I

ENERGY

EFFICIENCY

SOLUTIONS

FOR

MUNICIPALITIES

The Energy Services Division is able to offer the Audit++ Program as a result of its partnership with the Ministries of Energy and Public Infrastructure Renewal under the Province of Ontarios Municipal Eco-Challenge Fund. We believe the greenhouse gas reductions and financial savings achieved from the projects undertaken as a result of the Audit++ Program will be multiplied many times over. These projects will act as the cornerstone of a long term, sustainable and integrated energy management system that will allow Ontario municipalities to collectively benefit and leverage each others strengths and best practices.

The LAS Energy Services Division offers a number of services designed to help municipalities save money, energy, and the natural environment.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY SOLUTIONS FOR MUNICIPALITIES

Letter from the Chair

s the Chair of the Local Authority Services Limited Board, I am pleased to provide you with a copy of this compilation of the Audit++ Program Case Studies. Numerous colleagues from across Ontario have long told me that they would like to retrofit an old facility, as either part of a capital works project or larger energy management plan, but they lacked the local expertise and budget. LAS developed the Audit++ to meet this need by not only providing an action-oriented document but by educating local staff on how to emulate these examples in other facilities.

Gary McNamara Chair

Mayor, Town of Tecumseh

As the second largest energy consuming sector in Ontario, representing an expenditure of over $680 million on electricity and $275 million on natural gas annually, municipal governments do not need to look beyond the decision-making realm of our council chambers to make a difference. Municipal governments are leading the way in energy conservation and greenhouse gas reduction. I am pleased that the Audit++ Program has been a well-received addition to the municipal energy conservation toolbox and has helped make an impact locally. LAS offers this document to all municipalities in Ontario so that municipalities outside of the program can also benefit from the lessons learned. This initiative is meant to build capacity across the sector by highlighting operational and technological improvements that can improve the energy efficiency of similar facilities across Ontarios municipal sector. The Audit++ Program was made possible as a result of a partnership with the Ministries of Energy and Public Infrastructure Renewal under the Province of Ontarios Municipal EcoChallenge Fund (MECF). On behalf of LAS I would like to say thank you to Minister Smitherman and to Barry Beale and his hard-working staff in the Energy Efficiency and Distributed Energy branch for supporting this and other valuable programs under the MECF. I would also like to extend my gratitude to Walter Mathias at Enbridge Gas and Greg Kempa at Union Gas for developing new models of collaboration and incentive support for the local municipal staff working to implement the recommendations in the Audit++ Implementation Reports. The work and wisdom of Marion Fraser (Fraser & Co.), Judy Simon (IndEco), and Rick Clayton (IBM) who constituted the Independent Selection Panel was also very much appreciated. Thank you to all of the personnel involved in the I.B.Storey led consortium for the hard work and many kilometers they logged in delivering this very valuable program to the 42 municipalities from Amherstburg to York. Finally, our municipal member participants at all locations are to be congratulated for taking a leadership role in enhancing the municipal triple bottom line.

Audit++ Program Introduction

LAS initiated the Audit++ Program in January 2008 and commenced implementation in early March 2008 upon finalization of the Municipal Eco-Challenge Fund (MECF) agreement with the Province of Ontario. Shortly thereafter, LAS selected the provider and invited all Ontario municipalities to submit applications in March. In April an Independent Selection Panel chose the 42 sites which represented the best possible mixture of facility type, need and possible energy savings, geography, and community size.

The Audit++ Program, which was rolled out across the 42 sites from May 2008 to February 2009, combined a number of valuable services for each participating facility, including:
I Pre-audit communications and information collection

I Development of an Implementation Report that details

with local staff

I Historical energy use analysis including creation of a

the operational and technological improvement opportunities discovered during the shared audit, as well as an explanation of how to realize these opportunities and financial analysis details that may be used to seek and justify necessary capital support
I A full day post audit classroom session on energy

load profile
I An introductory meeting with local stakeholders to

management and a review of improvement plans

I An update of reports to include feedback from the

provide an overview of energy issues

I A full day assessment of facility and equipment

classroom sessions

focusing on energy impacts

I Interaction with facilities personnel to understand local

operating and management practices

I Metering and load profiling of key equipment I Development of a RETScreen profile and related

assessment of current performance and opportunities for energy efficiency retrofits, as well as recommendations to improve operating practices
I Development of an Audit Report that functions as

a blend between a detailed audit and a basic re-commissioning report

I Evaluation of retrofit projects for federal, provincial and

The purpose of the Audit++ Program was to help meet the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Targets set for the municipal sector in the Provinces Go Green Action Plan on Climate Change by building local energy management capacity, positioning recipient municipalities to apply for the retrofit support under the MECF and other incentive programs, and adding to the best practice literature being developed by LAS for dissemination across the province. LAS maintains that the cost-effectiveness of reducing GHGs through energy efficiency projects is unsurpassed while the operating savings and job creation in local municipalities are welcome spin-offs.

utility funding

ENERGY EFFICIENCY SOLUTIONS FOR MUNICIPALITIES

Discussion of Impacts

With a total consumption load larger than every industrial sector except Pulp & Paper, Ontarios municipalities are in a position to make a meaningful contribution to the Provinces greenhouse gas and electricity demand reduction targets, if given the proper capacity. This is why LAS was so pleased that the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure enabled us to offer the Audit++ Program to municipalities, many of whom would not have undertaken such an energy management measure due to financial and human resource capacity constraints.

The 42 facilities in the Audit++ Program covered a wide spectrum in terms of size, function, consumption, and equipment use. From the 3638 ft2 works garage in Frontenac Islands to the 210,700ft2 recreation centre in Pickering, the average size was just over 54,442ft2 for a grand total of 2,286,584ft2. In total, the 42 facilities consumed over 100,410,000 ekWh per year (55,966,000 ekWh of electricity and 44,444,000 ekWh of fuel) during 2007, which resulted in 20,335 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions. To sequester this amount of carbon we would have to plant approximately 30,000 acres of forest (US EPA figures). Fortunately, the Audit++ team identified considerable savings potential.

Table #1: Audit++ Program Total Projected Savings

Category Energy Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) Operating Costs Electricity Fuel 7813063 ekWh 12766900 ekWh Average 186025 ekWh 303974 ekWh 97 tCO2e $ 26,980.95 Total 20579963 ekWh 4087 tCO2e $1,133,200

Range = 7tCO2e to 462 tCO2e Range = $5,600 to $116,000

NOTE: Equivalent kilowatt hours are used herein to normalize and combine energy used form electricity, natural gas, and propane. Greenhouse gas figures were generated using Environment Canada emission factors and are provided in equivalent tones of Carbon dioxide throughout.

Considerable opportunities were identified in each of the 42 facilities and ranged from routine maintenance procedures to dramatic alterations of building operating systems that often included renewable energy systems. The average operating cost savings per site was $26,980.95 on a total investment of $6,478,600 for all 42 sites, which amounts to an approximate simple payback of 5.72 years.

It is very likely that most of the proposed projects will be undertaken by municipal staff given access to incentive programs to offset the initial capital costs. More encouragingly, many of these same staff indicated a strong desire to take the lessons learned forward to other municipal facilities. It is our hope that those that read this publication will take the initiative to both contact those that received an Audit++ Program and to investigate the possibility of similar conservation and energy efficiency measures in their own communities.

Audit++ Program Introduction

Site Audit Portion of the Audit ++ Program

80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Poor Fair Good Consultants Knowledge Energy Management Usefullness No opinion Excellent Knowledge Transfer Facility Specific Info

Participant Evaluation
Participants were surveyed twice, in September 2008 and January 2009, to get a better picture of the overall value of the Audit++ Program. The responses, received from 23 of the 42 municipal participants (55%), indicated there was a high level of satisfaction with the program and a strong desire for it to continue. For example, 100% felt the Audit++ Program was a good use of public money for the facility, municipality, and provincial level; and 90% felt the Audit++ Program should be rolled out to both other facilities in their municipality as well as other municipalities. Respondents stated that facility managers, engineers, planners, treasurers, accounting and purchasing staff, CAOs, Chief Building officials, council members, environmental and energy management staff all benefitted from the Audit++ Program process. Staff involved in the Audit++ Program also indicated that they will alter operating and routine maintenance practices as well as capital project and major maintenance plans going forward. In terms of impact on operating and routine maintenance practices in the next 12 months, 64% suggested a major impact, 36% minor, and 0% responded that the Audit++ Program would have little impact. In terms of impact on operating and routine maintenance practices, 64% suggested a major impact, 36% minor, and 0% responded that the Audit++ Program would have little impact for both the next 12 months and the next few years. Respondents also indicated that both the site audit portion and the post audit intervention meeting were very effective in terms of information provided, knowledge transfer, approach and style, timing, and overall delivery.
80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Audit++ Program Post Audit Intervention Meeting

Poor Fair Excellent Good Timing Facilitators Knowledge Communication Style

No opinion Quality of Info

"Lessons learned" from Audit++ Program included; how to clarify energy management programs, importance of planning energy projects, importance of developing awareness and providing training to operators and occupants, awareness of grant programs, new technologies and energy management principles, crossapplication to other facilities, and impacts of off-hours energy waste. The following comment is indicative of those provided by numerous other respondents: The benefit to our facility and municipality is the opportunity to identify energy management priorities that will save tax dollars in the end. This no-cost service will allow us access to government funding that would have otherwise required a consultant's audit/report at our cost. There are likely many other communities across the province that would like to participate in energy management improvements, but have difficulty finding or justifying the finances to carry out the required audits.

The Audit++ Program has proven itself as another initiative in which LAS and its municipal members have built conservation and energy efficiency capacity that will enable municipalities to use less energy while providing the same or superior service levels to the public. The Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure is to be congratulated once more for providing the funding to make this program possible. The How to Guide that follows briefly describes the purpose of the 42 case studies and provides contact information for the municipal leads at each site. LAS encourages those interested to contact these staff directly and to continue to build the canon of municipal energy management knowledge and expertise; share your own practices with us so that we can disseminate across the sector. We would also like to invite those with suggestions for future programs to contact us directly.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY SOLUTIONS FOR MUNICIPALITIES

How-To Guide

This case study guides have been created so that all municipalities can benefit from the lessons learned during the Audit++ Program on a site by site basis. This initiative is meant to build capacity across the municipal sector by highlighting some operational and technological improvements that can be implemented to improve the energy efficiency of similar facilities across Ontarios municipalities. The 42 case studies that follow are a synopsis of the more detailed implementation reports that each host municipality received as part of the Audit++ Program. They were refined both before and after a joint workshop with the providers and local staff/elected officials to include the most up-to-date information and to focus on the main local concerns in addition to energy savings and greenhouse gas emissions. Each case study includes an overview of the participating municipality, information about the chosen facility, and a local contact so those interested can find out more information if so desired. Each case study also provides a high-level project development structure based on a range of energy saving opportunities, available incentive information, and cash-flow analysis. The energy intensity benchmarks presented herein have been compared to similar, but not identical facilities, and are presented in ekWh/ft2, a unit of measurement that converts electrical and thermal energy into equivalent kilowatt hours and divides the total by the square footage of the building.

At each Audit++ Program location, the providers walked municipal staff through a well-tested process that started with understanding current costs and comparing the selected facility to the industry standard, understanding when and where energy is consumed, eliminating waste, and then taking steps to maximize efficiency and in some cases optimize supply. The energy savings opportunities and other points of interest identified during the Audit++ Program process fell in one of the following areas: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Manual Control Automatic Control Operating Conditions Efficient Equipment Optimize Supply Deferred Items (due to long payback periods)

The description of the actions within each of these categories provides a better understanding of some of the energy saving opportunities that may exist in your own local facility. Please note, however, that this is meant as a starting point only and further investigation into the exact energy saving opportunities and availability pricing in your municipality is required before proceeding with any retrofit work.

The energy load distribution of load-consuming devices was broken down into consumption areas and subsequently balanced against the approximate energy consumption for a given billing period. Proposed retrofits were analyzed according to energy and GHG savings, potential operating cost savings (note that escalating utility costs are not included), retrofit costs, and simple payback. An energy investment's simple payback period is the amount of time it will take to recover the initial investment in energy savings, dividing initial installed cost by the annual energy cost savings. For example, an energy-saving measure that costs $5,000 and saves $2,500 per year has a simple payback of 5000 divided by 2500 or 2 years. While simple payback is easy to compute, it fails to factor in the time value of money, inflation, project lifetime or operation and maintenance costs. A more detailed life-cycle cost analysis must be performed to take these factors into account. Simple payback is useful for making ball-park estimates of how long it will take to recoup an initial investment.

Audit++ Program Introduction

Notice

The case studies in this binder are meant to contribute to the energy management toolbox of municipal staff but are by no means definitive or accurate in all facilities of this type due to variations in equipment, age and condition, usage, energy load, etc. Recommendations are based on the best information available and assumptions based on observations. Cost estimates in this energy assessment are based on industry standard pricing, not local contractor or product pricing. Savings estimates have not been de-rated and are not guaranteed. For greater certainty, further analysis/engineering is required prior to implementation including verification of individual energy loads of interest. Without express written permission, any use of these case studies by a third party, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it are the responsibility of such third party. LAS and I.B. Storey accept no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report.

To find out more about the Audit++ Program or to obtain an additional binder please contact:
Scott Vokey, LAS Energy Services Coordinator at 416-971-9856 x 357 or svokey@amo.on.ca 200 University Avenue, Suite 801 Toronto, Ontario M5H 3C6 Tel: 416-971-9856 Toll Free: 1-877-426-6527 www.las.on.ca

For information about hiring an Energy Auditor, technical briefings, and other energy management planning tools please visit the LAS Energy Toolbox:

http://www.amo.on.ca/Content/las/EnergyServices/Toolbox/default.htm

DETAILS AND CONTACT INFORMATION FOR THE I.B. STOREY CONSORTIUM TEAM ARE PROVIDED BELOW COMPANY I.B. Storey Professional Energy Solutions TdS Dixon Inc. Qui Tunc Inc. Canadian Institute for Energy Training Andrea Dwight & Associates WEBSITE www.ibstorey.ca www.knowenergy.com www.knowenergy.com www.cietcanada.com www.adwight.com KEY CONTACT Ian B. Storey Stephen Dixon Garth White Doug Tripp Andrea Dwight

200 University Avenue, Suite 801 Toronto, Ontario M5H 3C6

Tel: 416-971-9856 Toll Free: 1-877-426-6527 Web Site: www.las.on.ca