GWCC MV Year 1 Report 09242018.docx

Georgia World Congress Center

Measurement and Verification Report Reconciliation Year 1 (July 2017 - June 2018)

Trane – Georgia/Alabama District Ingersoll Rand 4000 DeKalb Technology Parkway Building 100 Atlanta, GA, 30340

Executive Summary

PROJECT LIFETIME TOTAL

Cost Savings

$2,244,732

Electricity Savings

23,014,810 kWh

Reduced CO2 Emissions

18,141 MT

Trane U.S. Inc. ‘Trane’ is pleased to provide this Measurement and Verification(M&V) report as part of the Guaranteed Energy Savings Performance Contract (hereinafter the “Agreement”), dated September 28, 2015.The purpose of this report is to provide the update on energy savings to the Georgia World Congress Center Authority (Georgia World Congress Center and Centennial Olympic Park) as a result of the energy efficiency retrofits project implemented in 2015 and 2016 by Trane. This report involves the M&V period of July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. The following analysis was performed for the Georgia World Congress Center Authority to determine the energy savings of the M&V performance period of Year-1. Trane concluded that the total cost savings for the Yr-1 of the performance contract was $2,244,732, which exceeds the guaranteed savings $2,044,466 by $200,266.

Performance Period – Current Year

Table 1 and 2 summarizes the energy savings and cost savings for the first year of the Guaranteed Period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018 based on the collected data via BAS trends, occupancy schedule, utility bills retrieved from Georgia Power website for electricity, Scana Energy Marketing Inc., City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management, visual inspections and measured data during the M&V activities. Total cost savings have been calculated utilizing the agreed upon rates in the contract for electricity, gas and water.

Table1: Guaranteed Vs. Actual Savings by Utility type

Table 2: Guaranteed Vs. Actual Cost savings by ECM type

Table of Content

Project Overview

The GWCC, located in downtown Atlanta, Georgia, was constructed in 4 Phases beginning in 1976 (Phase 1), 1984 (Phase 2), 1992 (Phase 3) and 2002 (Phase 4). The facility consists of three main buildings connected by a common lobby/concourse area. Owned by the State of Georgia and operated by the Georgia World Congress Center Authority, the GWCC encompasses 3.9 million square feet and is the fourth largest convention center in the nation, in terms of exhibit hall space. The Georgia International Plaza includes a pedestrian plaza on Andrew Young International Boulevard, adjacent to the Georgia World Congress Center. The Red Deck parking structure is a seven level, 2,000 car parking deck. The Gold Deck parking structure is a 300 car parking deck. The Yellow lot has 1,284 spaces and the marshalling yard next to it has 1,377 spaces. Centennial Olympic Park (C.O.P.), located in downtown Atlanta, consists of 21 acres of green space along with three major water features, one restaurant/visitors center, two pavilions, one amphitheater and the facility operations building.

UTILITY SUMMARY

Georgia Power:

Account #: 3448002 Serves: Building A, B and C (4 meters combined Rate (tariff): RTP-DA (real-time pricing, day ahead) / MLM-8 (multiple load management) billing structure

Scana Energy Marketing, Inc:

Account: # 23088255009 Serves: 99.7% of the total natural gas consumption of the facility Rate: Marginal Rate

City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management:

Serves: The entire building system Rate: Commercial rate schedule

Project Summary Retrofitted ECMs under this project are:

· ECM1: New B Building Central Energy Plant

· ECM2: GWCC Interior Lighting

· ECM3: GWCC Exterior Lighting

· ECM4: COP Exterior Lighting

· ECM5: Water / Kitchen

· ECM6: Water Feature Motor Upgrades

· ECM7: Building A Retrocommissioning

· ECM8: Exhibit Hall Lighting Retrofit

Premises Evaluated:

The list of facilities specifically included in the IGA are:

· Georgia World Congress Center Building A

· Georgia World Congress Center Building B

· Georgia World Congress Center Building C

· International Plaza

· Red Parking Deck

· Gold Parking Deck

· Yellow Parking Lot and Marshalling Yard

· Centennial Olympic Park

· Googie Burger and Visitors Center

Project Summary Table 4 and 5 summarizes the guaranteed savings and actual savings for the first year of the performance Period, July 1, 2017- June 30, 2018.

Summary of Guaranteed savings

Table 3: Summary of Guaranteed Savings

Figure 1 Guaranteed Savings

Confidential and Proprietary Information of Trane U.S. Inc.

Performance Savings Summary

Table 4: Summary of Year 1 Verified Savings

Figure 2 Actual Savings

Operational and Maintenance Savings As defined in the contract and agreed to by the Customer and Trane are the Operation and Maintenance savings for year one.

Table 5: Operational and maintenance savings (Cost Avoidance) Year 1

* Trane was able to apply for a 179D tax deduction and awarded $560,146 to GWCC. This item was not included in the original contract.

Total Energy Savings Summary Table

Table 6. Total Energy Savings Summary

Energy Conservation Measurement and Verification Approach

This section summarizes the savings generated during the Year-1 guarantee period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018.

Baseline data The project base year’s energy consumption data for the pre-retrofit condition is based on the performance and operation of the Georgia World Congress Center (“GWCC”) in the calendar year 2013, established by a full building energy simulation in Trane TraceTM 700. With this tuned model in place, baseline data for this reporting period (performance period) is July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. The electric bills were collected from Georgia Power from four electric meters, gas bills from Scana Energy Marketing, Inc., and water bills from City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management. GWCC provided chiller and boiler plant performance trend data, including operational conditions such as equipment efficiencies and runtimes, collected from Trane’s BAS. Local weather data was collected from the Atlanta Hartsfield Jackson International Airport weather station over the 12 months period.

Energy Savings Calculation Methodology The avoided energy costs (i.e., Energy Savings) are measured and calculated following the guidelines provided by International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocols (IPMVP). IPMVP provides four Options (A, B, C and D) for developing and determining savings and implementing a quality M&V process. The method to calculate avoided energy costs will vary depending on the type of M&V option selected for each of the Energy Conservation Measures.

For this project’s measurement and verification process, Trane and Customer mutually agreed upon Option A and Option D methods for various ECMs provided by the IPMVP to calculate the savings as stated in the contract.

Table 7. M&V Option used by ECM

Option A - Retrofit Isolation Method Savings determination based on Option A is a combination of measured and estimated factors when variations in factors are not expected. Measurements are spot or short-term and are measured at the component or system level, both in the baseline and post-installation cases. This method involves defining the key performance parameters of the Energy Conservation Measure as outlined in the Contract. Estimated factors are supported by historical or manufacturer’s data and were agreed upon by both the parties, customer and Trane in the contract. Measurements included the key performance parameter(s), which define the energy use of the ECM. The verification techniques for Option A determine energy savings by measuring the capacity or efficiency of a system before and after a retrofit, and multiplying the difference by an agreed-upon factor, such as hours of operation or load on the system. Savings are determined by means of engineering calculations of baseline and post-installation energy use based on measured and estimated values. For this project, savings were determined using combination of spreadsheet calculations and Trane TraceTM 700 simulation model. Dollar savings were calculated using the agreed upon rates in the contract for electricity, gas and water.

The ECMs that were included in Option A Measurement and Verification process are:

· ECM2: GWCC Interior Lighting

· ECM3: GWCC Exterior Lighting

· ECM4: COP Exterior Lighting

· ECM5: Water / Kitchen

· ECM6: Water Feature Motor Upgrades

· ECM8: Exhibit Hall Lighting Retrofit

Option A ECMs measurement and calculation details:

Energy Conservation Measure Savings - Lighting This energy conservation measure (ECM) involves the installation of high efficiency lighting at the majority of the buildings included in the project.

Table 8: Summary of all lighting ECM savings

Verification Approach The lighting efficiency improvement project aimed to reduce the connected lighting load while maintaining the lighting level. The Pre (existing) and Post (new) power wattage for a sample of Lamp/Ballast configurations that represented 75% of the total savings were measured. Power was measured by a recently calibrated true RMS wattmeter owned by the lighting contractor. The contractor measured the power at the switches/breakers serving randomly preselected fixtures of each type. Each measurement recorded the number of operating lamps, burned out lamps and fixtures connected to the switch, verified by turning the switch on and off. The average wattage per lamp/ballast configuration is defined as the wattage representation of the entire lighting population. Operating time data was agreed upon for both parties (Trane and the customer). Buildings/Area included for lighting update:

· - Building A

· - Building B

· - Building C

· - Centennial Olympic Park

· - Googie Burger-visitor center

· - A' Marshaling Yard

· - Red Deck

· - West Plaza

· - Yellow lot

· - North Side Drive

Exterior lighting Savings calculation:

The calculation of savings for Exterior Lighting was determined through an Excel spreadsheet model. The mean power of each lamp type was determined from the pre and post measurements. The difference between the measured Pre and Post lamp/ballast power wattage was compared and savings were calculated as:

KWh Savings = (Baseline Energy) – (Post-Installation Energy) KWh Savings = [{Sum of kW/Fixture (Pre) * Quantity)}-{Sum of kW/Fixture (Post)*Quantity}]*Hours of Operation Where:

Baseline Energy = Energy value (kWh) determined from pre-retrofit measurements based on existing (or Pre-installation) lighting KW.

Post-Installation Energy = Energy value (kWh) determined from pre-retrofit measurements based on post-installation lighting KW

Table 9: Summary of savings calculation for exterior lighting ECM

The short fall in savings due to the implementation of the Exterior Lighting ECM was due to a fixture miscount error made during the IGA phase. Due to this discrepancy, Trane, GWCC and the lighting contractor decided to offset the savings by upgrading the existing interior fluorescent fixtures to LED technology in different areas throughout the facility, such as meeting rooms, concourses, back of house, etc.

Interior lighting Savings calculation:

Interior lighting savings calculation was determined through the Trane TraceTM 700 Energy model in coordination with a specialized lighting analysis spreadsheet tool. All changes to the initial model with construction As-Built data as well as measured data for pre and post lighting were input in the Templates section of the software. For the first M&V period, it was necessary to modify the lighting internal load templates in the energy model, and thus the expected lighting impact of occupied spaces were updated accordingly. Changes to the lighting density for this ECM (using post-M&V measurements and as-built data) in the model was done. Based on the lighting audit, the lighting power density (LPD) in Watts per square foot was calculated for each Trane TraceTM 700 internal load template, as shown in Table 9.

Table 10: Updated Lighting Power Densities

Table 11: Summary of savings calculation for interior lighting

Measurement of this ECM is a one-time measurement and will not be measured and calculated in future M&V performance year period. Year1 verified savings numbers will be presented in future years with the agreed upon escalated utility rates.

Energy Conservation Measure Savings - Water

Bathroom fixtures, Kitchen Dish Sprayers & Ice Machines Water(kgal)

Cost Savings ($)

Water energy conservation measure (ECM) consisted of water conservation retrofits of bathroom fixtures-urinals, faucets, and showerheads, Kitchen fixtures – kitchen Hand Sinks, Kitchen Dish Sprayers and Pedal Valve on Prep Sinks and Ice Machines. The calculation of savings for this ECM was determined through an Excel Spreadsheet model. The energy savings and savings verification process and calculation method is presented below.

Table 12. Summary of savings calculation for water retrofit ECM

Verification Approach The methodology uses existing (pre) and as-built (post) fixture counts and measured flush rates as well as the agreed upon stipulated parameters described in the agreement. Pre (existing) and Post (new) water flow or per flush rates for a sample of Plumbing fixtures were measured (A sample of 10 fixtures of each type were used which represented 75% of the total savings). The average Flow/Flush rates were the values representing the entire plumbing fixture population. The difference between the measured Pre and Post Flow/Flush rates were compared and that became the basis for the savings.

The energy savings for the Water ECM are determined by correctly applying the utility rates to the calculated actual energy units. The water consumption baseline for each building was calculated by factoring in the number of people, times the average number of flushes per day, times number of days per year of use, times the average water flow (gallons per flush). GWCC and Trane collaboratively agreed upon this assumptions and the results throughout the calculations process. The annual energy savings are determined by subtracting the Post Retrofit (as built) water consumption (gal), and costs, from the pre-retrofit (baseline) water consumption (gal) and costs. The post retrofit measured flow rates were used to develop the average flow rate by fixture type. Energy savings calculation was done by;

Water Fixtures:

Figure 3 Water ECM Calculation Spreadsheet Snapshot

Water related electrical energy savings retrofit;

The Pre (existing) and Post (new) sample of electrical energy consumption of ice machines were measured. The average electrical energy consumption was the value representing the entire ice machine population. The difference between the measured electrical energy consumption were compared and that became the basis for the savings.

Water related gas savings retrofit;

Measurement of this ECM is a onetime measurement and will not be measured and calculated in future M&V performance year period. Year-1 verified savings numbers will be presented in future year with the agreed upon escalated rate.

Energy Conservation Measure Savings - Water Features Motor Upgrades During the construction of the project, two of the new pump motors were not installed based on the following:

· Main Water Feature motor in Building B was decommissioned.

· Fish Pond Water Feature 2 had already a high efficiency motor in place

For the remaining of the pumps replaced by this project (2 total), motor kW prior to retrofit was measured and recorded. New motor power after retrofit was also measured and recorded. The annual operating hours for each water feature motors were stipulated. The difference between the measured Pre and Post motor kW was compared and became the basis of the savings.

Table 13. M&V results for water features motor upgrade ECM

Measurement of this ECM is a onetime measurement and will not be measured and calculated in future M&V performance year period. Year-1 verified savings numbers will be presented in future year with the agreed upon escalated rate.

OPTION “B” -- Retrofit Isolation with All Parameter Measurement

This option is based on periodic or continuous measurement of energy use taken at the component or system level when variations in factors are expected. Energy or proxies of energy use are measured continuously. Periodic spot or short-term measurements may be sufficient when variations in factors are not expected. Savings are determined from analysis of baseline and reporting period energy use or proxies of energy use. Direct measurements and estimated values, engineering calculations and/or component or system models often developed through regression analysis. Adjustments to models are not typically required.

ECM 7: Retrocommissioning ECMs

7a. Building A: Updating single zone units’ chilled water and hot water coil operation Trends were created in the JCI Metasys BAS to monitor and validate the performance of the retrocommissioning work done in the single zone units located in the Concourse are of Building A. Based on the retrocommissioning sheets, all units passed the established functional performance test, indicating all changes were done and successfully implemented. However, analyzing the collected data it was verified that seven out of fifteen unit’s retrocommissioned were operating as specified in our scope of work and the rest were operating differently. These units are listed in Table 14 below. Also, a comparative chart is shown In Figures 4 and Figure 5 showing one AHU operating with wild coils and another unit following the sequence specified in the contract.

Table 14.- Units operation status

Figure 4 Building A AHU-S1 showing incorrect operation

Figure 5 Building A AHU-S3 showing correct operation

7b. Building A: Concourse and Exhibit Hall Single Zone Units Simultaneous Heating/Cooling Trends were created in the JCI Metasys BAS to monitor and validate the performance of the retrocommissioning work done in the single unit located in the concourse area in Building A. It was validated that all of these units have the same zone temperature set point when operating at the same time. It was also confirmed that the supply air temperature is very similar for each unit, which confirms the statement that these units are not fighting each other for cooling or heating the concourse area.

Table 15. Concourse unit settings/performance. May 2017

In regards to Unit AHU-S5, it is suspected that data obtained is unreliable due to suspicious chilled water supply and return temperature readings of 70.1F and 76.6F, respectively, when a calculated average from other units at both the same location and distribution loop was found to be 43F for CHWS and 52F for CHWR.

7c. Building A: Outside Air Unit RCX Trends were created in the JCI Metasys BAS to monitor and validate the retrocommissioning work done in the Outside Air Unit (OAAHU) in Building A. It was verified that the preheat coil temperature setpoint was changed from 80F to 50F and also the leaving air temperature setpoint was set to 55F. However, during the retrocommissioning work done during the project’s construction phase, it was detected that the Temperature Low Limit Sensor was bad and needed replacement. This sensor being out of service will prevent the unit from operating.

Figure 6 OAAHU-1 changed preheat setpoint.

Option C - Continuous Metering Guarantee

This option is based on continuous measurements of energy use taken at the system level when variations in factors are expected. Energy or proxies of energy use are measured continuously. This method involves collecting utility bills throughout the guarantee period and comparing them to the adjusted baseline. Energy savings are calculated using the following equation:

Avoided Energy Use (Savings) = (Baseline Energy Use) adjusted – (Post Installation Energy Use)

Where;

Adjusted-baseline Energy is defined as the baseline energy and any routine and non-routine adjustments needed to adjust it to the conditions of the reporting period.

This option was not included in this project.

OPTION “D” – Calibrated Simulation Option D, involves the use of computer simulation software to predict facility energy usage for the baseline and/or reporting period. Option D can be used to assess the performance of all ECMs in a facility; however, the simulation tool also allows estimating the savings attributable to each ECM within a multiple-ECM project. As the system is complex, ECM interactive effects are also complex, unpredictable changes in the occupancy and schedule of the buildings make the computation of non-routine adjustments so inaccurate that Options A, B or C would create excessive error in the savings determination for this facility.

For this project, Option D method was used to calculate the savings for ECM 1 New Central Energy Plant in Building B. Data was trended in the Building Automation System (BAS). The collected data was input in an updated detailed energy simulation model built in collaboration with Griffith Engineering, Inc. (GEI). The energy model was created using Trane TraceTM 700 to help predict energy usage over the course of the year. The model is "calibrated" so that it predicts an energy pattern that approximately matches actual metered data for baseline energy usage with acceptable accuracy during the baseline year. The following inputs were revised for this M&V period based on unique information from the site.

· Calendar / occupancy schedule

· Weather data

· Chilled water plant performance

· Hot water plant Performance

For Option D, two calibrated models are included; one corresponds to the baseline case (no ECMs) and another includes all of the implemented ECMs. In either case, the models and measured energy data are under the same set of operating conditions. Savings with Option D can be calculated using two forms of Equations, Equations 1f) and 1g) given by IPMVP guideline.

Avoided energy (Savings) = Baseline energy from the calibrated model [hypothetical or without ECMs] – Reporting-period energy from the calibrated model [with ECMs] Or, Avoided Energy (Savings) = Baseline energy from the calibrated model [hypothetical or without ECMs] - Actual calibration-period energy +/- Calibration error in the corresponding calibration reading

Trane TraceTM 700 model simulation details for new B Central Plant:

Model Changes The energy model used for M&V purposes involves two separate simulations of the building, with the difference in energy usage between the two representing the savings. The baseline simulation of the model was built upon a previously calibrated model, with an adjusted baseline bases on As-Built information. The proposed case incorporates the changes that have been made to the chilled water plant and hot water plant. The model updates for calendar and weather have been made to both cases.

Calendar.

The custom calendar for the energy model was modified based on the actual event schedule obtained from the GWCC. Based on actual events, the TRACE calendar assigns each day of the simulation to one of eight different day types. Because a schedule of events was provided for July 2017 – June 2018, the calendar had to be split between the two years in order to cover the full scope. The first half of 2018 was used to populate the custom calendar months January through June. Similarly, the second half of 2017 was used to populate July through December.

The base load kW used in the calendar methodology remained at 4,500 kW.

Figure 7 GWCC’s typical raw event schedule

Weather Actual weather data for Atlanta (Hartsfield Jackson International Airport weather station) was obtained and used for the model simulation. The obtained data was input into a full year’s weather file for the model. Because the M&V period spans parts of both 2017 and 2018, the first half of 2018 weather data (January through June) was combined with 2017 weather data (for July through December) to create a full year’s profile similar to the calendar methodology described above.

Chiller Performance For each chiller, the weighted average kW/ton during the M&V period was calculated based on 15-minute interval data. The table below shows the average weighted efficiency used in the model for each chiller. The efficiencies in kW/Ton were weighted based on the calculated tonnage at that interval vs the overall sum of tonnages.

Chiller Performance Issues (Non-routine Adjustment for M&V Year 1) Due to failures in the condensate water loop, the chillers did not operate at maximum efficiency during M&V Year 1. A failed condenser water bypass valve resulted in drastically reduced condenser water flow through the chillers. The condenser water bypass that was not inside the scope of the original project, failed in the open position and allowed constant unwanted bypass during the entirety of M&V Year 1. Because this failure was outside the scope of the project, yet effected the operation of critical project equipment, IPMVP allows for adjustment to be made to try and remove effects of this unforeseen issue.

By bypassing condenser water return around the chiller excessively, the valve failure reduced chiller capacity and decreased chiller efficiency. During some days the reduced chiller capacity required the running of an additional chiller when it should not have been needed. This issue forced the chillers to operate in less ideal part load conditions to meet the load. To adjust for this issue, the time periods where additional chillers ran when they shouldn’t have been needed were excluded from the calculated efficiency results below. This corresponded to removal of data for approximately 14 days during M&V Year 1.

Despite removing this period it was difficult to remove other effects of the valve failure. Starving the chiller of condenser water caused the machines to produce higher than design leaving condenser water temperatures during warmer days. Additionally, condenser water temperature difference was significantly higher than design for the majority of the time. Theoretically, this causes reduced chiller operational efficiency as well. However, this effect is difficult to specifically determine. There is no published data or recorded operational efficiency of this type of chiller operating during extremely non-optimal condenser water conditions. Additionally, the small amount of data available after the issue was fixed did not provide a conclusive answer for the efficiency adjustment needed to remove the effect of too low condenser water flow. Because chiller efficiency exceeded project projections without removal of this effect, additional efforts were not made to adjust further for these effects. Trane recommends that this valve be repaired and be controllable again.

Modeled Chiller Efficiency The efficiencies below only include intervals where condensate leaving temperatures were at or below the design temperature of 95°F and had a ΔT less than the design of 14°F.

Table 16 – Chiller Performance

Boiler Performance For each of the new condensing boilers, the thermal efficiency during the M&V Year 1 was calculated based on an in-situ combustion analysis. Combustion analyses were performed during July 2018, so results were collected for only a condensing operational range. The result of the combustion analysis was an average boiler full-load combustion efficiency of 89.2% with 100F entering water temperature (methodology from BTS-2000 was used to calculate the efficiency (see Table 17). This result was compared to manufacturer’s data which suggests the boilers should operate at 92.7% efficiency at these conditions.

Table 17. Boiler efficiency results based on combustion test

The results extrapolated to normal full load conditions with 140-150F entering water temperatures, was 83.0%. Adding in the existing plant inefficiencies modeled in the original baseline model, resulted in an average boiler full-load efficiency of 69.5%. Additionally, the graphs below show the three curves used in the model, generated or confirmed from the combustion tests and plant trend data.

Figure 8 Power Consumed Curve (generated from combustion tests)

Figure 9 OA Reset Curve (confirmed with plant trends)

Figure 10 HW Reset Curve (Generated from Manufacture’s data and combustion tests)

New M&V Trane TraceTM 700 File Savings for the M&V period are calculated through Trane TraceTM 700 by comparing the updated file to the baseline file. Trane TraceTM 700 calculations are performed over a full M&V period calendar year. Additionally, the chiller performance calculations described above are for the M&V period year-1 only. As a result, the energy savings for M&V shall only include months within the M&V period.

Trane TraceTM 700 M&V Results

Based on the two simulations in the energy model, the savings were determined for the B Central Plant (ECM1 and ECM7) improvements. Year-1 energy consumption report has been generated from the model showing the difference in consumption between the two simulations. Note that the only applicable values from the report are for the current M&V period. The table below summarizes the M&V results and compares them to the project guaranteed savings.

Table 18: M&V Year 1 Trane TraceTM 700 Results - Electric

(kWh) Modeled Proposed (kWh) Modeled Savings (kWh)

Table 19 – M&V Year 1 Trane TraceTM 700 Results – Gas

Table 20 – M&V Year 1 Trane TraceTM 700 Results – Water

Utility Rate:

Electricity GWCC’s Georgia Power electricity bill associated with the main facility (Buildings A, B, & C) is based on input from four meters which are combined (multiple load management) from a billing perspective. The Georgia Power GWCC electricity-billing tariff is an RTP-DA (real-time pricing, day ahead) / MLM-8 (multiple load management) billing structure. A mutually agreed upon rates by both Trane and the customer were used to calculate the savings for this performance period. The agreed upon rates are given in table below:

Table 21: Electricity Energy Rates used for Energy Cost Reduction Calculations GWCC Incremental Electricity Rates

Natural Gas The marginal natural gas rate is based on the main meter serviced by Scana Energy Marketing, Inc. (Account # 23088255009) as its usage represents 99.7% of the total natural gas consumption

Table 22: Rates Used for Energy Cost Reduction Calculations

Rate

Water and Sewer City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management bills the Georgia World Congress Center facility under a commercial rate schedule. The following table shows the mutually agreed upon rates by Trane and the customer to calculate the savings for this performance period:

Table 23 Water and Sewer Rates Used for Energy Cost Reduction Calculations

Escalated Rates Rates escalation has been established in the Investment Grade Audit Agreement document, ARTICLE 2, Scope of Energy Audit and Energy Audit Report, Section 2.3.8.2 Acceptable Proposed Savings. The following table shows the escalated rates that will be used from Year-2 in the project.

Table 24: Escalated Rates Used for Energy and Operational Cost Reduction Calculations

For this report, the rates were used same as base year and were not escalated. Rate escalation will be effective starting from 2nd year of M&V.

Baseline Adjustments Trane reserves the right to make baseline adjustments in response to changes to the facility(s) or deviations in the operating parameters per the PACT Agreement. Trane has periodically reviewed systems and facility operations in order to determine if all of the operational parameters are as per contract; if there will be any changes on any of the parameters baseline adjustments is done.

Routine adjustments:

The baseline utility data for the electric meter and New Central Chilled Water Plant Performance data is always adjusted for weather conditions and occupancy calendar in order to have a valid comparison for savings calculation. For electric demand (kW) and consumption (kWh) - the adjustment is made based on cooling degree-days and for natural gas consumption (therms) - the adjustment is based on heating degree-days. Adjusted baseline data is derived from the Trane TraceTM 700 software and accounts for hourly weather conditions. The building(s) occupied and/or equipment and/or lighting utilized is a variable which is adjusted for if the hours of operation for every M&V period. GWCC’s event calendars is used to input the occupied hours and number of occupancy for the performance period.

Avoided Energy use (Savings) = (Baseline Energy ± Routine Adjustments to the Reporting period conditions) – Reporting period Energy

Non-Routine adjustments:

Trane also reserves the right to make baseline adjustments in response to changes to the facility(s) or deviations in the operating parameters. A non-routine adjustment will need to be made to the baseline model to account for something that was modified during the M&V period that is not typical. Some changes that can lead to the need for non-routine adjustments in GWCC include, but are not limited to:

· Additions to the building, such as a new exhibit hall or wing of the building.

· Changes to the rentable locations of the building, such as when an exhibit hall or other large space become ineligible for rented activities. Alternatively, previously not rented space may have become rentable.

· Major equipment changes including new plant heating or cooling equipment, HVAC airside systems, lighting retrofits, and base loads.

· Increased ventilation rates for code compliance and the addition of heating and/or air-conditioning to areas that previously had no environment conditioning.

· The non-routine adjustments is described by the equation as follows;

Avoided Energy Use (Savings) = (Adjusted Baseline Energy Use) – (Reporting Period Energy Use) ± Non-Routine Adjustments of the baseline energy to reporting period conditions Where;

Adjusted Baseline Energy is defined as the baseline energy and any routine adjustments needed to adjust it to the conditions of the reporting period Owner’s Responsibilities Besides, above mentioned non-routine adjustments list, Trane also reserves the right to make baseline adjustments for below listed points for owner’s responsibility. Customer agrees to contact Trane within seven (7) calendar days of commencement of any changes or additions of equipment or environments. At Trane’s discretion, the Baseline may be adjusted based on the data or newly discovered information. The baseline may be adjusted for failures by Owner to perform its obligations under the Agreement or in the event, any representation or warranty made by Owner under the Agreement is false or misleading. The GWCCA shall be responsible for maintaining the following operating parameters during the Contract Time:

Table 25. System operating conditions based on Contract

Operating Parameters

per operating hours from C.O.P. show schedule

Trane Intelligent Services (TIS)

Trane Intelligent Services (TIS) is Trane’s cloud based energy management platform. TIS allows us to gain a deeper understanding of the way the GWCC operates through the use of analytics and data trends. As part of the project, the GWCC was linked to the TIS platform. Trane personnel have been continuously monitoring the performance of the GWCC and using the TIS platform to proactively address inefficient operations. The following pages will give a glance into how TIS has helped maintain the operational efficiency of the GWCC chiller plant.

Below is a sample of the live energy dashboard that is being used at the GWCC. This dashboard brings in data points from all of the electricity and gas meters in the GWCC. The dashboard then displays the consumption and demand metrics in easy to read graphical displays. The dashboard sums up similar utilities into one value for the building. In the case of the electrical consumption, there are five meters on the GWCC and each is brought in to one “virtual,” meter in the dashboard.

The display above can be used in a “kiosk,” format to create awareness in the GWCC. It allows patrons to see the real time energy consumption of the building that they are visiting. In addition, it gives insight into all of the energy conservation measures the GWCC has undertaken.

Tracking Energy Conservation Measures

The spectral analysis is 2D way of displaying energy consumption. Each vertical columns represents an individual day. Each day starts at 00:00 at the top and progresses down to 24:00 at the bottom. The color shading represents electrical demand in kW.

The first spectral image below points out the end of the major construction period. Note how the shading shifts dramatically to more green areas (less electrical demand). This gives a graphical representation of the impact of the energy project. In the future, the GWCC can track additional operational changes and the impact each change has on the buildings energy footprint.

In a different format, the progress of the construction and implementation of the energy conservations measures are shown below. There was a clear decrease in both consumption and demand across the construction period. The data used in these graphs is pulled directly from TIS and allows for long term tracking, trending and base lining.

Identifying Inefficient Operation

The spectral image below shows a time when Chiller Plant B went down and forced Chiller plant C to carry the cooling load in the building. This operational change caused a significant increase in the overall electrical consumption. The average increase in demand to run Chiller Plant C is 447 kW. At this rate, that is 10,728 kWh per day or $924.75 per day at the current blended rate. The analytics allow Trane and the GWCC to assign a cost penalty to the inefficient operation in real time. In certain cases, this can be important in budgeting for repairs and upgrades on inefficient components.

Appendix

Appendix A. Monthly Electric Bill (2015 to 2018)

Appendix B. Avoided Cost Analysis

· Let’s Consider an Example:

· Observations:

· Car 2 is more fuel efficient, but its annual gas bill is higher. Why? Because it was driven 5,000 miles more than Car 1.

· So, what is avoided cost? Consider if Car 1 was driven 15,000 miles/year as Car 2 was, what would Car 1’s gas bill have been?

· Answer: $2,000 year

· So the car owner’s avoided cost would be $2,000 - $1,500 = $500

· Stated differently, keeping the annual mileage constant (15,000 miles), if the car owner had chosen to drive Car 1, his/her gas bill would’ve been $500 more than if he/she…