date

Company Log
Name of Facility
Address of facility
Data Center Energy Efficiency Assessment
Assessor and affiliation
_______________________________________________________________________
_
Disclaimer
This report was prepared by Qualified Assessor in the course of performing an energy
assessment contracted for and sponsored by Sponsor. Reproduction or distribution of the
whole, or any part, of the contents of this document without written permission of
Sponsor is prohibited. either the assessor, Sponsor nor any of its employees ma!e any
warranty or representations, e"pressed or implied, or assume any legal liability or
responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any data, information,
method product or process disclosed in this document, or represents that its use will not
infringe any pri#ately$owned rights, including, but not limited to, patents, trademar!s, or
copyrights.
This report uses preliminary information from #endor data and technical references. The
report, by itself, is not intended as a basis for the engineering re%uired to adopt any of the
recommendations. &ts intent is to inform the site of potential energy sa#ing opportunities
and #ery rough cost sa#ings. The purpose of the recommendations and calculations is to
determine whether measures warrant further in#estigation.
Acknowledgments
Authors
'oe (reen )ngineer $ %ualified assessor
The Authors Would Like to Acknowledge the Contributions and
Assistance of the Following Peole!
Site staff or others who helped
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
+
_______________________________________________________________________
_
TA"LE #F C#NTENT$
FAC%L%T& #'E('%EW ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) *
FAC%L%T& ENE(+& ,$E ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) *
&T )Q,&-.)T L/A*S..................................................................................................................................0
*ATA C)T)R ))R(1 )* ,S)................................................................................................................2
-EC.AN%CAL $&$TE- DE$C(%PT%#N ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) /
ELECT(%CAL $&$TE- DE$C(%PT%#N ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 0
"ENC.-A(1%N+ ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 2
2.+ /3)RALL ))R(1 )44&C&)C1 .)TR&CS...............................................................................................5
2.6 A&R .AA().)T A* A&R *&STR&7,T&/ .)TR&CS..........................................................................8
2.9 C//L&( -LAT .)TR&CS...................................................................................................................+:
2.0 )L)CTR&CAL -/;)R C<A& .)TR&CS..................................................................................................++
#"$E('AT%#N$ ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 34
(EC#--ENDED ENE(+& EFF%C%ENC& -EA$,(E$ ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 34
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
6
_______________________________________________________________________
_
E5ecuti6e $ummary
Summari=e the following> sponsor, site, contractor, brief description of site, use of *C
-ro tools, etc.
A number of energy efficiency opportunities with #arying paybac! periods were
identified during the assessment. 7ased on an estimated energy cost of ?""""@!;h,
energy cost sa#ings of appro"imately ?"","""@yr are possible through measures that ha#e
an a#erage paybac! period of "." years and represent appro"imately "A energy sa#ings.
The table below summari=es the proBected economics for the recommended measures>
(rouped
)fficiency
.easures
)stimated
&nstalled Cost
)stimated 1early
)nergy Sa#ings
)stimated Simple
-aybac! $ 1ears
Totals ? ? weighted a#e.
Table 1 7 $ummary of Estimated $a6ings and Payback Times
Additional high le#el findings
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
9
_______________________________________________________________________
_
Facility #6er6iew
<igh le#el description of facility
Facility Energy ,se
The total electrical demand was on a#erage appro"imately CCC !; with a yearly energy
use of appro"imately C.C (;h@yr. Appro"imately CCA of the energy use is related to
the ser#ers. The data center is Dstand aloneE located in an office buildingE etc.F, it was
DnotF separately submetered, and the team had to de#elop the energy usage through a
combination of temporary submetering, spot measurements and@or spreadsheet
calculations.
%T E8uiment Loads
Summari=ed in )rror> Reference source not found below is the a#erage power G!;H for
&T e%uipment
*ata
Center
Areas
Area GsfH &T e%uipment load G!;H -ower *ensity G;@sfH
Totals
Table 9 %T e8uiment load
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
0
_______________________________________________________________________
_
Data Center Energy End ,se
The electrical end use brea!down associated with the data center space was determined
and is shown in Table 9.
Data Center End
,se
Aro5imate
Area
:$F;
A6erage
%T
Load :kW;
Power Density
:W<$F;
CCC ",""" """ ""
CCC ",""" "" ""
T#TAL$! 5=555 555 55
Table 4 7 $ummary of Data Center Electrical End ,se
Data Center Energy Use (kW)
IT Load
52%
Compressors
25%
Other mechanca!
"%
U#$ Losses
"%
C%&C e'ap (!o)ers
*%
+,md-caton
2%
Lghtng
2%
$tand(y .en W/+
1%
.!yco! and ar coo!ed
condenser -ans
"%
.!yco! #,mps
2%
E5amle Figure 1 >Electrical "reakout by End ,se
(elace with actual breakdown
-echanical $ystem Descrition
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
2
_______________________________________________________________________
_
Figure 2 > .'AC $ystem $chematic
Electrical $ystem Descrition
,P$ $ystem!
E5amle Table *) ,P$ Electrical -easurements

,nits ,P$7A ,P$7" Combined
,-S &nput !; """ """ """
,-S /utput !; """ """ """
Losses !; "" "" ""
)fficiency A "" "" ""
Load 4actor A "" "" ""
Distribution transformers<PD,s!
Lighting!
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
I
_______________________________________________________________________
_
"enchmarking
The purpose of this section is to summari=e the metrics that were gathered as part of the
assessment process and compare them to data from other facilities, where a#ailable.
/)3 #6erall energy Efficiency metrics
The table below indicates the metrics that were collected and the interpretation of their
#alues.
Metric
ID
Metric Name Unit Value Interpretation
)....+ *Ci) Gsite energyH
G&T energy use @ total energy useH
$
)....6 -,)
GTotal -ower@&T -owerH
$
)....9 <3AC )ffecti#eness
G&T -ower @<3AC -owerH
$
)....0 Site )nergy ,se &ntensity Site 7T,@sf$yr
)....2 Source )nergy ,se &ntensity Source 7T,@sf$yr
)....I -urchased )nergy Cost &ntensity )nergy ?@sf$yr
)....5 -ea! )lectrical *emand &ntensity -ea! ;@sf
Charts for selected metrics are pro#ided below
Figure " 7 Data Center %nfrastructure Efficiency :DCiE;
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
5
1our center is
here
_______________________________________________________________________
_
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
PUE
Data center number
PUE
Figure 0 7 Data Center Power ,tili?ation Effecti6eness :P,E;
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
IT Power/HVAC power
Data center number
HVAC System effectiveness
Figure 0 7 %T e8uiment ower<.'AC ower
/)9 Air -anagement and Air Distribution -etrics
Se#eral ser#er inta!e and e"haust temperatures were collected from a representati#e
sample of ser#ers in the data center. &n addition, measurements of return and supply air
temperatures were ta!en from all of the CRAC or CRA< units as well as from the
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
8
1our center is
here
1our center is
here
_______________________________________________________________________
_
perforated tiles. The goal is to establish an understanding of the air management
performance, identify any issues such as potential hot spots. 4rom these temperature
measurements, the following indices were calculated>
Rac! Cooling &nde" GRC&H>
RC& is a dimensionless measure of how effecti#ely the e%uipment is cooled within
a gi#en inta!e temperature specification Ge.g., AS<RA), )7SH. &t pro#ides a
measure of the conditions at the high G<&H end and at the low GL/H end of the
specified temperature range. RC&
<&
J+::A means that no inta!e temperature is
abo#e the ma"imum recommended, and RC&
L/
J+::A means that no inta!e
temperature is below the minimum recommended. ,sing AS<RA) Class +
temperature specification, KpoorL conditions are MN:A whereas KgoodL conditions
are ONIA. The RC& is assuming the AS<RA) Class + recommended inta!e temperature
Return Temperature &nde" GRT&H>
The Return Temperature &nde" GRT&H is a dimensionless measure of the actual
utili=ation of the a#ailable temperature differential in the e%uipment room as well
as a measure of the le#el of by$pass air or recirculation air in the data center.
+::A is generally the targetE P+::A recirculation airE Q+::A by$pass air.
Supply <eat &nde" GS<&H>
The Supply <eat &nde" GS<&H is a dimensionless measure of recirculation of hot
air into the cold aisles. S<& is a number between : and +, the lower the better. S<&
is typically Q :.0:. An S<& J : means that all inlet temperatures are e%ual to the
supply temperature.
The table below summari=es the metrics.
Metric ID Metric Name Unit Value Interpretation
A....+ CRAC@CRA<@A<, Temperature
*ifferential
4
A....6 A#erage Rac! Temperature Rise 4
A....9 Return Temperature &nde" GRT&H,
measure of by$pass air and
recirculation air.
A
A....0 Rac! &nta!e Temperatures 4
A....2 Rac! Cooling &nde" GRC&H, measure of
conformance with an inta!e
temperature specification Ge.g.,
AS<RA), )7SH.
A
A....I Supply <eat &nde" GS<&H $
A....5 CRAC@CRA<@A<, .oisture
*ifferential
lbs
A....8 Airflow )fficiency ;@cfm
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
N
_______________________________________________________________________
_
A....N Ratio of Total System 4low to Total
Rac! 4low
one

A....+: System -ressure *rop in.
w.g.


A....++ 4an motor efficiency A

A....+6 )con ,tili=ation 4actor A

/)4 Cooling Plant -etrics
This section is rele#ant only if the data center is ser#ed by a cooling plant.
The table below summari=es the metrics.
Metric ID Metric Name Unit Value Interpretation
CS...+ Chiller -lant ;ire to ;ater )fficiency !;@ton

CS...6 Chiller Rated )fficiency at *esign !;@ton
-L3


CS...9 Cooling Tower *esign )fficiency gpm@<-

CS...0 Cooling Tower *esign Approach 4

CS...2 Condenser Approach Temperature 4

CS...I Chilled ;ater -umping )fficiency ;@gpm

CS...5 Condenser ;ater -umping )fficiency ;@gpm

CS...8 -ump and fan motor efficiency A

CS...N Chiller ;ater$Side )con ,tili=ation
4actor
A

)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
+:
_______________________________________________________________________
_
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Chier pant wire to water efficiency
Data center
Chiller plant wire to water efficiency Chiller rated efficiency at design
Figure 2 > Chilled Water lant and Chiller rated efficiency
/)* Electrical Power Chain -etrics
The ,-S system typically represents an efficiency opportunity in most data centers. &n
this data center, the ,-S was on an a#erage loaded to appro"imately CCA of its rated
capacity. Since ,-S efficiency is higher at higher load factors, loading to 2:A total for
6 system or 0:A for each module is good from an efficiency point of #iew. The
efficiency at this load factor was obser#ed to be appro"imately CCA. This means that
the ,-S efficiency is about a#erage for all systems benchmar!ed at this load factor.
The table below summari=es the metrics that were collected.
Metric ID Metric Name Unit Value Interpretation
)*...+ ,-S Load 4actor $
)*...6 ,-S System )fficiency A
)*...9 Transformer )fficiency Gupstream ,-S
systemH
)fficiency
A
)*...0 -*, Gwith built$in transformerH
System )fficiency
A
)*...2 &T -ea! -ower *ensity ;@sf
)*...I &T A#e -ower *ensity ;@sf
)*...5 &T -ea! -ower *ensity GdesignH ;@sf
)*...8 &T Rac! -ower *ensity !;@rac!
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
++
1our Chiller rated
efficiency is here
1our Chiller plant
efficiency is here
_______________________________________________________________________
_
)*...N &T Rac! -ower *ensity GdesignH !;@rac!
)*...+: ,-S output #oltage 3 dc
ED.M.11 Stand-by Gen Block heater power W

Figure @ 7 -easured ,P$ Efficiency Cur6es
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
UPS !oa" #actor
Data center number
UPS!oa" #actor
Figure A 7 ,P$ Load Factor
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
+6
E5amle your
center
1our data center
is here
_______________________________________________________________________
_
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
140.00
160.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
IT !oa" Density
Data center number
IT !oa" Density
Figure 3B 7 -easured %T Load Density
O(ser'atons
(ecommended Energy Efficiency -easures
The following measures are recommended for further e#aluation>
(ecommendations Cost $imle ayback
:years;
+.
?CC ! R1.1 6.
9.
0.
2. ?CC ! R1.1
I. ?CC ! R1.1
5. ?CC ! R1.1
8. ?CC ! R1.1
N. ?CC! R1.1
+:. ?CC ! R1.1
Total CDDDk E&)& FweightedG
Air -anagement -easures
.'AC -easures
Electrical -easures
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
+9
1our data center
is here
_______________________________________________________________________
_
%T E8uiment -easures
Commissioning -easures
Additional -easures
&n addition to these recommendations, the following strategies are recommended>
+. &t is recommended that the company management in#estigate and adopt a
Stotal cost of ownershipS approach to their data centers. )nergy costs are
already eclipsing the cost of the &T e%uipment o#er its life and this will
only get worse as energy prices rise. &f actions re%uiring capital were not
ta!en in the past without regard to the ongoing energy sa#ings, this
practice should be re#iewed.
6. An energy manager should be established with responsibility for
monitoring energy performance and trac!ing impro#ements o#er time.
Specific goals GtargetsH for energy reduction should be implemented along
with the commitment for capital e"penditures where return on in#estment
warrants.
9. &f the company operates multiple centers, a mechanism to share best
practices should be established.
The pie charts below show the current data center energy brea!down along with the
proBected energy brea!down after implementation of recommendations G*Ci)R:.CCH.
Data Center Energy Use (kW)
IT Load
52%
Compressors
25%
Other mechanca!
"%
U#$ Losses
"%
C%&C e'ap (!o)ers
*%
+,md-caton
2%
Lghtng
2%
$tand(y .en W/+
1%
.!yco! and ar coo!ed
condenser -ans
"%
.!yco! #,mps
2%
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
+0
_______________________________________________________________________
_
)"ample 4igure 8 T Current 4acility -erformance
Replace with actual chart

IT Load
11%
Compressors
22%
Other mechanca!
"%
U#$ Losses
"%
C%&C e'ap (!o)ers
5%
+,md-caton
1%
Lghtng
1%
$tand(y .en W/+
2%
.!yco! and ar coo!ed
condenser -ans
"%
.!yco! #,mps
1%
)"ample 4igure N T -roBected 4acility -erformance replace with actual proBections
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
+2
_______________________________________________________________________
_
APPEND%CE$
APPEND%D 7 A >"est Practices
APPEND%D > " 7 DC7Pro Assessment Tool > %nuts H #ututs
APPEND%D 7 C > Electrical $ingle Lines
APPEND%D 7 D > Electrical Power -easurements < (eadings
APPEND%D 7 E > -echanical Flow Diagram < PH%DIs
APPEND%D 7 F > -echanical $ystem -easurements < (eadings
APPEND%D 7 + 7 Assessment instrumentation
)nergy )fficiency Assessment
Site
*ate
+I