Wednesday, October 14, 2009
ESCO Project on Capitol Hill
As the executive director for the Capitol Preservation Board I would like to thank the teams of: Chevron, Trane and Siemens for submitting their proposals. Each one was well prepared and provided excellent information. Based upon the proposals we have decided to interview two of the three teams in order to help us make our final decision. Following the interviews the selected team will be awarded the project and will be posted on this blog.
Friday, October 2, 2009
ESCO Questions - October 2, 2009
I am sorry for not getting back to everyone sooner with the answer to the first question from last night. It was:
1. How Much is the York Chiller loaded during the Winter? (approximate tonnage or KW)
The answer is:
It varies from 50 to 200 tons.
Typical days are 100-200 tons.
Typical nights are 50-125 tons.
I hope that helps. This concludes the alloted time period for answering questions. Please address any further concerns you have in the proposal which you will be submitting. We look forward to all of your submittals.
1. How Much is the York Chiller loaded during the Winter? (approximate tonnage or KW)
The answer is:
It varies from 50 to 200 tons.
Typical days are 100-200 tons.
Typical nights are 50-125 tons.
I hope that helps. This concludes the alloted time period for answering questions. Please address any further concerns you have in the proposal which you will be submitting. We look forward to all of your submittals.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
ESCO Questions - October 1, 2009
The following questions have been asked. Please see the answer directly below each question.
1. How much is the York Chiller loaded during the winter? (approximate tonnage or kW)
This question will be answered after consulting with the Maintenance Department. We should have the answer posted by Friday evening.
2. Where is the heat rejected from the DX Leiberts expelled? Is this location centralized?
The heat to my knowledge is pulled into the central return system of the building in which the unit is located. We currently do not capture or use that heat in any way.
3. Are there any irrigation wells on the campus?
Not to my knowledge. We do store drainage and slowly release it to the city storm drain.
I hope this addresses the questions. David
1. How much is the York Chiller loaded during the winter? (approximate tonnage or kW)
This question will be answered after consulting with the Maintenance Department. We should have the answer posted by Friday evening.
2. Where is the heat rejected from the DX Leiberts expelled? Is this location centralized?
The heat to my knowledge is pulled into the central return system of the building in which the unit is located. We currently do not capture or use that heat in any way.
3. Are there any irrigation wells on the campus?
Not to my knowledge. We do store drainage and slowly release it to the city storm drain.
I hope this addresses the questions. David
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Energy Services Companies (ESCO) on Capitol Hill
The executive director of the Capitol Preservation Board in consultation with DFCM’s John Harrington is interested in pursuing several ESCO projects on Capitol Hill. The focus will be on projects with a 7 year payback located mainly in the State Office Building however, all of the buildings on Capitol Hill will be investigated for possible projects. The State of Utah has held a preliminary qualification of ESCO organization. The executive director has after review selected the following teams to provide information in a second round of selection specific to the Capitol Hill projects. These firms are:
o TAC Energy Solutions
o Chevron Energy Solutions
o Trane
o Siemens Building Technologies Inc.
These teams will be notified the week of September 14th and asked to confirm their involvement or interest in the stage two submittal process by the 18th of September. Following the receipt of confirmation of each team a RFP along with a sample contract will be sent to them via email the week of September 21st. The firms will then have three weeks to review and submit their proposal to the Capitol Preservation Board Office. Please submit proposal to:
Attention David H, Hart, FAIA, Executive Director,
Capitol Preservation Board
Utah State Capitol room 120
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114.
RFP responses are due no later than 2:00 PM on the 8th of October 2009 in the Capitol Preservation Board offices address above. All proposals received later than this identified time will be returned unopened. Please submit a minimum of 3 complete proposals.
Questions shall be submitted in writing to the executive director via email at dhart@utah.gov. All answers will be posted on this blog within a reasonable time period. No questions will be answered after October 2, 2009 at 5:00 PM. It is the responsibility of the proposing team to check this blog and to make sure that they have read the answers to the questions.
The executive director will assemble a selection committee to review and to identify the ranking of the four teams. The highest ranked team will be invited in for an interview where members of the selection team will be interested in learning about the management plan for the project and pricing. If the highest ranked team is successful in addressing the questions and concerns of the selection committee they will be invited to begin negotiations with the CPB for a Technical Energy Audit and Project Proposal Contact. If successful the team will receive a notice to proceed. If for any reason the highest ranked team is not successful then the executive director will terminate discussions and move the seconded highest ranked team and so on until a team is successful and a contract is negotiated.
o TAC Energy Solutions
o Chevron Energy Solutions
o Trane
o Siemens Building Technologies Inc.
These teams will be notified the week of September 14th and asked to confirm their involvement or interest in the stage two submittal process by the 18th of September. Following the receipt of confirmation of each team a RFP along with a sample contract will be sent to them via email the week of September 21st. The firms will then have three weeks to review and submit their proposal to the Capitol Preservation Board Office. Please submit proposal to:
Attention David H, Hart, FAIA, Executive Director,
Capitol Preservation Board
Utah State Capitol room 120
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114.
RFP responses are due no later than 2:00 PM on the 8th of October 2009 in the Capitol Preservation Board offices address above. All proposals received later than this identified time will be returned unopened. Please submit a minimum of 3 complete proposals.
Questions shall be submitted in writing to the executive director via email at dhart@utah.gov. All answers will be posted on this blog within a reasonable time period. No questions will be answered after October 2, 2009 at 5:00 PM. It is the responsibility of the proposing team to check this blog and to make sure that they have read the answers to the questions.
The executive director will assemble a selection committee to review and to identify the ranking of the four teams. The highest ranked team will be invited in for an interview where members of the selection team will be interested in learning about the management plan for the project and pricing. If the highest ranked team is successful in addressing the questions and concerns of the selection committee they will be invited to begin negotiations with the CPB for a Technical Energy Audit and Project Proposal Contact. If successful the team will receive a notice to proceed. If for any reason the highest ranked team is not successful then the executive director will terminate discussions and move the seconded highest ranked team and so on until a team is successful and a contract is negotiated.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Increased Energy Efficiency Planned for State Office Building
The executive director has been working with DFCM and their energy office to investigate the possibilities of combining several small energy related items into one larger ESCO (Energy Services Company) delivery process.
What makes this delivery process unique? Under the ESCO delivery method the selected company would provide a proposal identify the energy projects that have a 5 to 10 year payback as well as the saving in energy associated with each project. The ESCO would then sign an agreement guaranteeing the saving and working with the CPB to obtain funding from a third party with the saving as the payment mechanism. Once the financing is arranged, the ESCO as a type of design Build Company would design the various projects and systems and then oversee as CM (construction manager) the construction. This is all done so the ESCO will at the end of construction guarantee the cost savings. The money then generated from the energy savings over the 5 to 10 year period would go to repay the debt within that same 5 to 10 year time frame.
One of the projects that is also being contemplated is the use of photovoltaic cells. Currently the executive director is reviewing options of where to locate the massive amounts of panels. Once decided then the ESCO will provide the analysis.
In addition to these energy project the CPB may elected to do some seismic work as well as some other work that is needed at this time to keep the State Office Building functioning.
What makes this delivery process unique? Under the ESCO delivery method the selected company would provide a proposal identify the energy projects that have a 5 to 10 year payback as well as the saving in energy associated with each project. The ESCO would then sign an agreement guaranteeing the saving and working with the CPB to obtain funding from a third party with the saving as the payment mechanism. Once the financing is arranged, the ESCO as a type of design Build Company would design the various projects and systems and then oversee as CM (construction manager) the construction. This is all done so the ESCO will at the end of construction guarantee the cost savings. The money then generated from the energy savings over the 5 to 10 year period would go to repay the debt within that same 5 to 10 year time frame.
One of the projects that is also being contemplated is the use of photovoltaic cells. Currently the executive director is reviewing options of where to locate the massive amounts of panels. Once decided then the ESCO will provide the analysis.
In addition to these energy project the CPB may elected to do some seismic work as well as some other work that is needed at this time to keep the State Office Building functioning.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Photovoltaic Panels at the Capitol
The executive director has begun a study which will look at the possibility of using Photovoltaic (PV) Panels to generate energy from the sun to be used to light the Capitol and the Capitol Complex at night.
During the day energy will be developed by the sun through the PV panels. Once the suns energy is turned into electricity it will be placed into the power grid then at night the power will be taken back from the grid to light the Capitol Dome, Capitol Building and the site lighting of the Complex.
It is estimated that the total amount of KWh/yr that would be required to accomplish 100% of the night lighting would be 258,994 KWh/yr or a total watts of 59,131 and would require approximately 990 PV panels. This is the long term goal for the capitol would:
- Cost $2,200,000 engineering and installation
- Save the State $43,000 per year for a payback of 51 years.
- Save 120 Ton of CO2 each year.
While it may appear that a 51 year payback is a very long time in a commercial world, for the State Capitol Complex it make excellent sense since the Capitol and the Complex will always be under the ownership of the State and the Capitol Preservation Board 20 year Master plan is focused on building 100 year plus facilities. Therefore at the end of the Capitol’s next 100 years the State would have saved with PV panels after the initial pay back of the costs (49 years x $43,000/year in FY2009 dollars) over $2.1 million dollars.
Currently this concept is being investigated with a local engineering company. Following the analysis a phased plan of action and funding will be developed and presented to the Capitol Preservation Board.
During the day energy will be developed by the sun through the PV panels. Once the suns energy is turned into electricity it will be placed into the power grid then at night the power will be taken back from the grid to light the Capitol Dome, Capitol Building and the site lighting of the Complex.
It is estimated that the total amount of KWh/yr that would be required to accomplish 100% of the night lighting would be 258,994 KWh/yr or a total watts of 59,131 and would require approximately 990 PV panels. This is the long term goal for the capitol would:
- Cost $2,200,000 engineering and installation
- Save the State $43,000 per year for a payback of 51 years.
- Save 120 Ton of CO2 each year.
While it may appear that a 51 year payback is a very long time in a commercial world, for the State Capitol Complex it make excellent sense since the Capitol and the Complex will always be under the ownership of the State and the Capitol Preservation Board 20 year Master plan is focused on building 100 year plus facilities. Therefore at the end of the Capitol’s next 100 years the State would have saved with PV panels after the initial pay back of the costs (49 years x $43,000/year in FY2009 dollars) over $2.1 million dollars.
Currently this concept is being investigated with a local engineering company. Following the analysis a phased plan of action and funding will be developed and presented to the Capitol Preservation Board.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Lighting and Lamp Types used at the Utah State Capitol
There are 42,240 total lamps used for interior lighting within the Utah State Capitol of those 3,403 or only 8% are incandescent lamps. All other lamps 38,837 or 92% are energy-efficient lamps consisting of fluorescent, HID and LED.
The total interior Lighting Power Density is 0.98 watts/sf.
The allowable Lighting Power Density by code (ASHRAE 90.1-1999 or 2001) is 1.3 watts/sf.
This results in an improvement of 25% over and above the code requirement.
The total interior Lighting Power Density is 0.98 watts/sf.
The allowable Lighting Power Density by code (ASHRAE 90.1-1999 or 2001) is 1.3 watts/sf.
This results in an improvement of 25% over and above the code requirement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)