SYSTEM COMPONENTS Weighting of Selection Criteria FACTORS WEIGHT System Economics (Business Case; Balancing CapEx & OpEx) Weigh the costs and payback of each system 9 Community Finances (Effect on North Bayshore & Mt View Collective Budget) Weigh the business potential of each system to North Bayshore and Mountain View 9 Infrastructure Aesthetics & Open Space Assess the benefit or challenge each system may pose to the character or creation of public spaces 5 Reliability (Municipal System Enhancement / Disaster Prep) Ability of each system to provide a backup to municipal infrastructure or to provide critical functionality in the event of disruption 9 Regulatory Compliance (i.e. AB32, CEQUA, C3) The extent to which each system can assist the city in achieving compliance with legislated performance objectives 4 Future-Proofing / Resiliency (Adaptability) The ability of each system be effective & easy to use in potential environmental, regulatory, administrative or other future conditions 7 Social Sustainability (Public Awareness / Access / Equality) The extent to which each system can enhance public opportunities for use, involvement, exploration or enlightenment 6 Environmental Sustainability (Carbon/Resource Efficiency / Habitat & Ecology / Health) Rate the benefits or reductions in damage to the natural world each system provides 9 Leadership (Innovation / Inspiration) The ability for each system to provide an example to other municipalities and or bring positive press or references 5 Choosing by Advantages
CHOOSING BY ADVANTAGE Systems Analysis Conceptual Design
Supply Baseline Individual plant for each building District level systems Demand Baseline Gold + Deep Green Review Existing Conditions Sustainability, Risk, Financial Analyzing District Systems
THERMAL ENERGY CUP COMPARISON Best System, Least Cost Choosing by Advantages Economics Instantaneous Payback No Payback Good Better Best
THERMAL ENERGY Rough Comparison to Building Scale Assumptions: 1.Used % premium from VRF @ NBV: CapEx (CWL was $37.3M vs VRF $31.3M) O&M (CWL was $.50/sf vs VRF $1.15/sf 2.Energy performance predicted by DEF: 8.5% less energy needed annually Years <4 years<6 years~6 years
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.