impactedby human ac vity.

Greenhouse Gases (GHG)Those gases, such as water vapour, carbon dioxide, andmethane, that are transparent to solar radia on, butopaque to long wave radia on, and which contribute tothe greenhouse e ect.

GreywaterWastewater generated from domes c purposes such asdish washing, lavatory and bathing.

Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP)

A type of heat pump that uses the ground, groundwater, or ponds as a heat source and heat sink, ratherthan outside air. Ground or water temperatures aremore constant and are warmer in winter and cooler insummer than air temperatures. Geothermal heat pumpsoperate more e ciently than “conven onal” or “airsource” heat pumps.

Heat Island EffectThe e ect whereby an urban area is signi cantly warmerthan surrounding rural areas, mainly due to solar energyreten on on constructed surfaces. Principal surfacesthat contribute to the heat island e ect include streets,sidewalks, parking lots and buildings.

Heat RecoveryThe process of capturing heat from the exhaust air froma building and transferring it to the supply air enteringthe building to preheat the air and increase overalle ciency.

HumidistatAn automa c control device used to maintain humidityat a xed or adjustable setpoint.

HVAC SystemThe Hea ng, Ven la ng, and Air-Condi oning systemsequipment, distribu on systems, and terminals usedto provide thermal comfort and ven la on for buildinginteriors.

Hydrochloro luorocarbons (HCFCs)Refrigerants used in building equipment that depletethe stratospheric ozone layer, but to a lesser extentthan CFCs. These chemicals are also potent greenhouse

Glossary

gases, in the order of 100 – 2,000 mes stronger thanCO2.

Hydro luorocarbons (HFCs)Refrigerants that do not deplete the stratospheric ozonelayer. However, some HFCs have high global warmingpoten al, in the order of 1,000 – 10,000 mes strongerthan CO2, and thus are not environmentally benign.

Impervious SurfaceA surface which does not allow rainwater to passthrough it, crea ng stormwater runo .

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ)The nature of air that a ects the health and well-beingof building occupants.

Industrial SymbiosisA form of coexistence whereby a number of industriesmake use of each other’s produc on residues or by-products for commercial and environmental reasons.

In iltrationThe uninten onal or accidental introduc on of outsideair into a building, typically through cracks in thebuilding envelope and through use of doors for passage.

Light ShelfAn architectural element which consists of a highlyre ec ve overhang on a window. Light shelves aredesigned to increase dayligh ng by re ec ng light ontothe ceiling and deeper into a space.

Light PollutionCaused by stray light from unshielded light sources andlight re ec ng o surfaces that enters the atmosphere,


causing an e ect know as “sky glow”. Light pollu oncan substan ally limit visual access to the night sky andadversely a ect nocturnal environments, and needlesslyconsumes energy and natural resources.

Light TrespassObtrusive, unwanted light.

Low-E (Emissivity) CoatingA coa ng applied to the surface of the glazing of awindow to improve thermal performance by increasingits ability to re ect heat.

MERV (Minimum Ef iciency Reporting Value)A measure of the e ciency of an air lter in removingpar cles.

Modular/Pre-Fab ConstructionConstruc on using standard designs that allow somelevel of preassembly before delivery to the site.

Native/Adapted VegetationSpecies that are indigenous to a locality or have adaptedto the local climate and are not invasive. Such plants donot require irriga on or fer lisa on once root systemsare established in the soil.

Natural VentilationThe process of supplying and removing air withoutmechanical assistance in building spaces by usingopenings such as windows and doors, non-poweredven lators, and in ltra on processes.

NEMA (National Electrical ManufacturersAssociation)A US organisa on which provides standards for high

e ciency motors.

Noise Criteria (NC)A standard system established in the US for ra ng indoornoise from air condi oning systems, etc.

Occupancy SensorA device that detects the presence or absence of peoplewithin an area and causes ligh ng, equipment, orappliances to be regulated accordingly.

Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner (PTAC)A self-contained air condi oning and hea ng systemcommonly found in hotels. Typically, PTACs use arefrigerant cycle for cooling, with electric hea ng.

Packaged Terminal Heat Pump (PTHP)A PTAC capable of using the refrigera ng system in areverse cycle or heat pump mode to provide heat.

Pervious/Permeable PavingPaving which allows rainwater to pass through it andseep into the ground, reducing stormwater runo .

Photovoltaic (PV) CellA device which converts light into electricity.

Potable WaterWater that meets drinking water quality standards andis approved for human consump on by the state or localauthori es having jurisdic on.

Prime MoverA device in a building’s HVAC system where electricalenergy is converted to rota ng-sha power, such asboilers, chillers and air handling fans.

Rainwater Harvesting

The collec on and storage of rainwater, which can beused for irriga on or toilet- ushing.

Rapidly Renewable MaterialsAgricultural products, either bre or animal, which take10 years or less to grow/raise and harvest in an ongoingand sustainable fashion.

RecyclingThe collec on, reprocessing, marke ng and use ofmaterials which have been diverted or recovered fromthe solid waste stream.

Re lectivityThe ra o of the light re ected by a material to the lightincident upon it.

RefrigerantThe working uid of refrigera on cycles. Refrigerantsabsorb heat through evapora on from a reservoir at lowtemperatures and reject heat through condensa on athigher temperatures.

Regional MaterialA material which has been extracted/harvested/recovered and manufactured within a speci c distanceof the building site, typically 800 kilometres (500 miles).

Relative Humidity (RH)The ra o of par al density of water vapour in the airto the satura on density of water vapour at the sametemperature.

Return AirAir removed from condi oned spaces that is either

Glossary


recirculated in the building or exhausted to the outside.

Reverberation ControlThe reduc on of reverbera on, or echoing, as a meansof reducing the spread of sound from one area toanother, typically through the use of porous, sound-absorp ve materials.

Reverse Osmosis (RO)A ltra on process where pressure is used to forcewater through a membrane, leaving behind anyimpuri es.

RS MeansThe leading US supplier of construc on cost informa on.

R-value (Thermal Resistance)The reciprocal of U-value. Units of R are h• 2•°F/Btu.

SedimentationThe addi on of soils to water bodies by natural andhuman-related ac vi es. Sedimenta on decreaseswater quality and accelerates the aging process of lakes,rivers and streams.

Solar Heat Gain Coef icient (SHGC)The ra o of the solar heat gain entering the spacethrough a glazing to the incident solar radia on. Solarheat gain includes directly transmi ed solar heat andabsorbed solar radia on, which is then reradiated,conducted, or convected into the space.

Solar OrientationThe orienta on of a building with respect to the sun,which can have a signi cant e ect on energy e ciency.

Solar Thermal

The technology of extrac ng thermal energy (heat) fromsolar energy. Typical uses include domes c hot waterand pool hea ng.

SRI (Solar Re lectance Index)A measure of a material’s ability to reject solar heat. Astandard black has an SRI of 0 and a standard white 100.

Stormwater RunoffWater volumes that are created during precipita onevents and ow over surfaces into sewer systems orreceiving waters.

Sunpath AnalysisA simula on of the progression of the sun over a year,which is used when designing a building to determineshading e ects and sun penetra on.

Supply AirAir delivered to condi oned spaces for use in ven la ng,hea ng, cooling, humidifying, and dehumidifying thosespaces.

Thermal Broken DetailA façade element featuring a spacer, made of aninsula ng material, which separates indoor and outdoorsurfaces.

Thermal ComfortA condi on of mind experienced by building occupantsexpressing sa sfac on with the thermal environment.

Thermal StorageThe storage of thermal energy during u lity o -peak mes at night, usually in the form of ice or other phase-

Glossary

change materials, which is then used during peakperiods the next day.

Total Phosphorous (TP)Pollutants found in stormwater, consis ng oforganically bound phosphates, poly-phosphates andorthophosphates, the majority of which originates fromfer liser applica on. Chemical precipita on is the typicalremoval mechanism.

Total Suspended Solids (TSS)Par cles which are too small or light to be removedfrom stormwater via gravity se ling. Suspended solidconcentra ons are typically removed via ltra on.

Urea-Formaldehyde(see Formaldehyde)

U-value (Thermal Transmittance)The rate of heat transmission through a material,induced by a temperature di erence between one sideand the other. Units of U are Btu/ h• 2•°F.

Vapour BarrierAn element in a wall, oor or ceiling that does notallow moisture or air to penetrate and is used to xontrolmoisture migra on through building envelopes.

Variable Frequency Drive (VFD)A system for controlling the rota onal speed of a motorby controlling the frequency of the electrical powersupplied to the motor, allowing the speed of the motorto match demand.

Variable Air Volume (VAV)HVAC system capable of varying the rate of heated or


cooled supply air to a space as demand varies.

VentilationThe process of supplying and removing air to and fromspaces in a building by natural or mechanical means.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)Organic compounds which vaporise at normal roomtemperatures, and may contribute to poor indoor airquality in buildings.

Waste Stream AuditThe measurement of the quan ty and composi on ofthe waste generated by a facility.

Water Cooled ChillerA refrigera on device that uses cooling towers to rejectheat.

Water HardnessA measure of the level of minerals such as calcium andmagnesium ions in water.

Waterless UrinalA dry plumbing xture that uses advanced hydraulicdesign and a buoyant uid instead of water to maintainsanitary condi ons.

Weather strippingThe use of strips of material for sealing buildingopenings such as doors and windows, to reduce airin ltra on and heat loss.

WHO (World Health Organisation) DrinkingWater Quality StandardsThe interna onal reference point for drinking water

quality regula on and standard se ng.

Wildlife CorridorAn area of habitat connec ng wildlife popula onsseparated by human ac vi es such as roads,development or logging.

XeriscapingLandscaping designed to reduce or eliminate the needfor supplemental irriga on.

Glossary

APPENDICES

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: ExistingHotels Energy Analysis

Introduction 1How to Use this Appendix 2How to Read the CalculationSheets

3

Energy Model Assumptions 7Global Climate Map 15Climate Data 16

Calculation Sheets 18Overall Summary Page 19Hot-Humid 20Arid 76Temperate 132Cold-Alpine 188

APPENDIX B: NewHotels Energy Analysis

Introduction 1How to Use this Appendix 2How to Read the CalculationSheets

3

Energy Model Assumptions 7Global Climate Map 10Climate Data 11

Energy Charts 13

Calculation Sheets 22Overall Summary Page 23Hot-Humid 24Arid 54Temperate 84Cold-Alpine 118

APPENDIX C: LEEDDocumentation

Introduction 1

APPENDIX A: Existing Hotels Energy Analysis

Introduction 1How to Use this Appendix 2How to Read the Overall Summary Page 3How to Read the Climate Summary Pages 4How to Read the Individual ECM CalculationSheets

5

Energy Model Assumptions: General 7Energy Model Assumptions: Financial 10Energy Model Assumptions: Individual ECMs 12Global Climate Map 15Climate Data 16

Calculation Sheets 18Overall Summary Page 19Hot-Humid: Install or Replace Immediately 20Hot-Humid: Replace at End of Lifetime 56Arid: Install or Replace Immediately 76Arid: Replace at End of Lifetime 112Temperate: Install or Replace Immediately 132Temperate: Replace at End of Lifetime 168Cold-Alpine: Install or Replace Immediately 188Cold-Alpine: Replace at End of Lifetime 224

APPENDIX A: Existing Hotels Energy Analysis

Introduction

Issued February 1, 2011 1 Existing Hotels Energy Analysis - Green Engage/Solutions

Green Engage/Solu ons for Exis ng Hotels contains 40 Level1 Prerequisite Ac ons and 10 Level 2 Prerequisite Ac ons (50Prerequisites in total). These ac ons are designed to improvethe sustainable opera ons of a hotel across a wide range ofareas including water use, waste management, products andmaterials, guest comfort, and par cularly energy use.

Of the 50 Level 1 and Level 2 Prerequisites, 15 have a directimpact on energy consump on (11 Level 1 and four Level 2Ac ons). This appendix has been developed to show boththe individual impact these 15 Prerequisites can have onhotel energy use, and to show the overall savings that can beachieved by reaching Level 1 and Level 2 Cer ca on.

To do this, a detailed computer energy model of an 'average'IHG hotel was created, using actual IHG prototype drawings andenergy use data. The e ect of each Prerequisite was calculatedin four climates, represen ng the full range of loca ons of IHGproper es. Then these Prerequisites were combined to showhow a Level 1 Cer ed Hotel and Level 2 Cer ed Hotel wouldperform against a typical hotel that hasn't gone through theGreen Engage/Solu ons program.

These results can all be found in the Calcula on Sheets. Thediagram to the right shows how these sheets t together.Detailed instruc ons on how to read and interpret these sheetsare provided on the following four pages

For informa on on the climate zones, and help determiningwhich climate zone your hotel is located in, refer to the GlobalClimate Map and Climate Data sec ons.

While the results of this energy analysis are applicable to hotelsin a wide variety of loca ons and brands, obviously in the realworld actual results may vary. If you'd like to look in moredetail at how the energy model was created, and determinewhether these assump ons apply to your par cular property,refer to the Energy Modelling Assump ons sec on.

How to Use this Appendix


How to Read the Overall Summary Page


How to Read the Climate Summary Pages


How to Read the Individual ECM Calculation Sheets (1/2)




Introduction:

A full building energy model was created for this study,using the energy modelling program eQUEST. Thismodel is intended to represent a typical IHG hotel withaverage energy performance.

The model se ngs, including construc on, ligh ng andequipment loads, mechanical systems and e ciencies,are typical of a 10 - 30 year old full service hotel. Toverify the assump ons used, the energy consump onof the model was entered into Energy Star Target Finderto ensure that it aligned very closely with the actualaverage energy consump on of hotels in a number ofdi erent loca ons.

Every “real” IHG hotel will di er to some degree fromthis energy model. Nevertheless, it was created toapproximate as many IHG hotels as closely as possible.

In general, the results are scalable and can be appliedeven to hotels that are very di erent from the model.For example, implemen ng a measure in a hotel thatis twice the size of the model is likely to cost twice asmuch but yield twice the annual energy savings, so theoverall result will be the same.

However, in some obvious cases there will be measuresand results that do not apply to some hotels. Forexample, using energy e cient guest room refrigeratorswould be di cult for a hotel which does not have guestroom refrigerators.

In other cases, hotels which are completely di erentfrom the model can expect results which are also quitedi erent. A resort with acres of landscaped grounds,several swimming pools and a casino is going to seeenergy savings by implemen ng the Green Engage Level1 and Level 2 Prerequisite ac ons, but as a percentageof its total energy consump on these savings will looksmaller than for a limited service hotel.

Energy Model Performance

The energy model was validated by entering thepredicted energy consump on into Energy Star TargetFinder. This US government-backed tool compares thisnumber against a database of energy consump on datafrom a large number of actual hotels, and returns anEnergy Star score, represen ng which percen le themodel falls into. For example, and Energy Star scoreof 70 means that the model is performing be er than70% of hotels. Since the energy model was intended torepresent an average hotel, an Energy Star score of 50was targeted.

The graph below shows the Energy Star scores for themodel in each of the four climate zones. Note thatthe Energy Star score takes into account the e ectclimate has on energy performance, so while the energyconsump on varied greatly from model to model,the Energy Star score did not. In fact, the di erencebetween the energy model and an Energy Star score of50 was no more than 4% in any of the climate zones.

Climates Modelled:

The model was run in four climate zones, covering thefull range of loca ons of IHG’s proper es. The followingweather data was used to simulate these four zones:

• Hot-Humid: West Palm Beach, Florida

• Arid: Phoenix, Arizona

• Temperate: New York, New York

• Cold-Alpine: Fargo, North Dakota

Slight modi ca ons were made to the model to adapt itto each climate zone. For example, extra insula on wasprovided in the cold-alpine zone. Each of these changeshas been noted in the following sec ons.

Building Geometry:The geometry of the model, including alloca on of oorspace and number of guest rooms, was based on IHGHoliday Inn Balanced Full Service Prototype drawings.

The model has the following proper es:

• 150 guest rooms

• Guest room area: 400 sf (37 m²)

Energy Model Assumptions: General (1/3)



• 6 oors

• Total building area: 90,000 sf (8,360 m²)

• Building area per oor: 15,000 sf (1,390 m²)

• Exterior walls have 30% glazing

Building Envelope Construction• Walls: 4 inch heavyweight concrete with 2 inch

polystyrene insula on (R-8)

• Roof: 4 inch heavyweight concrete with 2 inchpolystyrene insula on (R-8). Cold-Alpine modeluses 4 inch polystyrene insula on (R-16).

• Windows: double clear glazing, aluminium frame,operable. Hot-Humid model has bronze ntedglass.

• Shading: Light-coloured fabric drapes. Hot-humidmodel has 2 foot overhangs on all windows.

Occupancy:• Hotel rooms: 2 people per room

• All other spaces: default occupancy densi es used

Lighting Load• All loads are based on ASHRAE 90.1-1999

allowances for each space type. A 50/50 splitof incandescent and uorescent ligh ng wasassumed.

Equipment loads• Hotel rooms: One non-Energy Star 32” LCD TV and

one non-Energy Star 3 cu. . refrigerator per room

• Food prepara on: 2 dishwashers, 4 ovens,2 refrigerators, 2 freezers, 2 icemakers, 4microwaves. All equipment is commercial and non-

Energy Star.

• Laundry: 3 clothes washers, 3 clothes dryers. Allequipment is commercial and non-Energy Star.

• All other spaces: default equipment loads used

Space Allocations:The alloca on of oor space was based on IHG HolidayInn Balanced Full Service Prototype drawings. “HotelRooms” and “Corridors” are allocated to oors 2 – 6,all other spaces are allocated to the rst oor of themodel.

Space Type BuildingArea

Occupancy(sf/person)

Ligh ng(W/sf)

Equipment(W/sf)

HotelRooms 66.6% 200 1.5 0.66

Conven onCentre /Restaurant

3.9% 15 1.6 0.5

Corridors 13.8% 100 0.7 0.1

Mech andElec Rooms 5.6% 333 1.3 1.0

Lobby 5.7% 100 1.8 1.0

Restrooms,Lockers andLaundry

1.7% 100 1.0 3.3

FoodPrepara on 1.1% 200 2.2 150

Fitness 1.6% 50 1.1 2.0

Schedules:Default “high-use hotel” schedules were used foroccupancy, ligh ng and equipment loads in the model.These schedules are shown below:

Occupancy:

Ligh ng:

Equipment:



Mechanical Systems:• 1st oor and corridors: VAV system with reheat

• Guest rooms: Packaged terminal air condi oners(PTACs)

• Cooling e ciency: 8.0 EER (2.3 COP). Hot-humidmodel has 9.0 EER (2.6 COP).

• Hea ng (hot-humid and arid): electric resistancehea ng

• Hea ng (temperate and cold-alpine): gas- red hotwater boiler, e ciency 75%

Thermostat Setpoints• Cooling: 74°F

• Hea ng: 74°F

Other Loads• Domes c Hot Water: Gas- red hot water storage

tank, 7.4 gallons/person/day

• 2 passenger elevators

• Exterior ligh ng of the following spaces, based onASHRAE 90.1-1999 allowances:

• Car park and grounds: 100,000 sf (9,290 m²)

• Façade and entrances: 30,000 sf (2,790 m²)


Labour Costs:

All labour costs are sourced from RS Means. They areUS na onal average gures and assume “open” contractprices (as opposed to union rates). The below tableshows the base rate (including fringe bene t), the totaloverhead and pro t percentage increase and the labourrate with overhead and pro t included. The overheadand pro t includes workers’ compensa on insurancespeci c to each trade, an average xed overhead of16.3%, an overhead for each trade and a pro t of 10%.

Trade Base Rate O&P % Rate withO&P

CommonBuildingLabourers

$25.50 68.2% 42.90%

SkilledWorker $32.70 67.7% $54.85

Carpenter $32.40 68.2% $54.50

Electrician $39.20 62.7% $63.80

Plumber $38.50 63.9% $63.10

Capital Costs and Lifetimes:

Capital costs occur in both scenarios of “replace orinstall now” and “replace at end of life me”.

For the rst scenario it should be noted that exis ngproducts to be replaced immediately are assumed tobe, on average, halfway through their life me. Under“straight line” deprecia on principles they are thereforeworth half of their original purchase value.

Install now products incur a full capital cost outlay sincethese products do not already exist within the hotel.

The second scenario of “replace at end of life me” is

obtained from the US Department of Commerce for thecommercial end-use sector.

EnergyType

2010-2015

2015-2020

2020-2025

2025-2030

2030-2035

Electricity -0.9% 0.4% 0.5% 0.8% 1.0%

NaturalGas 2.6% 0.7% 0.7% 1.9% 1.2%

Projected average (nominal) fuel escala on ratesincluding the in a on gure of 2.875% stated earlier.

EnergyType

2010-2015

2015-2020

2020-2025

2025-2030

2030-2035

Electricity 1.9% 3.2% 3.3% 3.6% 3.8%

NaturalGas 5.4% 3.5% 3.5% 4.7% 4.0%

Weighted Average Cost of Capital:

The discount rate applied to determine the net presentvalue (NPV) of each ECM can be di erent for eachproject, each franchise and each region. Each newproject should input their own personalized discountrate.

However, to provide a star ng point and a basis forcomparison across regions, we have determined theweighted average cost of capital (rwacc) for the IHGGroup as a whole. This was calculated using the typical nancial equa ons (r_wacc=r_d×d/v+r_e×e/v and r_

e=r_f+ ×r_m) with the appropriate inputs from a varietyof sources including the IHG Group 2009 Annual Report,the US Department of Treasury, MSN Money, CNN andBloomberg.

• rwacc (nominal): 7.19%

Utilities:

U lity values for electricity and natural gas wereobtained from the US Energy Informa on Administra onfor the baseline 2010 year. These gures are for theCommercial US Average. U lity values for water wereobtained from the Circle of Blue’s Urban Water PricingSurvey for 2010.

• Electricity - US$0.1028/kWh

• Natural Gas – US$9.27/ Mcf (US$0.90/therm)

• Water - US$0.0037/Gal

Emission Factors:Emission factors for electricity depend on the state orcountry electricity mix. However, for comparison acrossclimate zones the average emission for CO2, SO2 andNOX across the US has been used. These gures weresourced from the EPA’s eGRID 2007, the EIA and theEERE.

Energy Type CO2(lb/MWh)

SO2(lb/MWh)

NOX(lb/MWh)

Electricity 1,329.35 5.2589 1.9366

Natural Gas 398.31 0 0.2994

NPV Financial Inputs:

• Base year for analysis: 2010

• Building Analysis/Study Period : 20 years

The in a on rates for the past twenty years wereobtained from the US Bureau of Sta s cs and averagedto provide a historical trend.

• In a on rate: 2.785% (20 year historical average)

Projected average (real) fuel escala on rates were

Energy Model Assumptions: Financial (1/2)


only for exis ng products and the capital cost in thiscase assumes that the exis ng product has reached theend of its useful life me (and therefore has a zero bookvalue) and therefore only a cost premium has to be paidfor the new energy e cient product.

Maintenance Costs:All recurring and non-recurring maintenance costs havebeen excluded from this analysis.

Replacement Costs:Replacement costs occur at the end of the measures’useful life and is the original cost premium (in 2010dollars) with in a on factored in. This replacement costis the same in both scenarios of “replace or install now”and “replace at end of life me”.

Replacement costs do not take into account futurechanges in product prices or technology.

Energy Model Assumptions: Financial (2/2)


• Cost Premium - US$680

• Average Life me – 12 years

Commercial Icemakers:

• Size of Unit(s): Large

• Number of Unit(s) Included - 2

• Average Energy Star cost per unit - US$3,905

• Conven onal cost per unit - US$3,550



Vending Machines:






Energy Ef icient Televisions:• Size of Unit(s): 32 inch

• Number of Unit(s): 150

• Average Energy Star cost per unit - US$400 (onlineaverage price minus 20% bulk discount)



Energy Ef icient Guest Room Refrigerators:• Medium sized bar fridge at 3 cu. .

Commercial Dishwasher:

• Number Included - 2



• Cost Premium - US$1,000


Commercial Gas Oven:






Commercial Fridge:

• Size of Unit(s): 72 - 80 cu. .






Commercial Freezer:

• Size of Unit(s): 60+ cu. .




Towel/Sheet Program:

No addi onal costs are associated with this measure.

However, there are addi onal savings (apart fromelectricity and natural gas) from water use and laundrydetergent reduc on

• Water savings of 34,606 gallons

• Detergent savings of 173 gallons at $7 per gallon

• Labour cost savings are not included

Energy Ef icient Appliances:This was calculated using a basket of commercialappliances that possess an Energy Star ra ng. Pleasenote that clothes dryers and microwaves do notcurrently possess Energy Star ra ngs and have thus beenexcluded from the calcula on.

The energy e cient total average life me has beencalculated by average weigh ng all appliances in thebasket. This average life me is 12 years.

The same has been done to determine the totalweighted basket cost of $79,451 and the weighted costpremium of $5,864.

The individual appliance characteris cs are containedbelow:

Commercial Clothes Washers:


• Average Energy Star cost per unit - US$750

• Conven onal cost per unit - US$492



Energy Model Assumptions: Individual ECMs (1/3)


Pipe Insulation:

• All pipe insula on is breglass with an all servicejacket

• Cost of insula on depends on width of pipe andthickness of insula on suggested as per GreenEngage Energy Charts (see New Hotels EnergyAnalysis). Prices range from $4.71 to $12.85including material, labour, overheard and pro t.

• Insula on Life me – 30 years

Two types of piping are to be insulated:

1. Domes c hot water line: both primary and secondary

2. Hea ng hot water lines (temperate and cold climatesonly): Plant room piping, VAV reheat, and PTAC hea ngcoils.

NB: The cos ng assumes that there is easy access to allpiping within the exis ng hotel. It therefore does notinclude any demoli on costs.

Occupancy Sensors in Of ices:• US$193 per sensor including electrician labour

• Four o ces per hotel building

• Sensor life me – 10 years

• Conven onal cost per unit of US$0.60 with bulb lifeof 750 – 1,000 hours

• Common building labourer sta rate

Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Back ofHouse Spaces:• Total of 200 bulbs in back of house with 50%

designated for replacement

building

• US$193 per sensor including electrician labour

• Sensor life me – 10 years

• Increase bulb life mes by 40%

• All 200 corridor light bulbs are assumed to alreadybe CFLs

Install Weatherstripping:• Material cost of weather stripping – US$0.88/

• 5 x 5 window on 130 rooms requiring 1 hour ofcarpenter labour rate per window

• 5 x 10 window on 20 corner rooms requiring 1.5hours of carpenter labour per window

• Average weatherstripping life me – 10 years

100% of Guest Rooms have 4°F Thermostats:• US$217 per thermostat including electrician labour


Meet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow Rates:• Install aerator on all bathroom faucets and low- ow

shower heads

• Cost of each aerator is US$22.85 including commonbuilding labour rates

• Aerator life me – 15 years

• Cost of each low- ow shower head is US$77.50including plumber labour rates

• Shower head life me – 10 years

• Average Energy Star cost per unit - US$120 (onlineaverage price minus 20% bulk discount)



Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in GuestRooms:• Total of 12 bulbs per room with 50% designated for

replacement

• Therefore, there are 6 bulbs to be changed perroom which amounts to 900 bulbs building wide

• Average Energy Star cost per unit of US$3.40 withbulb life of 6,000 – 12,000 hours



Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in CirculationSpaces:• Total of 40 bulbs per corridor with 50% designated

for replacement

• Therefore, there are 20 bulbs per corridor whichrequire replacement with CFLs.

• This amounts to 100 bulbs to be replaced acrossthe en re building


• Long range sensors cover roughly 50 total

• Length of building – 220

• Therefore, 5 sensors per oor and 25 total per



• Average motor life me – 15 years

In addi on, the two colder climates can also install a1 HP NEMA e ciency motor on the hot water hea ngloop.

• Cost of 1 HP NEMA e ciency motor is $531including electrician installa on rate

• Cost of 1 HP normal motor is $430 includingelectrician installa on rate

• Cost Premium of $101

• Average motor life me – 15 years

NB: demoli on costs are not included

• Therefore, there are 100 bulbs in back of housewhich require replacement with CFLs




Occupancy Sensors in Corridors forDecorative Fixtures:• Increase o ce light bulb life me by 25%

• All 16 o ce light bulbs are assumed to already beCFLs

Variable Frequency Drives:• VFDs only recommended on motors greater than

5HP.

• All four climate zones can install one 15 HP capableVFD for the supply fan motor

• Cost of VFD is $2,868 including electricianinstalla on rate

• VFD life me – 10 years

NEMA Premium Motors:• All four climates can install a 15 HP NEMA e ciency

motor on the supply fan.

• Cost of 15 HP NEMA e ciency motor is $1,482including electrician installa on rate

• Cost of 15 HP normal motor is $1,195 includingelectrician installa on rate

• Cost Premium of $287



Source: Peel et.al. Updated world map of the Koppen-Geiger climate classi ca on, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 1633–1644, 2007

Global Climate Map


Hot-Humid: West Palm Beach, Florida

Climate Data

Arid: Phoenix, Arizona


Temperate: New York City, New York

Climate Data

Cold-Alpine: Fargo, North Dakota


Calculation Sheets


InstallReplaceReplaceReplaceReplaceReplaceReplaceInstallInstallInstallInstall

InstallInstallInstall

Replace

All Climate Zones Energy Modelling Results Summary Existing Hotels

Energy Efficient Guest Room Refrigerators

Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Circulation SpacesZero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Back of House SpacesE-09

Fargo, NDNew York, NY

E-10

Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Guest Rooms

Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decorative Fixtures

Phoenix, ARWest Palm Beach, FL

E-07E-07

E-09E-09

Energy Efficient TVs

Immediate0.1 yrs0.2 yrs

ImmediateImmediate

M-11

0.3 yrs Immediate

B-04

0.2 yrs

6.2 yrs N/A

W-03

Variable Frequency Drives

9 yrs

2.9 yrs6 yrs

0.3 yrs Immediate

N/A

NEMA Premium Efficiency Motors 2.1 yrs

Meet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow Rates

N/A 1.3 yrs7.1 yrs N/A

Immediate

M-09

N/A 3 yrs

2.6 yrs N/A

N/A1.4 yrs

3.5 yrs N/A

M-11

Use of Building Appropriate Materials100% of Guest Rooms have 4F Deadband Thermostats 3.7 yrs

N/A 1.3 yrs N/A

5.3 yrsN/A

0.3 yrs0.1 yrs

Immediate

Immediate

2.6 yrs

0.2 yrs

3.8 yrs N/A5 yrs

Immediate

N/A

N/A 10 yrs

6 yrs 2.1 yrs

15 yrs5 yrs

3.3 yrs

N/AN/A 2.3 yrs N/A 2.2 yrs

7.1 yrs Never

7.6 yrsImmediate

0.1 yrs

N/A

Immediate0.3 yrs1.3 yrs

N/A

0.3 yrs

ImmediateImmediate ImmediateImmediate

16 yrs5.2 yrs

N/A

Immediate

2.4 yrs

6.9 yrs

6.9 yrs

Immediate20 yrs > 20 yrs

Immediate

10 yrs

Green Engage Level 2 CertificationE-08 Pipe Insulation 10 yrs N/A 10 yrs N/A 8.2 yrs

The table below summarises the financial performance, in terms of simple payback, for the modelled existing hotel in 4 climate zones against various baseline models. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures.

For details regarding each measure and for additional energy and financial performance metrics (CO2 reduction, IRR, first year yield on marginal cost and NPV) refer to the summary pages and individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.

Relevant Action Group Measure

Install New or Replace

Hot/Humid

ImmediateImmediate

N/A

0.1 yrs

Arid Temperate Cold-Alpine

Install for First Time or Replace Current Item

Now

Replace At End of Current Item's

Lifetime


Now


Lifetime


Now


Lifetime


Now


Lifetime

Green Engage Level 1 CertificationO-04 Towel/Sheet Program Immediate N/A Immediate N/A Immediate N/A Immediate N/AE-07 Energy Efficient Appliances 7.3 yrs 1.1 yrs 7.4 yrs 1.2 yrs 7.7 yrs 1.2 yrs 7.6 yrs 1.2 yrs

N/AE-10 Occupancy Sensors in Offices 19 yrs N/A 20 yrs N/A Never N/A Never N/A

Replace

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Legend (Criteria Based On Simple Payback Only):Very Short or Immediate Payback (0 - 3 years)Intermediate Payback (3 - 7 years)Long or No Payback (>7 years)N/A - Measure to be Installed for First TimeN/A

M 11 6 yrsNEMA Premium Efficiency Motors 2.1 yrs 6 yrs 2.1 yrs 3.3 yrs2.4 yrs6.9 yrs 10 yrs

Install All New Measures Immediately &Replace Existing Measures At End of Lifetime

Green Engage Level 1 Certification Cumulative Savings Scenarios

All Measures Installed or Replaced Immediately 2.7 yrs N/A 2.8 yrs N/A 3.3 yrs N/A 3.2 yrs N/A

1.3 yrs 1.3 yrs 1.5 yrs 1.5 yrs

Green Engage Level 2 Certification Cumulative Savings Scenarios (Includes Green Engage Level 1)

N/A 3.8 yrs N/A


1.6 yrs 1.6 yrs 2.2 yrs 2.2 yrs

All Measures Installed or Replaced Immediately 2.9 yrs N/A 3 yrs N/A 3.8 yrs


Hot-Humid: Install or Replace Immediately



E-07

E-10

M-09W-03

E-09E-09E-09

B-04

Immediate

Use of Building Appropriate Materials$36,032

0.9% 5.7%

2.6 yrs

9 yrs3.5 yrs

1.4 yrs

29.4% 28.0% $63,575

$19,7740.1%

519.3% $20,193

N/AN/A

74.6%

2.0%

$23,481


Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Back of House Spaces

$

2.4%

Energy Efficient Guest Room RefrigeratorsZero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Guest Rooms

Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decorative Fixtures 76.5%

100% of Guest Rooms have 4F Deadband Thermostats1.2% 39.5% 37.4% $48,384

0.6% 2.8% 10.2% ($4,165)4.6%

$12,838($7,364)

19.5%0.9%

0.2 yrs 0.8% 523.3%

21.5%

1.7%


Hot-HumidExisting HotelsInstall or Replace ImmediatelyThe table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modelled existing hotel in the hot-humid climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy saving cost reductions. Due to different modelling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The stoplight colour legend contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.

Hot/HumidWest Palm Beach, FL

0.2 yrs 9.9% 705.2% 702.0% $243,3690.1 yrs $51,069

NPV(Over 20 years)Simple Payback

12.5%Energy Efficient Appliances

Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Circulation Spaces

Energy Modelling Results Summary

13.4%7.3 yrs


Green Engage Level 1 Certification

5 yrs

IRR

15 yrs

%

3.9%

CO2 Reductions

O-04E-07E-07 Energy Efficient TVs

Towel/Sheet Program

% %

1372.9% 1279.0%

First Year Yield On Marginal Cost

yrs


Replace

N/A

N/A

Legend (Criteria Based On Simple Payback Only):Very Short or Immediate Payback (0 - 3 years)Intermediate Payback (3 - 7 years)Long or No Payback (>7 years)

M-11 NEMA Premium Efficiency MotorsM-11

E-08

0.1%$7,567

9.4% $4,03719 yrs 0.0%E-10

Variable Frequency Drives 34.8%1.9% 9.1% ($291)

Pipe Insulation

15.9% $72834.6%

Occupancy Sensors in Offices10 yrs 0.7% 10.2%


All Measures Installed or Replaced Immediately 2.7 yrs 24.7% 39.0% 35.6% $495,357

16.7%6 yrs0.5%2.9 yrs





Base Case3 commercial, non-Energy Star washing machines and

dryers, operating for 8 hours per day.

Proposed ModificationsThe energy consumption of washing machines and dryers is reduced by 17%, based on a study by the

American Hotel & Lodging Association.

Space Heating - Gas

374 6

94.21,835.9

HVAC FansHeat Rejection 0.0

2,380.3

93.71,835.9

Base Case Energy Use

Proposed Energy Use

LightingSpace Heating - Elec

0.0%

Environmental Impact Analysis

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,498,588 0.1%SO2 (lb/yr) 8,992 8,981

% Savings (+) / Loss (-)ProposedBase CaseEmissions

0.1%

0.1%NOX (lb/yr)


0.0

Energy End-Use Benchmark Comparison

Energy End-Use

Savings (+) / Loss (-)

Operations

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


2,377.6 2.7 0.1%

0.0

PumpsSpace Cooling

374 3 0 3 0 1%

Individual Resource Calculations Install or Replace Immediately Existing Hotels Hot-Humid

-0.4 -0.5%3,483

0.0 0.00.0 0.0

3,479 0.1%%

0.0%MBtu/yr

0.0%

2,501,896 2,498,588

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r

Annual CO2 Emissions


Receptacles - Gas 425.8 421.8

374.6HVAC Fans

Financial Assumptions- No additional costs

- Additional savings (apart from energy) from water and laundry detergent - Water savings of 34,606 gallons - Detergent savings of 173 gallons @ $7 per gallon (This is included under the Replacement Life and Cost Summary as a Savings)- Labour cost savings are not included

Base Utilities - Gas

Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,145.0 4.7 0.4%0.9%

0.1%7,795.0 7,783.7

374.3 0.3 0.1%

0.0 0.0%

0.1%

11.31,534.9 1,534.9

4.0

Total

2,501,896 2,498,588

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,981

3,479

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

SO2 (lb/yr) NOX (lb/yr)

g/yr

Annual SO2 and NOX EmissionsBase Case

Proposed

7,795 7,784

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr

Annual Total Energy Use


Additional Capital CostHVAC Plant First Cost Reductions

Cooling Plant SavingsHeating Plant Savings

Yr.

Financial Table

kWh

$1 879

Capital Costs Savings Summary$393

$451

$36$220

Annual Savings (+) / Loss (-)

Annual Resource Cost Summary

Galstherms

$0.0037

ResourceAnnual Resource Savings

(+) / Loss (-)

N/AN/A

2

$0


1

$1,389

$1,315$1,279$1,245

$1,729

$1,638$1,683

$0.9000$0.1028Unit Cost

Operations

Water & sewerNatural gasElectricity

34,60640

2,137

0 $0$0

Cash Flow$0

$393

6 $1 428

$0


IRR

MBhtons $0 $437

$424543

$1,352

Immediate

N/A

N/A$414$403

$1,827$1,776

$128 Simple Payback


Costs (Marginal/Maint/

Replace)

$0

Initial Annual Savings

Initial Marginal Cost

Financial Results Summary


Heating Plant SavingsAirside Distribution Savings

Total Additional Capital Cost:

Estimated Useful Life (yrs)Percent replacedReplacement Cost (In 2010 Dollars)

Base YearValuation TypeProject Analysis PeriodInflation RateDiscount Rate for Defined ValuationEnergy Escalation Rate (Nominal)

N/A $0$1,879$451N/A $0

$0

1 Replacement Life and Cost Summary

20191817Defined

20

2010

100%$1,211 $1,731

$1,638 $526

$2,425

$684$661$639

(See Table in Assumptions)

$1,986

11

$2,041 $2,7252.79%

Financial Analysis

$1,684

$1,779$597

$2,647

7.19%

$559

$2,571$2,497

13

$2,098 $708 $2,806

$465 $1,933

$542

876

$479$1,509

109

12

$1,551$510$494

$1,594

$1,468$1,428

1615

$617

14

$1,879

$577 $2,356

$1,932

$1,828

$2,164$2,103$2,045$1,988

$2,226$2,290

NPVcfmMBh $19,774

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $50,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years

Simple Payback Graph


All appliances replaced with Energy Star rated equivalents. Overall saving of 30% on electricity and

34% on natural gas.

Energy E-07 Energy Efficient Appliances

Energy End-Use Benchmark Comparison Environmental Impact Analysis

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %

Emissions Base Case Proposed % Savings (+) / Loss (-)

Base CaseThe following commercial, non-Energy Star appliances

located in the food preparation and laundry areas: 3 washing machines, 2 dishwashers, 4 gas ovens, 2

fridges, 2 freezers, 2 icemakers and 5 vending machines

Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,442,457 2.4%

3,483 3,409 2.1%Space Heating - Elec 93.7 95.4 -1.7 -1.8%

SO2 (lb/yr) 8,992 8,825 1.9%Lighting 1,835.9 1,835.9 0.0 0.0% NOX (lb/yr)

0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,370.6 9.7 0.4%Proposed ModificationsPumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 -16.7%

HVAC Fans 374 6 373 6 1 0 0 3%

2.4%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%


2,501,896 2,442,457

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


34% on natural gas.

255.1 3.3%Base Utilities - Gas 1,534.9 1,534.9 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 374.6 373.6 1.0 0.3%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,050.1 99.7 8.7%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 279.4 146.4 34.4%

- Basket of commercial appliances that have an energy star rating- Total weighted basket cost of US$79,451 and a weighted cost premium of US$5,864- Average lifetime of 12 years- Appliances include 3 washing machines, 2 dishwashers, 4 gas ovens, 2 fridges, 2 freezers, 2 icemakers and 5 vending machines

3.3%

Financial Assumptions Total 7,795.0 7,539.9

2,501,896 2,442,457

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,825

3,409

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,540

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





Cash FlowInitial Marginal Cost $42,658

$5,352

Annual Resource Cost Summary Financial Table Financial Results Summary


(+) / Loss (-) Unit CostAnnual Savings (+) /

Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Natural gas 1,464 therms $0.9000 $1,318Electricity 31,857 kWh $0.1028 $3,275 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 164,438 Gals $0.0037 $608 0 ($42,658) $0 ($42,658)1 $0 $5,352 $5,352

Simple Payback 7.3 yrs

4 $0 $5,837 $5,837 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 12.5%

13.4%IRR3 $0 $5,669 $5,6692 $0 $5,507

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6 220 $6 220N/A tons $0 5 $0 $6,025 $6,025


($42,658)Capital Costs Savings Summary $5,507




Estimated Useful Life (yrs)Percent replacedReplacement Cost Premium (In 2010 Dollars)


N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6,220 $6,220 NPV

9 $0 $6,844 $6,844

$6,4228 $0 $6,630 $6,630

$23,4817 $0 $6,422

12 11 $0 $7,303 $7,303Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0 $7,070 $7,070

14 $0 $8,050 $8,050($5,864) 13 $0 $7,793 $7,793

2010 16 $0 $8,678 $8,678Financial Analysis 15 $0 $8,358 $8,358

20 18 $0 $9,355 $9,355Defined 17 $0 $9,010 $9,010

7.19% 20 $0 $10,079 $10,0792.79% 19 $0 $9,714 $9,714


100% 12 ($8,154) $7,544 ($610)

($42,658)N/A cfm $0

($60,000)($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Television is replaced with Energy Star rated equivalent. Overall saving of 40% on electricity.

Energy E-07 Energy Efficient Televisions


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





Base CaseOne 32 inch non-Energy Star television per guest

room.

Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,480,246 0.9%



0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,365.6 14.7 0.6%Proposed ModificationsPumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 374 6 373 9 0 7 0 2%

0.9%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%


2,501,896 2,480,246

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




- 150, 32 inch energy star televisions- US$400 average outright cost per unit (including bulk discount)- US$0 cost premium over non-energy star TVs- Average lifetime - 10 years

0.7%


2,501,896 2,480,246

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,906

3,452

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,739

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






$1,706




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Natural gas 0 therms $0.9000 $0Electricity 16,286 kWh $0.1028 $1,674 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($30,000) $0 ($30,000)1 $0 $1,706 $1,706

Simple Payback 15 yrs


3.9%IRR3 $0 $1,771 $1,7712 $0 $1,738

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 922 $1 922N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,863 $1,863








N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,922 $1,922 NPV

9 $0 $2,113 $2,113

$1,9848 $0 $2,047 $2,047

-$7,3647 $0 $1,984


14 $0 $2,485 $2,485$0 13 $0 $2,406 $2,406


20 18 $0 $2,863 $2,863Defined 17 $0 $2,764 $2,764

7.19% 20 $0 $3,079 $3,0792.79% 19 $0 $2,966 $2,966


100% 12 $0 $2,329 $2,329

($30,000)N/A cfm $0

($40,000)

($30,000)

($20,000)

($10,000)

$0

$10,000

$20,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base CaseOne 3 cu. ft. non-Energy Star refrigerator per guest

room.

Proposed ModificationsRefrigerator is replaced with Energy Star rated

equivalent. Overall saving of 24% on electricity.

Energy E-07 Energy Efficient Guest Room Refrigerators


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





Space Heating - Gas 0.0

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,479,605 0.9%



0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,365.2 15.1 0.6%

0.0%

374 6 373 9 0 7 0 2%

0.9%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Pumps 0.0 0.0 0.0

HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,479,605

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


374.6 373.9 0.7 0.2%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,106.9 42.9 3.7%

Base Utilities - Gas 1,534.9 1,534.9 0.0 0.0%

- Medium sized bar fridge at 3 cu. ft.- Average Energy Star cost per unit - US$120 (online average price minus 20% bulk discount)- Cost Premium - US$0- Average Lifetime – 12 years

0.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans

Financial Assumptions Total 7,795.0 7,737.8 57.2 0.7%

2,501,896 2,479,605

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,904

3,451

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,738

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr









Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Natural gas 0 therms $0.9000 $0Electricity 16,768 kWh $0.1028 $1,724


$1,757Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($9,000) $01 $0 $1,757 $1,757

($9,000) Simple Payback 5 yrs

($9,000) 3 $0 $1,824 $1,824Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $1,790 $1,790


21.5%IRR

N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,918 $1,918N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 979 $1 979






9 $0

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $2,043N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,979 $1,979

($9,000) 8 $0 $2,108 $2,108

$12,838NPV$2,043

$2,176 $2,176

14 $0 $2,559 $2,55913 $0 $2,477 $2,477

$0 $2,247 $2,247


20 18 $0 $2,948 $2,948Defined 17 $0 $2,845 $2,845

7.19% 20 $0 $3,170 $3,1702.79% 19 $0 $3,054 $3,054


$0100% 12 $0 $2,398 $2,398

12 11 $0 $2,322 $2,322Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10

($20,000)

($10,000)

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



All 75W incandescent bulbs are replaced with 25W CFLs (6 per room or 900 in total). The guest room

lighting density is reduced to 0.75 W/sf.

Each guest room contains a total of 12 light bulbs. There is a 50/50 split of 75W incandescent bulbs and

25W CFLs, giving a lighting density of 1.5 W/sf. Bulbs operate for 8 hours/day.

Proposed Modifications

Energy E-09 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Guest Rooms


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





Base Case


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,253,343 9.9%



0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,207.9 172.4 7.2%Pumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 374 6 370 2 4 4 1 2%

9.9%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%


2,501,8962,253,343

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





- Total of 12 bulbs per room with 50% designated for replacement- Average Energy Star cost per unit of US$3.40 with bulb life of 6,000 – 12,000 hours- Conventional cost per unit of US$0.60 with bulb life of 750 – 1,000 hours- Common building laborer staff rate- Replacement cost premium is a savings because light bulbs will last longer for the price paid

8.2%


2,501,8962,253,343

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,009

3,121

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,7957,157

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






$19,586




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($2,790) $0 ($2,790)1 $0 $19,586 $19,586



705.2%IRR3 $2,709 $20,337 $23,0462 $0 $19,958

N/A MBh $0 6 $2 941 $22 071 $25 013N/A tons $0 5 $0 $21,387 $21,387








N/A MBh $0 6 $2,941 $22,071 $25,013 NPV

9 $3,194 $24,259 $27,453

$22,7788 $0 $23,506 $23,506

$243,3697 $0 $22,778


14 $0 $28,534 $28,534$2,494 13 $0 $27,623 $27,623

2010 16 $0 $30,626 $30,626Financial Analysis 15 $3,766 $29,562 $33,328

20 18 $4,090 $32,871 $36,960Defined 17 $0 $31,728 $31,728

7.19% 20 $0 $35,348 $35,3482.79% 19 $0 $34,054 $34,054


100% 12 $3,468 $26,740 $30,209

($2,790)N/A cfm $0

($100,000)

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



All 75W incandescent bulbs are replaced with 25W CFLs (20 per floor or 100 in total). The guest room


Corridors contain 40 light bulbs per floor. There is a 50/50 split of 75W incandescent bulbs and 25W CFLs, giving a lighting density of 0.7 W/sf. Bulbs operate for

24 hours/day.


Energy E-09 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Circulation Spaces


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





Base Case


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,451,580 2.0%



0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,349.3 31.0 1.3%Pumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 -16.7%

HVAC Fans 374 6 370 2 4 4 1 2%

2.0%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%


2,501,896 2,451,580

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





- Total of 40 bulbs per corridor with 50% designated for replacement- This amounts to 100 bulbs to be replaced across the entire building- Average Energy Star cost per unit of US$3.40 with bulb life of 6,000 – 12,000 hours- Conventional cost per unit of US$0.60 with bulb life of 750 – 1,000 hours- Common building laborer staff rate- Replacement cost premium is a savings because light bulbs will last longer for the price paid

1.7%


2,501,896 2,451,580

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,793

3,410

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,666

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





Cash FlowInitial Marginal Cost $310

$3,965




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($310) $0 ($310)1 $285 $3,965 $4,250



1372.9%IRR3 $301 $4,117 $4,4182 $293 $4,040

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $4 468 $4 795N/A tons $0 5 $318 $4,329 $4,647


($310)Capital Costs Savings Summary $4,333






N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $4,468 $4,795 NPV

9 $355 $4,911 $5,266

$4,9478 $345 $4,759 $5,104

$51,0697 $336 $4,611


14 $407 $5,776 $6,183$277 13 $396 $5,592 $5,988


20 18 $454 $6,654 $7,109Defined 17 $442 $6,423 $6,865

7.19% 20 $480 $7,156 $7,6362.79% 19 $467 $6,894 $7,361


100% 12 $385 $5,413 $5,799

($310)N/A cfm $0

($20,000)

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base Case

All 75W incandescent bulbs are replaced with 25W CFLs (100 in total). The average lighting density is

reduced to 0.7 W/sf.

Offices, food preparation, lockers, laundry, mechanical and electrical spaces contain a total of 200 light bulbs. There is a 50/50 split of 75W incandescent bulbs and 25W CFLs, giving an average lighting density of 1.4 W/sf. Bulbs operate for 8

hours/day.


Energy E-09 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Back of House


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use






CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,481,468 0.8%



0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,363.6 16.7 0.7%Pumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 -16.7%

HVAC Fans 374 6 372 8 1 8 0 5%

0.8%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%


2,501,896 2,481,468

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


reduced to 0.7 W/sf.



- Total of 200 bulbs in back of house with 50% designated for replacement- Average Energy Star cost per unit of US$3.40 with bulb life of 6,000 – 12,000 hours- Conventional cost per unit of US$0.60 with bulb life of 750 – 1,000 hours- Common building laborer staff rate- Replacement cost premium is a savings because light bulbs will last longer for the price paid

0.7%


2,501,896 2,481,468

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,911

3,454

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,743

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






$1,610




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($310) $0 ($310)1 $0 $1,610 $1,610



523.3%IRR3 $301 $1,671 $1,9722 $0 $1,640

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1 814 $2 141N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,758 $1,758


($310)Capital Costs Savings Summary $1,640






N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1,814 $2,141 NPV

9 $355 $1,994 $2,349

$1,8728 $0 $1,932 $1,932

$20,1937 $0 $1,872


14 $0 $2,345 $2,345$277 13 $0 $2,270 $2,270


20 18 $454 $2,702 $3,156Defined 17 $0 $2,608 $2,608

7.19% 20 $0 $2,905 $2,9052.79% 19 $0 $2,799 $2,799


100% 12 $385 $2,198 $2,583

($310)N/A cfm $0

($5,000)$0

$5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $50,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base CaseCorridors have a lighting density of 0.7 W/sf. Lights

operate for 24 hours a day.

Proposed ModificationsCorridor lighting load reduced by 40% to 0.42 W/sf. Operating schedule remains unchanged. Reduction in load based on US

EPA predictions, assuming lighting levels turn down by 50% h i d

Energy E-10 Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decorative Features


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use






CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,459,771 1.7%



0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,354.1 26.2 1.1%

-16.7%

374 6 370 8 3 8 1 0%


HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,459,771

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


when unoccupied. 374.6 370.8 3.8 1.0%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%


- 5 sensors required per floor - therefore, 25 total per building- US$193 per sensor including electrician labour- Sensor lifetime – 10 years- Increase bulb lifetime by 40% (Savings includes this extended lifetime)- All 200 corridor light bulbs are assumed to already be CFLs

1.4%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,459,771

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,825

3,422

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,687

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr









Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





($4,825) Simple PaybackWater & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($4,825) $0


1 $0 $3,599 $3,5991.4 yrs


76.5%IRR

N/A tons $0 5 $0 $3,937 $3,937N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $4 061 $4 061






9 $0

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $4,190N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $4,061 $4,061

($4,825) 8 $0 $4,323 $4,323

$36,032NPV$4,190

$4,460 $4,460

14 $0 $5,236 $5,23613 $0 $5,070 $5,070

($6,350) $4,605 ($1,745)


20 18 $0 $6,017 $6,017Defined 17 $0 $5,811 $5,811

7.19% 20 $0 $6,462 $6,4622.79% 19 $0 $6,230 $6,230


($4,825)100% 12 $0 $4,910 $4,910


($10,000)$0

$10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Infiltration is reduced by a third, to 0.2 air changes per hour, in all perimeter spaces.


Infiltration of 0.3 air changes per hour in all perimeter spaces.

Building Materials B-04 Weather Stripping


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





Base Case


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,487,023 0.6%

3,483 3,462 0.6%Space Heating - Elec 93.7 86.9 6.8 7.3%


0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,350.9 29.4 1.2%

0.0%

374 6 372 7 1 9 0 5%


HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,487,023

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




- Material cost of weather stripping – US$0.88/ft- 5ft x 5ft window on 130 rooms requiring 1 hour of carpenter labor rate per window- 5ft x 10ft window on 20 corner rooms requiring 1.5 hour of carpenter labor per window- Average weatherstripping lifetime – 10 years 0.5%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,487,023

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,933

3,462

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,757

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr









Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)

Savings (+) / Loss (-) Cash Flow

Initial Marginal Cost $11,540

$1,172Natural gas 1 therms $0.9000 $1Electricity 11,179 kWh $0.1028 $1,149 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($11,540) $0 ($11,540)1 $0 $1,172 $1,172




2.8%IRR

MBh $0 6 $0 $1 321


N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,280 $1,280N/A $1 321Heating Plant Savings

Airside Distribution SavingsTotal Additional Capital Cost:



cfm $0 7 $0 $1,363MBh $0 6 $0 $1,321 NPV

($11,540) 8 $0 $1,407 $1,407

-$4,165$1,363

10 11 $0 $1,549 $1,549Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 ($15,188) $1,500 ($13,688)

14 $0 $1,708 $1,708($11,540) 13 $0 $1,653 $1,653


20 18 $0 $1,967 $1,967Defined 17 $0 $1,899 $1,899

7.19% 20 $0 $2,115 $2,1152.79% 19 $0 $2,038 $2,038


100% 12 $0 $1,600 $1,600

9 $0 $1,452 $1,452

N/AN/A $1,321

($16,000)($14,000)($12,000)($10,000)($8,000)($6,000)($4,000)($2,000)

$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Mechanical M-09 100% of Guest Rooms have 4F Deadband Thermostats


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





Base CaseGuest room thermostat setpoints of 74°F (cooling) and

74°F (heating).

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,386,302 4.6%



Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,127.2 253.1 10.6%Proposed ModificationsPumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 -16.7%

HVAC Fans 374 6 384 1 9 5 2 5%

Guest room thermostat setpoints of 76°F (cooling) and 72°F (heating). 4.6%

Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%


2,501,896 2,386,302

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r



HVAC Fans 374.6 384.1 -9.5 -2.5%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%

- US$217 per sensor including electrician labour- Average Lifetime – 15 years

3.8%


2,501,896 2,386,302

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,535

3,315

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,498

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






$9,109




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($32,550) $0 ($32,550)1 $0 $9,109 $9,109



29.4%IRR3 $0 $9,459 $9,4592 $0 $9,282

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $10 265 $10 265N/A tons $0 5 $0 $9,947 $9,947








N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $10,265 $10,265 NPV

9 $0 $11,283 $11,283

$10,5948 $0 $10,933 $10,933

$63,5757 $0 $10,594


14 $0 $13,271 $13,271($32,550) 13 $0 $12,847 $12,847

2010 16 $0 $14,244 $14,244Financial Analysis 15 ($49,147) $13,749 ($35,398)

20 18 $0 $15,288 $15,288Defined 17 $0 $14,757 $14,757

7.19% 20 $0 $16,441 $16,4412.79% 19 $0 $15,839 $15,839


100% 12 $0 $12,437 $12,437

($32,550)N/A cfm $0

($50,000)

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base CaseDomestic hot water load of 7.40 gallons/person/day.

Load calculated by assuming water fixtures exceeding IPC rates by 20%, and default usage by hotel guests.

Water W-03 Meet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow Rates


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,471,872 1.2%



Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,380.3 0.0 0.0%Proposed ModificationsPumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 374 6 374 6 0 0 0 0%

Water fixtures meet IPC rates, reducing the domestic hot water load reduced to 6.16 gallons/person/day. 1.2%



2,501,896 2,471,872

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




- Install aerator on all bathroom faucets and low-flow shower heads

- Cost of each aerator is US$22.85 including common building labour rates- Aerator lifetime – 15 years

- Cost of each low-flow shower head is US$77.50 including plumber labour rates- Shower head lifetime – 10 years

3.3%


2,501,896 2,471,872

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,992

3,461

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,538

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






$5,631




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Natural gas 2,573 therms $0.9000 $2,315Electricity 0 kWh $0.1028 $0 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 838,836 Gals $0.0037 $3,104 0 ($15,053) $0 ($15,053)1 $0 $5,631 $5,631



39.5%IRR3 $0 $6,081 $6,0812 $0 $5,851

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6 721 $6 721N/A tons $0 5 $0 $6,518 $6,518








100%15

($11,625)100%

10

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6,721 $6,721 NPV

9 $0 $7,368 $7,368

$6,9308 $0 $7,146 $7,146

$48,3847 $0 $6,930

11 $0 $7,834 $7,834Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 ($15,300) $7,598 ($7,702)

14 $0 $8,590 $8,59013 $0 $8,330 $8,330

2010 16 $0 $9,235 $9,235Financial Analysis 15 ($5,175) $8,907 $3,731

20 18 $0 $9,933 $9,933Defined 17 $0 $9,577 $9,577

7.19% 20 $0 $10,651 $10,6512.79% 19 $0 $10,302 $10,302


12 $0 $8,078 $8,078($3,428)

($15,053)N/A cfm $0

($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Energy E-08 Pipe Insulation


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





Base CaseInsulation on domestic hot water piping is assumed to be of mixed thickness and condition, equivalent to 0.5

inch thick fibreglass piping. CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,484,001 0.7%



Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,356.7 23.6 1.0%Proposed ModificationsPumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 374 6 374 6 0 0 0 0%

1 inch thick fibreglass insulation on all domestic hot water piping. 0.7%



2,501,896 2,484,001

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




- All pipe insulation is fiberglass with an all service jacket- Cost of insulation depends on width of pipe and thickness of insulation suggested as per Green Engage Energy Charts. Prices range from $4.71 to $12.85 including material, labour, overheard and profit.- Warm climates – insulation on hot water pipes only- Insulation Lifetime – 30 yearsNB: Assumes easy access to all piping within hotel - It does not include any demolition costs.

1.3%


2,501,896 2,484,001

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,956

3,463

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,697

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






$1,432




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Natural gas 747 therms $0.9000 $672Electricity 6,902 kWh $0.1028 $710 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($15,279) $0 ($15,279)1 $0 $1,432 $1,432



10.2%IRR3 $0 $1,538 $1,5382 $0 $1,484

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 704 $1 704N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,648 $1,648








N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,704 $1,704 NPV

9 $0 $1,881 $1,881

$1,7618 $0 $1,820 $1,820

$4,0377 $0 $1,761


14 $0 $2,224 $2,224($15,279) 13 $0 $2,151 $2,151


20 18 $0 $2,620 $2,620Defined 17 $0 $2,515 $2,515

7.19% 20 $0 $2,837 $2,8372.79% 19 $0 $2,730 $2,730


100% 12 $0 $2,080 $2,080

($15,279)N/A cfm $0

($20,000)($15,000)($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Corridor lighting load is reduced by 25% to 1.35 W/sf. The operating schedule remains unchanged. The reduction in load

is based on US EPA predictions, assuming the lighting turns ff h i d


Base Case

Energy E-10 Occupancy Sensors in Offices


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





Offices have a lighting density of 1.8 W/sf. Lights operate for 8 hours a day.


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,501,001 0.0%



0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,379.6 0.7 0.0%

0.0%

374 6 374 5 0 1 0 0%


HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,501,001

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


off when unoccupied. 374.6 374.5 0.1 0.0%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%


- US$193 per sensor including electrician labour- Four offices per hotel building - Sensor lifetime – 10 years- Increase office bulb lifetime by 25%- Increase office light bulb lifetime by 25%- All 16 office light bulbs are assumed to already be CFLs

0.0%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,501,001

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,989

3,482

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,793

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





Yr.Costs

(Marginal/Maint/Replace)




$70Natural gas 0 therms $0.9000 $0Electricity 673 kWh $0.1028 $69 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($772) $0 ($772)1 $0 $70 $70


4 $0 $75 $75 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 9.1%

1.9%IRR3 $0 $88 $882 $0 $72

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $95 $95N/A tons $0 5 $0 $77 $77


($772)Capital Costs Savings Summary $72




Loss (-)





N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $95 $95 NPV

9 $0 $105 $105

$828 $0 $85 $85

-$2917 $0 $82

10 11 $0 $93 $93Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 ($1,016) $90 ($926)

14 $0 $103 $103($772) 13 $0 $99 $99

2010 16 $0 $110 $110Financial Analysis 15 $0 $127 $127

20 18 $0 $141 $141Defined 17 $0 $114 $114

7.19% 20 $0 $127 $1272.79% 19 $0 $123 $123


100% 12 $0 $115 $115

($772)N/A cfm $0

($1,200)($1,000)

($800)($600)($400)($200)

$0 $200 $400

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



One VFD (15 HP capacity) installed on VAV supply fan motor.

Constant speed, standard efficiency motor on supply fan for VAV system serving the first floor and corridor

spaces (15 HP capacity).


Base Case

Mechanical M-11 Variable Frequency Drives


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use






CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,489,298 0.5%



0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,369.7 10.6 0.4%

0.0%

374 6 351 6 23 0 6 1%


HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,489,298

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




VFDs only recommended on motors greater than 5HP.

- All four climate zones can install one 15 HP capable VFD for the supply fan motor- Cost of VFD is $3,275 including electrician installation rate- VFD lifetime – 10 years

0.4%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,489,298

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,942

3,465

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,763

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr









Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Natural gas 0 therms $0.9000 $0Electricity 9,477 kWh $0.1028 $974


$993Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($2,868) $01 $0 $993 $993

($2,868) Simple Payback 2.9 yrs



34.8%IRR

N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,084 $1,084N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 119 $1 119






9 $0

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,155N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,119 $1,119

($2,868) 8 $0 $1,191 $1,191

$7,567NPV$1,155

$1,230 $1,230

14 $0 $1,446 $1,44613 $0 $1,400 $1,400

($3,775) $1,270 ($2,504)


20 18 $0 $1,666 $1,666Defined 17 $0 $1,608 $1,608

7.19% 20 $0 $1,792 $1,7922.79% 19 $0 $1,726 $1,726


($2,868)100% 12 $0 $1,355 $1,355


($5,000)

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



VAV supply fan motor replaced with NEMA premium efficiency motor (15 HP capacity).




Base Case

Mechanical M-11 NEMA Premium Efficiency Motors


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use






CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,500,116 0.1%



0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,378.7 1.6 0.1%

0.0%

374 6 371 5 3 1 0 8%


HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,500,116

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




NB: demolition costs are not includedAll four climates can install a 15 HP NEMA efficiency motor on the supply fan. - 15 HP NEMA efficiency motor is $1,482- 15 HP normal motor is $1,195- Cost Premium of $287 0.1%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans


2,501,896 2,500,116

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,985

3,481

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,790

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr









Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($885) $01 $0 $140 $140

($885) Simple Payback 6 yrs

($885) 3 $0 $146 $146Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $143 $143


16.7%IRR

N/A tons $0 5 $0 $153 $153N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $158 $158






9 $0

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $163N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $158 $158

($885) 8 $0 $168 $168

$728NPV$163

$174 $174

14 $0 $204 $20413 $0 $198 $198

$0 $179 $179

2010 16 $0 $219 $219Financial Analysis 15 ($433) $212 ($222)

20 18 $0 $235 $235Defined 17 $0 $227 $227

7.19% 20 $0 $253 $2532.79% 19 $0 $244 $244


($287)100% 12 $0 $192 $192

15 11 $0 $185 $185Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10

($1,500)($1,000)

($500)$0

$500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




Cumulative Scenario Green Engage Lvl 1: All Measures Installed or Replaced Now

Base Case Energy End-Use Benchmark Comparison Environmental Impact AnalysisAs detailed in individual measures

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 1,884,383 24.7%



Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Proposed Modifications Space Cooling 2,380.3 1,809.6 570.7 24.0%

As detailed in individual measures Pumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 -16.7%

HVAC Fans 374 6 373 8 0 8 0 2%

24.7%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,501,896

1,884,383

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


HVAC Fans 374.6 373.8 0.8 0.2%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 962.3 187.5 16.3%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 277.1 148.7 34.9%Base Utilities - Gas 1,534.9 1,277.5 257.4 16.8%

All financial assumptions remain the same as in each individual measure.

24.0%

Financial Assumptions Total 7,795.0 5,925.6 1,869.4 24.0%

2,501,896

1,884,383

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

6,737

2,617

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795

5,926

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)Electricity 428,862 kWh $0.1028 $44,087Savings (+) /

Loss (-) Cash FlowInitial Marginal Cost $149,066

Water & sewer 1,037,880 Gals $0.0037 $3,840 0Natural gas 4,062 therms $0.9000 $3,656

Initial Annual Savings $53,005

($149,066) $0 ($149,066) Simple Payback 2.7 yrs

Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $1,572 $54,184 $55,756 IRR 39.0%($149,066) 3 $4,325 $55,409 $59,733

1 $1,245 $53,005 $54,249

N/A tons $0 5 $1,389 $58,443 $59,8324 $1,661 $56,636 $58,297 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 35.6%

N/A MBh $0 6 $5 023 $60 323 $65 346Heating Plant SavingsAirside Distribution Savings




N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $60,323 $65,346

$62,232 $63,699($149,066) 8 $1,854 $64,217 $66,071

NPV $495,357

9 $5,099 $66,284 $71,383

N/A 11 $1,638 $70,679 $72,317Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 ($34,880) $68,437 $33,557

N/A 13 $1,731 $75,385 $77,116N/A 12 ($2,231) $73,013 $70,782

14 $2,186 $77,855 $80,041

2010 16 $2,310 $83,606 $85,915Financial Analysis 15 ($48,309) $80,699 $32,390

20 18 $6,984 $89,808 $96,792Defined 17 $1,932 $86,640 $88,572

7.19% 20 $2,578 $96,529 $99,1072.79% 19 $2,041 $93,047 $95,088


($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 1,856,030 25.8%





HVAC Fans 374 6 348 7 25 9 6 9%

25.8%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%


Hot-HumidIndividual Resource Calculations Install or Replace Immediately Existing Hotels

2,501,896

1,856,030

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




25.5%


2,501,896

1,856,030

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

6,652

2,581

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795

5,811

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr








Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Natural gas 4,663 therms $0.9000 $4,197Electricity 444,913 kWh $0.1028 $45,737



($168,869) Simple Payback 2.9 yrsWater & sewer 1,037,880 Gals $0.0037 $3,840 0 ($168,869) $0

($168,869) 3 $4,325 $57,788 $62,113Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $1,572 $56,498 $58,071

1 $1,245 $55,256 $56,501

4 $1,661 $59,083 $60,744 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 32.7%

36.0%IRR

MBh $0 6 $5 023 $62 934



N/A tons $0 5 $1,389 $60,970 $62,359N/A $67 956Heating Plant Savings




cfm $0 7 $1,468 $64,927MBh $0 6 $5,023 $62,934

($168,869) 8 $1,854 $67,002 $68,855

$502,518NPV$66,395


14 $2,186 $81,246 $83,432N/A 13 $1,731 $78,667 $80,397


20 18 $6,984 $93,762 $100,746Defined 17 $1,932 $90,445 $92,377

7.19% 20 $2,578 $100,796 $103,3742.79% 19 $2,041 $97,156 $99,197


N/A 12 ($2,231) $76,188 $73,957

9 $5,099 $69,160 $74,259

N/AN/A $67,956

($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Hot-Humid: Replace at End of Lifetime



Energy Modelling Results Summary Replace at End of Lifetime Existing Hotels Hot-Humid

0.9%Immediate

O-04

Use of Building Appropriate Materials

$20,624

The table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modelled existing hotel in the hot-humid climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy saving cost reductions. Due to different modelling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The stoplight colour legend contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.

NPV(Over 20 Years)Simple Payback IRR

% $

Energy Efficient TVs

Towel/Sheet ProgramEnergy Efficient Appliances



N/A

2.4%1.1 yrs


E-07E-07

N/A


%

CO2 Reductions First Year Yield On Marginal Cost

%yrs


Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decorative FixturesE-10

100% of Guest Rooms have 4F Deadband Thermostats

E-09

N/A94.2%

E-07

E-09


Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Back of House SpacesZero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Circulation Spaces

9.9% N/A

E-09


B-04M-09W-03

N/A N/AN/A

N/A

$21,2340.9%

Immediate

N/A

2.0%0.8%

$57,807

N/A

Immediate $51,617

N/A$248,298

$20,740

Immediate

Immediate N/A91.3%


Replace

N/A

N/A


Variable Frequency DrivesM-11M-11 NEMA Premium Efficiency Motors



$572,120Install All New Measures Immediately &Replace Existing Measures At End of Lifetime 1.3 yrs 24.7% 84.4% 79.4%

$1,28551.0%2.1 yrs 0.1% 48.9%

E-08 Pipe InsulationN/AE-10 Occupancy Sensors in Offices


1.6 yrs 25.8% 68.7% 64.3% $579,838




Proposed Modifications-16.7%

HVAC Fans 374 6 373 6 1 0 0 3%


34% on natural gas.

Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,380.3 2,370.6 9.7 0.4%

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,442,457 2.4%



Energy End-Use

The following commercial, non-Energy Star appliances located in the food preparation and laundry areas: 3 washing machines, 2 dishwashers, 4 gas ovens, 2


Emissions Base Case Proposed

Individual Resource Calculations Replace at End of Lifetime Existing Hotels



Hot-Humid

Base Case% Savings (+) /

Loss (-)Base Case Energy Use

Proposed Energy Use




2,501,896 2,442,457

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


Financial Assumptions Total 7,795.0 7,539.9 255.1 3.3%Base Utilities - Gas 1,534.9 1,534.9 0.0 0.0%


3.3%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 279.4 146.4 34.4%

HVAC Fans 374.6 373.6 1.0 0.3%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,050.1 99.7 8.7%

34% on natural gas.

2,501,896 2,442,457

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,825

3,409

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,540

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr




Cooling Plant SavingsHeating Plant Savings N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6 220 $6 220

N/A tons $0 5 $0 $6,025 $6,0254 $0 $5,837 $5,837 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 91.3%

94.2%IRR($5,864) 3 $0 $5,669 $5,669

Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $5,507 $5,507

Water & sewer 164,438 Gals $0.0037 $608 0 ($5,864) $0 ($5,864)1 $0 $5,352 $5,352




$5,352




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



Individual Resource Calculations Replace at End of Lifetime Existing Hotels Hot-Humid




Base YearValuation TypeProject Analysis PeriodInflation RateDiscount Rate for Defined ValuationEnergy Escalation Rate (Nominal) (See Table in Assumptions)

100% 12 ($8,154) $7,544 ($610)

7.19% 20 $0 $10,079 $10,0792.79% 19 $0 $9,714 $9,714

20 18 $0 $9,355 $9,355Defined 17 $0 $9,010 $9,010


14 $0 $8,050 $8,050($5,864) 13 $0 $7,793 $7,793


9 $0 $6,844 $6,844

$6,422($5,864) 8 $0 $6,630 $6,630

$57,807N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $6,422N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6,220 $6,220 NPV

($20,000)$0

$20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




Proposed Modifications0.0%

HVAC Fans 374 6 373 9 0 7 0 2%



CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,480,246 0.9%



Energy End-Use

One 32 inch non-Energy Star television per guest room. Emissions Base Case Proposed




Hot-Humid



Proposed Energy Use




2,501,896 2,480,246

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




0.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,501,896 2,480,246

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,906

3,452

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,739

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,863 $1,8634 $0 $1,805 $1,805 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost N/A

N/AIRR$0 3 $0 $1,771 $1,771


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $0 $0 $01 $0 $1,706 $1,706

Simple Payback Immediate



$1,706




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








100% 12 $0 $2,329 $2,329

7.19% 20 $0 $3,079 $3,0792.79% 19 $0 $2,966 $2,966

20 18 $0 $2,863 $2,863Defined 17 $0 $2,764 $2,764


14 $0 $2,485 $2,485$0 13 $0 $2,406 $2,406


9 $0 $2,113 $2,113

$1,984$0 8 $0 $2,047 $2,047

$20,624N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,984N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,922 $1,922 NPV

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $50,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




Proposed Modifications0.0%

HVAC Fans 374 6 373 9 0 7 0 2%

Refrigerator is replaced with Energy Star rated equivalent. Overall saving of 24% on electricity.


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,479,605 0.9%



Energy End-Use

One 3 cu. ft. non-Energy Star refrigerator per guest room. Emissions Base Case Proposed




Hot-Humid



Proposed Energy Use




2,501,896 2,479,605

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




0.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,501,896 2,479,605

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,904

3,451

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,738

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,918 $1,918N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 979 $1 979

4 $0 $1,859 $1,859 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost N/A

N/AIRR$0 3 $0 $1,824 $1,824

Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $1,790 $1,7901 $0 $1,757 $1,757

$0 Simple Payback ImmediateWater & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $0 $0






Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)









7.19% 20 $0 $3,170 $3,1702.79% 19 $0 $3,054 $3,054

20 18 $0 $2,948 $2,948Defined 17 $0 $2,845 $2,845


14 $0 $2,559 $2,559$0 13 $0 $2,477 $2,477

$2,39812 11 $0 $2,322 $2,322

Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0 $2,247 $2,247

100% 12 $0 $2,398

9 $0 $2,176 $2,176$0 8 $0 $2,108 $2,108

$21,234N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $2,043N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,979 $1,979 NPV

$2,043

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $50,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



9.9%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Pumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 374 6 370 2 4 4 1 2%


Space Heating - Elec 93.7 113.2 -19.5 -20.8%


Proposed % Savings (+) / Loss (-)

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,253,343 9.9%

3,483 3,121 10.4%

Base Case









Hot-Humid

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Emissions Base Case

2,501,8962,253,343

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




8.2%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%



2,501,8962,253,343

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,009

3,121

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,7957,157

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr




Cooling Plant SavingsHeating Plant Savings N/A MBh $0 6 $2 941 $22 071 $25 013


N/AIRR$2,494 3 $2,709 $20,337 $23,046


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $2,494 $0 $2,4941 $0 $19,586 $19,586



Cash FlowInitial Marginal Cost ($2,494)

$19,586




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








100% 12 $3,468 $26,740 $30,209

7.19% 20 $0 $35,348 $35,3482.79% 19 $0 $34,054 $34,054

20 18 $4,090 $32,871 $36,960Defined 17 $0 $31,728 $31,728


14 $0 $28,534 $28,534$2,494 13 $0 $27,623 $27,623


9 $3,194 $24,259 $27,453

$22,778$2,494 8 $0 $23,506 $23,506

$248,298N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $22,778N/A MBh $0 6 $2,941 $22,071 $25,013 NPV

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



2.0%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Pumps 0.0 0.0 0.0 -16.7%

HVAC Fans 374 6 370 2 4 4 1 2%





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,451,580 2.0%

3,483 3,410 2.1%

Base Case




24 hours/day.





Hot-Humid

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Emissions Base Case

2,501,896 2,451,580

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




1.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%



2,501,896 2,451,580

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,793

3,410

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,666

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






N/AIRR$277 3 $301 $4,117 $4,418


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $277 $0 $2771 $285 $3,965 $4,250



Cash FlowInitial Marginal Cost ($277)

$3,965




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








100% 12 $385 $5,413 $5,799

7.19% 20 $480 $7,156 $7,6362.79% 19 $467 $6,894 $7,361

20 18 $454 $6,654 $7,109Defined 17 $442 $6,423 $6,865


14 $407 $5,776 $6,183$277 13 $396 $5,592 $5,988


9 $355 $4,911 $5,266

$4,947$277 8 $345 $4,759 $5,104

$51,617N/A cfm $0 7 $336 $4,611N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $4,468 $4,795 NPV

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




HVAC Fans 374 6 372 8 1 8 0 5%





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,481,468 0.8%

3,483 3,454 0.9%

All 75W incandescent bulbs are replaced with 25W CFLs (100 in total). The average lighting density is reduced to

0.7 W/sf.


hours/day.





Hot-Humid

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Emissions Base Case

2,501,896 2,481,468

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




0.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,501,896 2,481,468

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,911

3,454

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,743

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






N/AIRR$277 3 $301 $1,671 $1,972


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $277 $0 $2771 $0 $1,610 $1,610




$1,610




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








100% 12 $385 $2,198 $2,583

7.19% 20 $0 $2,905 $2,9052.79% 19 $0 $2,799 $2,799

20 18 $454 $2,702 $3,156Defined 17 $0 $2,608 $2,608


14 $0 $2,345 $2,345$277 13 $0 $2,270 $2,270


9 $355 $1,994 $2,349

$1,872$277 8 $0 $1,932 $1,932

$20,740N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,872N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1,814 $2,141 NPV

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $50,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




HVAC Fans 374 6 371 5 3 1 0 8%





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 2,500,116 0.1%

3,483 3,481 0.1%

VAV supply fan motor replaced with NEMA premium efficiency motor (15 HP capacity).




Base Case




Hot-Humid

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Emissions Base Case

2,501,896 2,500,116

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,501,896 2,500,116

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

8,985

3,481

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795 7,790

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





N/A tons $0 5 $0 $153 $153N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $158 $158


51.0%IRR($287) 3 $0 $146 $146

Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $143 $1431 $0 $140 $140

($287) Simple Payback 2.1 yrsWater & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($287) $0






Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)









7.19% 20 $0 $253 $2532.79% 19 $0 $244 $244

20 18 $0 $235 $235Defined 17 $0 $227 $227


14 $0 $204 $204($287) 13 $0 $198 $198

$19215 11 $0 $185 $185

Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0 $179 $179

100% 12 $0 $192

9 $0 $174 $174($287) 8 $0 $168 $168

$1,285N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $163N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $158 $158 NPV

$163

($500)$0

$500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




Cumulative Scenario Green Engage Lvl 1: Install All New Measures Immediately & Replace Existing Measures when Lifetime is Finished


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 1,884,383 24.7%





HVAC Fans 374 6 373 8 0 8 0 2%

24.7%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,501,896

1,884,383

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




24.0%


2,501,896

1,884,383

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

6,737

2,617

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795

5,926

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.








1 $1,245 $53,005 $54,249






N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $60,323 $65,346

$62,232 $63,699($66,784) 8 $1,854 $64,217 $66,071

NPV $572,120

9 $5,099 $66,284 $71,383


N/A 13 $1,731 $75,385 $77,116N/A 12 ($2,231) $73,013 $70,782

14 $2,186 $77,855 $80,041


20 18 $6,984 $89,808 $96,792Defined 17 $1,932 $86,640 $88,572

7.19% 20 $2,578 $96,529 $99,1072.79% 19 $2,041 $93,047 $95,088


($200,000)$0

$200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Proposed Modifications Space Cooling 2,380.3 1,779.6 600.7 25.2%


NOX (lb/yr) 3,483 2,581MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



8,992CO2 (lb/yr) 2,501,896 1,856,030 25.8%

25.9%Space Heating - Elec 93.7 128.3 -34.6 -36.9%

6,652 26.0%Lighting 1,835.9 1,097.3 738.7 40.2%


% SO2 (lb/yr)

Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

0.0 0.0 0.0 -16.7%

HVAC Fans 374 6 348 7 25 9 6 9%

25.8%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

As detailed in individual measures Pumps

2,501,896

1,856,030

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 962.3 187.5 16.3%HVAC Fans 374.6 348.7 25.9 6.9%


Receptacles - Gas 425.8 277.1 148.7 34.9%Base Utilities - Gas 1,534.9 1,217.4 317.5 20.7%


25.5%

2,501,896

1,856,030

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


8,992

3,483

6,652

2,581

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

7,795

5,811

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr








$85,990

Water & sewer 1,037,880 Gals $0.0037 $3,840 0


Replace)Electricity 444,913 kWh $0.1028 $45,737Natural gas 4,663 therms $0.9000 $4,197




Loss (-)Yr. Savings (+) /

Loss (-) Cash FlowInitial Marginal Cost

1 $1,245 $55,256 $56,501($85,990) $0 ($85,990) Simple Payback 1.6 yrs

($85,990) 3 $4,325 $57,788 $62,113Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $1,572 $56,498 $58,071 IRR 68.7%






N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $62,934 $67,956

$64,927 $66,395($85,990) 8 $1,854 $67,002 $68,855

NPV $579,838

9 $5,099 $69,160 $74,259


N/A 13 $1,731 $78,667 $80,397N/A 12 ($2,231) $76,188 $73,957

14 $2,186 $81,246 $83,432


20 18 $6,984 $93,762 $100,746Defined 17 $1,932 $90,445 $92,377

7.19% 20 $2,578 $100,796 $103,3742.79% 19 $2,041 $97,156 $99,197


($200,000)$0

$200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,600,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Arid: Install or Replace Immediately






E-09E-09E-09

Simple Payback IRR

1.8%

3.5%

6.2 yrs 0.9% 11.1%3.7 yrs 4.2% 27.7%

0.1%2.2%

16 yrs20.7%0.8%E-07

E-10 Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decorative Fixtures

5.2 yrs

1.3 yrs


CO2 Reductions

Immediate

1.2%

0.3 yrs

7.4 yrs

2.6 yrs

B-04 Use of Building Appropriate Materials100% of Guest Rooms have 4F Deadband ThermostatsMeet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow Rates





The table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modelled existing hotel in the arid climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy saving cost reductions. Due to different modelling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The stoplight colour legend contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.

AridWest Palm Beach, FL

0.2 yrs 8.6% 635.8% 632.4% $219,8830.1 yrs $56,748

N/A12.3%

N/A13.0%

$

($8,154)

yrs

2.2%

NPV(Over 20 Years)Install New or

Replace %

18.7%

1524.4% 1430.5%

83.8%

M-09W-03

Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Back of House Spaces $17,409

37.9% $49,432

15.4% $3,61526.4% $57,438

445.0%81.9%

0.7% 449.5%

40.1%

Energy Modelling Results Summary Install or Replace Immediately Existing Hotels Arid

$11,990

$40,275

0.8% 5.5%

% %

$22,069$19,444


Replace

N/A

N/A



E-10Pipe Insulation 10 yrs


$73333.7%

16.7%6 yrsM-11M-11 NEMA Premium Efficiency Motors 0.1%

Variable Frequency Drives 3 yrs

0.7%E-08


0.5% 33.8%Occupancy Sensors in Offices 20 yrs 0.0% 0.0% 8.2% ($382)

All Measures Installed or Replaced Immediately 3 yrs 23.8% 34.7% 31.5% $477,648

15.9%

9.0%

$7,264

9.7% $3,360



Individual Resource Calculations Install or Replace Immediately Existing Hotels Arid



Operations

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


2,251.2 2.5 0.1%

0.0

0.0

2,253.7


0.1%SO2 (lb/yr)

0.0 0.0

3,618 0.1%%

0.0%MBtu/yr

0.0%


0.0 0.0 0.0%


0.1%

3,6220.1%

NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,596,627

494 6 0 3 0 1%

The energy consumption of washing machines and dryers is reduced by 17%, based on a study by the


-1.1 -0.3%

0.2 0.00.2

HVAC Fans

336.0

-2.3%Proposed Modifications

9,346

Base Case

Heat Rejection

1,835.9


Proposed Energy Use


9,356

3 commercial, non-Energy Star washing machines and dryers, operating for 8 hours per day.

PumpsSpace Cooling

495 0

Energy End-Use

0.0Space Heating - Gas337.1

1,835.9

2,599,589 2,596,627

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


494.6 0.3 0.1%

0.0 0.0%8,080.0 8,069.6Total


0.1%1,583.7 1,583.7

HVAC Fans

- No additional costs


Base Utilities - Gas

Receptacles - Elec

0.1%

10.4

4.7 0.4%4.0 0.9%

Financial Assumptions

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 421.81,149.8 1,145.0495.0

2,599,589 2,596,627

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,346

3,618

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,070

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr









Towel/Sheet Program

0 $0$0


Replace)

O-04

$0

$366

$0 $408$395

543

$1,352

Immediate

N/A

N/A$385$376

$1,797$1,747

$128 Simple Payback

$0


IRR

MBhtons

$1,700

$1,611$1,655

Cash FlowSavings (+) / Loss (-)

1

$1 428

therms$0.0037$0.9000$0.1028Unit Cost


$0

Operations


6

1,877

$1 848


$420

$36

N/A

2


(+) / Loss (-)Yr.

Financial Table

kWh $193

N/A

$0

$1,389

$1,315$1,279$1,245


34,60640

Gals





NPVcfmMBh $19,444

$2,128$2,069$2,011$1,955

$2,189$2,252

$537 $2,316

$2,756$2,677

109

12

$1,551$475$460

$1,594

1615

$575

14

$1,879$1,932

$1,828

$2,098 $6592.79%

Financial Analysis

$1,684

$1,779$556

$2,601

7.19%

$521

$2,526$2,454

13$505


20191817Defined

20

2010

100%$1,211 $1,731

$1,638 $490

$2,384

$637$615$595


$1,986

11

$2,041

$446$1,509$1,468$1,428

$0

$0

876 $1,848$420N/A

N/A $0 $433 $1,901

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




34% on natural gas.


HVAC Fans 495 0 494 0 1 0 0 2%







Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,541,632 2.2%

Individual Resource Calculations Install or Replace Immediately Existing Hotels



Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,541,632

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


34% on natural gas.



3.1%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 279.4 146.4 34.4%


2,599,589 2,541,632

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,194

3,549

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 7,829

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






13.0%IRR($42,658) 3 $0 $5,548 $5,548


Water & sewer 164,438 Gals $0.0037 $608 0 ($42,658) $0 ($42,658)1 $0 $5,235 $5,235




$5,235




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








$9,15917


100% 12 ($8,154) $7,384 ($769)

18 $0 $9,159

7.19% 20 $0 $9,868 $9,8682.79% 19 $0 $9,511 $9,511

Defined$8,495

Financial Analysis 15 $0 $8,181 $8,181

20

14 $0 $7,880 $7,880($5,864) 13 $0 $7,628 $7,628

$0 $8,821 $8,8212010 16 $0 $8,495


9 $0 $6,700 $6,700

$6,286($42,658) 8 $0 $6,489 $6,489

$22,069N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $6,286N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6,089 $6,089 NPV

($60,000)($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Television is replaced with Energy Star rated equivalent. Overall saving of 40% on electricity. 0.8%

Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Pumps 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 495 0 492 5 2 4 0 5%



One 32 inch non-Energy Star television per guest room.



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,578,769 0.8%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,578,769

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




0.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,578,769

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,274

3,591

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,027

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






3.5%IRR($30,000) 3 $0 $1,704 $1,704


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($30,000) $0 ($30,000)1 $0 $1,641 $1,641




$1,641




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








$2,75317


100% 12 $0 $2,240 $2,240

18 $0 $2,753

7.19% 20 $0 $2,961 $2,9612.79% 19 $0 $2,853 $2,853

Defined$2,565


20

14 $0 $2,390 $2,390$0 13 $0 $2,314 $2,314

$0 $2,658 $2,6582010 16 $0 $2,565


9 $0 $2,032 $2,032

$1,908($30,000) 8 $0 $1,969 $1,969

-$8,154N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,908N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,849 $1,849 NPV

($35,000)($30,000)($25,000)($20,000)($15,000)($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Refrigerator is replaced with Energy Star rated equivalent. Overall saving of 24% on electricity. 0.8%


HVAC Fans 495 0 492 5 2 4 0 5%



One 3 cu. ft. non-Energy Star refrigerator per guest room.



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,578,189 0.8%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,578,189

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




0.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,578,189

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,271

3,591

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,025

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,841 $1,841N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 900 $1 900


20.7%IRR($9,000) 3 $0 $1,751 $1,751


($9,000) Simple Payback 5.2 yrsWater & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($9,000) $0






Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)









$2,30212 11 $0 $2,229 $2,229

Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0 $2,158

7.19% 20 $0 $3,043 $3,0432.79% 19 $0 $2,932 $2,932

20 18 $0 $2,830 $2,830Defined 17 $0 $2,732 $2,732


14 $0 $2,457 $2,457$0 13 $0 $2,378 $2,378

100% 12 $0 $2,302

9 $0 $2,089 $2,089($9,000) 8 $0 $2,024 $2,024

$11,990

$2,158

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,961N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,900 $1,900 NPV

$1,961

($15,000)($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






HVAC Fans 495 0 483 3 11 6 2 4%







Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,375,690 8.6%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,5892,375,690

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





7.1%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,5892,375,690

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

8,470

3,296

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,0807,505

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






635.8%IRR($2,790) 3 $2,709 $18,320 $21,029


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($2,790) $0 ($2,790)1 $0 $17,643 $17,643




$17,643




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








$29,61017


100% 12 $3,468 $24,088 $27,556

18 $4,090 $33,700

7.19% 20 $0 $31,842 $31,8422.79% 19 $0 $30,676 $30,676

Defined$27,588

Financial Analysis 15 $3,766 $26,629 $30,396

20

14 $0 $25,704 $25,704$2,494 13 $0 $24,883 $24,883

$0 $28,581 $28,5812010 16 $0 $27,588


9 $3,194 $21,852 $25,046

$20,518($2,790) 8 $0 $21,175 $21,175

$219,883N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $20,518N/A MBh $0 6 $2,941 $19,882 $22,823 NPV

($100,000)

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






HVAC Fans 495 0 490 1 4 8 1 0%




24 hours/day.



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,543,312 2.2%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,543,312

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





1.8%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,543,312

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,133

3,540

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 7,936

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






1524.4%IRR($310) 3 $301 $4,605 $4,906


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($310) $0 ($310)1 $285 $4,435 $4,719




$4,435




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








$7,44217


100% 12 $385 $6,055 $6,440

18 $454 $7,897

7.19% 20 $480 $8,003 $8,4832.79% 19 $467 $7,710 $8,177

Defined$7,364


20

14 $407 $6,461 $6,868$277 13 $396 $6,254 $6,650

$442 $7,184 $7,6262010 16 $430 $6,934


9 $355 $5,493 $5,847

$5,493($310) 8 $345 $5,322 $5,668

$56,748N/A cfm $0 7 $336 $5,157N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $4,997 $5,324 NPV

($20,000)$0

$20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




0.7 W/sf.


HVAC Fans 495 0 493 2 1 8 0 4%




hours/day.



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,582,083 0.7%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,582,083

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




0.6%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,582,083

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,287

3,596

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,035

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






449.5%IRR($310) 3 $301 $1,432 $1,733


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($310) $0 ($310)1 $0 $1,379 $1,379




$1,379




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








$2,31517


100% 12 $385 $1,883 $2,269

18 $454 $2,770

7.19% 20 $0 $2,490 $2,4902.79% 19 $0 $2,399 $2,399

Defined$2,157


20

14 $0 $2,010 $2,010$277 13 $0 $1,946 $1,946

$0 $2,235 $2,2352010 16 $0 $2,157


9 $355 $1,709 $2,063

$1,604($310) 8 $0 $1,656 $1,656

$17,409N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,604N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1,555 $1,881 NPV

($5,000)$0

$5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Corridor lighting load reduced by 40% to 0.42 W/sf. Operating schedule remains unchanged. Reduction in load based on US




HVAC Fans 495 0 490 9 4 1 0 8%


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,553,010 1.8%



Energy End-Use MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %

Corridors have a lighting density of 0.7 W/sf. Lights operate for 24 hours a day.




Arid

Base Case

Emissions Base Case Proposed % Savings (+) / Loss (-)Base Case

Energy UseProposed

Energy UseSavings (+) /

Loss (-)Savings (+) /

Loss (-)MBtu/yr

2,599,589 2,553,010

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


when unoccupied.



1.5%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,553,010

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,172

3,554

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 7,960

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





N/A tons $0 5 $0 $4,320 $4,320N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $4 457 $4 457


83.8%IRR($4,825) 3 $0 $4,107 $4,107








Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



Cash Flow







$5,38910 11 $0 $5,219 $5,219

Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 ($6,350)

7.19% 20 $0 $7,095 $7,0952.79% 19 $0 $6,840 $6,840

20 18 $0 $6,606 $6,606Defined 17 $0 $6,380 $6,380


14 $0 $5,747 $5,747($4,825) 13 $0 $5,565 $5,565

100% 12 $0 $5,389

9 $0 $4,894 $4,894($4,825) 8 $0 $4,744 $4,744

$40,275

$5,054 ($1,296)

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $4,598N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $4,457 $4,457 NPV

$4,598

($20,000)

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Infiltration is reduced by a third, to 0.2 air changes per hour, in all perimeter spaces. 0.9%


HVAC Fans 495 0 482 6 12 4 2 5%






Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,577,066 0.9%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,577,066

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,577,066

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,267

3,589

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,022

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,938 $1,938N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $2 000 $2 000


11.1%IRR($11,540) 3 $0 $1,843 $1,843


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($11,540) $0 ($11,540)1 $0 $1,775 $1,775




$1,775




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








$2,97917


100% 12 $0 $2,423 $2,423

18 $0 $2,979

7.19% 20 $0 $3,203 $3,2032.79% 19 $0 $3,086 $3,086

Defined$2,775


20

14 $0 $2,586 $2,586($11,540) 13 $0 $2,503 $2,503

$0 $2,875 $2,8752010 16 $0 $2,775

9 $0 $2,198 $2,198


($11,540) 8 $0 $2,130 $2,130

$3,615N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $2,064N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $2,000 $2,000 NPV

$2,064

($15,000)($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Guest room thermostat setpoints of 76°F (cooling) and 72°F (heating). 4.2%

Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Pumps 0.2 0.2 0.0 -4.5%

HVAC Fans 495 0 499 8 4 8 1 0%



Guest room thermostat setpoints of 74°F (cooling) and 74°F (heating).



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,490,434 4.2%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,490,434

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




3.5%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 495.0 499.8 -4.8 -1.0%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%

2,599,589 2,490,434

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

8,924

3,463

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 7,800

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






27.7%IRR($32,550) 3 $0 $8,932 $8,932


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($32,550) $0 ($32,550)1 $0 $8,602 $8,602




$8,602




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








$14,43617


100% 12 $0 $11,744 $11,744

18 $0 $14,436

7.19% 20 $0 $15,524 $15,5242.79% 19 $0 $14,956 $14,956

Defined$13,450

Financial Analysis 15 ($49,147) $12,983 ($36,164)

20

14 $0 $12,532 $12,532($32,550) 13 $0 $12,131 $12,131

$0 $13,935 $13,9352010 16 $0 $13,450


9 $0 $10,654 $10,654

$10,003($32,550) 8 $0 $10,324 $10,324

$57,438N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $10,003N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $9,693 $9,693 NPV

($60,000)($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





Proposed ModificationsWater fixtures meet IPC rates, reducing the domestic

hot water load reduced to 6.16 gallons/person/day.



HVAC Fans 495 0 495 0 0 0 0 0%


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,568,608 1.2%





Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





2,599,589 2,568,608

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r






3.3%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,568,608

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,356

3,598

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 7,815

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr









$5,708


N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6 819 $6 819N/A tons $0 5 $0 $6,613 $6,613


40.1%IRR3 $0 $6,168 $6,1682 $0 $5,933

Water & sewer 838,836 Gals $0.0037 $3,104 0 ($15,053) $0 ($15,053)1 $0 $5,708 $5,708


Natural gas 2,655 therms $0.9000 $2,389Electricity 0 kWh $0.1028 $0 Initial Annual Savings



Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)






cfm $0


12 $0 $8,198 $8,198

($15,053)N/A

7.19% 20 $0 $10,819 $10,8192.79% 19 $0 $10,464 $10,464

20 18 $0 $10,087 $10,087Defined 17 $0 $9,725 $9,725


14 $0 $8,719 $8,71913 $0 $8,454 $8,454


9 $0 $7,476 $7,476

$7,0318 $0 $7,250 $7,250

$49,4327 $0

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6,819 $6,819 NPV$7,031

($3,428)100%

15

($11,625)100%

10

($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



1 inch thick fibreglass insulation on all domestic hot water piping. 0.7%

0.2 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 495 0 495 0 0 0 0 0%

Pumps 0.2Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%



Insulation on domestic hot water piping is assumed to be of mixed thickness and condition, equivalent to 0.5

inch thick fibreglass insulation.



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,582,408 0.7%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,582,408

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%

Financial Assumptions Total 8,080.0 7,983.4 96.6 1.2%- All pipe insulation is fiberglass with an all service jacket- Cost of insulation depends on width of pipe and thickness of insulation suggested as per Green Engage Energy Charts. Prices range from $4.71 to $12.85 including material, labour, overheard and profit.- Warm climates – insulation on hot water pipes only- Insulation Lifetime – 30 yearsNB: Assumes easy access to all piping within hotel - It does not include any demolition costs.

1.2%

Base Utilities - Gas 1,583.7 1,508.8


74.9 4.7%

2,599,589 2,582,408

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,323

3,603

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 7,983

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






9.7%IRR($15,279) 3 $0 $1,480 $1,480


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($15,279) $0 ($15,279)1 $0 $1,376 $1,376


Natural gas 749 therms $0.9000 $674Electricity 6,347 kWh $0.1028 $652 Initial Annual Savings


$1,376




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








$2,52617


100% 12 $0 $2,004 $2,004

18 $0 $2,526

7.19% 20 $0 $2,736 $2,7362.79% 19 $0 $2,633 $2,633

Defined$2,326


20

14 $0 $2,142 $2,142($15,279) 13 $0 $2,072 $2,072

$0 $2,424 $2,4242010 16 $0 $2,326


9 $0 $1,812 $1,812

$1,696($15,279) 8 $0 $1,753 $1,753

$3,360N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,696N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,641 $1,641 NPV

($20,000)($15,000)($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Corridor lighting load is reduced by 25% to 1.35 W/sf. The operating schedule remains unchanged. The reduction in load is based on US EPA predictions,


HVAC Fans 495 0 494 9 0 1 0 0%






Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,598,790 0.0%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,598,790

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


reduction in load is based on US EPA predictions, assuming the lighting turns off when unoccupied.



0.0%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,598,790

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,353

3,621

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,078

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr




Cooling Plant SavingsHeating Plant Savings N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $87 $87

N/A tons $0 5 $0 $69 $694 $0 $67 $67 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 8.2%

0.0%IRR($772) 3 $0 $80 $80

Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $64 $64

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($772) $0 ($772)1 $0 $63 $63


Natural gas 0 therms $0.9000 $0Electricity 601 kWh $0.1028 $62 Initial Annual Savings


$63




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)








$12817


100% 12 $0 $105 $105

18 $0 $128

7.19% 20 $0 $114 $1142.79% 19 $0 $109 $109

Defined$98

Financial Analysis 15 $0 $116 $116

20

14 $0 $92 $92($772) 13 $0 $89 $89

$0 $102 $1022010 16 $0 $98


9 $0 $95 $95

$73($772) 8 $0 $76 $76

-$382N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $73N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $87 $87 NPV

($1,200)

($1,000)

($800)

($600)

($400)

($200)

$0

$200

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



One VFD (15 HP capacity) installed on VAV supply fan motor. 0.5%

Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Pumps 0.2 0.2 0.0 -2.3%

HVAC Fans 495 0 467 8 27 1 5 5%







Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,587,308 0.5%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,587,308

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





0.4%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,587,308

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,307

3,604

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,048

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,057 $1,057N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 091 $1 091


33.8%IRR($2,868) 3 $0 $1,005 $1,005


($2,868) Simple Payback 3 yrsWater & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($2,868) $0






Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)









$1,32110 11 $0 $1,279 $1,279

Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 ($3,775) $1,238

7.19% 20 $0 $1,746 $1,7462.79% 19 $0 $1,683 $1,683

20 18 $0 $1,624 $1,624Defined 17 $0 $1,568 $1,568


14 $0 $1,410 $1,410($2,868) 13 $0 $1,365 $1,365

100% 12 $0 $1,321

9 $0 $1,199 $1,199($2,868) 8 $0 $1,161 $1,161

$7,264

($2,537)

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,125N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,091 $1,091 NPV

$1,125

($5,000)

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



VAV supply fan motor replaced with NEMA premium efficiency motor (15 HP capacity). 0.1%


HVAC Fans 495 0 491 5 3 4 0 7%







Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,597,804 0.1%




Arid

Base Case

2,599,589 2,597,804

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,597,804

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,349

3,619

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,075

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





N/A tons $0 5 $0 $154 $154N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $159 $159


16.7%IRR($885) 3 $0 $146 $146


($885) Simple Payback 6 yrsWater & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($885) $0






Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)









$19215 11 $0 $186 $186

Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0 $180

7.19% 20 $0 $254 $2542.79% 19 $0 $245 $245

20 18 $0 $236 $236Defined 17 $0 $228 $228


14 $0 $205 $205($287) 13 $0 $198 $198100% 12 $0 $192

9 $0 $174 $174($885) 8 $0 $169 $169

$733

$180

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $164N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $159 $159 NPV

$164

($1,500)($1,000)

($500)$0

$500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,122 2,007,279 22.8%





HVAC Fans 495 0 471 9 23 0 4 7%

22.8%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,599,122

2,007,279

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




22.4%


2,599,122

2,007,279

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,621

7,204

2,793

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,076

6,270

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.








1 $1,245 $50,983 $52,228






N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $58,050 $63,073

$59,886 $61,354($149,066) 8 $1,854 $61,797 $63,651

NPV $470,972

9 $5,099 $63,786 $68,885


N/A 13 $1,731 $72,541 $74,272N/A 12 ($2,231) $70,260 $68,029

14 $2,186 $74,917 $77,103


20 18 $6,984 $86,427 $93,411Defined 17 $1,932 $83,376 $85,308

7.19% 20 $2,578 $92,894 $95,4722.79% 19 $2,041 $89,546 $91,587


($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




Base Case Energy End-Use Benchmark Comparison Environmental Impact Analysis


444.1 19.7%As detailed in individual measures Pumps 0.2 0.2 0.0 -6.8%

HVAC Fans 495 0 443 9 51 1

As detailed in individual measures

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Proposed Modifications Space Cooling 2,253.7 1,809.6

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,122 1,979,506 23.8%



10 3%

23.8%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,599,122

1,979,506

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




23.8%


2,599,122

1,979,506

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,621

7,124

2,758

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,076

6,153

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Natural gas 4,745 therms $0.9000 $4,271Electricity 424,446 kWh $0.1028 $43,633



($168,869) Simple Payback 3 yrsWater & sewer 1,037,880 Gals $0.0037 $3,840 0 ($168,869) $0

($168,869) 3 $4,325 $55,649 $59,973Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $1,572 $54,396 $55,968

1 $1,245 $53,190 $54,435

4 $1,661 $56,905 $58,566 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 31.5%

34.7%IRR

N/A tons $0 5 $1,389 $58,723 $60,112N/A MBh $0 6 $5 023 $60 615 $65 638Heating Plant Savings




N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468 $62,535N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $60,615 $65,638 NPV

$64,003($168,869) 8 $1,854 $64,533 $66,387

$477,648

9 $5,099 $66,612 $71,712


N/A 13 $1,731 $75,767 $77,498N/A 12 ($2,231) $73,380 $71,150

14 $2,186 $78,251 $80,437


20 18 $6,984 $90,318 $97,302Defined 17 $1,932 $87,119 $89,051

7.19% 20 $2,578 $97,095 $99,6722.79% 19 $2,041 $93,590 $95,631


($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Arid: Replace at End of Lifetime



N/A

E-09

$20,386


NPV(Over 20 Years)

yrsInstall New or

Replace

Immediate

N/A

% %

$56,395

N/A

N/A N/A0.7% N/A

1.2 yrs

Use of Building Appropriate Materials

N/A $17,9572.2%

100% of Guest Rooms have 4F Deadband Thermostats

Simple Payback IRR

Immediate

%

N/A

Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decorative Fixtures

Energy Modelling Results Summary Replace at End of Lifetime Existing HotelsThe table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modelled existing hotel in the arid climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy saving cost reductions. Due to different modelling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The stoplight colour legend contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.

AridWest Palm Beach, FL

Immediate 8.6% N/A N/A $224,812


Towel/Sheet Program

0.8% N/A89.3%92.2%






Immediate

2.2%

E-09

N/A

E-07

E-10

Arid

Immediate $57,295E-09

B-04M-09W-03


0.8%

$

$19,834Energy Efficient Appliances



Replace

N/A

N/A


$1,290


0.1% 49.0%Variable Frequency Drives

Pipe Insulation

NEMA Premium Efficiency Motors

E-08


$555,479

N/A


M-11M-11E-10

51.2%2.1 yrs

Occupancy Sensors in Offices

Green Engage Level 2 Certification Cumulative Savings Scenarios (Includes Green Engage Level 1)Install All New Measures Immediately &Replace Existing Measures At End of Lifetime 1.6 yrs 23.9% 66.4% 61.9%


Ari


34% on natural gas.





Arid

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use







CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,541,632 2.2%




HVAC Fans 495 0 494 0 1 0 0 2%


2,599,589 2,541,632

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


34% on natural gas. HVAC Fans 495.0 494.0 1.0 0.2%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,050.1 99.7 8.7%



3.1%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 279.4 146.4 34.4%


2,599,589 2,541,632

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,194

3,549

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 7,829

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Individual Resource Calculations Replace at End of Lifetime Existing Hotels Arid




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



$5,235Natural gas 1,464 therms $0.9000 $1,318Electricity 30,742 kWh $0.1028 $3,160 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 164,438 Gals $0.0037 $608 0 ($5,864) $0 ($5,864)1 $0 $5,235 $5,235




92.2%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6 089 $6 089N/A tons $0 5 $0 $5,898 $5,898





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $6,286N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6,089 $6,089 NPV

($5,864) 8 $0 $6,489 $6,489

$56,395

9 $0 $6,700 $6,700

$6,286


14 $0 $7,880 $7,880($5,864) 13 $0 $7,628 $7,628


20 18 $0 $9,159 $9,159Defined 17 $0 $8,821 $8,821

7.19% 20 $0 $9,868 $9,8682.79% 19 $0 $9,511 $9,511


100% 12 ($8,154) $7,384 ($769)

($20,000)$0

$20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Ari






Arid

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




One 32 inch non-Energy Star television per guest room. Emissions Base Case Proposed % Savings (+) /

Loss (-)CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,578,769 0.8%




HVAC Fans 495 0 492 5 2 4 0 5%


2,599,589 2,578,769

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





0.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,578,769

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,274

3,591

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,027

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Initial Marginal Cost $0


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $0 $0 $01 $0 $1,641 $1,641


$0 3 $0 $1,704 $1,704Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $1,672 $1,672


N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 849 $1 849N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,791 $1,791





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,908N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,849 $1,849 NPV

$0 8 $0 $1,969 $1,969

$19,834

9 $0 $2,032 $2,032

$1,908


14 $0 $2,390 $2,390$0 13 $0 $2,314 $2,314


20 18 $0 $2,753 $2,753Defined 17 $0 $2,658 $2,658

7.19% 20 $0 $2,961 $2,9612.79% 19 $0 $2,853 $2,853


100% 12 $0 $2,240 $2,240

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $50,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Ari


room.






Arid

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,578,189 0.8%




HVAC Fans 495 0 492 5 2 4 0 5%


2,599,589 2,578,189

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





0.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,578,189

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,271

3,591

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,025

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $0 $01 $0 $1,686 $1,686

$0 Simple Payback Immediate



N/AIRR

N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,841 $1,841N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 900 $1 900Heating Plant Savings




N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,961N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,900 $1,900 NPV

$1,961$0 8 $0 $2,024 $2,024

$20,386

9 $0 $2,089 $2,089

$2,30212 11 $0 $2,229 $2,229


100% 12 $0 $2,302

14 $0 $2,457 $2,457$0 13 $0 $2,378 $2,378


20 18 $0 $2,830 $2,830Defined 17 $0 $2,732 $2,732

7.19% 20 $0 $3,043 $3,0432.79% 19 $0 $2,932 $2,932


$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $50,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Ari







Arid

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use







CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,375,690 8.6%




HVAC Fans 495 0 483 3 11 6 2 4%


2,599,5892,375,690

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


lighting density is reduced to 0.75 W/sf. HVAC Fans 495.0 483.3 11.6 2.4%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%



7.1%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,5892,375,690

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

8,470

3,296

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,0807,505

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Initial Marginal Cost ($2,494)


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $2,494 $0 $2,4941 $0 $17,643 $17,643


$2,494 3 $2,709 $18,320 $21,029Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $17,978 $17,978


N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $2 941 $19 882 $22 823N/A tons $0 5 $0 $19,266 $19,266





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $20,518N/A MBh $0 6 $2,941 $19,882 $22,823 NPV

$2,494 8 $0 $21,175 $21,175

$224,812

9 $3,194 $21,852 $25,046

$20,518


14 $0 $25,704 $25,704$2,494 13 $0 $24,883 $24,883


20 18 $4,090 $29,610 $33,700Defined 17 $0 $28,581 $28,581

7.19% 20 $0 $31,842 $31,8422.79% 19 $0 $30,676 $30,676


100% 12 $3,468 $24,088 $27,556

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Ari







Arid

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





24 hours/day.


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,543,312 2.2%




HVAC Fans 495 0 490 1 4 8 1 0%


2,599,589 2,543,312

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





1.8%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,543,312

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,133

3,540

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 7,936

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Initial Marginal Cost ($277)


Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $277 $0 $2771 $285 $4,435 $4,719




N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $4 997 $5 324N/A tons $0 5 $318 $4,842 $5,160





N/A cfm $0 7 $336 $5,157N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $4,997 $5,324 NPV

$277 8 $345 $5,322 $5,668

$57,295

9 $355 $5,493 $5,847

$5,493


14 $407 $6,461 $6,868$277 13 $396 $6,254 $6,650


20 18 $454 $7,442 $7,897Defined 17 $442 $7,184 $7,626

7.19% 20 $480 $8,003 $8,4832.79% 19 $467 $7,710 $8,177


100% 12 $385 $6,055 $6,440

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Ari


0.7 W/sf.





Arid

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





hours/day.


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,582,083 0.7%




HVAC Fans 495 0 493 2 1 8 0 4%


2,599,589 2,582,083

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





0.6%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,582,083

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,287

3,596

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,035

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $277 $0 $2771 $0 $1,379 $1,379




N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1 555 $1 881N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,506 $1,506





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,604N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1,555 $1,881 NPV

$277 8 $0 $1,656 $1,656

$17,957

9 $355 $1,709 $2,063

$1,604


14 $0 $2,010 $2,010$277 13 $0 $1,946 $1,946


20 18 $454 $2,315 $2,770Defined 17 $0 $2,235 $2,235

7.19% 20 $0 $2,490 $2,4902.79% 19 $0 $2,399 $2,399


100% 12 $385 $1,883 $2,269

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Ari







Arid



Proposed Energy Use



MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,597,804 0.1%



Energy End-Use

Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 2,253.7 2,252.0 1.7 0.1%Proposed Modifications

0.0%

HVAC Fans 495 0 491 5 3 4 0 7%

VAV supply fan motor replaced with NEMA premium efficiency motor (15 HP capacity). 0.1%

Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Pumps 0.2 0.2 0.0

2,599,589 2,597,804

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,599,589 2,597,804

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

9,349

3,619

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080 8,075

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($287) $01 $0 $141 $141

($287) Simple Payback 2.1 yrs



51.2%IRR

N/A tons $0 5 $0 $154 $154N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $159 $159Heating Plant Savings




N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $164N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $159 $159 NPV

$164($287) 8 $0 $169 $169

$1,290

9 $0 $174 $174

$19215 11 $0 $186 $186


100% 12 $0 $192

14 $0 $205 $205($287) 13 $0 $198 $198


20 18 $0 $236 $236Defined 17 $0 $228 $228

7.19% 20 $0 $254 $2542.79% 19 $0 $245 $245


($500)$0

$500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Ari




Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 2,007,279 22.8%





HVAC Fans 495 0 471 9 23 0 4 7%

22.8%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,599,589

2,007,279

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




22.4%


2,599,589

2,007,279

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

7,204

2,793

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080

6,270

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.








1 $1,245 $51,021 $52,266






N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $58,098 $63,121

$59,935 $61,403($66,784) 8 $1,854 $61,848 $63,702

NPV $548,246

9 $5,099 $63,839 $68,938


N/A 13 $1,731 $72,602 $74,333N/A 12 ($2,231) $70,318 $68,087

14 $2,186 $74,980 $77,166


20 18 $6,984 $86,503 $93,487Defined 17 $1,932 $83,448 $85,380

7.19% 20 $2,578 $92,976 $95,5542.79% 19 $2,041 $89,625 $91,665


($200,000)$0

$200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Ari

23.9%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%



0.2 0.2 0.0 -6.8%

HVAC Fans 495 0 443 9 51 1 10 3%

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,599,589 1,979,506 23.9%

23.9%Space Heating - Elec 336.0 309.1 26.9 8.0%

7,124 23.9%Lighting 1,835.9 1,097.3 738.7 40.2%


% SO2 (lb/yr)

Arid




Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



9,356

Proposed Modifications Space Cooling 2,253.7 1,809.6 444.1 19.7%


2,599,589

1,979,506

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r



23.8%




2,599,589

1,979,506

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


9,356

3,622

7,124

2,758

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

8,080

6,153

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr








Natural gas 4,785 therms $0.9000 $4,307Initial Annual Savings $53,228





Water & sewer 1,037,880 Gals $0.0037 $3,840 0


Replace)Electricity 424,446 kWh $0.1028 $43,633




$85,990





7.19% 20 $2,578 $97,177 $99,7542.79% 19 $2,041 $93,669 $95,710

20 18 $6,984 $90,394 $97,378Defined 17 $1,932 $87,191 $89,123


14 $2,186 $78,314 $80,500N/A 13 $1,731 $75,828 $77,558N/A 12 ($2,231) $73,439 $71,208N/A 11 $1,638 $71,089 $72,727

Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 ($39,670) $68,833 $29,1629 $5,099 $66,665 $71,764

($85,990) 8 $1,854 $64,584 $66,438

NPV $555,479N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $60,663 $65,685

$62,584 $64,052

($200,000)$0

$200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Temperate: Install or Replace Immediately




Energy Modelling Results Summary Install or Replace Immediately Existing Hotels Temperate

2.4%

2.3 yrs 1.7% 45.3% 42.7%

0.3 yrs

0.1%2.3%

CO2 Reductions

0.6% 344.9% 340.4% $12,97183.6%

$59,073

7.1 yrs 0.7% 8.6% 12.1% $1,3655.3 yrs 3.0% 17.6% $27,176



E-09


$6,357

$39,385

0.6% 4.1%

% %

$19,508$18,679

13.9%

82.4%

1573.3% 1480.3%

0.7%

The table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modelled existing hotel in the temperate climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy saving cost reductions. Due to different modelling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The stoplight colour legend contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.

TemperateWest Palm Beach, FL

0.3 yrs 7.4% 501.1% 497.8% $169,7160.1 yrs $57,090

yrs


Towel/Sheet Program Immediate7.7 yrs

6.9 yrsE-07

Relevant Action Group

Energy Efficient Appliances


Measure

E-09

NPV(Over 20 Years)


Simple Payback IRR

20 yrs

%

0.4%

B-04M-09W-03


18.2%

N/A11.8%

N/A12.4%

$

($13,656)14.9%

E-09

Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decorative Fixtures 2.0%Use of Building Appropriate Materials100% of Guest Rooms have 4F Deadband ThermostatsMeet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow Rates

1.3 yrsE-10


Replace

N/A

N/A





1.9%Never 0.0% N/A 6.3% ($577)


0.1% 13.9%

10.7%

$1

12.1% $15,396E-10E-08 Pipe Insulation 8.2 yrs

0.2%7.1 yrs


7.2%13.9%6.9 yrsM-11 NEMA Premium Efficiency Motors

Occupancy Sensors in Offices

$66014.3%M-11 Variable Frequency Drives


Individual Resource Calculations Install or Replace Immediately Existing Hotels Temperate

PumpsSpace CoolingSpace Heating - Gas

409 6

0.01,831.3


Proposed Energy Use




The energy consumption of washing machines and dryers is reduced by 17%, based on a study by the



0.0

903.7

0.0

0.1%

Base CaseEmissions

0.1%

1,831.3

HVAC FansHeat Rejection

0 1%409 4 0 3

Operations

3,698.6 3,705.0 -6.4 -0.2%

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

0.0 0.0%


25.5


Energy End-Use


2,992

25.4 0.0


CO2 (lb/yr)

0.0 0.0

2,989 0.1%%

0.0%MBtu/yr

0.0%

902.2 1.5 0.2%

0.0


0.2%NOX (lb/yr)

2,401,837 2,399,566 0.1%SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,648

% Savings (+) / Loss (-)Proposed

2,401,837 2,399,566

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


409.6

0.0%

4.1Financial Assumptions

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 421.80.0 0.0%

1,149.8 1,145.0 4.7 0.4%

0.0%2,033.7 2,033.7

10,473.8




10,477.9Base Utilities - Gas

Receptacles - Elec4.0 0.9%

HVAC Fans 0.1%409.4 0.3

Total

2,401,837 2,399,566

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,648

2,989

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,474

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






$0

Operations

$1 428$1,389

$1,315$1,279$1,245

Water & sewerNatural gas

1,919Electricity

34,606-24


$349

-$22$197

therms$0.0037$0.9000$0.1028Unit Cost

N/AN/A

2

$0

Annual Resource Savings (+) / Loss (-)

Yr.

Financial Table

kWhResource

$322$316

$1,728$1,681$1,637

$1,555$1,596


Replace)Cash FlowSavings (+) /

Loss (-)

Simple Payback$0$0



Gals

6 $1 777

$0


IRR

MBhtons $0 $339

$329543

$1,352

Immediate

N/A

N/A

10$128

$0





$310





$1,468$1,428 $349

N/A $0N/A $0

$0


20191817Defined

20

2010

100%$1,211 $1,731

$1,638 $405

$2,286

$518$502$487


$1,986

11

$2,041 $2,5592.79%

Financial Analysis

$1,684

$1,779$457

$2,488

7.19%

$430

$2,418$2,351

13

$2,098 $535 $2,633

$359 $1,827

$417

876

$370$1,509

109

12

$1,551$393$381

$1,594

$1,777

1615

$472

14

$1,879

$443 $2,222

$1,932

$1,828

$2,043$1,987$1,932$1,879

$2,101$2,161

NPVcfmMBh $18,679

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years







34% on natural gas.


Base Case Proposed % Savings (+) / Loss (-)


2,992 2,921 2.4%Space Heating - Elec 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Lighting 1,831.3 1,831.3 0.0 0.0% NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,346,190 2.3%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,495 2.4%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

Pumps 25.5 25.4 0.1 0.4%

HVAC Fans 409 6 408 8 0 9 0 2%

Space Heating - Gas 3,698.6 3,720.2 -21.6 -0.6%Space Cooling 903.7 898.9 4.8 0.5%

2.3%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,346,190

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


34% on natural gas. HVAC Fans 409.6 408.8 0.9 0.2%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,050.1 99.7 8.7%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 279.4 146.4 34.4%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 2,033.7 0.0 0.0%


2.2%


2,401,837 2,346,190

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,495

2,921

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,248

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 164,438 Gals $0.0037 $608 0 ($42,658) $0 ($42,658)1 $0 $5,047 $5,047




12.4%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $5 850 $5 850N/A tons $0 5 $0 $5,668 $5,668





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $6,039N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $5,850 $5,850 NPV

($42,658) 8 $0 $6,234 $6,234

$19,508

9 $0 $6,435 $6,435

$6,039


14 $0 $7,566 $7,566($5,864) 13 $0 $7,325 $7,325


20 18 $0 $8,780 $8,780Defined 17 $0 $8,459 $8,459

7.19% 20 $0 $9,455 $9,4552.79% 19 $0 $9,114 $9,114


100% 12 ($8,154) $7,091 ($1,062)

($60,000)($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




room.






CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,385,794 0.7%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,580 1.2%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

Pumps 25.5 25.5 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 409 6 409 2 0 4 0 1%


0.7%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,385,794

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


HVAC Fans 409.6 409.2 0.4 0.1%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,106.9 42.9 3.7%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 2,033.7 0.0 0.0%


0.2%


2,401,837 2,385,794

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,580

2,966

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,459

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Natural gas -318 therms $0.9000 -$286Electricity 14,861 kWh $0.1028 $1,528



Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($9,000) $01 $0 $1,255 $1,255




14.9%IRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,419N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,376 $1,376 NPV

$1,419($9,000) 8 $0 $1,463 $1,463

$6,357

9 $0 $1,509 $1,509


$0 13 $0 $1,714 $1,714100% 12 $0 $1,660 $1,660

14 $0 $1,770 $1,770


20 18 $0 $2,014 $2,014Defined 17 $0 $1,950 $1,950

7.19% 20 $0 $2,157 $2,1572.79% 19 $0 $2,080 $2,080


($15,000)($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




room.






CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,386,252 0.6%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,582 1.1%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

Pumps 25.5 25.5 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 409 6 409 2 0 4 0 1%


0.6%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,386,252

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




0.2%


2,401,837 2,386,252

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,582

2,967

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,460

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



$1,219Natural gas -309 therms $0.9000 -$278Electricity 14,437 kWh $0.1028 $1,484 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($30,000) $0 ($30,000)1 $0 $1,219 $1,219




0.4%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 336 $1 336N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,296 $1,296





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,378N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,336 $1,336 NPV

($30,000) 8 $0 $1,421 $1,421

-$13,656

9 $0 $1,465 $1,465

$1,378


14 $0 $1,719 $1,719$0 13 $0 $1,665 $1,665


20 18 $0 $1,956 $1,956Defined 17 $0 $1,894 $1,894

7.19% 20 $0 $2,096 $2,0962.79% 19 $0 $2,020 $2,020


100% 12 $0 $1,613 $1,613

($35,000)($30,000)($25,000)($20,000)($15,000)($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base CaseEach guest room contains a total of 12 light bulbs.

There is a 50/50 split of 75W incandescent bulbs and 25W CFLs, giving a lighting density of 1.5 W/sf. Bulbs

operate for 8 hours/day.







CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,224,243 7.4%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 5,787 13.1%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

Pumps 25.5 25.5 0.0 -0.1%

HVAC Fans 409 6 405 2 4 4 1 1%


7.4%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,8372,224,243

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


lighting density is reduced to 0.75 W/sf. HVAC Fans 409.6 405.2 4.4 1.1%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 2,033.7 0.0 0.0%


1.9%


2,401,8372,224,243

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

5,787

2,703

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,277

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



$13,889Natural gas -3,637 therms $0.9000 -$3,273Electricity 165,523 kWh $0.1028 $17,016 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($2,790) $0 ($2,790)1 $0 $13,889 $13,889


($2,790) 3 $2,709 $14,171 $16,880Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $14,032 $14,032


501.1%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $2 941 $15 212 $18 153N/A tons $0 5 $0 $14,752 $14,752





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $15,686N/A MBh $0 6 $2,941 $15,212 $18,153 NPV

($2,790) 8 $0 $16,174 $16,174

$169,716

9 $3,194 $16,678 $19,872

$15,686


14 $0 $19,562 $19,562$2,494 13 $0 $18,948 $18,948


20 18 $4,090 $22,252 $26,342Defined 17 $0 $21,548 $21,548

7.19% 20 $0 $23,837 $23,8372.79% 19 $0 $22,978 $22,978


100% 12 $3,468 $18,353 $21,821

($50,000)$0

$50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 $400,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base CaseCorridors contain 40 light bulbs per floor. There is a

50/50 split of 75W incandescent bulbs and 25W CFLs, giving a lighting density of 0.7 W/sf. Bulbs operate for

24 hours/day.







CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,343,176 2.4%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,372 4.3%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

Pumps 25.5 25.5 0.0 -0.1%

HVAC Fans 409 6 406 0 3 7 0 9%


2.4%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,343,176

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


lighting density is reduced to 0.35 W/sf. HVAC Fans 409.6 406.0 3.7 0.9%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 2,033.7 0.0 0.0%


0.7%


2,401,837 2,343,176

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,372

2,897

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,408

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($310) $0 ($310)1 $285 $4,589 $4,874


($310) 3 $301 $4,685 $4,986Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $293 $4,638 $4,930


1573.3%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $5 031 $5 358N/A tons $0 5 $318 $4,879 $5,197





N/A cfm $0 7 $336 $5,188N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $5,031 $5,358 NPV

($310) 8 $345 $5,350 $5,695

$57,090

9 $355 $5,517 $5,871

$5,524


14 $407 $6,471 $6,879$277 13 $396 $6,268 $6,664


20 18 $454 $7,365 $7,819Defined 17 $442 $7,131 $7,573

7.19% 20 $480 $7,890 $8,3702.79% 19 $467 $7,606 $8,073


100% 12 $385 $6,071 $6,456

($20,000)$0

$20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base CaseOffices, food preparation, lockers, laundry, mechanical and

electrical spaces contain a total of 200 light bulbs. There is a 50/50 split of 75W incandescent bulbs and 25W CFLs, giving an average lighting density of 1.4 W/sf. Bulbs operate for 8

hours/day.


0.7 W/sf.





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,388,301 0.6%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,586 1.1%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

Pumps 25.5 25.3 0.2 0.8%

HVAC Fans 409 6 408 1 1 5 0 4%


0.6%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,388,301

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


HVAC Fans 409.6 408.1 1.5 0.4%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 2,033.8 -0.1 0.0%


0.1%


2,401,837 2,388,301

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,586

2,969

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,471

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($310) $0 ($310)1 $0 $1,055 $1,055




344.9%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1 141 $1 468N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,107 $1,107





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,177N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1,141 $1,468 NPV

($310) 8 $0 $1,213 $1,213

$12,971

9 $355 $1,250 $1,605

$1,177


14 $0 $1,464 $1,464$277 13 $0 $1,419 $1,419


20 18 $454 $1,656 $2,111Defined 17 $0 $1,606 $1,606

7.19% 20 $0 $1,771 $1,7712.79% 19 $0 $1,708 $1,708


100% 12 $385 $1,375 $1,760

($5,000)$0

$5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base Case








CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,354,615 2.0%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,429 3.4%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

Pumps 25.5 25.5 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 409 6 406 6 3 1 0 8%


2.0%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,354,615

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


when unoccupied. HVAC Fans 409.6 406.6 3.1 0.8%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 2,033.7 0.0 0.0%


0.6%


2,401,837 2,354,615

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,429

2,916

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,420

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)







1 $0 $3,974 $3,974


83.6%IRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $4,511N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $4,375 $4,375 NPV

$4,511($4,825) 8 $0 $4,651 $4,651

$39,385

9 $0 $4,795 $4,795


($4,825) 13 $0 $5,441 $5,441100% 12 $0 $5,272 $5,272

14 $0 $5,616 $5,616


20 18 $0 $6,385 $6,385Defined 17 $0 $6,183 $6,183

7.19% 20 $0 $6,835 $6,8352.79% 19 $0 $6,592 $6,592


($20,000)

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base Case

Proposed ModificationsInfiltration is reduced by a third, to 0.2 air changes per

hour, in all perimeter spaces.




Space Heating - Gas

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,384,799 0.7%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,673 -0.2%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


Pumps 25.5 25.2 0.3 1.0%

HVAC Fans 409 6 409 0 0 7 0 2%

3,698.6 3,520.0 178.6 4.8%Space Cooling 903.7 914.4 -10.7 -1.2%

0.7%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,384,799

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





2,401,837 2,384,799

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,673

2,982

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,309

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



$1,394Natural gas 1,788 therms $0.9000 $1,609Electricity -2,875 kWh $0.1028 ($296) Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($11,540) $0 ($11,540)1 $0 $1,394 $1,394




8.6%IRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,851N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,787 $1,787 NPV

$1,851($11,540) 8 $0 $1,917 $1,917

$1,365

9 $0 $1,985 $1,985


14 $0 $2,362 $2,362($11,540) 13 $0 $2,281 $2,281


20 18 $0 $2,860 $2,860Defined 17 $0 $2,727 $2,727

7.19% 20 $0 $3,121 $3,1212.79% 19 $0 $3,000 $3,000


100% 12 $0 $2,203 $2,203

($15,000)

($10,000)

($5,000)

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base Case

Proposed ModificationsGuest room thermostat setpoints of 76°F (cooling) and

72°F (heating).




Space Heating - Gas

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,330,490 3.0%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,535 1.8%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

Guest room thermostat setpoints of 74°F (cooling) and 74°F (heating).

Pumps 25.5 25.6 -0.1 -0.3%

HVAC Fans 409 6 411 6 1 9 0 5%

3,698.6 3,352.8 345.8 9.3%Space Cooling 903.7 822.1 81.6 9.0%

3.0%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,330,490

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


HVAC Fans 409.6 411.6 -1.9 -0.5%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 2,033.8 -0.1 0.0%


4.1%


2,401,837 2,330,490

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,535

2,917

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,053

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($32,550) $0 ($32,550)1 $0 $5,722 $5,722




18.2%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6 867 $6 867N/A tons $0 5 $0 $6,642 $6,642





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $7,099N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $6,867 $6,867 NPV

($32,550) 8 $0 $7,339 $7,339

$27,176

9 $0 $7,587 $7,587

$7,099


14 $0 $8,976 $8,976($32,550) 13 $0 $8,679 $8,679

2010 16 $0 $9,758 $9,758Financial Analysis 15 ($49,147) $9,359 ($39,788)

20 18 $0 $10,609 $10,609Defined 17 $0 $10,175 $10,175

7.19% 20 $0 $11,497 $11,4972.79% 19 $0 $11,063 $11,063


100% 12 $0 $8,392 $8,392

($40,000)

($20,000)

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Domestic hot water load of 7.40 gallons/person/day. Load calculated by assuming water fixtures exceeding IPC rates by 20%, and default usage by hotel guests.

Base Case

Proposed ModificationsWater fixtures meet IPC rates, reducing the domestic hot water load reduced to 6.16 gallons/person/day.


Space Heating - Gas 3,698.6 3,698.6 0.0 0.0%Space Cooling 903.7 903.7 0.0 0.0%Pumps 25.5



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,362,054 1.7%



1.7%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

25.5 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 409 6 409 6 0 0 0 0%

2,401,837 2,362,054

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%






3.3%


2,401,837 2,362,054

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,658

2,962

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,137

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



$6,424Natural gas 3,409 therms $0.9000 $3,068Electricity 0 kWh $0.1028 $0 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 838,836 Gals $0.0037 $3,104 0 ($15,053) $0 ($15,053)1 $0 $6,424 $6,424




45.3%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $7 716 $7 716N/A tons $0 5 $0 $7,480 $7,480





($3,428)100%

15

($11,625)100%

10

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $7,960N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $7,716 $7,716 NPV

9 $0 $8,471 $8,471

$7,9608 $0 $8,211 $8,211

$59,073


14 $0 $9,900 $9,90013 $0 $9,596 $9,596


20 18 $0 $11,507 $11,507Defined 17 $0 $11,081 $11,081

7.19% 20 $0 $12,365 $12,3652.79% 19 $0 $11,950 $11,950


12 $0 $9,302 $9,302

($15,053)

($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Insulation on heating hot water and domestic hot water piping is assumed to be of mixed thickness and condition, equivalent to 0.5 inch thick fibreglass

insulation.

Base Case

Proposed ModificationsFibreglass insulation installed on all heating hot water and domestic hot water piping. 2 inch thickness for

heating hot water piping 2 inches or larger, 1.5 inches



1.2%Lighting 1,831.3 1,831.3 0.0 0.0% NOX (lb/yr)


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,355,478 1.9%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



MBtu/yr MBtu/yr SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,576MBtu/yr %

Space Heating - Gas 3,698.6 3,556.4 142.2 3.8%Space Cooling 903.7 850.4 53.3 5.9%


HVAC Fans 409 6 409 6 0 0 0 0%

2,401,837 2,355,478

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


heating hot water piping 2 inches or larger, 1.5 inches for smaller piping. All domestic hot water insulation is

1 inch thick.

- All pipe insulation is fiberglass with an all service jacket- Cost of insulation depends on width of pipe and thickness of insulation suggested as per Green Engage Energy Charts. Prices range from $4.71 to $12.85 including material, labour, overheard and profit.- Cold climates – insulation on hot water pipes and HVAC heating pipes- Insulation Lifetime – 30 yearsNB: Assumes easy access to all piping within hotel - It does not include any demolition costs.

Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%HVAC Fans 409.6 409.6 0.0 0.0%


2.6%


2,401,837 2,355,478

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,576

2,943

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,205

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($34,748) $0 ($34,748)1 $0 $3,717 $3,717




12.1%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $4 453 $4 453N/A tons $0 5 $0 $4,308 $4,308





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $4,604N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $4,453 $4,453 NPV

($34,748) 8 $0 $4,759 $4,759

$15,396

9 $0 $4,920 $4,920

$4,604


14 $0 $5,820 $5,820($34,748) 13 $0 $5,628 $5,628


20 18 $0 $6,875 $6,875Defined 17 $0 $6,594 $6,594

7.19% 20 $0 $7,449 $7,4492.79% 19 $0 $7,168 $7,168


100% 12 $0 $5,442 $5,442

($60,000)

($40,000)

($20,000)

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base Case

Proposed ModificationsCorridor lighting load is reduced by 25% to 1.35 W/sf.

The operating schedule remains unchanged. The reduction in load is based on US EPA predictions,




Space Heating - Gas

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,401,211 0.0%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,655 0.0%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


Pumps 25.5 25.5 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 409 6 409 6 0 1 0 0%

3,698.6 3,700.4 -1.8 0.0%Space Cooling 903.7 903.3 0.4 0.0%

0.0%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,401,211

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


reduction in load is based on US EPA predictions, assuming the lighting turns off when unoccupied. HVAC Fans 409.6 409.6 0.1 0.0%

Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 2,033.7 0.0 0.0%


0.0%


2,401,837 2,401,211

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,655

2,991

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,478

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



$49Natural gas -18 therms $0.9000 -$16Electricity 629 kWh $0.1028 $65 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($772) $0 ($772)1 $0 $49 $49

Simple Payback Never



N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $69 $69N/A tons $0 5 $0 $51 $51





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $54N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $69 $69 NPV

($772) 8 $0 $56 $56

-$577

9 $0 $75 $75

$54


14 $0 $68 $68($772) 13 $0 $66 $66


20 18 $0 $99 $99Defined 17 $0 $74 $74

7.19% 20 $0 $82 $822.79% 19 $0 $79 $79


100% 12 $0 $83 $83

($1,400)

($1,200)

($1,000)

($800)

($600)

($400)

($200)

$0 0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base Case

Proposed ModificationsOne VFD (15 HP capacity) installed on VAV supply fan

motor.




Space Heating - Gas

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,396,486 0.2%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,618 0.6%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr



Pumps 25.5 25.5 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 409 6 384 7 25 0 6 1%

3,698.6 3,738.3 -39.7 -1.1%Space Cooling 903.7 903.0 0.6 0.1%

0.2%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,396,486

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





-0.1%

Financial Assumptions Total 10,477.9 10,492.0 -14.1 -0.1%

2,401,837 2,396,486

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,618

2,981

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,492

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Natural gas -397 therms $0.9000 -$357Electricity 7,511 kWh $0.1028 $772



Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($2,868) $01 $0 $410 $410


($2,868) 3 $0 $399 $399Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $405 $405


7.2%IRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $426N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $414 $414 NPV

$426($2,868) 8 $0 $438 $438

$1

9 $0 $451 $451

10 11 $0 $479 $479Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 ($3,775) $464 ($3,310)

($2,868) 13 $0 $509 $509100% 12 $0 $493 $493

14 $0 $524 $524


20 18 $0 $573 $573Defined 17 $0 $560 $560

7.19% 20 $0 $606 $6062.79% 19 $0 $585 $585


($4,000)($3,000)($2,000)($1,000)

$0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Base Case

Proposed ModificationsVAV supply fan motor replaced with NEMA premium efficiency motor (15 HP capacity). Heating hot water

circulator pump replaced with NEMA premium




Space Heating - Gas

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,399,712 0.1%

Temperate



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658 6,648 0.1%MBtu/yr %

Emissions

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

Constant speed, standard efficiency motor on supply fan for VAV system serving the first floor and corridor spaces (15 HP capacity). Constant speed, standard

efficiency motor for heating hot water circulator pump (1 HP capacity).

Pumps 25.5 23.0 2.5 9.8%

HVAC Fans 409 6 406 5 3 1 0 8%

3,698.6 3,701.7 -3.1 -0.1%Space Cooling 903.7 902.9 0.8 0.1%

0.1%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837 2,399,712

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


circulator pump replaced with NEMA premium efficiency motor (1 HP capacity). HVAC Fans 409.6 406.5 3.1 0.8%

Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8 0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 2,033.7 0.0 0.0%

NB: demolition costs are not includedAll four climates can install a 15 HP NEMA efficiency motor on the supply fan. - 15 HP NEMA efficiency motor is $1,482- 15 HP normal motor is $1,195- Cost Premium of $287

Two colder climates can also install a 1HP NEMA efficiency motor on the hot water heating loop.- 1 HP NEMA efficiency motor is $531- 1 HP normal motor is $430- Cost Premium of $101

0.0%


2,401,837 2,399,712

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,648

2,989

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,475

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($1,201) $01 $0 $167 $167

($1,201)Simple Payback 6.9 yrs



13.9%IRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $190N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $184 $184 NPV

$190($1,201) 8 $0 $196 $196

$660

9 $0 $202 $202

15 11 $0 $215 $215Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0 $208 $208

($388) 13 $0 $229 $229100% 12 $0 $222 $222

14 $0 $237 $237


20 18 $0 $271 $271Defined 17 $0 $262 $262

7.19% 20 $0 $290 $2902.79% 19 $0 $280 $280


($1,500)($1,000)

($500)$0

$500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



20.5%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

As detailed in individual measures Pumps 25.5 25.2 0.3 1.2%

HVAC Fans 409 6 398 1 11 5 2 8%

Space Heating - Gas 3,705.0 3,808.3 -103.3 -2.8%Proposed Modifications Space Cooling 903.7 692.6 211.0 23.4%

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,402,117 1,910,501 20.5%






Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





2,402,117

1,910,501

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




14.6%


Receptacles - Gas 421.8 277.1 144.7 34.3%

HVAC Fans 409.6 398.1 11.5 2.8%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 962.3 187.5 16.3%

2,402,117

1,910,501

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

4,889

2,308

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,4808,951

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







1 $1,245 $43,077 $44,322($149,066) $0 ($149,066) Simple Payback 3.3 yrsWater & sewer 1,037,880 Gals $0.0037 $3,840 0

Natural gas 3,822 therms $0.9000 $3,440Initial Annual Savings $43,077Electricity 336,264 kWh $0.1028 $34,568







Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)






7.19% 20 $2,578 $78,531 $81,1092.79% 19 $2,041 $75,709 $77,750

20 18 $6,984 $73,077 $80,061Defined 17 $1,932 $70,495 $72,427


14 $2,186 $63,347 $65,533N/A 13 $1,731 $61,342 $63,072N/A 12 ($2,231) $59,419 $57,188N/A 11 $1,638 $57,519 $59,158


($149,066) 8 $1,854 $52,270 $54,124

NPV $375,026N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $49,107 $54,130

$50,655 $52,123

($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



22.5%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%


HVAC Fans 409 6 371 1 38 6 9 4%

Space Heating - Gas 3,705.0 3,698.7 6.3 0.2%Proposed Modifications Space Cooling 903.7 648.9 254.7 28.2%

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,402,117 1,861,191 22.5%


4,774 28.3%Lighting 1,831.3 1,092.6 738.7 40.3% NOX (lb/yr) 2,992 2,250

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr




Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




% SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658

2,402,117

1,861,191

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


Financial Assumptions Total 10,480.3 8,703.3 1,777.0 17.0%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 1,629.9 403.8 19.9%


17.0%

Receptacles - Gas 421.8 277.1 144.7 34.3%

HVAC Fans 409.6 371.1 38.6 9.4%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 962.3 187.5 16.3%

2,402,117

1,861,191

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

4,774

2,250

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,480

8,703

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







1 $1,245 $47,013 $48,257($188,654) $0 ($188,654) Simple Payback 3.8 yrsWater & sewer 1,037,880 Gals $0.0037 $3,840 0

Natural gas 5,550 therms $0.9000 $4,995$36,822 Initial Annual Savings $47,013


Initial Marginal Cost $188,654Resource

Annual Resource Savings (+) / Loss (-) Unit Cost


Yr.Costs

(Marginal/Maint/Replace)Electricity 358,192 kWh $0.1028








7.19% 20 $2,578 $86,218 $88,7962.79% 19 $2,041 $83,108 $85,149

20 18 $6,984 $80,185 $87,169Defined 17 $1,932 $77,322 $79,254


14 $2,186 $69,400 $71,586N/A 13 $1,731 $67,196 $68,927N/A 12 ($2,231) $65,081 $62,850N/A 11 $1,638 $62,996 $64,635


($188,654) 8 $1,854 $57,229 $59,082

NPV $385,518N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $53,751 $58,774

$55,454 $56,922

($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Temperate: Replace at End of Lifetime



0.6% N/A N/A $13,5182.4%


0.7%

2.3%

N/AUse of Building Appropriate Materials100% of Guest Rooms have 4F Deadband ThermostatsMeet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow Rates

Immediate

O-04E-07

E-09 Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Circulation Spaces$174,645

N/A1.2 yrs

Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Guest RoomsN/A N/A


NPV(Over 20 Years)Simple Payback IRR

Immediate

%

N/A86.1%

0.6% N/A

% %

$53,83488.9%

$


E-09

$14,332E-07 Energy Efficient TVs


M-09W-03

E-07 Energy Efficient Guest Room Refrigerators

Energy Modelling Results Summary Replace at End of Lifetime Existing Hotels Temperate

N/A

Immediate $57,638E-09

B-04

The table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modelled existing hotel in the temperate climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy saving cost reductions. Due to different modelling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The stoplight colour legend contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.

TemperateWest Palm Beach, FL

Immediate 7.4% N/A N/A


yrs

$14,754N/A


Immediate

E-10 Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decorative Fixtures


Replace

N/A

N/A


M-11 44.6%2.4 yrs


Occupancy Sensors in OfficesE-08

$1,418M-11 Variable Frequency Drives

0.1%NEMA Premium Efficiency Motors 42.9%

$451,482Install All New Measures Immediately &Replace Existing Measures At End of Lifetime 1.5 yrs 20.5%

Green Engage Level 2 Certification Cumulative Savings Scenarios (Includes Green Engage Level 1)Install All New Measures Immediately &Replace Existing Measures At End of Lifetime 2.2 yrs

E-10

22.5% 48.6% 44.5% $462,732

N/A

69.6% 64.5%

Pipe Insulation




34% on natural gas.





Temperate

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use







CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,346,190 2.3%




HVAC Fans 409 6 408 8 0 9 0 2%


2,401,837 2,346,190

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


34% on natural gas. HVAC Fans 409.6 408.8 0.9 0.2%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,050.1 99.7 8.7%



2.2%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 279.4 146.4 34.4%


2,401,837 2,346,190

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,495

2,921

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,248

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Individual Resource Calculations Replace at End of Lifetime Existing Hotels Temperate




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 164,438 Gals $0.0037 $608 0 ($5,864) $0 ($5,864)1 $0 $5,047 $5,047




88.9%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $5 850 $5 850N/A tons $0 5 $0 $5,668 $5,668





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $6,039N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $5,850 $5,850 NPV

($5,864) 8 $0 $6,234 $6,234

$53,834

9 $0 $6,435 $6,435

$6,039


14 $0 $7,566 $7,566($5,864) 13 $0 $7,325 $7,325


20 18 $0 $8,780 $8,780Defined 17 $0 $8,459 $8,459

7.19% 20 $0 $9,455 $9,4552.79% 19 $0 $9,114 $9,114


100% 12 ($8,154) $7,091 ($1,062)

($20,000)$0

$20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years








Temperate

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




One 32 inch non-Energy Star television per guest room. Emissions Base Case Proposed % Savings (+) /

Loss (-)CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,386,252 0.6%




HVAC Fans 409 6 409 2 0 4 0 1%


2,401,837 2,386,252

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





0.2%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,401,837 2,386,252

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,582

2,967

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,460

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $0 $0 $01 $0 $1,219 $1,219




N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 336 $1 336N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,296 $1,296





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,378N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,336 $1,336 NPV

$0 8 $0 $1,421 $1,421

$14,332

9 $0 $1,465 $1,465

$1,378


14 $0 $1,719 $1,719$0 13 $0 $1,665 $1,665


20 18 $0 $1,956 $1,956Defined 17 $0 $1,894 $1,894

7.19% 20 $0 $2,096 $2,0962.79% 19 $0 $2,020 $2,020


100% 12 $0 $1,613 $1,613

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




room.






Temperate

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,385,794 0.7%




HVAC Fans 409 6 409 2 0 4 0 1%


2,401,837 2,385,794

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





0.2%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,401,837 2,385,794

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,580

2,966

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,459

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $0 $01 $0 $1,255 $1,255




N/AIRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,419N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,376 $1,376 NPV

$1,419$0 8 $0 $1,463 $1,463

$14,754

9 $0 $1,509 $1,509

$1,66012 11 $0 $1,608 $1,608


100% 12 $0 $1,660

14 $0 $1,770 $1,770$0 13 $0 $1,714 $1,714


20 18 $0 $2,014 $2,014Defined 17 $0 $1,950 $1,950

7.19% 20 $0 $2,157 $2,1572.79% 19 $0 $2,080 $2,080


$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years









Temperate

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use







CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,224,243 7.4%




HVAC Fans 409 6 405 2 4 4 1 1%


2,401,8372,224,243

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





1.9%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,401,8372,224,243

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

5,787

2,703

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,277

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $2,494 $0 $2,4941 $0 $13,889 $13,889




N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $2 941 $15 212 $18 153N/A tons $0 5 $0 $14,752 $14,752





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $15,686N/A MBh $0 6 $2,941 $15,212 $18,153 NPV

$2,494 8 $0 $16,174 $16,174

$174,645

9 $3,194 $16,678 $19,872

$15,686


14 $0 $19,562 $19,562$2,494 13 $0 $18,948 $18,948


20 18 $4,090 $22,252 $26,342Defined 17 $0 $21,548 $21,548

7.19% 20 $0 $23,837 $23,8372.79% 19 $0 $22,978 $22,978


100% 12 $3,468 $18,353 $21,821

$0 $50,000

$100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 $400,000 $450,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years









Temperate

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





24 hours/day.


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,343,176 2.4%




HVAC Fans 409 6 406 0 3 7 0 9%


2,401,837 2,343,176

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





0.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,401,837 2,343,176

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,372

2,897

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,408

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $277 $0 $2771 $285 $4,589 $4,874




N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $5 031 $5 358N/A tons $0 5 $318 $4,879 $5,197





N/A cfm $0 7 $336 $5,188N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $5,031 $5,358 NPV

$277 8 $345 $5,350 $5,695

$57,638

9 $355 $5,517 $5,871

$5,524


14 $407 $6,471 $6,879$277 13 $396 $6,268 $6,664


20 18 $454 $7,365 $7,819Defined 17 $442 $7,131 $7,573

7.19% 20 $480 $7,890 $8,3702.79% 19 $467 $7,606 $8,073


100% 12 $385 $6,071 $6,456

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




0.7 W/sf.





Temperate

Base Case

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





hours/day.


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 2,388,301 0.6%




HVAC Fans 409 6 408 1 1 5 0 4%


2,401,837 2,388,301

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r



Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 2,033.8 -0.1 0.0%


0.1%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,401,837 2,388,301

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,586

2,969

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,471

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $277 $0 $2771 $0 $1,055 $1,055




N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1 141 $1 468N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,107 $1,107





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,177N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1,141 $1,468 NPV

$277 8 $0 $1,213 $1,213

$13,518

9 $355 $1,250 $1,605

$1,177


14 $0 $1,464 $1,464$277 13 $0 $1,419 $1,419


20 18 $454 $1,656 $2,111Defined 17 $0 $1,606 $1,606

7.19% 20 $0 $1,771 $1,7712.79% 19 $0 $1,708 $1,708


100% 12 $385 $1,375 $1,760

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years









Temperate



Proposed Energy Use






Energy End-Use

Space Heating - Gas 3,698.6 3,701.7 -3.1 -0.1%Space Cooling 903.7 902.9 0.8 0.1%Proposed Modifications

9.8%

HVAC Fans 409 6 406 5 3 1 0 8%

VAV supply fan motor replaced with NEMA premium efficiency motor (15 HP capacity). Heating hot water



2,401,837 2,399,712

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r



circulator pump replaced with NEMA premium efficiency motor (1 HP capacity).




0.0%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,401,837 2,399,712

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

6,648

2,989

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478 10,475

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($388) $01 $0 $167 $167




44.6%IRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $190N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $184 $184 NPV

$190($388) 8 $0 $196 $196

$1,418

9 $0 $202 $202

$22215 11 $0 $215 $215


100% 12 $0 $222

14 $0 $237 $237($388) 13 $0 $229 $229


20 18 $0 $271 $271Defined 17 $0 $262 $262

7.19% 20 $0 $290 $2902.79% 19 $0 $280 $280


($1,000)($500)

$0 $500

$1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 1,910,501 20.5%





HVAC Fans 409 6 398 1 11 5 2 8%

20.5%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,401,837

1,910,501

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




14.6%


2,401,837

1,910,501

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

4,889

2,308

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,4788,951

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.








1 $1,245 $43,054 $44,299






N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $49,079 $54,101

$50,626 $52,094($66,784) 8 $1,854 $52,239 $54,093

NPV $451,482

9 $5,099 $53,922 $59,021


N/A 13 $1,731 $61,305 $63,036N/A 12 ($2,231) $59,383 $57,153

14 $2,186 $63,310 $65,496


20 18 $6,984 $73,032 $80,016Defined 17 $1,932 $70,452 $72,384

7.19% 20 $2,578 $78,482 $81,0592.79% 19 $2,041 $75,662 $77,703


($200,000)

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




% SO2 (lb/yr) 6,658

Proposed Modifications Space Cooling 903.7 648.9 254.7 28.2%

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,401,837 1,861,191 22.5%


4,774 28.3%Lighting 1,831.3 1,092.6 738.7 40.3%

Space Heating - Gas 3,698.6 3,698.7 -0.1 0.0%

25.5 22.7 2.8 10.8%As detailed in individual measures Pumps

HVAC Fans 409 6 371 1 38 6 9 4%

22.5%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%


2,401,837

1,861,191

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


34.9%Base Utilities - Gas 2,033.7 1,629.9 403.8 19.9%



16.9%


Receptacles - Gas 425.8 277.1 148.7

2,401,837

1,861,191

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,658

2,992

4,774

2,250

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

10,478

8,703

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Replace)



Electricity 358,192 kWh $0.1028 $36,822Savings (+) /






Loss (-)Yr.




N/A MBh $0 6 $5 023 $53 722 $58 745






N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $53,722 $58,745

$55,425 $56,892($105,560) 8 $1,854 $57,198 $59,052

NPV $462,732

($39,670) $60,964 $21,2939 $5,099 $59,046 $64,145

14 $2,186 $69,363 $71,54913 $1,731 $67,160 $68,891


20 18 $6,984 $80,139 $87,123Defined 17 $1,932 $77,279 $79,211

7.19% 20 $2,578 $86,169 $88,7462.79% 19 $2,041 $83,061 $85,102


N/AN/A 12 ($2,231) $65,046 $62,815N/A 11 $1,638 $62,963 $64,601

Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10

($200,000)

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Cold-Alpine: Install or Replace Immediately



Energy Modelling Results Summary Install or Replace Immediately Existing Hotels Cold-Alpine

$4,8980.5% 3.7%

% %

$20,025$110,952

12.7%

1494.0% 1401.0%0.5% 383.2%





378.9% $14,487

45.7% $65,261

25.2% $20,89818.6% $31,938

0.1%2.0%

Immediate7.6 yrs

IRR

> 20 yrs

%

N/A

CO2 Reductions NPV(Over 20 Years)Simple Payback

E-07 7.6 yrsEnergy Efficient Guest Room Refrigerators

M-09W-03


2.2 yrs

B-04 Use of Building Appropriate Materials100% of Guest Rooms have 4F Deadband ThermostatsMeet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow Rates 1.6%

0.3 yrs1.3 yrs 1.6% 78.7%E-10 Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decorative Fixtures

0.5%

The table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modeled existing hotel in the cold-alpine climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy saving cost reductions. Due to different modelling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The stoplight colour legend contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.

Cold/DryWest Palm Beach, FL

0.3 yrs 5.8% 456.6% 453.3% $153,7600.1 yrs $54,055

N/A11.9%

N/A12.6%

$

($15,073)

yrs

2.0%


13.3%




E-09E-09E-09

48.7%

3.8 yrs 1.3%77.5% $36,488

26.1%5 yrs 2.7% 19.6%


Replace

N/A

N/A


9.8%($1,335)

Occupancy Sensors in Offices 0.0% N/A 6.3% ($576)Variable Frequency Drives Never 0.2% N/A

Never9.1%

7.8%10 yrs 0.1%

10 yrs 1.3%


$5011.1%


E-108.5% $5,631

M-11M-11 NEMA Premium Efficiency Motors




E-08 Pipe Insulation


Individual Resource Calculations Install or Replace Immediately Existing Hotels Cold-Alpine


419 0

0.01,828.7


Proposed Energy Use


0.0-0.2%

772.8

0.01,828.7


6,461


0.1%

0.2%NOX (lb/yr)

419 0 0 0

Operations

7,112.3 7,117.4 -5.1 -0.1%

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

0.0 0.0%


28.8


Energy End-Use


3,249

28.8

0 0%


CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,784,423 0.1%



Proposed ModificationsThe energy consumption of washing machines and dryers is reduced by 17%, based on a study by the


-0.10.0 0.0

3,245 0.1%%

0.0%MBtu/yr

0.0%

770.4 2.4 0.3%

0.0


SO2 (lb/yr) 6,472

2,787,041 2,784,423

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


419.0

0.0%

5.9 0.0%2,322.8 2,322.9Base Utilities - Gas

Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,145.0 4.7 0.4%



14,060.0Financial Assumptions

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 421.8 4.0 0.9%

HVAC Fans

14,054.1

419.0 0.0

Total

0.0%

-0.1 0.0%


2,787,041 2,784,423

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,461

3,245

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,054

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






$0

Operations

$1 428$1,389

$1,315$1,279$1,245

Water & sewerNatural gas

2,075Electricity

25,920-12


(+) / Loss (-)Yr.

Financial Table

kWh

$10 582

Capital Costs Savings Summary$7,979

$9 154

-$11$213



Galstherms

$0.0037$0.9000$0.1028Unit Cost

N/AN/A

2

$0

$8,430

$0

$8,201

$10,295$10,016$9,745

$9,224$9,481



Loss (-)

6

$0


IRR

MBhtons $0 $8,906

$8,664543

$1,352

Immediate

N/A

N/A

10$96 Simple Payback$0$0





$7,979





N/A $0 $1,468$1,428 $10,582$9,154N/A $0

$0


20191817Defined

20

2010

100%$1,211 $1,731

$1,638 $10,501

$13,549

$13,082$12,728$12,383


$1,986

11

$2,041 $15,1232.79%

Financial Analysis

$1,684

$1,779$11,721

$14,713

7.19%

$11,094

$14,315$13,927

13

$2,098 $13,447 $15,544

$9,409 $10,876

$10,794

876

$9,671$1,509

109

12

$1,551$10,217$9,940

$1,594

1615

$12,047

14

$1,879

$11,403 $13,182

$1,932

$1,828

$12,140$11,811$11,491$11,179

$12,478$12,825

NPVcfmMBh $110,952

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,730,876 2.0%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use








MBtu/yr %

Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr

2.0%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Pumps 28.8 29.0 -0.2 -0.6%

HVAC Fans 419 0 419 0 0 1 0 0%

Proposed ModificationsAll appliances replaced with Energy Star rated

equivalents. Overall saving of 30% on electricity and 34% on natural gas.

2,787,041 2,730,876

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


99.7 8.7%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 279.4 146.4 34.4%

HVAC Fans 419.0 419.0 0.1 0.0%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,050.1



1.7%


34% on natural gas.

2,787,041 2,730,876

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,308

3,177

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 13,827

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 164,438 Gals $0.0037 $608 0 ($42,658) $0 ($42,658)1 $0 $5,088 $5,088




12.6%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $5 899 $5 899N/A tons $0 5 $0 $5,714 $5,714





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $6,089N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $5,899 $5,899 NPV

($42,658) 8 $0 $6,285 $6,285

$20,025

9 $0 $6,488 $6,488

$6,089


14 $0 $7,628 $7,628($5,864) 13 $0 $7,385 $7,385

17 $0 $8,530 $8,5302010 16 $0 $8,218 $8,218


$8,854

7.19% 20 $0 $9,534 $9,5342.79% 19 $0 $9,190 $9,190

Defined


100% 12 ($8,154) $7,150 ($1,004)

20 18 $0 $8,854($60,000)($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,772,836 0.5%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




room.



MBtu/yr %

Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 418 6 0 4 0 1%

Proposed ModificationsTelevision is replaced with Energy Star rated


2,787,041 2,772,836

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


41.7 3.6%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%




0.1%


2,787,041 2,772,836

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,398

3,225

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,050

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($30,000) $0 ($30,000)1 $0 $1,109 $1,109

Simple Payback > 20 yrs



N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 204 $1 204N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,168 $1,168





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,242N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,204 $1,204 NPV

($30,000) 8 $0 $1,280 $1,280

-$15,073

9 $0 $1,320 $1,320

$1,242


14 $0 $1,547 $1,547$0 13 $0 $1,498 $1,498

17 $0 $1,699 $1,6992010 16 $0 $1,647 $1,647


$1,753

7.19% 20 $0 $1,875 $1,8752.79% 19 $0 $1,808 $1,808

Defined


100% 12 $0 $1,451 $1,451

20 18 $0 $1,753($35,000)

($30,000)

($25,000)

($20,000)

($15,000)

($10,000)

($5,000)

$0 0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,772,418 0.5%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




room.



MBtu/yr %

Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 418 6 0 4 0 1%

Proposed ModificationsRefrigerator is replaced with Energy Star rated


2,787,041 2,772,418

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


42.9 3.7%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%




0.1%


2,787,041 2,772,418

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,396

3,224

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,049

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($9,000) $01 $0 $1,141 $1,141




13.3%IRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,278N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,240 $1,240 NPV

$1,278($9,000) 8 $0 $1,318 $1,318

$4,898

9 $0 $1,358 $1,358

11 $0 $1,447 $1,447Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0 $1,402 $1,402

14 $0 $1,592 $1,592$0 13 $0 $1,542 $1,542


20 18 $0 $1,804 $1,804Defined 17 $0 $1,749 $1,749

7.19% 20 $0 $1,931 $1,9312.79% 19 $0 $1,861 $1,861


100% 12 $0 $1,494 $1,49412

($15,000)($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,624,952 5.8%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Base CaseEach guest room contains a total of 12 light bulbs.

There is a 50/50 split of 75W incandescent bulbs and 25W CFLs, giving a lighting density of 1.5 W/sf. Bulbs

operate for 8 hours/day.



MBtu/yr %

Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 414 5 4 5 1 1%

Proposed ModificationsAll 75W incandescent bulbs are replaced with 25W CFLs (6 per room or 900 in total). The guest room


2,787,041 2,624,952

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%




0.8%



2,787,041 2,624,952

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

5,630

2,977

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 13,948

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($2,790) $0 ($2,790)1 $0 $12,647 $12,647


($2,790) 3 $2,709 $12,832 $15,541Capital Costs Savings Summary 2 $0 $12,742 $12,742


456.6%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $2 941 $13 726 $16 667N/A tons $0 5 $0 $13,315 $13,315





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $14,149N/A MBh $0 6 $2,941 $13,726 $16,667 NPV

($2,790) 8 $0 $14,586 $14,586

$153,760

9 $3,194 $15,036 $18,230

$14,149


14 $0 $17,621 $17,621$2,494 13 $0 $17,071 $17,071

17 $0 $19,349 $19,3492010 16 $0 $18,756 $18,756

Financial Analysis 15 $3,766 $18,180 $21,946

$24,049

7.19% 20 $0 $21,353 $21,3532.79% 19 $0 $20,588 $20,588

Defined


100% 12 $3,468 $16,538 $20,006

20 18 $4,090 $19,960($50,000)

$0 $50,000

$100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 $400,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,731,479 2.0%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Base CaseCorridors contain 40 light bulbs per floor. There is a

50/50 split of 75W incandescent bulbs and 25W CFLs, giving a lighting density of 0.7 W/sf. Bulbs operate for

24 hours/day.



MBtu/yr %

Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 416 4 2 6 0 6%

Proposed ModificationsAll 75W incandescent bulbs are replaced with 25W CFLs (20 per floor or 100 in total). The guest room


2,787,041 2,731,479

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%




0.4%



2,787,041 2,731,479

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,196

3,158

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,002

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($310) $0 ($310)1 $285 $4,343 $4,628




1494.0%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $4 748 $5 075N/A tons $0 5 $318 $4,605 $4,923





N/A cfm $0 7 $336 $4,896N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $4,748 $5,075 NPV

($310) 8 $345 $5,048 $5,393

$54,055

9 $355 $5,205 $5,560

$5,232


14 $407 $6,104 $6,511$277 13 $396 $5,913 $6,309

17 $442 $6,720 $7,1622010 16 $430 $6,508 $6,938


$7,392

7.19% 20 $480 $7,430 $7,9102.79% 19 $467 $7,163 $7,630

Defined


100% 12 $385 $5,727 $6,113

20 18 $454 $6,938($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,772,012 0.5%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Base CaseOffices, food preparation, lockers, laundry, mechanical and

electrical spaces contain a total of 200 light bulbs. There is a 50/50 split of 75W incandescent bulbs and 25W CFLs, giving an average lighting density of 1.4 W/sf. Bulbs operate for 8

hours/day.



MBtu/yr %

Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 418 9 0 2 0 0%

Proposed ModificationsAll 75W incandescent bulbs are replaced with 25W CFLs (100 in total). The average lighting density is reduced to

0.7 W/sf.

2,787,041 2,772,012

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%




0.1%


2,787,041 2,772,012

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,397

3,224

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,045

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($310) $0 ($310)1 $0 $1,175 $1,175




383.2%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1 283 $1 610N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,244 $1,244





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,323N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1,283 $1,610 NPV

($310) 8 $0 $1,364 $1,364

$14,487

9 $355 $1,406 $1,761

$1,323


14 $0 $1,649 $1,649$277 13 $0 $1,597 $1,597

17 $0 $1,814 $1,8142010 16 $0 $1,757 $1,757


$2,327

7.19% 20 $0 $2,005 $2,0052.79% 19 $0 $1,933 $1,933

Defined


100% 12 $385 $1,547 $1,932

20 18 $454 $1,873($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,742,756 1.6%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Base Case



MBtu/yr %



Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr




HVAC Fans 419 0 416 9 2 2 0 5%

2,787,041 2,742,756

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%when unoccupied.

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%




0.3%


2,787,041 2,742,756

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,252

3,176

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,014

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)







1 $0 $3,741 $3,741


78.7%IRR





Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 ($6,350) $4,641 ($1,709)

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $4,232N/A MBh $0 6

($4,825) 8 $0 $4,363 $4,363

$36,488$0 $4,105 $4,105 NPV$4,232

9 $0 $4,497 $4,497

14 $0 $5,265 $5,265


20 18 $0 $5,976 $5,976Defined 17 $0 $5,790 $5,790

7.19% 20 $0 $6,393 $6,3932.79% 19 $0 $6,168 $6,168


100% 12 $0 $4,943 $4,94310 11 $0 $4,790 $4,790

($4,825) 13 $0 $5,102 $5,102

($10,000)$0

$10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,751,084 1.3%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Base Case



MBtu/yr %

Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 415 9 3 1 0 7%



Infiltration is reduced by a third, to 0.2 air changes per hour, in all perimeter spaces.

2,787,041 2,751,084

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%





2,787,041 2,751,084

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,454

3,218

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 13,779

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



$2,912Natural gas 2,695 therms $0.9000 $2,425Electricity 3,392 kWh $0.1028 $349 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($11,540) $0 ($11,540)1 $0 $2,912 $2,912




26.1%IRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $3,732N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $3,607 $3,607 NPV

$3,732($11,540) 8 $0 $3,861 $3,861

$20,898

9 $0 $3,995 $3,995


14 $0 $4,740 $4,740($11,540) 13 $0 $4,580 $4,580


Defined 17 $0 $5,421 $5,421

$4,426

7.19% 20 $0 $6,166 $6,1662.79% 19 $0 $5,930 $5,930

20 18 $0 $5,670 $5,670


100% 12 $0 $4,426

($20,000)($10,000)

$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,711,853 2.7%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Base CaseGuest room thermostat setpoints of 74°F (cooling) and

74°F (heating).



MBtu/yr %

Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 420 3 1 2 0 3%

Proposed ModificationsGuest room thermostat setpoints of 76°F (cooling) and

72°F (heating).

2,787,041 2,711,853

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%

HVAC Fans 419.0 420.3 -1.2 -0.3%Receptacles - Elec 1,149.8 1,149.8



3.4%


2,787,041 2,711,853

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,365

3,173

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 13,579

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($32,550) $0 ($32,550)1 $0 $6,044 $6,044




19.6%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $7 309 $7 309N/A tons $0 5 $0 $7,069 $7,069





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $7,558N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $7,309 $7,309 NPV

($32,550) 8 $0 $7,815 $7,815

$31,938

9 $0 $8,081 $8,081

$7,558


14 $0 $9,567 $9,567($32,550) 13 $0 $9,249 $9,249

17 $0 $10,869 $10,8692010 16 $0 $10,416 $10,416

Financial Analysis 15 ($49,147) $9,983 ($39,164)

$11,342

7.19% 20 $0 $12,302 $12,3022.79% 19 $0 $11,836 $11,836

Defined


100% 12 $0 $8,942 $8,942

20 18 $0 $11,342($40,000)

($20,000)

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,741,609 1.6%






HVAC Fans 419 0 419 0 0 0 0 0%



Proposed ModificationsWater fixtures meet IPC rates, reducing the domestic

hot water load reduced to 6.16 gallons/person/day.

2,787,041 2,741,609

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%






2.8%


2,787,041 2,741,609

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,472

3,214

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 13,671

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



$6,883Natural gas 3,893 therms $0.9000 $3,504Electricity 0 kWh $0.1028 $0 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 838,836 Gals $0.0037 $3,104 0 ($15,053) $0 ($15,053)1 $0 $6,883 $6,883




48.7%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $8 292 $8 292N/A tons $0 5 $0 $8,036 $8,036





($3,428)100%

15

($11,625)100%

10

N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $8,556N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $8,292 $8,292 NPV

9 $0 $9,110 $9,110

$8,5568 $0 $8,829 $8,829

$65,261


14 $0 $10,659 $10,65913 $0 $10,329 $10,329


$12,419Defined 17 $0 $11,952 $11,952

($15,053)

7.19% 20 $0 $13,357 $13,3572.79% 19 $0 $12,905 $12,905

20 18 $0 $12,419


12 $0 $10,010 $10,010

($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000 $180,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,750,333 1.3%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Base CaseInsulation on heating hot water and domestic hot water

piping is assumed to be of mixed thickness and condition, equivalent to 0.5 inch thick fibreglass

insulation.



MBtu/yr %

Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 419 0 0 0 0 0%

Proposed ModificationsFibreglass insulation installed on all heating hot water and domestic hot water piping. 2 inch thickness for

heating hot water piping 2 inches or larger, 1.5 inches

2,787,041 2,750,333

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%



- All pipe insulation is fiberglass with an all service jacket- Cost of insulation depends on width of pipe and thickness of insulation suggested as per Green Engage Energy Charts. Prices range from $4.71 to $12.85 including material, labour, overheard and profit.- Cold climates – insulation on hot water pipes and HVAC heating pipes- Insulation Lifetime – 30 yearsNB: Assumes easy access to all piping within hotel - It does not include any demolition costs.

1.6%


heating hot water piping 2 inches or larger, 1.5 inches for smaller piping. All domestic hot water insulation is

1 inch thick.

2,787,041 2,750,333

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,412

3,210

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 13,836

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($34,748) $0 ($34,748)1 $0 $2,946 $2,946




9.1%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $3 544 $3 544N/A tons $0 5 $0 $3,428 $3,428





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $3,664N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $3,544 $3,544 NPV

($34,748) 8 $0 $3,788 $3,788

$5,631

9 $0 $3,916 $3,916

$3,664


14 $0 $4,634 $4,634($34,748) 13 $0 $4,481 $4,481

17 $0 $5,257 $5,2572010 16 $0 $5,040 $5,040


$5,482

7.19% 20 $0 $5,943 $5,9432.79% 19 $0 $5,718 $5,718

Defined


100% 12 $0 $4,332 $4,332

20 18 $0 $5,482($40,000)($30,000)($20,000)($10,000)

$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,786,416 0.0%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Base Case



MBtu/yr %

Emissions

Space Heating - Gas 7,112.3 7,114.0 -1.7 0.0%Space Cooling 772.8 772.3 0.5 0.1%

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 419 0 0 0 0 0%



Corridor lighting load is reduced by 25% to 1.35 W/sf. The operating schedule remains unchanged. The reduction in load is based on US EPA predictions,

2,787,041 2,786,416

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%




0.0%


reduction in load is based on US EPA predictions, assuming the lighting turns off when unoccupied.

2,787,041 2,786,416

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,469

3,247

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,060

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



$49Natural gas -17 therms $0.9000 -$15Electricity 620 kWh $0.1028 $64 Initial Annual Savings

Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($772) $0 ($772)1 $0 $49 $49

Simple Payback Never



N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $69 $69N/A tons $0 5 $0 $51 $51





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $55N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $69 $69 NPV

($772) 8 $0 $56 $56

-$576

9 $0 $75 $75

$55


14 $0 $68 $68($772) 13 $0 $66 $66


Defined 17 $0 $75 $75

7.19% 20 $0 $82 $822.79% 19 $0 $79 $79

20 18 $0 $99 $99


100% 12 $0 $83 $83

($1,400)

($1,200)

($1,000)

($800)

($600)

($400)

($200)

$0 0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,782,795 0.2%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Base Case



MBtu/yr %

Emissions

Space Heating - Gas 7,112.3 7,169.0 -56.7 -0.8%Space Cooling 772.8 773.3 -0.5 -0.1%

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 390 6 28 4 6 8%




One VFD (15 HP capacity) installed on VAV supply fan motor.

2,787,041 2,782,795

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%





-0.2%

Financial Assumptions Total 14,060.0 14,088.9 -28.9 -0.2%

2,787,041 2,782,795

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,429

3,238

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,089

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($2,868) $01 $0 $318 $318

($2,868) Simple Payback Never



N/AIRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $297N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $290 $290 NPV

$297($2,868) 8 $0 $304 $304

-$1,335

9 $0 $312 $312

10 11 $0 $330 $330Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 ($3,775) $321 ($3,454)

14 $0 $358 $358($2,868) 13 $0 $349 $349


20 18 $0 $369 $369Defined 17 $0 $367 $367

7.19% 20 $0 $382 $3822.79% 19 $0 $370 $370


100% 12 $0 $339 $339

($4,000)($3,500)($3,000)($2,500)($2,000)($1,500)($1,000)

($500)$0

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,785,525 0.1%

Cold-Alpine



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Base Case



MBtu/yr %

Emissions


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr


HVAC Fans 419 0 415 7 3 4 0 8%






2,787,041 2,785,525

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r


0.0 0.0%Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%





0.0%



2,787,041 2,785,525

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,464

3,246

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,060

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($1,201) $01 $0 $118 $118




7.8%IRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $131N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $127 $127 NPV

$131($1,201) 8 $0 $135 $135

$50

9 $0 $139 $139


14 $0 $163 $163($388) 13 $0 $158 $158


20 18 $0 $184 $184Defined 17 $0 $178 $178

7.19% 20 $0 $197 $1972.79% 19 $0 $190 $190


100% 12 $0 $153 $153

($1,500)

($1,000)

($500)

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,181 2,295,019 17.7%





HVAC Fans 419 0 407 1 11 9 2 9%

17.7%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,787,181

2,295,019

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




11.3%


2,787,181

2,295,019

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

4,740

2,570

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,06112,472

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.








1 $1,245 $43,111 $44,356






N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $49,246 $54,269

$50,802 $52,270($149,066) 8 $1,854 $52,425 $54,279

NPV $376,544

9 $5,099 $54,116 $59,216


N/A 13 $1,731 $61,538 $63,269N/A 12 ($2,231) $59,606 $57,375

14 $2,186 $63,553 $65,739


20 18 $6,984 $73,381 $80,365Defined 17 $1,932 $70,772 $72,704

7.19% 20 $2,578 $78,880 $81,4582.79% 19 $2,041 $76,042 $78,083


($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,181 2,257,657 19.0%



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




%

Space Heating - Elec 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

4,645 28.2%Lighting 1,828.7 1,090.1 738.7 40.4% NOX (lb/yr) 3,249 2,525

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr SO2 (lb/yr) 6,47222.3%



HVAC Fans 419 0 378 0 41 0 9 8%

19.0%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,787,181

2,257,657

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




12.6%


2,787,181

2,257,657

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

4,645

2,525

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,06112,296

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)Electricity 347,367 kWh $0.1028Savings (+) /



$35,709 Initial Annual Savings $46,089








N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $52,740 $57,763

$54,412 $55,880($188,654) 8 $1,854 $56,154 $58,008

NPV $374,685

9 $5,099 $57,969 $63,069


N/A 13 $1,731 $65,939 $67,669N/A 12 ($2,231) $63,863 $61,632

14 $2,186 $68,102 $70,288


20 18 $6,984 $78,711 $85,695Defined 17 $1,932 $75,895 $77,826

7.19% 20 $2,578 $84,641 $87,2182.79% 19 $2,041 $81,587 $83,628


($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Cold-Alpine: Replace at End of Lifetime



B-04M-09

0.5%Occupancy Sensors in Corridors for Decorative Fixtures

W-03

2.0%N/A N/A

E-09

N/A

$13,2940.5% N/A

Zero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Guest RoomsE-09E-09

Immediate 5.8% $158,690

E-10

Towel/Sheet Program1.2 yrs 2.0% $54,351

N/A N/A $15,035$54,602

N/AE-07

ImmediateZero Use of Incandescent Lamps in Back of House Spaces

N/A

N/A N/A

Use of Building Appropriate Materials100% of Guest Rooms have 4F Deadband ThermostatsMeet IPC 2006 Maximum Flow Rates

Immediate

Immediate 0.5%

NPV(Over 20 Years)


Simple Payback IRR

Immediate

%

N/A86.8%89.6%

$

$12,915

Relevant Action Group yrs

O-04E-07 Energy Efficient Appliances


E-07 Energy Efficient TVs

Energy Modelling Results Summary Replace at End of Lifetime Existing Hotels Cold-Alpine

Measure


The table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modelled existing hotel in the cold-alpine climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy saving cost reductions. Due to different modelling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The stoplight colour legend contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.

Cold/DryWest Palm Beach, FL

%%Install New or

Replace


N/A


Replace

N/A

N/A



NEMA Premium Efficiency Motors

Occupancy Sensors in OfficesVariable Frequency Drives

Pipe InsulationE-08

Green Engage Level 2 Certification Cumulative Savings Scenarios (Includes Green Engage Level 1)Install All New Measures Immediately &Replace Existing Measures At End of Lifetime 2.2 yrs 19.0% 47.7% 43.7% $452,053

N/A

31.1%3.3 yrsM-11


E-10

0.1% 30.4%M-11 $808









Cold-Alpine



Proposed Energy Use






Energy End-Use


-0.6%

HVAC Fans 419 0 419 0 0 1 0 0%


34% on natural gas.

2.0%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%Pumps 28.8 29.0 -0.2

2,787,041 2,730,876

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r



34% on natural gas.



1.7%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 279.4 146.4 34.4%


2,787,041 2,730,876

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,308

3,177

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 13,827

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Individual Resource Calculations Replace at End of Lifetime Existing Hotels Cold-Alpine




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 164,438 Gals $0.0037 $608 0 ($5,864) $0 ($5,864)1 $0 $5,088 $5,088




89.6%IRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $5 899 $5 899N/A tons $0 5 $0 $5,714 $5,714





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $6,089N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $5,899 $5,899 NPV

($5,864) 8 $0 $6,285 $6,285

$54,351

9 $0 $6,488 $6,488

$6,089


14 $0 $7,628 $7,628($5,864) 13 $0 $7,385 $7,385


20 18 $0 $8,854 $8,854Defined 17 $0 $8,530 $8,530

7.19% 20 $0 $9,534 $9,5342.79% 19 $0 $9,190 $9,190


100% 12 ($8,154) $7,150 ($1,004)

($20,000)$0

$20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



One 32 inch non-Energy Star television per guest room. Emissions Base Case Proposed




Cold-Alpine



Proposed Energy Use






Energy End-Use


0.0%

HVAC Fans 419 0 418 6 0 4 0 1%

Television is replaced with Energy Star rated equivalent. Overall saving of 40% on electricity. 0.5%


2,787,041 2,772,836

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





0.1%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,787,041 2,772,836

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,398

3,225

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,050

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $0 $0 $01 $0 $1,109 $1,109




N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1 204 $1 204N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,168 $1,168





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,242N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,204 $1,204 NPV

$0 8 $0 $1,280 $1,280

$12,915

9 $0 $1,320 $1,320

$1,242


14 $0 $1,547 $1,547$0 13 $0 $1,498 $1,498


20 18 $0 $1,753 $1,753Defined 17 $0 $1,699 $1,699

7.19% 20 $0 $1,875 $1,8752.79% 19 $0 $1,808 $1,808


100% 12 $0 $1,451 $1,451

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



One 3 cu. ft. non-Energy Star refrigerator per guest room. Emissions Base Case Proposed




Cold-Alpine



Proposed Energy Use






Energy End-Use


0.0%

HVAC Fans 419 0 418 6 0 4 0 1%

Refrigerator is replaced with Energy Star rated equivalent. Overall saving of 24% on electricity. 0.5%


2,787,041 2,772,418

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





0.1%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,787,041 2,772,418

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,396

3,224

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,049

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $0 $01 $0 $1,141 $1,141




N/AIRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,278N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $1,240 $1,240 NPV

$1,278$0 8 $0 $1,318 $1,318

$13,294

9 $0 $1,358 $1,358

$1,49412 11 $0 $1,447 $1,447


100% 12 $0 $1,494

14 $0 $1,592 $1,592$0 13 $0 $1,542 $1,542


20 18 $0 $1,804 $1,804Defined 17 $0 $1,749 $1,749

7.19% 20 $0 $1,931 $1,9312.79% 19 $0 $1,861 $1,861


$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years









Cold-Alpine



Proposed Energy Use






Energy End-Use


-0.3%

HVAC Fans 419 0 414 5 4 5 1 1%




2,787,041 2,624,952

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r






0.8%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,787,041 2,624,952

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

5,630

2,977

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 13,948

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $2,494 $0 $2,4941 $0 $12,647 $12,647




N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $2 941 $13 726 $16 667N/A tons $0 5 $0 $13,315 $13,315





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $14,149N/A MBh $0 6 $2,941 $13,726 $16,667 NPV

$2,494 8 $0 $14,586 $14,586

$158,690

9 $3,194 $15,036 $18,230

$14,149


14 $0 $17,621 $17,621$2,494 13 $0 $17,071 $17,071


20 18 $4,090 $19,960 $24,049Defined 17 $0 $19,349 $19,349

7.19% 20 $0 $21,353 $21,3532.79% 19 $0 $20,588 $20,588


100% 12 $3,468 $16,538 $20,006

$0 $50,000

$100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 $400,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




24 hours/day.





Cold-Alpine



Proposed Energy Use






Energy End-Use


0.0%

HVAC Fans 419 0 416 4 2 6 0 6%




2,787,041 2,731,479

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r






0.4%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,787,041 2,731,479

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,196

3,158

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,002

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $277 $0 $2771 $285 $4,343 $4,628




N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $4 748 $5 075N/A tons $0 5 $318 $4,605 $4,923





N/A cfm $0 7 $336 $4,896N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $4,748 $5,075 NPV

$277 8 $345 $5,048 $5,393

$54,602

9 $355 $5,205 $5,560

$5,232


14 $407 $6,104 $6,511$277 13 $396 $5,913 $6,309


20 18 $454 $6,938 $7,392Defined 17 $442 $6,720 $7,162

7.19% 20 $480 $7,430 $7,9102.79% 19 $467 $7,163 $7,630


100% 12 $385 $5,727 $6,113

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




hours/day.





Cold-Alpine



Proposed Energy Use






Energy End-Use


-1.1%

HVAC Fans 419 0 418 9 0 2 0 0%


0.7 W/sf.


2,787,041 2,772,012

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r





0.1%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,787,041 2,772,012

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,397

3,224

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,045

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)




Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 $277 $0 $2771 $0 $1,175 $1,175




N/AIRR

N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1 283 $1 610N/A tons $0 5 $0 $1,244 $1,244





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $1,323N/A MBh $0 6 $327 $1,283 $1,610 NPV

$277 8 $0 $1,364 $1,364

$15,035

9 $355 $1,406 $1,761

$1,323


14 $0 $1,649 $1,649$277 13 $0 $1,597 $1,597


20 18 $454 $1,873 $2,327Defined 17 $0 $1,814 $1,814

7.19% 20 $0 $2,005 $2,0052.79% 19 $0 $1,933 $1,933


100% 12 $385 $1,547 $1,932

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years









Cold-Alpine



Proposed Energy Use






Energy End-Use


4.7%

HVAC Fans 419 0 415 7 3 4 0 8%




2,787,041 2,785,525

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r







0.0%

Receptacles - Gas 425.8 425.8 0.0 0.0%


2,787,041 2,785,525

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

6,464

3,246

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,060 14,060

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)





Water & sewer 0 Gals $0.0037 $0 0 ($388) $01 $0 $118 $118




31.1%IRR





N/A cfm $0 7 $0 $131N/A MBh $0 6 $0 $127 $127 NPV

$131($388) 8 $0 $135 $135

$808

9 $0 $139 $139

$15315 11 $0 $148 $148


100% 12 $0 $153

14 $0 $163 $163($388) 13 $0 $158 $158


20 18 $0 $184 $184Defined 17 $0 $178 $178

7.19% 20 $0 $197 $1972.79% 19 $0 $190 $190


($1,000)

($500)

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use





CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,295,019 17.7%





HVAC Fans 419 0 407 1 11 9 2 9%

17.7%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

2,787,041

2,295,019

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r




11.3%


2,787,041

2,295,019

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

4,740

2,570

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,06012,472

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr










Loss (-)Yr.








1 $1,245 $43,100 $44,345






N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $49,232 $54,255

$50,788 $52,255($66,784) 8 $1,854 $52,409 $54,263

NPV $453,154

9 $5,099 $54,101 $59,200


N/A 13 $1,731 $61,520 $63,251N/A 12 ($2,231) $59,589 $57,358

14 $2,186 $63,534 $65,720


20 18 $6,984 $73,359 $80,343Defined 17 $1,932 $70,750 $72,682

7.19% 20 $2,578 $78,855 $81,4332.79% 19 $2,041 $76,018 $78,059


($200,000)

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



19.0%Heat Rejection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%


Space Heating - Gas 7,112.3 7,136.7 -24.4 -0.3%

28.8 26.6 2.2 7.5%

HVAC Fans 419 0 378 0 41 0 9 8%

CO2 (lb/yr) 2,787,041 2,257,657 19.0%


4,645 28.2%Lighting 1,828.7 1,090.1 738.7 40.4%


% SO2 (lb/yr)

Cold-Alpine




Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



6,472

Proposed Modifications Space Cooling 772.8 556.8 216.0 27.9%


2,787,041

2,257,657

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

lb/y

r



12.5%




2,787,041

2,257,657

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,472

3,249

4,645

2,525

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000


g/yr


Proposed

14,06012,296

02,0004,0006,0008,000

10,00012,00014,00016,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr








Natural gas 5,794 therms $0.9000 $5,214Initial Annual Savings $46,077





Water & sewer 1,029,194 Gals $0.0037 $3,808 0


Replace)Electricity 347,367 kWh $0.1028 $35,709




$105,560





7.19% 20 $2,578 $84,616 $87,1942.79% 19 $2,041 $81,564 $83,604

20 18 $6,984 $78,688 $85,672Defined 17 $1,932 $75,873 $77,805


14 $2,186 $68,083 $70,269N/A 13 $1,731 $65,920 $67,651N/A 12 ($2,231) $63,845 $61,615N/A 11 $1,638 $61,799 $63,437


($105,560) 8 $1,854 $56,139 $57,993

NPV $452,053N/A cfm $0 7 $1,468N/A MBh $0 6 $5,023 $52,726 $57,748

$54,397 $55,865

($200,000)

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



APPENDIX B: New Hotels Energy Analysis

Introduction 1How to Use this Appendix 2How to Read the Overall Summary Page 3How to Read the Climate Summary Pages 4How to Read the Individual ECM CalculationSheets

5

Energy Model Assumptions: General 7Energy Model Assumptions: Financial 9Global Climate Map 10Climate Data 11

Energy Charts 13

Calculation Sheets 22Overall Summary 23Hot-Humid 24Arid 54Temperate 84Cold-Alpine 118

APPENDIX B: New Hotels Energy Analysis

Introduction

Issued February 1, 2011 1 New Hotels Energy Analysis - Green Engage/Solutions

Green Engage/Solu ons for New Hotels contains 55 Level 1Prerequisite Ac ons and 15 Level 2 Prerequisite Ac ons (70Prerequisites in total). These ac ons are designed to improvethe sustainable opera ons of a hotel across a wide range ofareas including water use, waste management, products andmaterials, guest comfort, and par cularly energy use.

In designing a new hotel, there are a number of decisions tobe made about the building and the systems to be put insideit - decisions that can signi cantly impact the energy e ciencyof the hotel. This appendix has been developed to help hotelsmake the right design choices for their building type andclimate.

The Energy Charts are a set guidelines covering all aspects ofhotel design, which provide a prescrip ve path for achievingenergy savings of up to 25% over a typical new hotel.

The Calcula on Sheets contain detailed analysis of the cost andsavings of speci c design op ons, such as one type of HVACsystem over another, in four di erent climate zones. Thesesheets are designed to allow those looking for even greatersavings to quickly and easily weigh up which op on makes themost sense.

The diagram to the right shows how these sheets t together.Detailed instruc ons on how to read and interpret these sheetsare provided on the following four pages

For informa on on the climate zones, and help determiningwhich climate zone your hotel is located in, refer to the GlobalClimate Map and Climate Data sec ons.

While the results of this energy analysis are applicable to hotelsin a wide variety of loca ons and brands, obviously in the realworld actual results may vary. If you'd like to look in moredetail at how the energy model was created, and determinewhether these assump ons apply to your par cular property,refer to the Energy Modelling Assump ons sec on.

How to Use this Appendix


How to Read the Overall Summary Page


How to Read the Climate Summary Pages






Introduction:

The energy cost associated with opera ng a hotelis dependent upon the building’s layout, climate,occupancy rate, available facili es, construc onmaterials, engineering systems, and energy pricing.Every hotel will have varia ons so predic ng the energysavings would require modelling of each hotel.

For this study, a generic hotel, representa ve of asample IHG Hotel was modelled using Trane Trace. Thisis of average size, construc on, and layout. The modelwas run for four di erent climates.

The baseline hotel is of standard construc on, usage,and engineering systems as de ned by ASHRAE 90.1-2004, Appendix G. This standard is the minimumrequirements allowed for new buildings in the US andde nes prac ce for calcula ng a building’s energysavings. This is also the acceptable method used byLEED to de ne energy savings required by Energy andAtmosphere Prerequisite 1 and Credit 1.

The ndings from the energy report are presented inthe prescrip ve measures charts. Use of these chartswill allow IHG to build a hotel that is approximately15% more energy e cient than the ASHRAE 90.1-2004baseline hotel for buildings similar to those modelled.Varia ons in climate, building geometry, facili es,occupancy and building construc on will producedi erent energy savings. To fully realise a property’senergy savings, an energy model should be done for thatspeci c project.

The following assump ons were used to create abaseline hotel for this study.

Climates Modelled:

The model was run in four climate zones, covering thefull range of loca ons of IHG’s proper es. The followingweather data was used to simulate these four zones:

• Hot-Humid: West Palm Beach, Florida

• Arid: Phoenix, Arizona

• Temperate: New York, New York

• Cold-Alpine: Fargo, North Dakota

Building Geometry:• 6 oors consis ng of guest rooms only

• 20 guest rooms on each oor, all with at least oneexterior wall

• Each room approximately 45 square meters or 484square feet

• Each oor is square (having equal length exposuresin the north, south, east, and west direc ons)

• Exterior walls have 40% glazing and are 60%opaque

Building Envelope Construction:• Walls are 4” lightweight block with 4” insula on

• Wall insula on: based on ASHRAE minimum infollowing chart

• Roof insula on: based on ASHRAE minimum infollowing chart

Climate Zone

BuildingEnvelopeComponent

Hot -Humid Arid Temperate Cold -

Alpine

RoofConstruc on

R-15.0,U=0.063

R-15.0,U=0.063

R-15.0,U=0.063

R-15.0,U=0.063

WallConstruc on

R-5.7,U=0.151

R-7.6,U=0.123

R-9.5,U=0.104

R-13.3,U=0.08

Fixed Glazing U=1.22 U=0.57 U=0.57 U=0.57

OperableGlazing U=1.27 U=0.67 U=0.67 U=0.67

Glazing SHGC 0.25 0.25 0.39 0.49

The four base models were built with the listedconstruc on and assump on. Addi onal test models wererun with energy e cient electrical systems, improvedmechanical systems and designs, and improved envelopeconstruc on. These op ons were used to develop theCredited Ac ons outlined in this report.

Room Loads:• Each room has two people

• Each room has a ligh ng density of 1.0 Wa s/squarefoot

• Each room has an equipment density of 0.5 Wa s/square foot (for TV, laptop, etc.)

Guest Occupancy Schedule:• Midnight – 9 AM: 100%

• 9 AM to 11 AM: 20%

• 11 AM to 5 PM: 0%

• 5 PM to Midnight: 100%




Mechanical Systems:• Individual room air-cooled PTACs

• Ven la on air delivered directly through the wallinto the room units

• Systems can run 24-7, as temperature requires

• No central plant (none required for air-cooledPTACs)


Utilities:U lity values for electricity and natural gaswere obtained from the US Energy Informa onAdministra on for the baseline 2008 year across all fourclimate zones. These gures are for the commercialstate averages of Florida, Arizona, New York and NorthDakota.

ClimateZone

Hot &Humid

Hot &Dry Temperate Cold

Alpine

Electricity(kWh) $0.0965 $0.0802 $0.1535 $0.0622

Natural Gas(therms) N/A N/A $1.5056 $1.1906

NPV Financial Inputs:

• Base year for analysis: 2008

• Building Analysis/Study Period : 20 years

• Projected average (nominal) fuel escala onrate was obtained from the US Department ofCommerce for the commercial end-use sector as anaverage for both electricity and natural gas – 3.5%

• Discount Rate (nominal) – 6%

HVAC Plant First Cost Reductions:Measures might have the impact of reducing (orincreasing) the required size of the HVAC plant. Todetermine this capital cost change the following gureswere sourced from RS Means 2008.

• Cooling plant costs - $450/ton

• Hea ng plant costs - $7.55/MBtu

• Airside distribu on costs - $3.5/cfm

Emission Factors:Emission factors for electricity depend on the state orcountry electricity mix. However, for comparison acrossclimate zones the average emission for CO2, SO2 andNOX across the US has been used. These gures weresourced from the EPA’s eGRID 2007, the EIA and theEERE.

Energy Type CO2(lb/MWh)

SO2(lb/MWh)

NOX(lb/MWh)

Electricity 1,329.35 5.2589 1.9366

Natural Gas 398.31 0 0.2994

Energy Model Assumptions: Financial


Source: Peel et.al. Updated world map of the Koppen-Geiger climate classi ca on, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 11, 1633–1644, 2007

Global Climate Map


Hot-Humid: West Palm Beach, Florida

Climate Data

Arid: Phoenix, Arizona


Temperate: New York City, New York

Climate Data

Cold-Alpine: Fargo, North Dakota


New Hotel Energy Charts


Hot & Humid Climates Energy Chart for HotelsIHG Hotel Benchmark for 15% Energy Performance Improvement over Baseline*

System Component Recommenda on Ac on Group

Wat

er

Piping Hea ng Hot Water Insula on (d<=1.5”/8”>d>1.5”/d>=8”) 1.5” thick, 2” thick/ 2.5” thick, minimum 0.22 K factor E-08

Chilled Water Insula on (d<=1.5”/d>1.5”) 1” thick/1.5” thick, minimum 0.22 K factor, vapour barrier E-08

Domes c Hot Water - Indoors (d<=2”/d>2”) 1” thick/1.5” thick, minimum 0.22 K factor E-08

Refrigerant Piping Outdoors or in uncondi oned areas 1.5” thick, minimum 0.22 K factor, vapour barrier E-08

Chilled Water Design Temperatures Use 14° T for chilled water instead of 12° T where applicable M-04

Water-cooled System Central plant with cooling water loop and high e ciency equipment M-04

Domes c Water Laundry equipment High e ciency laundry equipment W-04

Storage Hot Water Heaters - Gas 90% e cient E-08

Instantaneous Water Heaters - Gas 90% e cient E-08

Instantaneous Water Heaters - Electric 90% e cient E-08

Solar Thermal Hot Water Use a solar water hea ng system E-08


Build

ing

Enve

lope

Ver cal Glazing Window/Wall Ra o Install no more than 40% glazing B-01

Operable Glazing U-Value U=0.5 B-01

Fixed Glazing U-Value U=0.5 B-01

Glazing SHGC SHGC = 0.25 B-01

Roof Insula on above deck R-20 insula on, assembly maximum U=0.06 B-02

Metal Building R-20 insula on, assembly maximum U=0.06 B-02

A c and other R-38 insula on, assembly maximum U=0.027 B-02

Roof Re ec vity Albedo of 0.5 or greater B-03

Walls, above grade Mass R-20 insula on, assembly maximum U=0.06 B-02

Metal Building or Steel Framed R-20 insula on, assembly maximum U=0.06 B-02

Wood framed R-20 insula on, assembly maximum U=0.06 B-02

Floors Mass ASHRAE 90.1-2004 or be er B-02

Steel Framed ASHRAE 90.1-2004 or be er B-02

Wood framed and other ASHRAE 90.1-2004 or be er B-02

Slabs Heated R-7.5, F=1.02 B-02

Unheated F=0.73 B-02

Doors Swinging U=0.70 B-02

Non-swinging U=1.45 B-02

Skylights Skylight/Roof Ra o No more than 3% B-01

Glazing Assembly U-Value U=1.17 B-01



Hot & Humid Climates Energy Chart for HotelsIHG Hotel Benchmark for 15% Energy Performance Improvement over Baseline*


Mec

hani

cal

HVAC Systems Water Source Heat Pumps in Guest Rooms 13 SEER/7.7 HSPF, 0.00025 KW/CFM full load energy rate M-03

4 Pipe Fan Coils in Guest Rooms 0.00025 KW/CFM e ciency full load energy rate M-03

Central Air Handling Units (VAV & CV) 13 SEER, 0.00025 KW/CFM-in wg e ciency full load energy rate M-03

VFDs VFDs on all equipment over 5 HP M-11

Economiser Mode in Central Air Handlers ASHRAE 90.1-2004 or be er M-07

Humidity Control Provide dehumidi ca on and humidistats M-01

Ven la on Ven la on Air Delivery Central outside air unit ducted to each room with motorised dampers M-01, M-10, E-06

Demand Ven la on Minimum ow rates when room is unoccupied through use of CO2 sensors N/A

Ductwork Fric on in secondary duct work 0.08” w.c./100’ maximum N/A

Velocity in primary duct work 2000 FPM maximum N/A

Sealing Seal Class B N/A

Supply Duct Insula on R-6 N/A

Return Duct Insula on R-6 N/A

Exterior Duct or Duct in Unvented A cs Insula on R-8 N/A


Elec

tric

al

Interior Ligh ng Lower ligh ng levels 0.9 W/sf overall E-10

Occupancy sensors Occupancy sensors in all mul - occupancy spaces E-09

Equipment Use compact uorescent bulbs E-10

Ballast Electronic ballast E-10

Dimming Controls Dim Fixtures within 12’ of north/south windows or 8’ of skylight B-01

Interior Room Surface Re ectance Minimum 80% on ceilings, 70% on walls and ver cal par ons E-3

** This outline is based on the ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design Guide for Small O ce Buildings prescrip ve chart, modi ed by the results of the energy model of the baseline IHG hotel. Baselinecase and modelled case assump ons are listed in the document “Energy Model Assump ons” at the front of this document. Devia on from the modelled hotel may result in a di erent energy savingspercentage. This chart may not be applicable to exis ng hotels due to exis ng constraints. If the table list “ASHRAE 90.1-2004 or be er” for a component, meet either ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004 orthe local code requirements, whichever is more stringent. In the event that local code is more stringent than the benchmark prescrip ve, always refer to local code.


Arid Climates Energy Chart for HotelsIHG Hotel Benchmark for 15% Energy Performance Improvement over Baseline*

System Component Recommenda on N/A

Wat

er













Build

ing

Enve

lope















Slabs Heated R-7.5, F=1.02 B-02

Unheated F=0.73 B-02







Arid Climates Energy Chart for HotelsIHG Hotel Benchmark for 15% Energy Performance Improvement over Baseline*


Mec

hani

cal






Ven la on Ven la on Air Delivery Central outside air unit ducted to each room with motorised dampers M-01

Demand Ven la on Minimum ow rates when room is unoccupied through use of CO2 sensors M-01, M-10, E-06





Return Duct Insula on R-3.5 N/A



Elec

tric

al





Dimming Controls Dim Fixtures within 12’ of north/south windows or 8’ of skylight E-10

Interior Room Surface Re ectance Minimum 80% on ceilings, 70% on walls and ver cal par ons B-01



Temperate Climates Energy Chart for HotelsIHG Hotel Benchmark for 15% Energy Performance Improvement over Baseline*


Wat

er













Build

ing

Enve

lope















Slabs Heated R-10, 0.78 B-02

Unheated R-10, 0.54 B-02







Temperate Climates Energy Chart for HotelsIHG Hotel Benchmark for 15% Energy Performance Improvement over Baseline*


Mec

hani

cal







Demand Ven la on Minimum ow rates when room is unoccupied through use of CO2 sensors M-01, M-10, E-06








Elec

tric

al






Interior Room Surface Re ectance Minimum 80% on ceilings, 70% on walls and ver cal par ons B-01



IHG Hotel Benchmark for 15% Energy Performance Improvement over Baseline*

System Recommenda on Ac on Group

Wat

er













Build

ing

Enve

lope















Slabs Heated ASHRAE 90.1-2004 or be er B-02

Unheated ASHRAE 90.1-2004 or be er B-02






Cold Climates Energy Chart for Hotels


IHG Hotel Benchmark for 15% Energy Performance Improvement over Baseline*


Mec

hani

cal







Demand Ven la on Minimum ow rates when room is unoccupied through use of CO2 sensors M-01, M-10,E-06






Exterior Duct Insula on R-8 N/A


Elec

tric

al






Interior Room Surface Re ectance ASHRAE 90.1-2004 or be er B-01

** This outline is based on the ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design Guide for Small O ce Buildings prescrip ve chart, modi ed by the results of the energy model of the baseline IHG hotel. Baselinecase and modelled case assump ons are listed in the document “Energy Model Assump ons” at the front of this document. Devia on from the modelled hotel may result in a di erent energy savingspercentage. This chart may not be applicable to exis ng hotels due to exis ng constraints. If the table list “ASHRAE 90.1-2004 or be er” for a component, meet either ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004 or thelocal code requirements, whichever is more stringent. In the event that local code is more stringent than the benchmark prescrip ve, always refer to local code.

Cold Climates Energy Chart for Hotels


Calculation Sheets



All Climate Zones Energy Modelling Results Summary New HotelsThe table below summarises the financial performance, in terms of simple payback, for the modeled new hotel in 4 climate zones against various baseline models. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures.For details regarding each measure and for additional energy and financial performance metrics (CO2 reduction, IRR, first year yield on marginal cost and NPV) refer to the summary pages and individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.


M-2

AridHot/Humid Cold-AlpineFargo, NDNew York, NY

TemperatePhoenix, AR

Condenser Water Heat Pump

Optimise Building InsulationDedicated outside air unit

yrs

West Palm Beach, FL

Base Case: Identical VAV system but without fan-powered parallel terminal units. Note: FPPs not modelled in hot climates.

M-7M-7

Base Case: PTAC units with air-cooled unitary cooling and electric resistance heating.

M-7

Heat Recovery

Fan Coil Units

Water Cooled VAV with FPPAir Cooled VAV with FPP

Water Cooled VAV

Optimise Glazing

Air Cooled VAVM-72.8 yrs2.9 yrs

4.2 yrsImmediate

Base Case: Best performing HVAC system: water cooled VAV system

3.4 yrs19 yrs

B-1B-3

M-13

Demand Ventilation

M-9M-12M-13

Variable Frequency DrivesWater-Cooled ChillerEvaporative CoolingThermal Storage

Economiser Modes

M-2M-3M-4

M-7M-7

Simple Payback

Immediate> 20 yrs

5.2 yrs6.9 yrs

Simple Payback yrs

Simple Payback yrs

Simple Payback yrs

4.9 yrs> 20 yrs1.2 yrs3.7 yrs

> 20 yrs20 yrs

6.7 yrs5.5 yrs

N/A

Immediate> 20 yrs

6.6 yrs8.3 yrs10 yrs5.9 yrs

7 yrs12 yrs1.7 yrs5.3 yrs17 yrsNever

4.9 yrs12 yrs5.2 yrs3.3 yrs5.3 yrs6.5 yrs3 yrs

Immediate2.2 yrs11 yrs

3.3 yrs3.3 yrs

2.5 yrs3 yrs

11 yrs> 20 yrs11 yrs7.2 yrs8.3 yrs4.9 yrs4 yrsNever

11 yrs6.8 yrs

Immediate2 yrs

2.1 yrs2.1 yrs

5.2 yrs5 yrs


Hot-Humid



M-9M-12M-13

Variable Frequency DrivesWater-Cooled ChillerEvaporative Cooling

B-1B-3

M-2M-3M-4

Heat Recovery

26.5%($9,546)$14,076

Demand Ventilation

2.1%

20 yrs


13.2% 22.9%

($12,984)$11,463

23.1% 13.1%17.9%

$17,040

20.6%

% %

$134,306$214,692

$271,005

Fan Coil Units

Water Cooled VAV with FPP

11.7%1.2%

3.7 yrs1.2 yrs

> 20 yrs

N/A

2.4%N/AN/A

N/AN/AN/A

26.0%

29.7%87.5%

N/A

3.6%0.5%

0.1%

84.0%3.2%

4.2 yrs

0.8%

0.1%

22.1% 19.4%

M-2

yrs

M-7M-7

M-7M-7 Air Cooled VAV

Condenser Water Heat Pump

Optimise Building InsulationDedicated outside air unit

> 20 yrs

26.4%19.5%

5.5 yrs6.7 yrs

32.1%

> 20 yrsImmediate

16.9%13.6%

19.4%15.6%

$

$153,124

$97,874($17,545)


N/A


Base Case: Best performing HVAC system: water cooled VAV system

Air Cooled VAV with FPP

Base Case: PTAC units with air-cooled unitary cooling and electric resistance heating.

M-7M-7

%

15.0%

1.0%1.3%Immediate

2.3%

The table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modeled new hotel in the hot-humid climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy savings cost reductions. Due to different modeling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The colour key contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.


Energy Modelling Results Summary New Hotels Hot-Humid

$59,653

$110,938($11,720)

M-13 4.9 yrs

NPV(Over 20 Years)

0.0%Thermal Storage

Water Cooled VAV

Optimise Glazing

Economiser Modes

Simple Payback IRR

5.2 yrs6.9 yrs


Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but with improved glazing

properties. SHGC is unchanged, U-value is reduced to 0.5.

VAV system with reheat used for all rooms. Cooling provided by water-cooled chiller with cooling tower. Electric resistance heating. Demand ventilation.

Standard ASHRAE construction for climate zone 2.


88 7

0.31,186.6


Proposed Energy Use


N/A

0.8%NOX (lb/yr)

86 5 2 2 2 5%


CO2 (lb/yr) 840,588 833,459 0.8%SO2 (lb/yr) 3,325 3,297



0.8%212.2

669.7

0.41,186.6

B-1 Optimize Glazing

Base Case

N/A


Energy End-Use


Building Envelope

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

MBtu/yr MBtu/yrLightingSpace Heating - Elec 0.1 25.0%

1,225

N/A N/A

Individual Resource Calculations New Hotels Hot-Humid

190.9 21.3

1,214 0.8%%

0.0%MBtu/yr

10.0%

675.0 -5.3 -0.8%

0.0

840,588 833,459

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


0.5.

Assumptions

88.7HVAC Fans

2,139.3

N/A

Base UtilitiesReceptacles N/A N/A N/A N/A

0.8%

18.3 0.8%N/A N/A

86.5 2.2 2.5%

N/A N/A2,157.6Total

840,588 833,459

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,325

1,225

3,297

1,214

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,158 2,139

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr




Cooling Plant Savings ($450/ton)Heating Plant Savings ($7 55/MBh)

($21,896)

Building Envelope

$0$0

$0$0$0


00

5,363Resource


Yr.

Financial Table

kWh

$636


$636

$0$518



Galstherms

N/AN/A

$0.0965Unit Cost

15202

2$574$554


($21,896)


Replace)Cash Flow

6543

$0$615$594

$0

($63,866)


IRR

MBhtons

2.4%

N/A

$1 527$615$6,840

$0 Simple Payback > 20 yrs10

$594$574

$536$554





$21,896

$536


Heating Plant Savings ($7.55/MBh)Airside Distribution Savings ($3.5/cfm)


Estimated Useful Life (yrs)Percent replacedReplacement Cost

Base YearValuation TypeProject Analysis PeriodDiscount Rate for Defined ValuationEnergy Escalation Rate (Nominal)

9,601 $33,604 $0$0 $636$636202

($21,896)


20191817Defined

20

2008

0%$0 $0

$0 $756

$867

$995$961$929

3.50%

$0

1112

6.00%$0 $1,030 $1,030$0 $995

Financial Analysis

$0

$0$867

$838

$0

$0

$809$809

876

$682$0

109 $0

$730$705

$0

$961$929$89716

15$897

14

$0

$83813

$658

$756$730$705$682$658

$782 $782

-$12,984NPVcfmMBh $1,527

($25,000)

($20,000)

($15,000)

($10,000)

($5,000)

$0 0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



212.2

669.7Space Cooling



1.0%


1,212 1.0%

Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but with the overall wall U-value

reduced to 0.06.

1.0%SO2 (lb/yr) 3,325 3,291 1.0%

88 7

NOX (lb/yr) 1,225

N/A N/A N/A

1,186.6 0.0

1.6%

Space Heating - ElecSpace Heating - Gas

0.0%1,186.6

HVAC FansHeat RejectionPumps

0.7 -0.3 -75.0%

86 1 2 6 2 9%202.6


0.0

MBtu/yrLighting

MBtu/yr

Proposed Energy Use



Building Envelope

0.0 0.0 0.0%0.4

MBtu/yr %

9.6 4.5%


B-3 Optimize Building Insulation

Base Case

N/A


Energy End-Use

10.4659.3


CO2 (lb/yr) 840,588 831,900

840,588 831,900

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


1.0%

AssumptionsN/A

88.7N/AN/A

1.0%N/A N/A

HVAC Fans 86.1 2.6 2.9%

TotalBase UtilitiesReceptacles

N/AN/A

2,157.6 2,135.3 22.3

N/A N/A

840,588 831,900

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,325

1,225

3,291

1,212

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500


g/yr


Proposed

2,158 2,135

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr




Cooling Plant Savings ($450/ton)Heating Plant Savings ($7 55/MBh) $365

Galstherms

($12,650)Capital Costs Savings Summary


(+) / Loss (-)Annual Savings (+) /

Loss (-)

$2,240$0

kWh

N/AN/A

$0.0965


00

6,535 $631Unit Cost


$0$0

$0$0$0

Yr.

Financial Table




$724$699

$653$676

$699$676$653

N/A

6 $2,835

$0

$749$7244

32


48


Replace)Cash Flow

$775 $775

$0$749

$653

65

MBhtons

$2,24010 $0 Simple Payback


IRR

Immediate

N/A

($2,240)

Building Envelope







$365$0$0 NPV

$921

Defined20

2008

0%$0

3,340 $11,69048

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0$0

$0

$0109

3.50%6.00% $1,212$1,212$0

201918171615

$0 $1,255 $1,255

$1,171$1,132$1,094$1,057

$1,171$1,132

$0

$1,057

$953 $953

$1,021 $1,021

$0$1,094$0

$921$890$860$830

$986

$802$775

$890$860$830$802$775

$986

$11,463

$2,240

20 11

141312

Financial Analysis

876

cfmMBh

Replacement Life and Cost Summary

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



N/A

1,186.6 0.0MBtu/yr

Space Heating - Elec

Space CoolingSpace Heating - Gas


N/A1.3%

840,588 829,757 1.3%

1,186.6

Heat RejectionPumps

M-2 Dedicated Outside Air Unit



% Savings (+) / Loss (-)

SO2 (lb/yr) 3,325 3,283 1.3%NOX (lb/yr) 1,225 1,209 1.3%


CO2 (lb/yr)


Energy End-UseLighting 0.0%

Proposed Energy Use



ProposedBase CaseEmissions

21 1%

Hot-Humid

MBtu/yr %

-5.3%

8.6%N/A

18 7-11.3

57.8

Mechanical

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

MBtu/yr

212.2

669.7

0.4

N/A

88 7 107 4

Base Case

0.4 0.0 0.0%

Individual Resource Calculations New Hotels

Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but including a dedicated outside

air unit. 223.5

611.9

HVAC Fans

840,588 829,757

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r



1.3%

2,129.8 27.8 1.3%N/A N/A N/A

-21.1%N/A N/A N/AN/A

-18.788.7 107.4

Assumptions

HVAC Fans

2,157.6

N/A

N/A

840,588 829,757

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,325

1,225

3,283

1,209

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,158 2,130

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$814

($5,708)

$966 $966

$0

($9,695)

Mechanical

$786

MBhtons

Immediate

N/A

N/A


Replace)Cash Flow

$902$0$872$842

Simple Payback


54

$0

Financial Table



$814


Resource

3

$934 $934$902$872

$0

21

6


$5,708



GalsthermskWh

N/AN/A

$0.0965

$0

$0$0$0

Capital Costs Savings Summary


IRR


00

8,147

0 $0$814


-12 ($5,490)121 $911


Yr.Unit Cost

$842

$5,708





$1,460$1,411

$1,317

$1,230

NPV $17,040

$0

$0

$1,460$1,411

$966

$1,148$1,109$1,072$1,035$1,000$966

3.50%6.00%

201918171615

$0 $1,564 $1,564$0 $1,512$1,512$0

$1,363$1,363$0Defined

20

2008

0%$0

5,709 $19,982

Financial Analysis


$5,708

20

cfmMBh

11

141312 $1,188 $1,188

$1,273 $1,273

$0

$0$0

$0

$0

$1,148

$1,317

$1,230

$0$0

$1,109$1,072$1,035$0

$0

$1,000

109876121 $911

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



VAV system with reheat used for all rooms. Cooling provided by water-cooled chiller with cooling tower.

Gas-fired boilers provide heating. No demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE construction for climate

zone 2.

13.2%


N/A

1,186.6 0.0MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %

1,186.6

968,180 840,588 13.2%

Heat RejectionPumpsSpace CoolingSpace Heating - Gas


Base CaseEmissions

M-2 Improved Ventilation Air Delivery: Demand Ventilation

Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but with demand ventilation.

1,225 13.2%

Environmental Impact AnalysisEnergy End-Use Benchmark Comparison

Energy End-UseLighting

897.0 25.3%

94 7 88 7 6 0

669.7 227.3

0.4 15.10.0%

291.3

CO2 (lb/yr)SO2 (lb/yr) 3,830 3,325 13.2%NOX (lb/yr) 1,410

97.4%

27.2%

15.5

N/A N/A

Proposed Energy Use


6 3%

Base Case

N/A


HVAC Fans



Mechanical

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

MBtu/yr

212.2 79.1968,180

840,5881,000,000

1,500,000

lb/y

r


13.2%

N/AAssumptions


2,485.1 2,157.6 327.5 13.2%N/A N/A N/A

94.7 88.7 6.0N/A N/A

6.3%HVAC FansN/A N/A

N/A

968,180840,588

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,830

1,410

3,325

1,225

0

2,000

4,000

6,000


g/yr


Proposed2,485

2,158

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Yr.

Financial Table

95,981

$0$0

$0$0

GalsthermskWh

N/AN/A

$0.0965Savings (+) /

Loss (-)


Replace)




MBhtons

1 $9,586$0

$00 $1353


Resource


0

Unit Cost

$0 $0

M-2

$11 38665

($41,802)

Improved Ventilation Air Delivery: Demand Ventilation



Cash Flow

$11 386$11,001$10,629$10,269

$9,586$9,922

($41,802) 4.2 yrs

22.9%

26.0%

$24

($42,000) $10,26934

$11,001$10,629

IRR$9,922

Simple Payback

2

0


$41,802

Mechanical

0 $0$9,262






$0$0 NPV

cfmMBh

$0

$11,784

3.50%6.00% $17,806

$17,204$17,806

2019

$0 $18,430 $18,430

$17,204$0

Defined20

2008

0%$0

11 $393

181716

$0

$0

$13,99620

$11,386

876

$13,522$13,065

$0$16,060$0

$0

$0$14,486

9

$13,522$13,996

$14,993

$16,623

$0

$16,060$15,517$15,517

$14,486

$16,623

$97,874

$13,065$12,623$12,196$11,784$11,386

15

11

141312

$24

Financial Analysis

Replacement Life and Cost Summary$12,623$12,196$0

$0

$14,993

$010

($41,802)

($100,000)

($50,000)

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





2.3%


N/A


1,186.6

840,588 821,303 2.3%



Base CaseEmissions

M-3 Heat Recovery


air unit and a ventilation heat recovery unit.

1,196 2.3%



669.7 12.0%

88 7 115 4 26 7

589.2 80.5

0.2 0.20.0%

212.2


50.0%

-2.1%

0.4

N/A N/A

Proposed Energy Use


30 1%

Base Case

N/A


HVAC Fans



Mechanical

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

MBtu/yr

216.7 -4.5

840,588 821,303

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


2.3%

N/AAssumptions


2,157.6 2,108.1 49.5 2.3%N/A N/A N/A

88.7 115.4 -26.7N/A N/A

-30.1%HVAC FansN/A N/A

N/A

840,588 821,303

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,325

1,225

3,249

1,196

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,158 2,108

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Yr.

Financial Table

14,507

$0$0

$0$0

GalsthermskWh

N/AN/A

$0.0965Savings (+) /

Loss (-)


Replace)




MBhtons

1 $1,449$0

$0-7 ($3,015)

166


Resource


0

Unit Cost

$0 $0

M-3

$1 72165

($40,597)

Heat Recovery



Cash Flow

$1 721$1,663$1,606$1,552

$1,449$1,500

($40,597) 20 yrs

3.6%

0.1%

$1 254

($64,337) $1,55234

$1,663$1,606

IRR$1,500

Simple Payback

2

0


$40,597

Mechanical

0 $0$1,400






$0$0 NPV

cfmMBh

$0

$1,781

3.50%6.00% $2,691

$2,600$2,691

2019

$0 $2,786 $2,786

$2,600$0

Defined20

2008

0%$0

7,286 $25,501166

181716

$0

$0

$2,11520

$1,721

876

$2,044$1,975

$0$2,427$0

$0

$0$2,189

9

$2,044$2,115

$2,266

$2,512

$0

$2,427$2,345$2,345

$2,189

$2,512

-$17,545

$1,975$1,908$1,843$1,781$1,721

15

11

141312

$1,254

Financial Analysis


$0

$2,266

$010

($40,597)

($45,000)($40,000)($35,000)($30,000)($25,000)($20,000)($15,000)($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





0.1%


N/A


1,186.6

840,588 839,848 0.1%



Base CaseEmissions

M-4 Economizer Modes

Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but with an enthalpy economizer.

1,223 0.1%



669.7 0.3%

88 7 88 7 0 0

667.8 1.9

0.4 0.00.0%

212.2


0.0%

0.0%

0.4

N/A N/A

Proposed Energy Use


0 0%

Base Case

N/A


HVAC Fans



Mechanical

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

MBtu/yr

212.2 0.0

840,588 839,848

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


0.1%

N/AAssumptions


2,157.6 2,155.7 1.9 0.1%N/A N/A N/A

88.7 88.7 0.0N/A N/A

0.0%HVAC FansN/A N/A

N/A

840,588 839,848

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,325

1,225

3,322

1,223

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,158 2,156

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Yr.

Financial Table

557

$0$0

$0$0

GalsthermskWh

N/AN/A

$0.0965Savings (+) /

Loss (-)


Replace)




MBhtons

1 $56$0

$00 $00


Resource


0

Unit Cost

$0 $0

M-4

$6665

($10,963)

Economizer Modes



Cash Flow

$66$64$62$60

$56$58

($10,963) > 20 yrs

0.5%

N/A

$0

($10,963) $6034

$64$62

IRR$58

Simple Payback

2

0


$10,963

Mechanical

0 $0$54






$0$0 NPV

cfmMBh

$0

$68

3.50%6.00% $103

$100$103

2019

$0 $107 $107

$100$0

Defined20

2008

0%$0

0 $00

181716

$0

$0

$8120

$66

876

$78$76

$0$93$0

$0

$0$84

9

$78$81

$87

$96

$0

$93$90$90

$84

$96

-$9,546

$76$73$71$68$66

15

11

141312

$0

Financial Analysis

Replacement Life and Cost Summary$73$71$0

$0

$87

$010

($10,963)

($11,500)

($11,000)

($10,500)

($10,000)

($9,500)

($9,000)

($8,500)0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



N/A216.7N/A

M-7 Guest Room Equipment Selection: Condensor Water Heat Pump

Baseline ASHRAE HVAC system: PTAC units used for all rooms. Air-cooled unitary cooling. Electric

resistance heating. Demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE construction for climate zone 2.

26.4%



Mechanical

0.0 0.0%

MBtu/yr

-61.7 -39.8%155.0

26.4%NOX (lb/yr) 1,804

1,153.2

0.3

Proposed ModificationsPTACs replaced by heat pumps. Condenser water

cooling. Electric resistance heating. Demand ventilation. Identical construction to Base Case. 683 9 126 7 557 2

29.8%

HVAC Fans

MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %1,186.6

0.0 0.0

1,186.6 0.0



N/A809.0 344.2

0.0%Space Heating - Elec 0.8 -0.5 -166.7%

81 5%

Base Case

N/A


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) CO2 (lb/yr) 1,238,519



4,900 3,6061,328 26.4%

SO2 (lb/yr)

Base CaseEmissions

911,572 26.4%

1,238,519

911,572

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

lb/y

r


N/A

N/A N/A

26.4%

ventilation. Identical construction to Base Case.

Assumptions

683.9 126.7 557.2HVAC Fans

3,179.0 2,339.8 839.2 26.4%N/A N/A N/A N/A

81.5%N/A N/A


1,238,519

911,572

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,900

1,804

3,606

1,328

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,179

2,340

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Financial Table

($145,387)$0




Resource$23,734

Annual Savings (+) / Loss (-)Unit Cost

Yr.Initial Marginal Cost


$145,387

$0$0$0


IRR

$29 175$0

43


2

$29 175

$0

00

6

0

245,945

($145,400)

$0

MBh

$0.0965

$28,188$27,235

tons

Capital Costs Savings Summary1

5

GalsthermskWh

N/AN/A

Mechanical

0

5.5 yrs

16.9%

19.4%

$24,564

Simple Payback

$26,314

$24,564$25,424



Replace)Cash Flow

$28,188$27,235

$20 $0 $0

($145,387)

$26,314

$24,564$0

$25,424






NPV$30,196$29,175

$0$0 $29,175

$33,479109876

($145,387)cfmMBh

$37,118$35,863 $35,863

$38,418 $38,418

$34,651

3.50%6.00%

Defined20

2008

0%$0

3 $110

2019181716

$0 $47,225 $47,225$45,628$44,085$42,594$41,154

$45,628$44,085$42,594

$0$0

$0

$0 $39,762$39,762

$214,692

$0

$0$37,118$0

$0

$0

$34,65120

$41,154$0

$33,479$32,347$31,253$30,196

15

11

141312

$2

Financial Analysis


$0

($200,000)($100,000)

$0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



N/A211.2N/A

M-7 Guest Room Equipment Selection: Fan Coil Units



19.5%



Mechanical

0.0 0.0%

MBtu/yr

-56.2 -36.3%155.0

19.5%NOX (lb/yr) 1,804

1,153.2

0.3

Proposed ModificationsPTACs replaced by fan coil units. Water-cooled chiller


50.3%

HVAC Fans


0.0 0.0

1,186.6 0.0



N/A573.6 579.6

0.0%Space Heating - Elec 0.3 0.0 0.0%

14 3%

Base Case

N/A


Proposed Energy Use





4,900 3,9421,452 19.5%

SO2 (lb/yr)

Base CaseEmissions

996,543 19.5%

1,238,519

996,543

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

lb/y

r


N/A

N/A N/A

19.5%


Assumptions

683.9 586.2 97.7HVAC Fans

3,179.0 2,557.9 621.1 19.5%N/A N/A N/A N/A

14.3%N/A N/A


1,238,519

996,543

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,900

1,804

3,942

1,452

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,179

2,558

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Financial Table

($133,667)$0




Resource$17,566




$133,667

$0$0$0


IRR

$21 593$0

43


2

$21 593

$0

00

6

0

182,026

($133,680)

$0

MBh

$0.0965

$20,862$20,157

tons


5

GalsthermskWh

N/AN/A

Mechanical

0

6.7 yrs

13.6%

15.6%

$18,180

Simple Payback

$19,475

$18,180$18,817



Replace)Cash Flow

$20,862$20,157

$20 $0 $0

($133,667)

$19,475

$18,180$0

$18,817






NPV$22,348$21,593

$0$0 $21,593

$24,778109876

($133,667)cfmMBh

$27,472$26,543 $26,543

$28,433 $28,433

$25,645

3.50%6.00%

Defined20

2008

0%$0

3 $110

2019181716

$0 $34,952 $34,952$33,770$32,628$31,524$30,458

$33,770$32,628$31,524

$0$0

$0

$0 $29,428$29,428

$134,306

$0

$0$27,472$0

$0

$0

$25,64520

$30,458$0

$24,778$23,940$23,130$22,348

15

11

141312

$2

Financial Analysis


$0

($200,000)

($100,000)

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



N/A123.9N/A

M-7 Guest Room Equipment Selection: Air Cooled VAV

Baseline ASHRAE HVAC system: Air-cooled PTAC units used for all rooms. Electric resistance heating.

Demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE construction for climate zone 2.

23.1%



Mechanical

0.0 0.0%

MBtu/yr

31.1 20.1%155.0

23.1%NOX (lb/yr) 1,804

1,153.2

0.3

Proposed ModificationsPTACs replaced by a VAV system. Air-cooled chiller


9.4%

HVAC Fans


0.0 0.0

1,186.6 0.0



N/A1,045.1 108.1

0.0%Space Heating - Elec 0.4 -0.1 -33.3%

87 0%

Base Case

N/A


Proposed Energy Use





4,900 3,7681,388 23.1%

SO2 (lb/yr)

Base CaseEmissions

952,441 23.1%

1,238,519

952,4411,000,000

1,500,000

lb/y

r


N/A

N/A N/A

23.1%


Assumptions

683.9 88.7 595.2HVAC Fans

3,179.0 2,444.7 734.3 23.1%N/A N/A N/A N/A

87.0%N/A N/A


1,238,519

952,441

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,900

1,804

3,768

1,388

0

2,000

4,000

6,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,179

2,445

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Financial Table

($164,030)$0




Resource$20,767




$164,030

$0$0$0


IRR

$25 528$0

43


2

$25 528

$0

00

6

0

215,202

($212,000)

$0

MBh

$0.0965

$24,665$23,831

tons


5

GalsthermskWh

N/AN/A

Mechanical

499

6.9 yrs

13.1%

15.0%

$21,494

Simple Payback

$23,025

$21,494$22,246



Replace)Cash Flow

$24,665$23,831

$3 7673 $1,440 $0

($164,030)

$23,025

$21,494$0

$22,246






NPV$26,421$25,528

$0$0 $25,528

$29,294109876

($164,030)cfmMBh

$32,479$31,380 $31,380

$33,615 $33,615

$30,319

3.50%6.00%

Defined20

2008

0%$0

12,218 $42,763499

2019181716

$0 $41,322 $41,322$39,925$38,574$37,270$36,010

$39,925$38,574$37,270

$0$0

$0

$0 $34,792$34,792

$153,124

$0

$0$32,479$0

$0

$0

$30,31920

$36,010$0

$29,294$28,303$27,346$26,421

15

11

141312

$3,767

Financial Analysis


$0

($200,000)

($100,000)

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



M-7 Guest Room Equipment Selection: Water Cooled VAV



32.1%

0.0%


N/A N/A

683 9 88 7 595 2

669.7 483.5 41.9%

0.4

SO2 (lb/yr) 4,900 3,325 32.1%NOX (lb/yr) 1,804 1,225 32.1%

CO2 (lb/yr) 1,238,519 840,588 32.1%

212.2 -57.2 -36.9%155.0HVAC Fans

PTACs replaced by a VAV system. Water-cooled chiller cooling. Electric resistance heating. Demand


Mechanical

0.0 0.0 0.0

1,186.6 0.0MBtu/yrMBtu/yr MBtu/yr %

1,186.6

Heat RejectionPumps N/A


Space Heating - Elec -0.1 -33.3%

87 0%


Base Case

N/A


Proposed Energy Use






1,153.2

0.3


1,238,519

840,588

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

lb/y

r


3,179.0 2,157.6 1,021.4N/A N/A

683.9 88.7 595.2

32.1%

HVAC FansN/A N/A N/A


N/A

N/A32.1%

N/A

87.0%N/A

AssumptionsTotalBase UtilitiesReceptacles

1,238,519

840,588

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,900

1,804

3,325

1,225

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,179

2,158

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





N/AN/A

$0.0965Unit Cost


Natural gasElectricity

00

MBhtons

432

Yr.

Financial Table Financial Results Summary

$28,887

0

$0


$0$0$0


($166,670)1


GalsthermskWh

$35 509$0

$32,027$30,944

$34,308$33,148$32,027

$29,898$30,944

Guest Room Equipment Selection: Water Cooled VAV

65

$29,898


Resource

Water & sewer

Savings (+) / Loss (-)299,343

New Hotels

Mechanical

Individual Resource Calculations Hot-Humid


5.2 yrs

17.9%

20.6%

3499 $3 767


Replace)Cash Flow

$35 509$0$34,308$33,148

$29,898

$166,670

$1,440

($214,640)

($166,670)


IRR

$0 $0 Simple Payback

$0

M-7





NPVcfmMBh

$40,747$39,369$38,038$36,752$35,5096

3.50%6.00%

Defined20

2008

0%$0

12,218 $42,763499 $3,767

Financial Analysis


$0

$55,534$53,657$51,842$50,089$48,395

$55,534$53,657$51,842

$39,369$38,038$0

$0

$36,752

201918171615

$0 $57,478 $57,478$0

$50,089

$35,509$0$0

$0

$0$45,177$0

$0

$0

$0

11

141312

$0

$0

$42,174

$48,395

$45,177

$42,174

$271,005

($166,670)

20 $43,650 $43,650

$46,759 $46,759

$40,74710987

($300,000)($200,000)($100,000)

$0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000 $800,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






2.1%

0.0%


N/A N/A

88 7 44 0 44 7

669.7 0.0 0.0%

0.4

SO2 (lb/yr) 3,325 3,256 2.1%NOX (lb/yr) 1,225 1,199 2.1%

CO2 (lb/yr) 840,588 823,173 2.1%

212.2 0.0 0.0%212.2HVAC Fans

As with Base Case, but with variable frequency drives (VFDs) used in VAV system.

Mechanical

0.0 0.0 0.0

1,186.6 0.0MBtu/yrMBtu/yr MBtu/yr %

1,186.6

Heat RejectionPumps N/A


Space Heating - Elec 0.0 0.0%

50 4%


Base Case

N/A


Proposed Energy Use






669.7

0.4


840,588 823,173

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


2,157.6 2,112.9 44.7N/A N/A

88.7 44.0 44.7

2.1%

HVAC FansN/A N/A N/A

N/A

N/A2.1%N/A

50.4%N/A

AssumptionsTotalBase UtilitiesReceptacles

840,588 823,173

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,325

1,225

3,256

1,199

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500


g/yr


Proposed

2,158 2,113

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





N/AN/A

$0.0965Unit Cost


Natural gasElectricity

00

MBhtons

432

Yr.


$1,264

0

$0


$0$0$0


($4,945)1


GalsthermskWh

$1 554$0

$1,402$1,354

$1,501$1,451$1,402

$1,308$1,354


65

$1,308


Resource

Water & sewer

Savings (+) / Loss (-)13,100

New Hotels

Mechanical

Individual Resource Calculations Hot-Humid


3.7 yrs

26.5%

29.7%

00 $0


Replace)Cash Flow

$1 554$0$1,501$1,451

$1,308

$4,945

$0

($4,945)

($4,945)


IRR

$0 $0 Simple Payback

$0

M-9





NPVcfmMBh

$1,783$1,723$1,665$1,608$1,5546

3.50%6.00%

Defined20

2008

0%$0

0 $00 $0

Financial Analysis


$0

$2,430$2,348$2,269$2,192$2,118

$2,430$2,348$2,269

$1,723$1,665$0

$0

$1,608

201918171615

$0 $2,515 $2,515$0

$2,192

$1,554$0$0

$0

$0$1,977$0

$0

$0

$0

11

141312

$0

$0

$1,846

$2,118

$1,977

$1,846

$14,076

($4,945)

20 $1,910 $1,910

$2,046 $2,046

$1,78310987

($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





Proposed Energy Use



MBtu/yr

0 0%212.2

Mechanical

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

As with Base Case, but with a water-cooled chiller and cooling tower.

Base Case



N/AProposed Modifications


11.7%

952,441 840,588 11.7%

669.7 375.4 35.9%

0.4 0.0 0.0%

N/A123.9

1,045.1N/A N/A

88 7 88 7 0 0HVAC Fans

0.4

VAV system with reheat used for all rooms. Cooling provided by air-cooled chiller. Electric resistance heating. Demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE

construction for climate zone 2.

11.7%

SO2 (lb/yr) 3,768 3,325 11.7%


M-12 Water Cooled Chiller


CO2 (lb/yr)


1,186.6


NOX (lb/yr) 1,388 1,225

Heat RejectionPumps

-88.3 -71.3%

952,441840,588

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

lb/y

r



0.0%N/A N/A N/A

Assumptions287.1 11.7%

N/A N/A N/A2,157.6

88.7 88.7 0.0HVAC Fans

11.7%

2,444.7N/A

N/A

N/A

952,441840,588

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,768

1,388

3,325

1,225

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000


g/yr


Proposed2,445

2,158

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







Loss (-)

($10,000)

($10,000)

$8,404

$10,000

$0$9,002

$9,644$9,317$9,002

$9,644

$0

$9 981$0

$8,698

$0

84,141

0

84.0%

87.5%

Simple Payback$0

0 $0

$0$8,120


43

5


$0

$9,317

$8,404$8,698

($10,000)$8,404

6$0 $9 981

Mechanical

$0$0

2



IRR

MBhtons


Resource


0

Yr.

Financial Table

GalsthermskWh

N/AN/A

$0.0965Unit Cost


00


1.2 yrs1








$110,938

18171615

$14,079$14,079

$0$0

$15,082$14,572

$15,082$14,572

$13,603$0 $13,603

$12,269 $12,269

$13,143 $13,143$12,699$0

$0

$0

$11,854

$0

$11,066$10,692$10,330$9,981

3.50%6.00%

2019

$0 $16,156 $16,156$0 $15,610$15,610

0%$0

0 $0

11

0

$11,453$11,066$10,692$0

$0

$10,330

$0$12,699

($10,000)

20

$0$0

$11,453

20

2008

$11,854109876$0

Financial Analysis


Defined

14

$9,981

1312

$0

NPVcfmMBh

($50,000)

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





Proposed Energy Use



MBtu/yr

0 8%205.2

Mechanical

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

As with Base Case, but with an evaporative cooling system.

Base Case





1.2%

840,588 830,264 1.2%

650.9 18.8 2.8%

0.4 0.0 0.0%

N/A212.2

669.7N/A N/A

88 7 88 0 0 7HVAC Fans

0.4



1.2%

SO2 (lb/yr) 3,325 3,285 1.2%


M-13 Evaporative Cooling


CO2 (lb/yr)


1,186.6


NOX (lb/yr) 1,225 1,210

Heat RejectionPumps

7.0 3.3%

840,588 830,264

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r



0.8%N/A N/A N/A

Assumptions26.5 1.2%

N/A N/A N/A2,131.1

88.7 88.0 0.7HVAC Fans

1.2%

2,157.6N/A

N/A

N/A

840,588 830,264

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,325

1,225

3,285

1,210

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500


g/yr


Proposed

2,158 2,131

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







Loss (-)

($24,200)

($24,200)

$776

$24,200

$0$831

$890$860$831

$890

$0

$921$0

$803

$0

7,766

0

3.2%

N/A

Simple Payback$0

0 $0

$0$749


43

5


$0

$860

$776$803

($24,200)$776

6$0 $921

Mechanical

$0$0

2



IRR

MBhtons


Resource


0

Yr.

Financial Table

GalsthermskWh

N/AN/A

$0.0965Unit Cost


00


> 20 yrs1








-$11,720

18171615

$1,300$1,300

$0$0

$1,392$1,345

$1,392$1,345

$1,256$0 $1,256

$1,132 $1,132

$1,213 $1,213$1,172$0

$0

$0

$1,094

$0

$1,021$987$954$921

3.50%6.00%

2019

$0 $1,491 $1,491$0 $1,441$1,441

0%$0

0 $0

11

0

$1,057$1,021$987$0

$0

$954

$0$1,172

($24,200)

20

$0$0

$1,057

20

2008

$1,094109876$0

Financial Analysis


Defined

14

$921

1312

$0

NPVcfmMBh

($30,000)

($25,000)

($20,000)

($15,000)

($10,000)

($5,000)

$0 0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





Proposed Energy Use



MBtu/yr

0 0%212.2

Mechanical

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

As with Base Case, but including a thermal storage unit.

Base Case





0.0%

840,588 840,588 0.0%

669.7 0.0 0.0%

0.4 0.0 0.0%

N/A212.2

669.7N/A N/A

88 7 88 7 0 0HVAC Fans

0.4



0.0%

SO2 (lb/yr) 3,325 3,325 0.0%


M-13 Thermal Storage


CO2 (lb/yr)


1,186.6


NOX (lb/yr) 1,225 1,225

Heat RejectionPumps

0.0 0.0%

840,588 840,588

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r



0.0%N/A N/A N/A

Assumptions0.0 0.0%

N/A N/A N/A2,157.6

88.7 88.7 0.0HVAC Fans

0.0%

2,157.6N/A

N/A

N/A

840,588 840,588

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,325

1,225

3,325

1,225

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500


g/yr


Proposed

2,158 2,158

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







Loss (-)

($50,000)

($32,626)

$6,314

$32,626

$0$6,763

$7,245$7,000$6,763

$7,245

$0

$7 498$0

$6,534

$0

0

0

19.4%

22.1%

Simple Payback$0

39 $17,375

$0$6,100


43

5


$0

$7,000

$6,314$6,534

($32,626)$6,314

6$0 $7 498

Mechanical

$0$0

2



IRR

MBhtons


Resource


0

Yr.

Financial Table

GalsthermskWh

N/AN/A

$0.0965Unit Cost


00


4.9 yrs1








$59,653

18171615

$10,577$10,577

$0$0

$11,331$10,948

$11,331$10,948

$10,220$0 $10,220

$9,218 $9,218

$9,874 $9,874$9,540$0

$0

$0

$8,906

$0

$8,314$8,033$7,761$7,498

3.50%6.00%

2019

$0 $12,138 $12,138$0 $11,727$11,727

0%$0

0 $0

11

0

$8,605$8,314$8,033$0

$0

$7,761

$0$9,540

($32,626)

20

$0$0

$8,605

20

2008

$8,906109876$0

Financial Analysis


Defined

14

$7,498

1312

$0

NPVcfmMBh

($60,000)($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Arid



Energy Modelling Results Summary New Hotels Arid

Base Case: PTAC units with air-cooled unitary cooling and electric resistance heating. M-7 Condenser Water Heat Pump 5.9 yrs 32.5% 17.9% 15.6% $187,558

NPV(Over 20 Years)

yrs % % % $

The table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modeled new hotel in the arid climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy savings cost reductions. Due to different modeling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The colour key contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.


AridPhoenix, AR

Simple Payback CO2 Reductions

M-7 Air Cooled VAV 8.3 yrs 27.0% 11.9% 10.7% $103,401M-7 Fan Coil Units 10 yrs 18.3% 10.5% 9.6%

IRR First Year Yield On Marginal Cost

Base Case: Best performing HVAC system: water cooled VAV systemB-1 Optimise Glazing > 20 yrs 0.6% N/A 0.5% ($45,370)

$185,837

Base Case: Identical VAV system but without fan-powered parallel terminal units. Note: FPPs not modelled in hot climates.M-7 Air Cooled VAV with FPP N/AM-7 Water Cooled VAV with FPP

M-7 Water Cooled VAV 6.6 yrs 35.5% 15.9% 13.8%

$57,117

$9,733M-2 Dedicated outside air unit 19 yrs 0.8% 1.0% 4.0% ($3,528)B-3 Optimise Building Insulation Immediate 1.5% N/A N/A

$134,248M-3 Heat Recovery Never -1.0% N/A N/A ($67,484)M-2 Demand Ventilation 3.4 yrs 21.2% 32.3% 29.0%

($2,992)M-9 Variable Frequency Drives 5.3 yrs 1.9% 20.3% 17.7% $7,875M-4 Economiser Modes 17 yrs 1.1% 2.5% 4.7%

$75,493M-13 Evaporative Cooling 12 yrs 4.0% 7.3% 7.4% $2,843M-12 Water-Cooled Chiller 1.7 yrs 11.6% 62.8% 59.3%

$31,551M-13 Thermal Storage 7 yrs 0.0% 14.8% 12.9%




B-1 Optimize GlazingBuilding Envelope


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Lighting


CO2 (lb/yr) 721,762 717,749 0.6%MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %

0.0%Space Cooling 396.1 396.9 -0.8 -0.2%Pumps N/A N/A

70.9 61.0 9.9 14.0%1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%

SO2 (lb/yr) 2,855 2,839 0.6%1,051 1,046 0.6%NOX (lb/yr)

1.3%HVAC Fans 74 7 75 1 0 4 0 5%



AridIndividual Resource Calculations New Hotels


Heat Rejection 124.3 122.7 1.6N/A N/A

0.6%

Space Heating - Gas 0.0 0.0 0.0

721,762 717,749

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


HVAC Fans 74.7 75.1 -0.4

Base Utilities N/A N/A N/A N/A

-0.5%Receptacles N/A N/A N/A N/A

Total 1,852.6 1,842.3 10.3 0.6%

0.6%

N/A

0.5.

Assumptions

721,762 717,749

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,855

1,051

2,839

1,046

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

1,853 1,842

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





> 20 yrs


Building Envelope

Natural gas 0 therms N/A $0Electricity 3,019 kWh Initial Annual Savings

$51,896

$250

B-1

$0 ($51,896) Simple Payback



Replace)Cash Flow


($51,896)

$2682 $0

4 $0 $278 $278 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost

$298

0.5%

$259 $259 IRR

55 MBh $411 6 $0 $298

3 $0 $268

tons $2,340 5 $0 $2875

N/ACapital Costs Savings Summary($63,866)

$287

Annual Resource Cost Summary Financial Table

1 $0 $250 $250Water & sewer 0 Gals N/A $0 0



Loss (-)Yr.

Individual Resource Calculations New Hotels Arid

$0.0802 $242

Optimize Glazing





7$298 NPV55 MBh $411 6 $0 $298$308

8 $0 $319 $319

-$45,370


$379

$40514 $0 $392 $39215 $0

20 18 $0 $450 $450Defined

2008 16 $0 $420 $42017 $0 $434 $434

6.00% 19 $0 $465 $4653.50% 20 $0 $482 $482

0% 12 $0 $366 $366

$0 $308

Financial Analysis

($51,896)2,634 cfm $9,219

$330 $3309 $0

$405

$0 13 $0 $379

($54,000)

($52,000)

($50,000)

($48,000)

($46,000)

($44,000)

($42,000)

($40,000)0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





B-3 Optimize Building InsulationBuilding Envelope


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 1.5%


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%


SO2 (g/yr) 2,855 2,812 1.5%CO2 (lb/yr) 721,762 710,931

1,051 1,036 1.5%NOX (g/yr)


1.5%


5.1%

Space Cooling 396.1 387.1 9.0 2.3%Pumps N/A N/A


0 8%HVAC Fans 74 7 74 1 0 6


reduced to 0.06.


721,762 710,931

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


0.8%Receptacles N/A N/A N/A N/A

Total 1,852.6 1,824.8 27.8

HVAC Fans 74.7 74.1 0.6


1.5%

1.5%Assumptions

N/A

721,762 710,931

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,855

1,051

2,812

1,036

0

2,000

4,000

SO2 (g/yr) NOX (g/yr)

g/yr


Proposed

1,853 1,825

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







Electricity 8,147 kWh $0.0802 $653



Replace)


Building Envelope

Natural gas 0 therms N/A $0N/A $0 0 $52



Loss (-)Yr.

Water & sewer 0 Gals

$676



$803

4 $0 $750 $750 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost N/A

$676

$803$776

($11,500)

6 tons $2,745 5 $0 $77639 MBh $291 6 $0

2 $0 $700$724$700




IRR

1 $0 $676

N/A

$0 $52

3 $0 $724





$803$831

$9,733$803 NPV

$860

14 $0 $1,057 $1,057

20 11 $0 $954 $954

$1,022 $1,022

Defined 17 $0 $1,172 $1,172

Financial Analysis 15 $0 $1,094 $1,0942008 16 $0 $1,133 $1,133

6.00% 19 $0 $1,256 $1,2563.50% 20 $0 $1,300 $1,300

0% 12 $0

$890 $890

$0

9

20 18 $0

$921 $921$0

8 $0 $860

39 MBh $291 6 $0

$522,433 cfm $8,516

$987 $987

$1,213 $1,213

$0 13 $0

Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0

7 $831

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






zone 3.

Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 21.2%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (g/yr) 3,624 2,855 21.2%CO2 (lb/yr) 916,052 721,762

1,335 1,051 21.2%NOX (g/yr)


21.2%


37.8%



HVAC Fans 92 5 74 7 17 8


air unit.


19 2%

916,052

721,762

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


N/A N/A

Total 2,351.3 1,852.6 498.7

HVAC Fans 92.5 74.7 17.8

N/AAssumptions

21.2%

Base Utilities N/A N/A N/A N/A21.2%

19.2%Receptacles N/A N/A

916,052

721,762

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,624

1,335

2,855

1,051

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,351

1,853

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$0Electricity 146,155 kWh $0.0802 $11,718

Yr.Costs



Natural gas 0 therms N/A

Cash FlowInitial Annual Savings


$12,128

Gals N/A $0 0

IRR

$0 ($41,840) Simple Payback 3.4 yrs

3 $0 $12,992 $12,9922 $0

($41,840)

4 $0 $13,447 $13,447 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost

$14 4053 MBh $25 6 $0 $14 405tons $135 5 $0 $13,917 $13,917

($42,000)

0




(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $12,128 $12,128

29.0%

32.3%$12,553 $12,553

Water & sewer 0




Unit CostAnnual Savings (+) /

Loss (-)

Mechanical M-2





7$14,405 NPV

8 $0 $15,431 $15,431

$134,2483 MBh $25 6 $0 $14,405$0 $14,909

$15,971 $15,971


14 $0 $18,968 $18,968

Defined $0 $21,030 $21,0302008 16 $0 $20,319 $20,319


6.00% 19 $0 $22,528 $22,5283.50% 20 $0 $23,317 $23,317

0% 12 $0 $17,707

20 18 $0

($41,840)0 cfm $0 $14,909

9 $0

$17,707

17$21,766 $21,766

$0 13 $0 $18,327 $18,327

($100,000)($50,000)

$0 $50,000

$100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




air unit.

HVAC Fans 74 7 75 1 0 4 0 5%128.3 -4.0 -3.2%

-2.7%PumpsSpace Cooling 396.1 406.9 -10.8


N/A N/A N/A N/A0.8%



1,051 1,043 0.8%NOX (g/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 721,762 715,762 0.8%


SO2 (g/yr) 2,855 2,832 0.8%


Arid

Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use






Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%


Heat Rejection 124.3

721,762 715,762

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


Assumptions

0.8%

N/A

0.8%Total 1,852.6 1,837.2 15.4

HVAC Fans 74.7 75.1 -0.4 -0.5%Receptacles N/A N/A N/A N/ABase Utilities N/A N/A N/A N/A

721,762 715,762

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,855

1,051

2,832

1,043

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

1,853 1,837

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





Dedicated Outside Air Unit

1 $0 $375 $375Capital Costs Savings Summary

-2 tons ($1,035) 5 $0 $430

Water & sewer 0 Gals N/A $0

($9,695) 3 $0 $401 $4012 $0 $388 $388 IRR

$4304.0%4

0

Cash Flow

173 $1 304 6 $0 $445 $445MBh

($9,426)

$0 $415 $415 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost

$0 ($9,426) Simple Payback 19 yrs

1.0%


$375



(+) / Loss (-)

M-2

Initial Annual SavingskWh $0.0802 $362Unit Cost


Mechanical

Natural gas 0 therms N/A $0Electricity 4,513

Yr.Costs









$0 $460

9

0% 12 $0 $547 $547

19 $0 $696 $696

15 $0 $606 $606

3.50% 20 $0 $720 $7206.00%

Defined 17 $0 $649 $64920 18 $0 $672 $672

2008 16 $0 $627 $627Financial Analysis

$0 13 $0 $566 $56614 $0 $586 $586


173 $1,304 6 $0

($9,426)0 cfm $0

$0 $493 $493

7

20 11 $0 $528 $528

$445 $445 NPV

8 $0 $476 $476

-$3,528$460

MBh

($10,000)

($8,000)

($6,000)

($4,000)

($2,000)

$0

$2,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) -1.0%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%

M-3 Heat Recovery


SO2 (g/yr) 2,855 2,883 -1.0%CO2 (lb/yr) 721,762 728,736

1,051 1,062 -1.0%NOX (g/yr)

Heat Rejection 124.3 131.1 -6.8N/A N/A

-1.0%


-5.5%

Space Cooling 396.1 421.2 -25.1 -6.3%Pumps N/A N/A


HVAC Fans 74 7 109 9 35 2


air unit and a ventilation heat recovery unit.


47 1%

721,762 728,736

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


N/A N/A

Total 1,852.6 1,870.5 -17.9

HVAC Fans 74.7 109.9 -35.2

N/AAssumptions

-1.0%

Base Utilities N/A N/A N/A N/A-1.0%

-47.1%Receptacles N/A N/A

721,762 728,736

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,855

1,051

2,883

1,062

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

1,853 1,871

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$0Electricity -5,246 kWh $0.0802 ($421)

Yr.Costs






($435)

Gals N/A $0 0

IRR

$0 ($64,923) Simple Payback Never

3 $0 ($466) ($466)2 $0

($64,923)

4 $0 ($483) ($483) First Year Yield On Marginal Cost

($517)173 MBh $1 304 6 $0 ($517)tons ($1,890) 5 $0 ($500) ($500)

($64,337)

-4




(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 ($435) ($435)

N/A

N/A($451) ($451)

Water & sewer 0


Heat Recovery



Loss (-)

Mechanical M-3





7($517) NPV

8 $0 ($554) ($554)

-$67,484173 MBh $1,304 6 $0 ($517)$0 ($535)

($573) ($573)

20 11 $0 ($614) ($614)Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0 ($593) ($593)

14 $0 ($681) ($681)

Defined $0 ($755) ($755)2008 16 $0 ($729) ($729)

Financial Analysis 15 $0 ($705) ($705)

6.00% 19 $0 ($809) ($809)3.50% 20 $0 ($837) ($837)

0% 12 $0 ($636)

20 18 $0

($64,923)0 cfm $0 ($535)

9 $0

($636)

17($781) ($781)

$0 13 $0 ($658) ($658)

($80,000)($78,000)($76,000)($74,000)($72,000)($70,000)($68,000)($66,000)($64,000)($62,000)($60,000)($58,000)

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (g/yr) 2,855 2,823 1.1%CO2 (lb/yr) 721,762 713,541

1,051 1,039 1.1%NOX (g/yr)


1.1%


3.2%



HVAC Fans 74 7 74 7 0 0



0 0%

721,762 713,541

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


N/A N/A

Total 1,852.6 1,831.5 21.1

HVAC Fans 74.7 74.7 0.0

N/AAssumptions

1.1%



721,762 713,541

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,855

1,051

2,823

1,039

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

1,853 1,832

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$0Electricity 6,184 kWh $0.0802 $496

Yr.Costs






$513

Gals N/A $0 0

IRR


3 $0 $550 $5502 $0

($10,963)


$6090 MBh $0 6 $0 $609tons $0 5 $0 $589 $589

($10,963)

0




(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $513 $513

4.7%

2.5%$531 $531

Water & sewer 0


Economizer Modes



Loss (-)

Mechanical M-4





7$609 NPV

8 $0 $653 $653

-$2,9920 MBh $0 6 $0 $609$0 $631

$676 $676


14 $0 $803 $803

Defined $0 $890 $8902008 16 $0 $860 $860

Financial Analysis 15 $0 $831 $831

6.00% 19 $0 $953 $9533.50% 20 $0 $987 $987

0% 12 $0 $749

20 18 $0

($10,963)0 cfm $0 $631

9 $0

$749

17$921 $921

$0 13 $0 $775 $775

($12,000)($10,000)($8,000)($6,000)($4,000)($2,000)

$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 32.5%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (g/yr) 4,426 2,990 32.5%CO2 (lb/yr) 1,118,875 755,696

1,630 1,101 32.5%NOX (g/yr)


32.5%


-8.3%



HVAC Fans 636 5 95 7 540 8


cooling. Electric resistance heating. Demand ventilation. Identical construction to Base Case.


85 0%

1,118,875

755,6961,000,000

1,500,000

lb/y

r


N/A N/A

Total 2,871.9 1,939.7 932.2

HVAC Fans 636.5 95.7 540.8

N/A


Assumptions

32.5%



1,118,875

755,696

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,426

1,630

2,990

1,101

0

2,000

4,000

6,000


g/yr


Proposed2,872

1,940

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$0Electricity 273,201 kWh $0.0802 $21,904

Yr.Costs






$22,671

Gals N/A $0 0

IRR


3 $0 $24,286 $24,2862 $0

($145,400)


$26 9260 MBh $0 6 $0 $26 926tons $0 5 $0 $26,015 $26,015

($145,400)

0




(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $22,671 $22,671

15.6%

17.9%$23,464 $23,464

Water & sewer 0


Guest Room Equipment Selection: Condensor Water Heat Pump



Loss (-)

Mechanical M-7





7$26,926 NPV

8 $0 $28,844 $28,844

$187,5580 MBh $0 6 $0 $26,926$0 $27,868

$29,853 $29,853


14 $0 $35,456 $35,456

Defined $0 $39,311 $39,3112008 16 $0 $37,982 $37,982


6.00% 19 $0 $42,111 $42,1113.50% 20 $0 $43,585 $43,585

0% 12 $0 $33,099

20 18 $0

($145,400)0 cfm $0 $27,868

9 $0

$33,099

17$40,687 $40,687

$0 13 $0 $34,257 $34,257

($200,000)($100,000)

$0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 18.3%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (g/yr) 4,426 3,616 18.3%CO2 (lb/yr) 1,118,875 913,949

1,630 1,331 18.3%NOX (g/yr)


18.3%


-19.7%



HVAC Fans 636 5 545 6 90 9

Proposed ModificationsPTACs replaced by fan coil units. Water-cooled chiller



14 3%

1,118,875913,9491,000,000

1,500,000

lb/y

r


N/A N/A

Total 2,871.9 2,345.9 526.0

HVAC Fans 636.5 545.6 90.9

N/A


Assumptions

18.3%



1,118,875913,949

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,426

1,630

3,616

1,331

0

2,000

4,000

6,000


g/yr


Proposed2,872

2,346

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$0Electricity 154,155 kWh $0.0802 $12,360

Yr.Costs






$12,792

Gals N/A $0 0

IRR


3 $0 $13,703 $13,7032 $0

($133,680)


$15 1930 MBh $0 6 $0 $15 193tons $0 5 $0 $14,679 $14,679

($133,680)

0




(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $12,792 $12,792

9.6%

10.5%$13,240 $13,240

Water & sewer 0


Guest Room Equipment Selection: Fan Coil Units



Loss (-)

Mechanical M-7





7$15,193 NPV

8 $0 $16,275 $16,275

$57,1170 MBh $0 6 $0 $15,193$0 $15,725

$16,845 $16,845


14 $0 $20,006 $20,006

Defined $0 $22,181 $22,1812008 16 $0 $21,431 $21,431


6.00% 19 $0 $23,761 $23,7613.50% 20 $0 $24,593 $24,593

0% 12 $0 $18,676

20 18 $0

($133,680)0 cfm $0 $15,725

9 $0

$18,676

17$22,958 $22,958

$0 13 $0 $19,330 $19,330

($200,000)($150,000)($100,000)

($50,000)$0

$50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




Baseline ASHRAE HVAC system: Air-cooled PTAC units used for all rooms. Electric resistance heating. Demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE construction

for climate zone 3.

Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 27.0%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (g/yr) 4,426 3,231 27.0%CO2 (lb/yr) 1,118,875 816,745

1,630 1,190 27.0%NOX (g/yr)


27.0%


30.1%



HVAC Fans 636 5 74 7 561 8




88 3%

1,118,875

816,7451,000,000

1,500,000

lb/y

r


N/A N/A

Total 2,871.9 2,096.4 775.5

HVAC Fans 636.5 74.7 561.8

N/A


Assumptions

27.0%



1,118,875

816,745

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,426

1,630

3,231

1,190

0

2,000

4,000

6,000


g/yr


Proposed2,872

2,096

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$0Electricity 227,277 kWh $0.0802 $18,222

Yr.Costs






$18,860

Gals N/A $0 0

IRR


3 $0 $20,203 $20,2032 $0

($176,746)


$22 400389 MBh $2 938 6 $0 $22 400tons $4,095 5 $0 $21,642 $21,642

($212,000)

9




(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $18,860 $18,860

10.7%

11.9%$19,520 $19,520

Water & sewer 0


Guest Room Equipment Selection: Air Cooled VAV



Loss (-)

Mechanical M-7





7$22,400 NPV

8 $0 $23,995 $23,995

$103,401389 MBh $2,938 6 $0 $22,400$0 $23,184

$24,835 $24,835


14 $0 $29,496 $29,496

Defined $0 $32,703 $32,7032008 16 $0 $31,597 $31,597


6.00% 19 $0 $35,032 $35,0323.50% 20 $0 $36,258 $36,258

0% 12 $0 $27,535

20 18 $0

($176,746)8,063 cfm $28,221 $23,184

9 $0

$27,535

17$33,848 $33,848

$0 13 $0 $28,499 $28,499

($300,000)

($200,000)

($100,000)

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 35.5%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (g/yr) 4,426 2,855 35.5%CO2 (lb/yr) 1,118,875 721,762

1,630 1,051 35.5%NOX (g/yr)


35.5%


-9.6%



HVAC Fans 636 5 74 7 561 8

Proposed ModificationsPTACs replaced by a VAV system. Water-cooled

chiller cooling. Electric resistance heating. Demand ventilation. Identical construction to Base Case.


88 3%

1,118,875

721,7621,000,000

1,500,000

lb/y

r


N/A N/A

Total 2,871.9 1,852.6 1,019.3

HVAC Fans 636.5 74.7 561.8

N/A


Assumptions

35.5%



1,118,875

721,762

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,426

1,630

2,855

1,051

0

2,000

4,000

6,000


g/yr


Proposed2,872

1,853

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$0Electricity 298,727 kWh $0.0802 $23,951

Yr.Costs






$24,789

Gals N/A $0 0

IRR


3 $0 $26,555 $26,5552 $0

($179,386)


$29 442389 MBh $2 938 6 $0 $29 442tons $4,095 5 $0 $28,446 $28,446

($214,640)

9




(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $24,789 $24,789

13.8%

15.9%$25,657 $25,657

Water & sewer 0





Loss (-)

Mechanical M-7





7$29,442 NPV

8 $0 $31,539 $31,539

$185,837389 MBh $2,938 6 $0 $29,442$0 $30,472

$32,643 $32,643


14 $0 $38,769 $38,769

Defined $0 $42,984 $42,9842008 16 $0 $41,530 $41,530


6.00% 19 $0 $46,046 $46,0463.50% 20 $0 $47,657 $47,657

0% 12 $0 $36,191

20 18 $0

($179,386)8,063 cfm $28,221 $30,472

9 $0

$36,191

17$44,488 $44,488

$0 13 $0 $37,458 $37,458

($300,000)($200,000)($100,000)

$0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (g/yr) 2,855 2,800 1.9%CO2 (lb/yr) 721,762 707,737

1,051 1,031 1.9%NOX (g/yr)


1.9%


0.0%



HVAC Fans 74 7 38 7 36 0

Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but with variable frequency drives

(VFDs) used in VAV system.


48 2%

721,762 707,737

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


N/A N/A

Total 1,852.6 1,816.6 36.0

HVAC Fans 74.7 38.7 36.0

N/AAssumptions

1.9%



721,762 707,737

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,855

1,051

2,800

1,031

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

1,853 1,817

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$0Electricity 10,551 kWh $0.0802 $846

Yr.Costs






$876

Gals N/A $0 0

IRR


3 $0 $938 $9382 $0

($4,945)


$1 0400 MBh $0 6 $0 $1 040tons $0 5 $0 $1,005 $1,005

($4,945)

0




(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $876 $876

17.7%

20.3%$906 $906

Water & sewer 0





Loss (-)

Mechanical M-9





7$1,040 NPV

8 $0 $1,114 $1,114

$7,8750 MBh $0 6 $0 $1,040$0 $1,076

$1,153 $1,153


14 $0 $1,369 $1,369

Defined $0 $1,518 $1,5182008 16 $0 $1,467 $1,467


6.00% 19 $0 $1,626 $1,6263.50% 20 $0 $1,683 $1,683

0% 12 $0 $1,278

20 18 $0

($4,945)0 cfm $0 $1,076

9 $0

$1,278

17$1,571 $1,571

$0 13 $0 $1,323 $1,323

($10,000)

($5,000)

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but with a water-cooled chiller and

cooling tower.

HVAC Fans 74 7 74 7 0 0 0 0%124.3 -45.0 -56.7%

42.2%PumpsSpace Cooling 684.9 396.1 288.8


N/A N/A N/A N/A11.6%



1,190 1,051 11.6%NOX (g/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 816,745 721,762 11.6%


SO2 (g/yr) 3,231 2,855 11.6%


Arid

Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




VAV system with reheat used for all rooms. Cooling provided by air-cooled chiller. Electric resistance heating. Demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%


Heat Rejection 79.3

816,745721,762

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


Assumptions

11.6%

N/A

11.6%Total 2,096.4 1,852.6 243.8

HVAC Fans 74.7 74.7 0.0 0.0%Receptacles N/A N/A N/A N/ABase Utilities N/A N/A N/A N/A

816,745721,762

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


3,231

1,190

2,855

1,051

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,0961,853

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





Water Cooled Chiller

1 $0 $5,929 $5,929Capital Costs Savings Summary

0 tons $0 5 $0 $6,804


($10,000) 3 $0 $6,351 $6,3512 $0 $6,137 $6,137 IRR

$6,80459.3%4

0

Cash Flow

0 $0 6 $0 $7 042 $7 042MBh

($10,000)

$0 $6,574 $6,574 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost


62.8%


$5,929



(+) / Loss (-)

M-12

Initial Annual SavingskWh $0.0802 $5,729Unit Cost


Mechanical


Yr.Costs









$0 $7,288

9

0% 12 $0 $8,656 $8,656

19 $0 $11,013 $11,013

15 $0 $9,598 $9,598

3.50% 20 $0 $11,399 $11,3996.00%

Defined 17 $0 $10,281 $10,28120 18 $0 $10,641 $10,641

2008 16 $0 $9,933 $9,933Financial Analysis

$0 13 $0 $8,959 $8,95914 $0 $9,273 $9,273


0 $0 6 $0

($10,000)0 cfm $0

$0 $7,808 $7,808

7

20 11 $0 $8,364 $8,364

$7,042 $7,042 NPV

8 $0 $7,544 $7,544

$75,493$7,288

MBh

($20,000)$0

$20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000 $180,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but with an evaporative cooling

system.

HVAC Fans 74 7 72 6 2 1 2 8%106.7 17.6 14.2%



N/A N/A N/A N/A4.0%



1,051 1,010 4.0%NOX (g/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 721,762 693,049 4.0%


SO2 (g/yr) 2,855 2,742 4.0%


Arid

Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use






Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



721,762 693,049

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


Assumptions

4.0%

N/A

4.0%Total 1,852.6 1,778.9 73.7


721,762 693,049

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,855

1,051

2,742

1,010

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

1,853 1,779

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





Evaporative Cooling


0 tons $0 5 $0 $2,057


($24,200) 3 $0 $1,920 $1,9202 $0 $1,855 $1,855 IRR

$2,0577.4%4

0

Cash Flow

0 $0 6 $0 $2 129 $2 129MBh

($24,200)



7.3%


$1,792



(+) / Loss (-)

M-13



Mechanical


Yr.Costs









$0 $2,203

9

0% 12 $0 $2,617 $2,617

19 $0 $3,329 $3,329

15 $0 $2,901 $2,901

3.50% 20 $0 $3,446 $3,4466.00%

Defined 17 $0 $3,108 $3,10820 18 $0 $3,217 $3,217


$0 13 $0 $2,708 $2,70814 $0 $2,803 $2,803


0 $0 6 $0

($24,200)0 cfm $0

$0 $2,360 $2,360

7

20 11 $0 $2,528 $2,528

$2,129 $2,129 NPV

8 $0 $2,280 $2,280

$2,843$2,203

MBh

($30,000)

($20,000)

($10,000)

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but including a thermal storage

unit.

HVAC Fans 74 7 74 7 0 0 0 0%124.3 0.0 0.0%



N/A N/A N/A N/A0.0%



1,051 1,051 0.0%NOX (g/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 721,762 721,762 0.0%


SO2 (g/yr) 2,855 2,855 0.0%


Arid

Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use






Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



721,762 721,762

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


Assumptions

0.0%

N/A

0.0%Total 1,852.6 1,852.6 0.0


721,762 721,762

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,855

1,051

2,855

1,051

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

1,853 1,853

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





Thermal Storage


33 tons $15,039 5 $0 $5,170


($50,000) 3 $0 $4,826 $4,8262 $0 $4,663 $4,663 IRR

$5,17012.9%4

0

Cash Flow

0 $0 6 $0 $5 351 $5 351MBh

($34,961)



14.8%


$4,505



(+) / Loss (-)

M-13



Mechanical

Natural gas 0 therms N/A $0Electricity 0

Yr.Costs









$0 $5,538

9

0% 12 $0 $6,578 $6,578

19 $0 $8,369 $8,369

15 $0 $7,293 $7,293

3.50% 20 $0 $8,662 $8,6626.00%

Defined 17 $0 $7,812 $7,81220 18 $0 $8,086 $8,086


$0 13 $0 $6,808 $6,80814 $0 $7,046 $7,046


0 $0 6 $0

($34,961)0 cfm $0

$0 $5,933 $5,933

7

20 11 $0 $6,355 $6,355

$5,351 $5,351 NPV

8 $0 $5,732 $5,732

$31,551$5,538

MBh

($60,000)($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Temperate



19.4% $67,307$3,240

M-13 Thermal Storage 4.9 yrs 0.0% 22.2%M-13 Evaporative Cooling 12 yrs 2.2% 7.5% 7.5%

$15,938M-12 Water-Cooled Chiller 5.2 yrs 2.2% 20.9%M-9 Variable Frequency Drives 3.3 yrs 1.8% 32.4% 29.1%

18.2% $16,636

17.8% $17,617$27,836

M-4 Economiser Modes 5.3 yrs 2.4% 20.4%M-3 Heat Recovery 6.5 yrs 3.8% 16.1% 14.0%

32.7% $156,653$54,167

M-2 Demand Ventilation 3 yrs 13.8% 36.1%M-2 Dedicated outside air unit Immediate 2.1% N/A N/AB-3 Optimise Building Insulation 2.2 yrs 1.6% 49.1% 45.6% $17,687

Base Case: Best performing HVAC system: water cooled VAV systemB-1 Optimise Glazing 11 yrs 5.0% 8.2% 8.0% $11,910

M-7 Water Cooled VAV with FPP 3.3 yrs 7.8% 33.0%M-7 Air Cooled VAV with FPP

29.7% $78,9753.3 yrs 7.6% 33.1% 29.8% $79,109

$658,118


M-7 Water Cooled VAV 2.8 yrs 41.5% 38.1% 34.7%34.5% $636,142

$627,987M-7 Air Cooled VAV 2.9 yrs 40.2% 37.9%M-7 Fan Coil Units 2.5 yrs 38.4% 42.4% 39.0%

Base Case: PTAC units with air-cooled unitary cooling and electric resistance heating. M-7 Condenser Water Heat Pump 3 yrs 33.9% 36.0% 32.6% $541,790

NPV(Over 20 Years)

yrs % % % $

Energy Modelling Results Summary New Hotels TemperateThe table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modeled new hotel in the temperate climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy savings cost reductions. Due to different modeling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The colour key contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.


TemperateNew York, NY

Simple Payback CO2 Reductions IRR First Year Yield On Marginal Cost




Gas-fired boilers provide heating. Demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE construction for climate zone 4.

B-1 Optimize GlazingBuilding Envelope


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Lighting


Temperate

14.6 4.4 23.2%1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %

N/A N/A

SO2 (lb/yr) 2,356 2,427 -3.0%935 922 1.4%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 685,223 651,234 5.0%

19.0

-11.1%HVAC Fans 53 9 62 7 8 8 16 3%





5.0%

Space Heating - Gas 769.0 323.3 445.7 58.0%Space Cooling 195.6 229.4 -33.8 -17.3%Pumps 685,223 651,234

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


HVAC Fans 53.9 62.7 -8.8



Total 2,297.4 1,898.0 399.4 17.4%

17.4%

N/A

0.3.

Assumptions

685,223 651,234

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,356

935

2,427

922

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,297

1,898

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





11 yrs


Building Envelope

Natural gas 4,458 therms $1.5056 $6,712Electricity -13,569 kWh Initial Annual Savings

$60,133

$4,792

B-1

$0 ($60,133) Simple Payback



Replace)Cash Flow


($60,133)

$5,1332 $0


$5 691

8.0%

$4,960 $4,960 IRR

112 MBh $849 6 $0 $5 691

3 $0 $5,133

tons $1,512 5 $0 $5,4993

8.2%Capital Costs Savings Summary($63,866)

$5,499

Optimize Glazing

1 $0 $4,792 $4,792Water & sewer 0 Gals N/A $0 0

$0.1535 ($2,082)




Loss (-)Yr.

Individual Resource Calculations New Hotels Temperate





7$5,691 NPV112 MBh $849 6 $0 $5,691$5,891

8 $0 $6,097 $6,097

$11,910


$7,241

$7,75714 $0 $7,495 $7,49515 $0

20 18 $0 $8,600 $8,600Defined

2008 16 $0 $8,028 $8,02817 $0 $8,309 $8,309

6.00% 19 $0 $8,901 $8,9013.50% 20 $0 $9,213 $9,213

0% 12 $0 $6,996 $6,996

$0 $5,891

Financial Analysis

($60,133)392 cfm $1,372

$6,310 $6,3109 $0

$7,757

$0 13 $0 $7,241

($80,000)($60,000)($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






B-3 Optimize Building InsulationBuilding Envelope


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,356 2,355 0.0%CO2 (lb/yr) 685,223 674,398

935 927 0.9%NOX (lb/yr)


1.6%


1.1%



1 1%HVAC Fans 53 9 53 3 0 6


reduced to 0.06.685,223 674,398

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r



Total 2,297.4 2,205.6 91.8

HVAC Fans 53.9 53.3 0.6


4.0%

4.0%

N/AAssumptions

685,223 674,398

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,356

935

2,355

927

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,297 2,206

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr








Electricity 117 kWh $0.1535 $18



Replace)


Building Envelope

Natural gas 914 therms $1.5056 $1,377N/A $0 0 ($3,166)



Loss (-)Yr.

Water & sewer 0 Gals

$1,443


$1,546$1,494$1,443

4 $0 $1,600 $1,600 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 45.6%$1,6563 tons $1,265 5 $0 $1,656$1 71429 MBh $219 6 $0 $1 714

($10,120)




IRR

1 $0 $1,443

49.1%

$0 ($3,166)

3 $0 $1,5462 $0 $1,494





7 $1,774

$0

$1,714 NPV

8 $0 $1,836 $1,836

29 MBh $219 6 $0 $1,714$1,774

$17,687

14 $0 $2,257 $2,257

20 11 $0 $2,036 $2,0360% 12 $0


3.50% 20 $0 $2,775 $2,7756.00% 19 $0 $2,681 $2,681

Defined 17 $0 $2,503 $2,50320 18 $0

$1,901 $1,901

$0

9$1,967 $1,967

($3,166)1,563 cfm $5,471

$2,107 $2,107

$2,590 $2,590

$0 13 $0 $2,181 $2,181

Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0

($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






air unit. 73.3 70.6 2.7HVAC Fans 53 9 44 0 9 9 18 4%

Space Cooling 195.6 210.6 -15.0


N/A N/A N/A N/A2.1%


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,356 2,345 0.5%

% Savings (+) / Loss (-)Emissions Base Case Proposed

935 922 1.3%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 685,223 671,025 2.1%



Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%


Heat Rejection


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




3.7%

-7.7%Pumps

Mechanical

Base Case

685,223 671,025

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


Assumptions

4.6%

N/A

4.6%Total 2,297.4 2,191.9 105.5


685,223 671,025

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,356

935

2,345

922

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,297 2,192

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





5 tons $2,318 5 $0 $2,132



($9,695) 3 $0 $1,990 $1,9902 $0 $1,923 $1,923 IRR


$2,132N/A4

0


440 $3 322 6 $0 $2 207 $2 207MBh

$29,205


$0 $29,205 Simple Payback Immediate

N/A


$1,858


(+) / Loss (-)

M-2



Mechanical

Natural gas 986 therms $1.5056 $1,485Electricity 2,022

Yr.Costs









$0 $2,284

9

0% 12 $0 $2,713 $2,713

19 $0 $3,451 $3,451

15 $0 $3,008 $3,008

3.50% 20 $0 $3,572 $3,5726.00%

Defined 17 $0 $3,222 $3,22220 18 $0 $3,335 $3,335


$0 13 $0 $2,808 $2,80814 $0 $2,906 $2,906


440 $3,322 6 $0

$29,2059,503 cfm $33,261

$0 $2,447 $2,447

7

20 11 $0 $2,621 $2,621

$2,207 $2,207 NPV

8 $0 $2,364 $2,364

$54,167$2,284

MBh

$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years







zone 4.

Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 13.8%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (lb/yr) 2,620 2,356 10.1%CO2 (lb/yr) 794,810 685,223

1,065 935 12.2%NOX (lb/yr)


13.8%

Space Heating - Gas 1,134.4 769.0 365.4 32.2%

40.2%



38 1%HVAC Fans 87 1 53 9 33 2


794,810685,223

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r



Total 2,834.6 2,297.4 537.2

HVAC Fans 87.1 53.9 33.2

19.0%


N/AAssumptions

794,810685,223

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,620

1,065

2,356

935

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,835

2,297

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$5,503Electricity 50,350 kWh $0.1535 $7,727

Yr.Costs



Mechanical

Natural gas 3,655 therms $1.5056

M-2




$13,693



$16 263

IRR3 $0 $14,668 $14,6682 $0

3 MBh $23 6 $0 $16 263tons $99 5 $0 $15,713 $15,713

($42,000)36.1%$14,172 $14,172

Water & sewer 0 Gals N/A $0 0 ($41,847)





Loss (-)

0


32.7%

Financial Table


(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $13,693 $13,693





7$16,263 NPV

8 $0 $17,421 $17,421

$156,6533 MBh $23 6 $0 $16,263$0 $16,832

$18,031 $18,031


$0 $22,165 $22,16514 $0 $21,415 $21,415

3.50% 20 $0 $26,325 $26,3256.00% 19 $0 $25,434 $25,434

$19,991

Defined $0 $23,743 $23,74320 18 $0

$0 $20,691 $20,691

2008 16 $0 $22,940 $22,940Financial Analysis 15

($41,847)9 cfm $32 $16,832

9 $0

$19,991

17$24,574 $24,574

$0 130% 12 $0

($100,000)($50,000)

$0 $50,000

$100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 $400,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years







Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%

M-3 Heat Recovery


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,356 2,403 -2.0%CO2 (lb/yr) 685,223 659,047

935 924 1.2%NOX (lb/yr)


3.8%


-1.4%



26 0%HVAC Fans 53 9 67 9 14 0


air unit and a ventilation heat recovery unit.685,223 659,047

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r



Total 2,297.4 2,000.7 296.7

HVAC Fans 53.9 67.9 -14.0

12.9%


N/AAssumptions

685,223 659,047

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,356

935

2,403

924

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,2972,001

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$4,935Electricity -9,085 kWh $0.1535 ($1,394)

Yr.Costs



Mechanical


M-3




$3,665



$4 353

IRR3 $0 $3,926 $3,9262 $0

440 MBh $3 322 6 $0 $4 353tons $1,616 5 $0 $4,206 $4,206

($64,337)16.1%$3,793 $3,793



Heat Recovery



Loss (-)

4


14.0%

Financial Table


(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $3,665 $3,665





7$4,353 NPV

8 $0 $4,663 $4,663

$27,836440 MBh $3,322 6 $0 $4,353$0 $4,505

$4,826 $4,826


$0 $5,932 $5,93214 $0 $5,732 $5,732

3.50% 20 $0 $7,046 $7,0466.00% 19 $0 $6,808 $6,808

$5,351

Defined $0 $6,355 $6,35520 18 $0

$0 $5,538 $5,538


($26,139)9,503 cfm $33,261 $4,505

9 $0

$5,351

17$6,577 $6,577

$0 130% 12 $0

($40,000)

($20,000)

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years







Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (lb/yr) 2,356 2,291 2.7%CO2 (lb/yr) 685,223 668,884

935 911 2.5%NOX (lb/yr)


2.4%

Space Heating - Gas 769.0 769.2 -0.2 0.0%

12.7%



0 2%HVAC Fans 53 9 53 8 0 1

Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but with an enthalpy economizer. 685,223 668,884

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r



Total 2,297.4 2,255.6 41.8

HVAC Fans 53.9 53.8 0.1

1.8%


N/AAssumptions

685,223 668,884

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,356

935

2,291

911

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,297 2,256

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





-$3Electricity 12,309 kWh $0.1535 $1,889

Yr.Costs



Mechanical

Natural gas -2 therms $1.5056

M-4




$1,952



$2 318

IRR3 $0 $2,091 $2,0912 $0

0 MBh $0 6 $0 $2 318tons $0 5 $0 $2,240 $2,240

($10,963)20.4%$2,020 $2,020



Economizer Modes



Loss (-)

0


17.8%

Financial Table


(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $1,952 $1,952





7$2,318 NPV

8 $0 $2,483 $2,483

$17,6170 MBh $0 6 $0 $2,318$0 $2,399

$2,570 $2,570


$0 $3,160 $3,16014 $0 $3,053 $3,053

3.50% 20 $0 $3,753 $3,7536.00% 19 $0 $3,626 $3,626

$2,850

Defined $0 $3,385 $3,38520 18 $0

$0 $2,950 $2,950


($10,963)0 cfm $0 $2,399

9 $0

$2,850

17$3,503 $3,503

$0 130% 12 $0

($20,000)

($10,000)

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years







Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 33.9%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (lb/yr) 4,631 3,061 33.9%CO2 (lb/yr) 1,170,535 773,812

1,705 1,127 33.9%NOX (lb/yr)


33.9%


-63.0%



89 7%HVAC Fans 676 0 69 3 606 7



1,170,535

773,812

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

lb/y

r



Total 3,004.5 1,986.2 1,018.3

HVAC Fans 676.0 69.3 606.7

33.9%


N/A


Assumptions

1,170,535

773,812

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,631

1,705

3,061

1,127

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,005

1,986

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$0Electricity 298,434 kWh $0.1535 $45,799

Yr.Costs



Mechanical

Natural gas 0 therms $1.5056

M-7




$47,402



$56 298

IRR3 $0 $50,778 $50,7782 $0

0 MBh $0 6 $0 $56 298tons $0 5 $0 $54,394 $54,394

($145,400)36.0%$49,061 $49,061



Guest Room Equipment Selection: Condensor Water Heat Pump



Loss (-)

0


32.6%

Financial Table


(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $47,402 $47,402





7$56,298 NPV

8 $0 $60,308 $60,308

$541,7900 MBh $0 6 $0 $56,298$0 $58,269

$62,419 $62,419


$0 $76,729 $76,72914 $0 $74,134 $74,134

3.50% 20 $0 $91,130 $91,1306.00% 19 $0 $88,048 $88,048

$69,205

Defined $0 $82,194 $82,19420 18 $0

$0 $71,627 $71,627


($145,400)0 cfm $0 $58,269

9 $0

$69,205

17$85,070 $85,070

$0 130% 12 $0

($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years







Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 38.4%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (lb/yr) 4,631 2,579 44.3%CO2 (lb/yr) 1,170,535 720,858

1,705 1,002 41.3%NOX (lb/yr)


38.4%


-96.9%



73 3%HVAC Fans 676 0 180 5 495 5

Proposed ModificationsPTACs replaced by fan coil units. Water-cooled chiller cooling. Heating provided by gas-fired boiler. Demand


1,170,535

720,858

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

lb/y

r



Total 3,004.5 2,264.2 740.3

HVAC Fans 676.0 180.5 495.5

24.6%


N/A


Assumptions

1,170,535

720,858

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,631

1,705

2,579

1,002

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,005

2,264

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





-$8,901Electricity 390,165 kWh $0.1535 $59,876

Yr.Costs



Mechanical

Natural gas -5,912 therms $1.5056

M-7




$52,759



$62 662

IRR3 $0 $56,517 $56,5172 $0

0 MBh $0 6 $0 $62 662tons $0 5 $0 $60,543 $60,543

($135,380)42.4%$54,606 $54,606



Guest Room Equipment Selection: Fan Coil Units



Loss (-)

0


39.0%

Financial Table


(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $52,759 $52,759





7$62,662 NPV

8 $0 $67,125 $67,125

$627,9870 MBh $0 6 $0 $62,662$0 $64,855

$69,474 $69,474


$0 $85,401 $85,40114 $0 $82,514 $82,514

3.50% 20 $0 $101,430 $101,4306.00% 19 $0 $98,000 $98,000

$77,027

Defined $0 $91,484 $91,48420 18 $0

$0 $79,723 $79,723


($135,380)0 cfm $0 $64,855

9 $0

$77,027

17$94,686 $94,686

$0 130% 12 $0

($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,600,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





Baseline ASHRAE HVAC system: Air-cooled PTAC units used for all rooms. Electric resistance heating.


Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 40.2%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (lb/yr) 4,631 2,416 47.8%CO2 (lb/yr) 1,170,535 700,456

1,705 957 43.9%NOX (lb/yr)


40.2%


24.0%



92 0%HVAC Fans 676 0 53 9 622 1


cooling. Heating provided by gas-fired boiler. Demand ventilation. Identical construction to Base Case.

1,170,535

700,4561,000,000

1,500,000

lb/y

r



Total 3,004.5 2,336.5 668.0

HVAC Fans 676.0 53.9 622.1

22.2%


N/A


Assumptions

1,170,535

700,456

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,631

1,7052,416

957

0

2,000

4,000

6,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,005

2,337

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





-$11,581Electricity 421,143 kWh $0.1535 $64,630

Yr.Costs



Mechanical


M-7




$54,905



$65 210

IRR3 $0 $58,816 $58,8162 $0

361 MBh $2 726 6 $0 $65 210tons $4,856 5 $0 $63,005 $63,005

($212,000)37.9%$56,827 $56,827



Guest Room Equipment Selection: Air Cooled VAV



Loss (-)

11


34.5%

Financial Table


(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $54,905 $54,905





7$65,210 NPV

8 $0 $69,855 $69,855

$636,142361 MBh $2,726 6 $0 $65,210$0 $67,493

$72,300 $72,300


$0 $88,875 $88,87514 $0 $85,869 $85,869

3.50% 20 $0 $105,555 $105,5556.00% 19 $0 $101,986 $101,986

$80,160

Defined $0 $95,205 $95,20520 18 $0

$0 $82,966 $82,966


($159,314)12,887 cfm $45,105 $67,493

9 $0

$80,160

17$98,537 $98,537

$0 130% 12 $0

($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,600,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years







Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


Savings (+) / Loss (-) 41.5%


Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (lb/yr) 4,631 2,356 49.1%CO2 (lb/yr) 1,170,535 685,223

1,705 935 45.2%NOX (lb/yr)


41.5%


-59.7%



92 0%HVAC Fans 676 0 53 9 622 1


chiller cooling. Heating provided by gas-fired boiler. Demand ventilation. Identical construction to Base

1,170,535

685,223

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

lb/y

r



Total 3,004.5 2,297.4 707.1

HVAC Fans 676.0 53.9 622.1

23.5%


N/A

Demand ventilation. Identical construction to Base Case.

Assumptions

1,170,535

685,223

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


4,631

1,7052,356

935

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,005

2,297

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





-$11,581Electricity 432,602 kWh $0.1535 $66,388

Yr.Costs



Mechanical


M-7




$56,725



$67 372

IRR3 $0 $60,766 $60,7662 $0

361 MBh $2 726 6 $0 $67 372tons $4,856 5 $0 $65,094 $65,094

($216,340)38.1%$58,711 $58,711






Loss (-)

11


34.7%

Financial Table


(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $56,725 $56,725





7$67,372 NPV

8 $0 $72,170 $72,170

$658,118361 MBh $2,726 6 $0 $67,372$0 $69,730

$74,696 $74,696


$0 $91,821 $91,82114 $0 $88,716 $88,716

3.50% 20 $0 $109,055 $109,0556.00% 19 $0 $105,367 $105,367

$82,817

Defined $0 $98,361 $98,36120 18 $0

$0 $85,716 $85,716


($163,654)12,887 cfm $45,105 $69,730

9 $0

$82,817

17$101,804 $101,804

$0 130% 12 $0

($400,000)($200,000)

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000

$1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,600,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years





VAV system with reheat used for all rooms. Cooling provided by air-cooled chiller. Gas-fired boilers provide

heating. Demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE construction for climate zone 4.

Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%

M-7 Guest Room Equipment Selection: Air Cooled VAV with FPP


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,416 2,400 0.6%CO2 (lb/yr) 700,456 646,922

957 914 4.5%NOX (lb/yr)


7.6%


0.0%



17 6%HVAC Fans 53 9 44 4 9 5

Proposed ModificationsAs with Base Case, but with fan-powered parallel

terminal units instead of standard VAV boxes. (Note: FPP systems have not been modelled for hot-humid or hot-dry

700,456 646,922

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r



Total 2,336.5 1,901.5 435.0

HVAC Fans 53.9 44.4 9.5

18.6%


N/A

( y yclimates as there are insufficient cooling loads for this system to be

viable).

Assumptions

700,456 646,922

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,416

957

2,400

914

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,337

1,902

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$6,399Electricity 2,960 kWh $0.1535 $454

Yr.Costs



Mechanical


M-7




$7,093



$8 425

IRR3 $0 $7,598 $7,5982 $0

21 MBh $159 6 $0 $8 425tons $0 5 $0 $8,140 $8,140

($24,000)33.1%$7,342 $7,342



Guest Room Equipment Selection: Air Cooled VAV with FPP



Loss (-)

0


29.8%

Financial Table


(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $7,093 $7,093





7$8,425 NPV

8 $0 $9,025 $9,025

$79,10921 MBh $159 6 $0 $8,425$0 $8,719

$9,340 $9,340


$0 $11,482 $11,48214 $0 $11,094 $11,094

3.50% 20 $0 $13,637 $13,6376.00% 19 $0 $13,176 $13,176

$10,356

Defined $0 $12,300 $12,30020 18 $0

$0 $10,718 $10,718


($23,841)0 cfm $0 $8,719

9 $0

$10,356

17$12,730 $12,730

$0 130% 12 $0

($50,000)

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years







73.3 73.3 0.0HVAC Fans 53 9 44 4 9 5 17 6%

Space Cooling 195.6 195.4 0.2


N/A N/A N/A N/A7.8%


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,356 2,340 0.6%


935 892 4.6%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 685,223 631,766 7.8%



Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%

M-7 Guest Room Equipment Selection: Water Cooled VAV with FPP

Heat Rejection


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




0.0%

0.1%Pumps

Mechanical

Base Case

685,223631,766

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

lb/y

r



viable).

Assumptions

18.9%

N/A

18.9%Total 2,297.4 1,862.6 434.8


685,223631,766

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,356

935

2,340

892

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

2,297

1,863

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





0 tons $0 5 $0 $8,129

Guest Room Equipment Selection: Water Cooled VAV with FPP


($24,000) 3 $0 $7,588 $7,5882 $0 $7,332 $7,332 IRR


$8,12929.7%4

0


21 $159 6 $0 $8 413 $8 413MBh

($23,841)



33.0%


$7,084


(+) / Loss (-)

M-7



Mechanical

Natural gas 4,250 therms $1.5056 $6,399Electricity 2,901

Yr.Costs









$0 $8,708

9

0% 12 $0 $10,342 $10,342

19 $0 $13,158 $13,158

15 $0 $11,467 $11,467

3.50% 20 $0 $13,619 $13,6196.00%

Defined 17 $0 $12,283 $12,28320 18 $0 $12,713 $12,713


$0 13 $0 $10,704 $10,70414 $0 $11,079 $11,079


21 $159 6 $0

($23,841)0 cfm $0

$0 $9,328 $9,328

7

20 11 $0 $9,993 $9,993

$8,413 $8,413 NPV

8 $0 $9,013 $9,013

$78,975$8,708

MBh

($50,000)

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years







Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%



SO2 (lb/yr) 2,356 2,308 2.0%CO2 (lb/yr) 685,223 673,185

935 917 1.9%NOX (lb/yr)


1.8%


0.0%



57 3%HVAC Fans 53 9 23 0 30 9


(VFDs) used in VAV system.

685,223 673,185

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

lb/y

r



Total 2,297.4 2,266.5 30.9

HVAC Fans 53.9 23.0 30.9

1.3%


N/AAssumptions

685,223 673,185

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,356

935

2,308

917

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

2,297 2,267

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





$0Electricity 9,056 kWh $0.1535 $1,390

Yr.Costs



Mechanical


M-9




$1,438



$1 708

IRR3 $0 $1,541 $1,5412 $0

0 MBh $0 6 $0 $1 708tons $0 5 $0 $1,651 $1,651

($4,945)32.4%$1,489 $1,489






Loss (-)

0


29.1%

Financial Table


(+) / Loss (-)

1 $0 $1,438 $1,438





7$1,708 NPV

8 $0 $1,830 $1,830

$15,9380 MBh $0 6 $0 $1,708$0 $1,768

$1,894 $1,894


$0 $2,328 $2,32814 $0 $2,250 $2,250

3.50% 20 $0 $2,765 $2,7656.00% 19 $0 $2,672 $2,672

$2,100

Defined $0 $2,494 $2,49420 18 $0

$0 $2,174 $2,174


($4,945)0 cfm $0 $1,768

9 $0

$2,100

17$2,581 $2,581

$0 130% 12 $0

($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






cooling tower. 34.9 73.3 -38.4HVAC Fans 53 9 53 9 0 0 0 0%



N/A N/A N/A N/A2.2%


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,416 2,356 2.5%


957 935 2.3%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 700,456 685,223 2.2%

VAV system with reheat used for all rooms. Cooling provided by air-cooled chiller. Gas-fired boilers provide

heating. Demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE construction for climate zone 4.

Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%


Heat Rejection


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




-110.0%

28.4%Pumps

Mechanical

Base Case

700,456 685,223

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

lb/y

r


Assumptions

1.7%

N/A

1.7%Total 2,336.5 2,297.4 39.1


700,456 685,223

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,416

957

2,356

935

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000


g/yr


Proposed

2,337 2,297

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





0 tons $0 5 $0 $2,089



($10,000) 3 $0 $1,950 $1,9502 $0 $1,884 $1,884 IRR


$2,08918.2%4

0


0 $0 6 $0 $2 162 $2 162MBh

($10,000)



20.9%


$1,820


(+) / Loss (-)

M-12



Mechanical

Natural gas 0 therms $1.5056 $0Electricity 11,459

Yr.Costs









$0 $2,237

9

0% 12 $0 $2,657 $2,657

19 $0 $3,381 $3,381

15 $0 $2,946 $2,946

3.50% 20 $0 $3,499 $3,4996.00%

Defined 17 $0 $3,156 $3,15620 18 $0 $3,266 $3,266


$0 13 $0 $2,750 $2,75014 $0 $2,847 $2,847


0 $0 6 $0

($10,000)0 cfm $0

$0 $2,397 $2,397

7

20 11 $0 $2,567 $2,567

$2,162 $2,162 NPV

8 $0 $2,316 $2,316

$16,636$2,237

MBh

($20,000)

($10,000)

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years






system. 73.3 63.6 9.7HVAC Fans 53 9 53 5 0 4 0 7%



N/A N/A N/A N/A2.2%


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,356 2,295 2.6%


935 913 2.4%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 685,223 669,990 2.2%



Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%


Heat Rejection


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




13.2%

14.8%Pumps

Mechanical

Base Case

685,223 669,990

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

lb/y

r


Assumptions

1.7%

N/A

1.7%Total 2,297.4 2,258.3 39.1


685,223 669,990

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,356

935

2,295

913

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

2,297 2,258

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





0 tons $0 5 $0 $2,089

Evaporative Cooling


($24,200) 3 $0 $1,950 $1,9502 $0 $1,884 $1,884 IRR


$2,0897.5%4

0


0 $0 6 $0 $2 162 $2 162MBh

($24,200)



7.5%


$1,820


(+) / Loss (-)

M-13



Mechanical

Natural gas 0 therms $1.5056 $0Electricity 11,459

Yr.Costs









$0 $2,237

9

0% 12 $0 $2,657 $2,657

19 $0 $3,381 $3,381

15 $0 $2,946 $2,946

3.50% 20 $0 $3,499 $3,4996.00%

Defined 17 $0 $3,156 $3,15620 18 $0 $3,266 $3,266


$0 13 $0 $2,750 $2,75014 $0 $2,847 $2,847


0 $0 6 $0

($24,200)0 cfm $0

$0 $2,397 $2,397

7

20 11 $0 $2,567 $2,567

$2,162 $2,162 NPV

8 $0 $2,316 $2,316

$3,240$2,237

MBh

($30,000)

($20,000)

($10,000)

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




unit.

HVAC Fans 53 9 53 9 0 0 0 0%73.3 0.0 0.0%



N/A N/A N/A N/A0.0%



935 935 0.0%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 685,223 685,223 0.0%


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,356 2,356 0.0%


Temperate

Mechanical


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use






Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%


Heat Rejection 73.3

685,223 685,223

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

lb/y

r


Assumptions

0.0%

N/A

0.0%Total 2,297.4 2,297.4 0.0


685,223 685,223

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,356

935

2,356

935

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

2,297 2,297

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





Thermal Storage


30 tons $13,325 5 $0 $8,164


($50,000) 3 $0 $7,621 $7,6212 $0 $7,364 $7,364 IRR

$8,16419.4%4

0

Cash Flow

0 $0 6 $0 $8 450 $8 450MBh

($36,676)



22.2%


$7,115



(+) / Loss (-)

M-13



Mechanical

Natural gas 0 therms $1.5056 $0Electricity 0

Yr.Costs









$0 $8,746

9

0% 12 $0 $10,387 $10,387

19 $0 $13,215 $13,215

15 $0 $11,516 $11,516

3.50% 20 $0 $13,678 $13,6786.00%

Defined 17 $0 $12,337 $12,33720 18 $0 $12,768 $12,768


$0 13 $0 $10,751 $10,75114 $0 $11,127 $11,127


0 $0 6 $0

($36,676)0 cfm $0

$0 $9,369 $9,369

7

20 11 $0 $10,036 $10,036

$8,450 $8,450 NPV

8 $0 $9,052 $9,052

$67,307$8,746

MBh

($50,000)

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Cold-Alpine



$6,169M-13 Thermal Storage 11 yrs 0.0% 7.9% 7.8%M-13 Evaporative Cooling > 20 yrs 2.0% N/A 2.5% ($18,936)M-12 Water-Cooled Chiller 11 yrs 2.0% 8.7% 8.3% $2,480

$6,441M-9 Variable Frequency Drives 7.2 yrs 2.0% 14.4% 12.6% $5,404M-4 Economiser Modes 8.3 yrs 2.9% 12.0% 10.7%M-3 Heat Recovery 4.9 yrs 5.6% 21.9% 19.1% $53,572M-2 Demand Ventilation 4 yrs 13.6% 27.0% 23.9% $104,153

$50,991M-2 Dedicated outside air unit Never -0.4% N/A N/A ($9,415)

49.2% $149,713B-3 Optimise Building Insulation Immediate 2.9% N/A N/A

$156,071

Base Case: Best performing HVAC system: water cooled VAV systemB-1 Optimise Glazing 2 yrs 13.4% 52.6%

49.1% $156,179M-7 Water Cooled VAV with FPP 2.1 yrs 14.9% 52.5% 49.0%

$242,546

Base Case: Identical VAV system but without fan-powered parallel terminal units. Note: FPPs not modelled in hot climates.M-7 Air Cooled VAV with FPP 2.1 yrs 14.6% 52.5%

M-7 Water Cooled VAV 5.2 yrs 50.2% 20.8% 18.1%M-7 Air Cooled VAV 5 yrs 49.1% 21.6% 18.9% $240,067M-7 Fan Coil Units 11 yrs 33.2% 8.4% 8.1% $31,388

Base Case: PTAC units with air-cooled unitary cooling and electric resistance heating. M-7 Condenser Water Heat Pump 6.8 yrs 24.0% 15.3% 13.4% $140,870

NPV(Over 20 Years)

yrs % % % $

Energy Modelling Results Summary New Hotels Cold-AlpineThe table below summarises the overall energy and financial performance for the modeled new hotel in the cold-alpine climate zone against the baseline building. Energy savings for a specific building may vary based on that building's parameters and financial results may also vary based on local costs and financing structures. For details regarding each measure refer to the individual calculation pages immediately following this page. For detailed assumptions relating to the energy model, utilities, emission factors, financial inputs, cost of capital, etc refer to the assumptions section of this book.Note: CO2 reduction percentages closely match both source energy reductions and annual energy savings cost reductions. Due to different modeling methodologies existing hotel and new hotel CO2 reduction percentages cannot be compared against each other. The colour key contained below refers solely to simple payback periods.


Cold/AlpineFargo, ND

Simple Payback CO2 Reductions IRR First Year Yield On Marginal Cost


HVAC Fans 70 6

1,090.9 1,000.1 47.8%22.9 7.3 24.2%

68 6 2 0

187.2 -24.5 -15.1%

SO2 (lb/yr) 2,327 2,348 -0.9%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr)%


960 7.7%

832,220 720,813 13.4%

As with Base Case, but with improved glazing properties. SHGC is unchanged, U-value is reduced to

0.3.

2,091.0

Building Envelope

Base Case Energy End-Use Benchmark Comparison Environmental Impact AnalysisVAV system with reheat used for all rooms. Cooling provided by water-cooled chiller with cooling tower.


1,040

N/A N/A N/A

Space Heating - Elec 30.2

Space Cooling 162.7Pumps

Space Heating - GasProposed Modifications

Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6

2 8%

13.4%

Individual Resource Calculations New Hotels Cold-Alpine

N/AHeat Rejection 59.5 58.0 1.5 2.5%

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use




MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr0.0 0.0%

832,220720,813

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


N/A


Assumptions

27.4%

27.4%Total 3,600.6 2,614.2 986.4

HVAC Fans 70.6 68.6 2.0N/A N/A N/A N/A

0.3. 2.8%Receptacles

832,220720,813

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,327

1,040

2,348

960

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

3,601

2,614

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





14 tons $6,309 5 $0 $13,850 $13,850

52.6%

2 yrs

$24,549

$12,069

MBh $1 102 6 $0 $14 334 $14 334146

Capital Costs Savings Summary($63,866)

4 $0 $13,3813 $0 $12,929 $12,9292 $0 $12,492 $12,492 IRR

$13,381 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 49.2%

Cash Flow

1 $0 $12,069 $12,069Water & sewer 0 Gals N/A $0 0


($24,549) $0 ($24,549) Simple Payback



Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)



Natural gas 10,004 therms $1.1906 $11,911Electricity -4,015 kWh $0.0622 ($250)



Building Envelope







7($24,549)

cfm $31,906 $0 $14,836

$0

Financial Analysis 15 $0

Defined 17 $0 $20,928 $20,92820 18 $0

0% 12 $0 $17,621 $17,621

$21,660 $21,660

$19,536 $19,536

6.00% 19 $0 $22,418 $22,4183.50% 20 $0 $23,203 $23,203

$0 13 $0 $18,237 $18,23714 $0 $18,876 $18,876

2008 16 $0 $20,220 $20,220


9

MBh $1,102 6 $0 $14,334

$15,893 $15,893

9,1168 $0 $15,355 $15,355

$14,836$149,713$14,334 NPV146

($50,000)$0

$50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000

0 5 10 15 20Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years




reduced to 0.06.N/A N/A

Heat Rejection 59.5 50.4 9.1 15.3%N/A

HVAC Fans 70 6 68 6 2 0 2 8%

Space Cooling 162.7 154.3 8.4 5.2%Pumps

Space Heating - Gas

2.9%N/A

2,091.0 1,957.5 133.5 6.4%Space Heating - Elec 30.2 28.1 2.1 7.0%


2.3%Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6SO2 (lb/yr) 2,327 2,293 1.4%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 832,220 808,221

Emissions Base Case ProposedSavings (+) /

Loss (-)

0.0 0.0%


Building Envelope




1,040 1,016

2.9%


MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use

832,220 808,221

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


N/AAssumptions

Total 3,600.6 3,445.5 155.1

Receptacles N/A N/A N/A

4.3%

N/A

4.3%Base Utilities N/A N/A N/A N/A

HVAC Fans 70.6 68.6 2.0 2.8%

832,220 808,221

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,327

1,040

2,293

1,016

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

3,601 3,446

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr





($7,130)Capital Costs Savings Summary N/A


$2 438 $2 438123 MBh $929 6 $011 tons $4,950 5 $0 $2,356 $2,356


IRR3 $0 $2,199 $2,1992 $0 $2,125 $2,125

Water & sewer 0 Gals N/A $0 0 $0 $22,881 Simple Payback$22,8811 $0 $2,053 $2,053

$0.0622 $394


Immediate



$2,053


Savings (+) / Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)Cash Flow

Building Envelope

Natural gas 1,335 therms $1.1906 $1,590ElectricityResource



6,330 kWh






$22,881cfm $24,133

Financial Analysis $3,323

$0 $3,102 $3,102

9 $0

$2,438 $2,438 NPV

$0 13

6.00% 19 $0 $3,813 $3,8133.50% 20 $0 $3,947 $3,947

0% 12 $0 $2,997 $2,997

15 $0

20 18 $0 $3,684 $3,684Defined

2008 16 $0 $3,439 $3,43917 $0 $3,560 $3,560

$3,32314 $0 $3,211 $3,211

$2,798 $2,798$2,703 $2,703

20 11 $0 $2,896 $2,896Replacement Life and Cost Summary 10 $0

6,8958 $0 $2,612 $2,612

$50,9917 $0 $2,524 $2,524

123 MBh $929 6 $0

$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Mechanical




M-2

1,040 1,047 -0.7%Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use

Space Heating - Gas 2,091.0 2,067.3 23.7 1.1%

SO2 (lb/yr) 2,327 2,351 -1.0%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 832,220 835,609 -0.4%

Space Cooling 162.7 176.0 -13.3 -8.2%

72 6 2 0 2 8%

N/A N/A N/A


-0.4%59.5 60.1


-0.6


Pumps


N/AHeat Rejection



air unit. -1.0%HVAC Fans 70 6

832,220 835,609

500,000

1,000,000

lb/y

r


Total 3,600.6 3,592.7 7.9N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/ABase Utilities

0.2%

72.6 -2.0 -2.8%

0.2%

N/AAssumptions

N/A N/A N/AReceptaclesHVAC Fans 70.6

832,220 835,609

0

500,000

1,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,327

1,040

2,351

1,047

0

2,000

4,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,601 3,593

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr








Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)Electricity -4,631 kWh $0.0622 ($288) Initial Annual Savings


Mechanical


($6)Natural gas 237 therms $1.1906 $282


IRR

1 $0 ($6) ($6)$0

3 $0 ($6) ($6)2 $0 ($6) ($6)

4 $0 ($7) ($7) First Year Yield On Marginal Cost N/A($7)$0 ($7)($7)23 MBh $174 6 $0 ($7)

($9,695)



-1 tons ($369) 5

N/A

($9,890) Simple Payback Never







($7)($7) NPV

20 11 $0 ($8) ($8)Replacement Life and Cost Summary

08 $0 ($7) ($7)

-$9,41523 MBh $174 6 $0 ($7)$0

$0 13 $0 ($9) ($9)14 $0 ($9) ($9)

2008 16 $0 ($10) ($10)Financial Analysis

($10) ($10)20 18 $0 ($11) ($11)

0% 12 $0 ($9) ($9)

3.50% 20 $0 ($11) ($11)6.00% 19 $0 ($11) ($11)

Defined 17

($8)

7 $0 ($7)

9 $0 ($8)

15 $0 ($9) ($9)

10 $0 ($8) ($8)

$0

($9,890)cfm

($10,100)

($10,050)

($10,000)

($9,950)

($9,900)

($9,850)

($9,800)0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



35 1%Heat Rejection


41.4%HVAC Fans 108 7 70 6 38 1


101.5 59.5 42.0


Space Heating - Gas

N/AN/A N/A N/A

2,644.5 2,091.0 553.5 20.9%

13.6%



0.0%

Improved Ventilation Air Delivery: Demand VentilationM-2

1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0SO2 (lb/yr) 2,589 2,327 10.1%NOX (lb/yr)

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Mechanical



zone 7. 1,185 1,040 12.2%Lighting

CO2 (lb/yr) 963,141 832,220 13.6%



963,141832,220

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

lb/y

r


Total 4,324.3 3,600.6 723.7

N/ABase Utilities N/A N/A N/A N/AReceptacles

16.7%

N/A

35.1%

16.7%

HVAC Fans 108.7 70.6 38.1

Assumptions

N/A N/A N/A

963,141832,220

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,589

1,185

2,327

1,040

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000


g/yr


Proposed

4,324

3,601

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







0 MBh $0

($42,000)

$0 $11 916 $11 9160 tons $77 5 $0 $11,513 $11,513


IRR

6

3 $0 $10,747 $10,7472 $0 $10,384 $10,384 27.0%

Water & sewer 0 Gals N/A $0 0 $0 ($41,924) Simple Payback($41,924)1 $0 $10,033 $10,033


$10,033

4 yrs

Natural gas 5,537 therms $1.1906 $6,592Electricity 49,881 kWh



Cash Flow




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)

Savings (+) / Loss (-)$0.0622 $3,102 Initial Annual Savings

Mechanical





7 $0 $12,333

$14,647

$13,211 $13,2119 $0

0 MBh $0

($41,924)cfm $0

$0 13 $0 $15,160 $15,160

6.00% 19 $0 $18,636 $18,636

0% 12 $0 $14,647

3.50% 20 $0 $19,288 $19,288

20 18 $0 $18,005 $18,005Defined 17 $0 $17,397 $17,397


14 $0 $15,691 $15,691


$12,333$12,764

$104,153$0 $11,916 $11,916 NPV0

8 $0 $12,764

6

($100,000)($50,000)

$0 $50,000

$100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



19 5%Heat Rejection


-9.4%HVAC Fans 70 6 84 4 13 8


air unit and a ventilation heat recovery unit. 59.5 65.1 -5.6

Space Cooling 162.7 185.4 -22.7 -14.0%Pumps

Space Heating - Gas

N/AN/A N/A N/A

2,091.0 1,576.6 514.4 24.6%

5.6%



0.0%

Heat RecoveryM-3

1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0SO2 (lb/yr) 2,327 2,378 -2.2%NOX (lb/yr)

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Mechanical



1,040 1,014 2.5%Lighting

CO2 (lb/yr) 832,220 785,224 5.6%



832,220 785,224

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


Total 3,600.6 3,119.7 480.9


13.4%

N/A

-19.5%

13.4%

HVAC Fans 70.6 84.4 -13.8

Assumptions

N/A N/A N/A

832,220 785,224

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,327

1,040

2,378

1,014

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

3,6013,120

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







185 MBh $1 397

($77,743)

$0 $6 780 $6 780-3 tons ($1,449) 5 $0 $6,551 $6,551


IRR

6

3 $0 $6,115 $6,1152 $0 $5,909 $5,909 21.9%



$5,709

4.9 yrs

Natural gas 5,145 therms $1.1906 $6,126Electricity -9,818 kWh

M-3 Heat Recovery


Cash Flow




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)

Savings (+) / Loss (-)$0.0622 ($610) Initial Annual Savings

Mechanical





7 $0 $7,018

$8,335

$7,517 $7,5179 $0

185 MBh $1,397

($29,891)cfm $47,905

$0 13 $0 $8,626 $8,626

6.00% 19 $0 $10,604 $10,604

0% 12 $0 $8,335

3.50% 20 $0 $10,975 $10,975

20 18 $0 $10,245 $10,245Defined 17 $0 $9,899 $9,899


14 $0 $8,928 $8,928


$7,018$7,263

$53,572$0 $6,780 $6,780 NPV13,687

8 $0 $7,263

6

($40,000)($20,000)

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000

$100,000 $120,000 $140,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



0 3%Heat Rejection


30.9%HVAC Fans 70 6 70 4 0 2


59.5 41.1 18.4


Space Heating - Gas

N/AN/A N/A N/A

2,091.0 2,090.5 0.5 0.0%

2.9%



0.0%

Economizer ModesM-4

1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0SO2 (lb/yr) 2,327 2,231 4.1%NOX (lb/yr)

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Mechanical



1,040 1,005 3.4%Lighting

CO2 (lb/yr) 832,220 808,085 2.9%



832,220 808,085

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


Total 3,600.6 3,538.3 62.3


1.7%

N/A

0.3%

1.7%

HVAC Fans 70.6 70.4 0.2

Assumptions

N/A N/A N/A

832,220 808,085

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,327

1,040

2,231

1,005

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

3,601 3,538

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







0 MBh $0

($10,963)

$0 $1 392 $1 3920 tons $0 5 $0 $1,345 $1,345


IRR

6

3 $0 $1,255 $1,2552 $0 $1,213 $1,213 12.0%



$1,172

8.3 yrs

Natural gas 5 therms $1.1906 $6Electricity 18,112 kWh



Cash Flow




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Mechanical





7 $0 $1,440

$1,711

$1,543 $1,5439 $0

0 MBh $0

($10,963)cfm $0

$0 13 $0 $1,771 $1,771

6.00% 19 $0 $2,177 $2,177

0% 12 $0 $1,711

3.50% 20 $0 $2,253 $2,253

20 18 $0 $2,103 $2,103Defined 17 $0 $2,032 $2,032


14 $0 $1,833 $1,833


$1,440$1,491

$6,441$0 $1,392 $1,392 NPV0

8 $0 $1,491

6

($15,000)($10,000)($5,000)

$0 $5,000

$10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



88 5%Heat Rejection

Space Heating - Elec 1,913.9 1,712.5 201.4 10.5%

-57.1%HVAC Fans 859 1 98 4 760 7



39.6 62.2 -22.6


Space Heating - Gas

N/AN/A N/A N/A

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%

24.0%



0.0%

Guest Room Equipment Selection: Condensor Water Heat PumpM-7

1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0SO2 (lb/yr) 6,605 5,019 24.0%NOX (lb/yr)

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Mechanical

Base Case Energy End-Use Benchmark Comparison Environmental Impact AnalysisBaseline ASHRAE HVAC system: PTAC units used for

all rooms. Air-cooled unitary cooling. Electric resistance heating. Demand ventilation. Standard

ASHRAE construction for climate zone 7.

2,432 1,848 24.0%Lighting

CO2 (lb/yr) 1,669,605 1,268,635 24.0%



1,669,605

1,268,635

800,0001,000,0001,200,0001,400,0001,600,0001,800,000

lb/y

r


Total 4,285.5 3,256.3 1,029.2


24.0%

N/A

88.5%

24.0%

HVAC Fans 859.1 98.4 760.7ventilation. Identical construction to Base Case.

Assumptions

N/A N/A N/A

1,669,605

1,268,635

0200,000400,000600,000800,000

1,000,0001,200,0001,400,0001,600,0001,800,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,605

2,432

5,019

1,848

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000


g/yr


Proposed

4,286

3,256

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







0 MBh $0

($145,400)

$0 $23 055 $23 0550 tons $0 5 $0 $22,275 $22,275


IRR

6

3 $0 $20,794 $20,7942 $0 $20,091 $20,091 15.3%



$19,411

6.8 yrs




Cash Flow




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Mechanical





7 $0 $23,862

$28,340

$25,561 $25,5619 $0

0 MBh $0

($145,400)cfm $0

$0 13 $0 $29,332 $29,332

6.00% 19 $0 $36,056 $36,056

0% 12 $0 $28,340

3.50% 20 $0 $37,318 $37,318

20 18 $0 $34,837 $34,837Defined 17 $0 $33,659 $33,659


14 $0 $30,359 $30,359


$23,862$24,697

$140,870$0 $23,055 $23,055 NPV0

8 $0 $24,697

6

($200,000)

($100,000)

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



14 3%Heat Rejection

Space Heating - Elec 1,913.9 31.8 1,882.1 98.3%

-81.1%HVAC Fans 859 1 736 3 122 8

Proposed ModificationsPTACs replaced by fan coil units. Water-cooled chiller cooling. Heating provided by gas-fired boiler. Demand

ventilation. Identical construction to Base Case.39.6 71.7 -32.1


Space Heating - Gas

N/AN/A N/A N/A

0.0 2,297.6 -2,297.6 0.0%

33.2%



0.0%

Guest Room Equipment Selection: Fan Coil UnitsM-7

1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0SO2 (lb/yr) 6,605 3,352 49.2%NOX (lb/yr)

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Mechanical




2,432 1,436 41.0%Lighting

CO2 (lb/yr) 1,669,605 1,115,651 33.2%



1,669,605

1,115,651

800,0001,000,0001,200,0001,400,0001,600,0001,800,000

lb/y

r


Total 4,285.5 4,472.8 -187.3


-4.4%

N/A

14.3%

-4.4%


Assumptions

N/A N/A N/A

1,669,605

1,115,651

0200,000400,000600,000800,000

1,000,0001,200,0001,400,0001,600,0001,800,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,605

2,4323,352

1,436

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000


g/yr


Proposed

4,286 4,473

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







0 MBh $0

($141,041)

$0 $13 636 $13 6360 tons $0 5 $0 $13,174 $13,174


IRR

6

3 $0 $12,298 $12,2982 $0 $11,883 $11,883 8.4%



$11,481

11 yrs

Natural gas -22,983 therms $1.1906 -$27,363Electricity 618,468 kWh



Cash Flow




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Mechanical





7 $0 $14,113

$16,762

$15,118 $15,1189 $0

0 MBh $0

($141,041)cfm $0

$0 13 $0 $17,348 $17,348

6.00% 19 $0 $21,325 $21,325

0% 12 $0 $16,762

3.50% 20 $0 $22,072 $22,072

20 18 $0 $20,604 $20,604Defined 17 $0 $19,908 $19,908


14 $0 $17,955 $17,955


$14,113$14,607

$31,388$0 $13,636 $13,636 NPV0

8 $0 $14,607

6

($200,000)($150,000)($100,000)

($50,000)$0

$50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



91 8%Heat Rejection


24.7%HVAC Fans 859 1 70 6 788 5


cooling. Heating provided by gas-fired boiler. Demand ventilation. Identical construction to Base Case.

39.6 29.8 9.8


Space Heating - Gas

N/AN/A N/A N/A

0.0 2,091.0 -2,091.0 0.0%

49.1%



0.0%

Guest Room Equipment Selection: Air Cooled VAVM-7

1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0SO2 (lb/yr) 6,605 2,395 63.7%NOX (lb/yr)

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Mechanical

Base Case Energy End-Use Benchmark Comparison Environmental Impact AnalysisBaseline ASHRAE HVAC system: Air-cooled PTAC units used for all rooms. Electric resistance heating.


2,432 1,065 56.2%Lighting

CO2 (lb/yr) 1,669,605 849,401 49.1%



1,669,605

849,4011,000,000

2,000,000

lb/y

r


Total 4,285.5 3,644.7 640.8


15.0%

N/A

91.8%

15.0%


Assumptions

N/A N/A N/A

1,669,605

849,401

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,605

2,4322,3951,065

0

5,000

10,000


g/yr


Proposed

4,286

3,645

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







476 MBh $3 594

($212,000)

$0 $30 582 $30 58218 tons $7,884 5 $0 $29,548 $29,548


IRR

6

3 $0 $27,583 $27,5832 $0 $26,650 $26,650 21.6%



$25,749

5 yrs




Cash Flow




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Mechanical





7 $0 $31,652

$37,593

$33,907 $33,9079 $0

476 MBh $3,594

($136,479)cfm $64,043

$0 13 $0 $38,909 $38,909

6.00% 19 $0 $47,829 $47,829

0% 12 $0 $37,593

3.50% 20 $0 $49,503 $49,503

20 18 $0 $46,212 $46,212Defined 17 $0 $44,649 $44,649


14 $0 $40,271 $40,271


$31,652$32,760

$240,067$0 $30,582 $30,582 NPV18,298

8 $0 $32,760

6

($200,000)($100,000)

$0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



91 8%Heat Rejection


-50.3%HVAC Fans 859 1 70 6 788 5


chiller cooling. Heating provided by gas-fired boiler. Demand ventilation. Identical construction to Base

39.6 59.5 -19.9


Space Heating - Gas

N/AN/A N/A N/A

0.0 2,091.0 -2,091.0 0.0%

50.2%



0.0%

Guest Room Equipment Selection: Water Cooled VAVM-7

1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0SO2 (lb/yr) 6,605 2,327 64.8%NOX (lb/yr)

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Mechanical




2,432 1,040 57.2%Lighting

CO2 (lb/yr) 1,669,605 832,220 50.2%



1,669,605

832,220800,000

1,000,0001,200,0001,400,0001,600,0001,800,000

lb/y

r


Total 4,285.5 3,600.6 684.9


16.0%

N/A

91.8%

16.0%

HVAC Fans 859.1 70.6 788.5Demand ventilation. Identical construction to Base Case.

Assumptions

N/A N/A N/A

1,669,605

832,220

0200,000400,000600,000800,000

1,000,0001,200,0001,400,0001,600,0001,800,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


6,605

2,4322,327

1,040

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000


g/yr


Proposed

4,286

3,601

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







476 MBh $3 594

($222,001)

$0 $31 570 $31 57018 tons $7,884 5 $0 $30,502 $30,502


IRR

6

3 $0 $28,474 $28,4742 $0 $27,511 $27,511 20.8%



$26,581

5.2 yrs




Cash Flow




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)


Mechanical





7 $0 $32,675

$38,807

$35,002 $35,0029 $0

476 MBh $3,594

($146,480)cfm $64,043

$0 13 $0 $40,166 $40,166

6.00% 19 $0 $49,374 $49,374

0% 12 $0 $38,807

3.50% 20 $0 $51,102 $51,102

20 18 $0 $47,704 $47,704Defined 17 $0 $46,091 $46,091


14 $0 $41,572 $41,572


$32,675$33,818

$242,546$0 $31,570 $31,570 NPV18,298

8 $0 $33,818

6

($200,000)($100,000)

$0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



35 8%Heat Rejection


0.3%HVAC Fans 70 6 45 3 25 3



29.8 29.7 0.1


Space Heating - Gas

N/AN/A N/A N/A

2,091.0 1,106.4 984.6 47.1%

14.6%



0.0%

Guest Room Equipment Selection: Air Cooled VAV with FPPM-7

1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0SO2 (lb/yr) 2,395 2,357 1.6%NOX (lb/yr)

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Mechanical

Base Case Energy End-Use Benchmark Comparison Environmental Impact AnalysisVAV system with reheat used for all rooms. Cooling

provided by air-cooled chiller. Gas-fired boilers provide heating. Demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE


1,065 965 9.4%Lighting

CO2 (lb/yr) 849,401 724,999 14.6%



849,401

724,999

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


Total 3,644.7 2,635.8 1,008.9


27.7%

N/A

35.8%

27.7%

HVAC Fans 70.6 45.3 25.3( y yclimates as there are insufficient cooling loads for this system to be

viable).

Assumptions

N/A N/A N/A

849,401

724,999

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,395

1,065

2,357

965

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,645

2,636

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







222 MBh ($1 676)

($24,000)

$0 $14 959 $14 9590 tons $0 5 $0 $14,453 $14,453


IRR

6

3 $0 $13,492 $13,4922 $0 $13,036 $13,036 52.5%



$12,595

2.1 yrs

Natural gas 9,849 therms $1.1906 $11,726Electricity 7,122 kWh

M-7 Guest Room Equipment Selection: Air Cooled VAV with FPP


Cash Flow




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)

Savings (+) / Loss (-)$0.0622 $443 Initial Annual Savings

Mechanical





7 $0 $15,482

$18,388

$16,585 $16,5859 $0

-222 MBh ($1,676)

($25,676)cfm $0

$0 13 $0 $19,032 $19,032

6.00% 19 $0 $23,395 $23,395

0% 12 $0 $18,388

3.50% 20 $0 $24,213 $24,213

20 18 $0 $22,603 $22,603Defined 17 $0 $21,839 $21,839


14 $0 $19,698 $19,698


$15,482$16,024

$156,179$0 $14,959 $14,959 NPV0

8 $0 $16,024

6

($50,000)$0

$50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Mechanical

Base Case Energy End-Use Benchmark Comparison Environmental Impact AnalysisVAV system with reheat used for all rooms. Cooling provided by water-cooled chiller with cooling tower. Electric resistance heating. Demand ventilation.



M-7

1,040 940 9.6%Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,327 2,290 1.6%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 832,220 707,973 14.9%

Space Cooling 162.7 162.4 0.3 0.2%

45 3 25 3 35 8%

N/A N/A N/A

Guest Room Equipment Selection: Water Cooled VAV with FPP

14.9%59.5 59.5


0.0


Pumps


N/AHeat Rejection




0.0%HVAC Fans 70 6

832,220

707,973

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


Total 3,600.6 2,592.1 1,008.5N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/ABase Utilities

28.0%

45.3 25.3 35.8%

28.0%

N/A


viable).

Assumptions


832,220

707,973

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,327

1,040

2,290

940

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

3,601

2,592

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr








Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)Electricity 7,004 kWh $0.0622 $436 Initial Annual Savings


Mechanical


$12,587Natural gas 9,849 therms $1.1906 $11,726


IRR

1 $0 $12,587 $12,587$0

3 $0 $13,484 $13,4842 $0 $13,028 $13,028

4 $0 $13,956 $13,956 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 49.0%$14,444$0 $14,444$14 950222 MBh ($1 676) 6 $0 $14 950

($24,000)



0 tons $0 5

52.5%


M-7 Guest Room Equipment Selection: Water Cooled VAV with FPP






$15,473$14,950 NPV

20 11 $0 $17,755 $17,755Replacement Life and Cost Summary

08 $0 $16,014 $16,014

$156,071-222 MBh ($1,676) 6 $0 $14,950$0

$0 13 $0 $19,020 $19,02014 $0 $19,686 $19,686


$21,826 $21,82620 18 $0 $22,590 $22,590

0% 12 $0 $18,377 $18,377

3.50% 20 $0 $24,199 $24,1996.00% 19 $0 $23,381 $23,381

Defined 17

$16,575

7 $0 $15,473

9 $0 $16,575

15 $0 $20,375 $20,375

10 $0 $17,155 $17,155

$0

($25,676)cfm

($50,000)$0

$50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



59 5%Heat Rejection


0.0%HVAC Fans 70 6 28 6 42 0


(VFDs) used in VAV system. 59.5 59.5 0.0


Space Heating - Gas

N/AN/A N/A N/A

2,091.0 2,091.0 0.0 0.0%

2.0%



0.0%

Variable Frequency DrivesM-9

1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0SO2 (lb/yr) 2,327 2,262 2.8%NOX (lb/yr)

Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use



Mechanical



1,040 1,016 2.3%Lighting

CO2 (lb/yr) 832,220 815,857 2.0%



832,220 815,857

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


Total 3,600.6 3,558.6 42.0


1.2%

N/A

59.5%

1.2%

HVAC Fans 70.6 28.6 42.0

Assumptions

N/A N/A N/A

832,220 815,857

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,327

1,040

2,262

1,016

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

3,601 3,559

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr







0 MBh $0

($6,299)

$0 $941 $9410 tons $0 5 $0 $909 $909


IRR

6

3 $0 $849 $8492 $0 $820 $820 14.4%

Water & sewer 0 Gals N/A $0 0 $0 ($6,299) Simple Payback($6,299)1 $0 $792 $792


$792

7.2 yrs




Cash Flow




Loss (-)Yr.


Replace)

Savings (+) / Loss (-)$0.0622 $765 Initial Annual Savings

Mechanical





7 $0 $974

$1,157

$1,043 $1,0439 $0

0 MBh $0

($6,299)cfm $0

$0 13 $0 $1,197 $1,197

6.00% 19 $0 $1,471 $1,471

0% 12 $0 $1,157

3.50% 20 $0 $1,523 $1,523

20 18 $0 $1,422 $1,422Defined 17 $0 $1,374 $1,374


14 $0 $1,239 $1,239


$974$1,008

$5,404$0 $941 $941 NPV0

8 $0 $1,008

6

($10,000)

($5,000)

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Mechanical

Base Case Energy End-Use Benchmark Comparison Environmental Impact AnalysisVAV system with reheat used for all rooms. Cooling

provided by air-cooled chiller. Gas-fired boilers provide heating. Demand ventilation. Standard ASHRAE



M-12

1,065 1,040 2.3%Lighting 1,186.6 1,186.6 0.0 0.0%MBtu/yr MBtu/yr MBtu/yr %


Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,395 2,327 2.8%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 849,401 832,220 2.0%

Space Cooling 236.5 162.7 73.8 31.2%

70 6 0 0 0 0%

N/A N/A N/A


2.0%29.8 59.5


-29.7


Pumps


N/AHeat Rejection



cooling tower. -99.7%HVAC Fans 70 6

849,401 832,220

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


Total 3,644.7 3,600.6 44.1N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/ABase Utilities

1.2%

70.6 0.0 0.0%

1.2%

N/AAssumptions


849,401 832,220

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,395

1,065

2,327

1,040

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000


g/yr


Proposed

3,645 3,601

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr








Loss (-)Yr.




Mechanical


$832Natural gas 0 therms $1.1906 $0


IRR

1 $0 $832 $832$0

3 $0 $891 $8912 $0 $861 $861

4 $0 $922 $922 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 8.3%$954$0 $954$9880 MBh $0 6 $0 $988

($10,000)



0 tons $0 5

8.7%








$1,022$988 NPV


08 $0 $1,058 $1,058

$2,4800 MBh $0 6 $0 $988$0

$0 13 $0 $1,257 $1,25714 $0 $1,301 $1,301


$1,442 $1,44220 18 $0 $1,493 $1,493

0% 12 $0 $1,214 $1,214

3.50% 20 $0 $1,599 $1,5996.00% 19 $0 $1,545 $1,545

Defined 17

$1,095

7 $0 $1,022

9 $0 $1,095

15 $0 $1,346 $1,346

10 $0 $1,134 $1,134

$0

($10,000)cfm

($15,000)

($10,000)

($5,000)

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Mechanical




M-13



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,327 2,260 2.9%NOX (lb/yr)

CO2 (lb/yr) 832,220 815,312 2.0%

Space Cooling 162.7 131.7 31.0 19.1%

69 7 0 9 1 3%

N/A N/A N/A

Evaporative Cooling

2.0%59.5 48.0


11.5


Pumps


N/AHeat Rejection



system. 19.3%HVAC Fans 70 6

832,220 815,312

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


Total 3,600.6 3,557.2 43.4N/A N/A N/A N/A

N/ABase Utilities

1.2%

69.7 0.9 1.3%

1.2%

N/AAssumptions


832,220 815,312

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,327

1,040

2,260

1,016

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

3,601 3,557

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr








Loss (-)Yr.




Mechanical


$819Natural gas 0 therms $1.1906 $0


IRR

1 $0 $819 $819$0

3 $0 $877 $8772 $0 $847 $847

4 $0 $908 $908 First Year Yield On Marginal Cost 2.5%$939$0 $939$9720 MBh $0 6 $0 $972

($32,500)



0 tons $0 5

N/A

($32,500) Simple Payback > 20 yrs







$1,006$972 NPV


08 $0 $1,041 $1,041

-$18,9360 MBh $0 6 $0 $972$0

$0 13 $0 $1,237 $1,23714 $0 $1,280 $1,280


$1,419 $1,41920 18 $0 $1,469 $1,469

0% 12 $0 $1,195 $1,195

3.50% 20 $0 $1,574 $1,5746.00% 19 $0 $1,520 $1,520

Defined 17

$1,078

7 $0 $1,006

9 $0 $1,078

15 $0 $1,325 $1,325

10 $0 $1,116 $1,116

$0

($32,500)cfm

($35,000)

($30,000)

($25,000)

($20,000)

($15,000)

($10,000)

($5,000)

$0 0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



Mechanical




M-13



Energy End-Use


Proposed Energy Use CO2 (lb/yr) 832,220 832,220 0.0%



Space Heating - Elec 30.2 30.2 0.0 0.0%Space Heating - Gas 2,091.0 2,091.0 0.0 0.0%


SO2 (lb/yr) 2,327 2,327 0.0%NOX (lb/yr)

59.5 0.0

Thermal Storage

0.0%



unit.N/A

0.0%HVAC Fans 70 6 70 6 0 0 0 0%Heat Rejection

N/A N/A N/A59.5

832,220 832,220

400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

lb/y

r


Total 3,600.6 3,600.6 0.0N/AN/A

N/A

Base Utilities N/AReceptacles

0.0%

0.0%

N/A N/A

Assumptions

N/A N/A N/AHVAC Fans 70.6 70.6 0.0 0.0%

832,220 832,220

0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000

Base Case Proposed

lb/y

r


2,327

1,040

2,327

1,040

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500


g/yr


Proposed

3,601 3,601

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,000

Base Case Proposed

MBt

u/yr






Cash Flow

Mechanical

$0



Yr.Costs



0 $0 ($36,707) Simple Payback 11 yrs

0 MBh $0 6 $0

3 $0 $3,051 $3,0512 $0 $2,948 $2,948 IRR

7.8%

7.9%

$3 383 $3 38330

Electricity 0 kWh $0.0622 $2,752 Initial Annual Savings

Resource

tons $13,293 5 $0 $3,269 $3,269

($36,707)Water & sewer 0 Gals N/A $0

($50,000)


1 $0 $2,848 $2,848






$2,848






0 MBh $0 6 $0

20 11 $0 $4,018 $4,018

$3,383 $3,383 NPV

($36,707)$3,751 $3,751

8 $0 $3,624 $3,624$3,501

14 $0 $4,455 $4,455


Defined 17 $0 $4,939 $4,93920 18 $0 $5,112 $5,112

3.50% 20 $0 $5,476 $5,4766.00%

$6,169

$4,158

7 $0

19 $0 $5,291 $5,291

15 $0 $4,611 $4,611

$0 13 $0 $4,3040% 12 $0 $4,158

10 $0 $3,882 $3,882

$4,304


cfm $00 $3,501

9 $0

($50,000)($40,000)($30,000)($20,000)($10,000)

$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000

0 5 10 15 20

Net

Cas

h Fl

ow (E

nd o

f Yea

r)

Years



APPENDIX C: LEED Documentation

The IHG Green Engage/Solu ons program is LEEDPre-Cer ed. Many of the Prerequisites and CreditedAc ons in this program align with credits in LEED forExis ng Buildings (EB) 2009, meaning that a hotel thatachieves Green Engage/Solu ons Cer ca on hasalready cked o a number of LEED requirements and iswell on its way to achieving LEED cer ca on.

Running your hotel in a sustainable way is not enoughto achieve LEED cer ca on; you also have to proveit by maintaining policies, calcula ons, and otherdocumenta on.

To help with this process, there are a number of GreenEngage/Solu ons Level 1 and Level 2 PrerequisiteAc ons which require hotels to download, edit andadopt various sustainable policies, which are based onLEED credits and prerequisites. In many cases, thesepolicies come with calculators which are designed tohelp hotel managers track their progress and earnaddi onal credits.

The complete list of these policies and calculators isprovided to the right. These documents are available todownload in editable Word and Excel formats.

APPENDIX C: LEED Documentation

Document Green Engage/Solutions Action Group

Type ofAction Item LEED Credit

IHG Green Cleaning Policy O-04 Level 1 Prereq EQp3, EQc3.3& EQc3.4

Cleaning Products Purchasing Tool O-04 Level 1 Prereq EQc3.3Cleaning Equipment Purchases Tool O-04 Level 1 Prereq EQc3.4Cleaning Equipment Maintenance &Service Record O-04 Level 1 Prereq EQc3.4

IHG Energy BMPs Document E-01 Level 1 Prereq EAp1Sequence of Operations E-01 Level 1 Prereq EAp1Building Operating Plan E-01 Level 1 Prereq EAp1Systems Narrative E-01 Level 1 Prereq EAp1IHG Hotel Water Calculator W-02 Level 1 Prereq WEc1IHG Waste Audit Procedure G-01 Level 2 Prereq MRc6

IHG Solid Waste Management Policy G-02 Level 1 Prereq MRp1, MRc7,MRc8 & MRc9

Waste Tracking Matrix (OngoingConsumables) G-02 Level 1 Prereq MRc7

Waste Tracking Matrix (Durable Goods) G-02 Level 1 Prereq MRc8Waste Tracking Matrix (Additions andAlterations) G-02 Level 1 Prereq MRc9

IHG Sustainable Purchasing Policy P-01 Level 1 Prereq MRp1, MRc1& MRc2.1

Sustainable Purchasing Tracking Matrix(Ongoing Consumables) P-01 Level 1 Prereq MRc1

Sustainable Purchasing Tracking Matrix(Durable Goods) P-01 Level 1 Prereq MRc2.1

IHG Exterior and HardscapeManagement Plan S-01 Level 2 Prereq SSc2

IHG Integrated Pest Management,Erosion and Sedimentation andLandscape Plan

S-01 Level 2 Prereq SSc3

Issued February 1, 2011 1 LEED Documentation - Green Engage/Solutions

IHG ContactBroadwater ParkDenham, Buckinghamshire UB9 5HR

Laura Noctore: [email protected]

Green Engage/Solutions

Arup155 Avenue of the AmericasNew York, NY 10013

p: +1 212 229 2669f: +1 212 229 1056

www.arup.com

Karin Giefere: [email protected]

Issued on February 1, 2011

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.arup.com/

mailto:[email protected]