Highlights from the FEMP Advanced Metering Workshop September 25, 2003 Golden, Colorado

Overview Discuss guidance development process and structure Describe Advanced Metering technology Build a business case Discuss costs, strategies, and savings Consider government case studies

Guidance Development Process Form an Ad Hoc Meeting Committee (AHMC) Composed of attendees at the workshop Gather input from agencies and private sector regarding Potential benefits Better energy management Improved O&M, cost savings Improved security Resources Constraints on appropriated funds Limitations on personnel Use of Alternative Financing AHMC will present Draft Guidance to the Interagency Energy Task Force (IAETF) IAETF develops Consensus Guidance Consensus Guidance reviewed by 656 Committee DOE Secretary issues Guidance Carr, 2003

Guidance Development: Structure Produce a flexible framework that helps guide agencies when they develop specific implementation plans. Agency implementation plans should consider Specific constraints Opportunities Energy program management benefits Produce a screening process that identifies the cost- effective application of metered data, such as: Energy unit costs Ability to respond to demand and charges Bill aggregation Total annual costs Energy intensity per square foot Potential energy savings projects Ream, 2003

Guidance Development: Structure Exemptions granted on the basis of security or economic justification based on the lack of savings to cover the costs. Metering program reporting should be made through a simple change to the existing annual agency energy report. Metering should eventually include all energy sources (and water as economically appropriate) for which data use could result in better resource management. Ream, 2003

Guidance Development: Structure Sub-metering can include any meters on a multi-building facility beyond the utility revenue meter, or metering of large energy users in an individual building Initial phases Access to existing utility revenue meter pulse data Metering of obviously significant buildings using rules of thumb, e.g. annual energy use over $X0,000 Ream, 2003

Guidance Development: Structure Guidance should outline a phased effort to start with easily implemented, cost-effective projects, and the use of early experience to refine follow-up efforts. Follow-up phases Identify and prioritize additional meter installation through a cost - benefit analysis based on assessment of the specific metering costs and related potential savings. Ream, 2003

Purposes of Advanced Metering Utility Time-of-use billing Demand response Automated meter reading Distribution load management Energy management Benchmark, target Analyze loads Manage peak demand Measurement & Verification Facility management Power quality Emergency / condition alerts Maintenance diagnostics Combine multiple BMS Financial management Load aggregation Cost allocation Budgeting, forecasting and reporting Burns, 2003

Advanced Metering Technology Hardware Advanced “smart” meter Interval measurements Communication ability Sub-meter Separate loads by buildings, floors, etc. What to meter Electricity, natural gas, water, steam Software Data presentation Data analysis Gateways Data collection Communication Data format Transmission System Security, data storage and management Burns, 2003

Building a Business Case Costs, benefits, issues, what-if’s Comes before RFP Yet needs feedback from RFP for cost calculation Determine needs Satisfy whom? Facility manager Energy manager Financial manager Determine goals Identify data sources Burns, 2003

Building a Business Case Costs easy to underestimate Hardware Who owns, inventory Software (presentation) Data collection (communication) Data storage, system management Internal IT, outsourced ASP, SLA Burns, 2003

Building a Business Case Costs, continued Installation, integration, project management Turnkey solution, internal team costs, onsite labor Training, evaluation Ongoing Data collection (communication) Maintenance, updates, upgrades, additions Re-training, re-integrating Labor Burns, 2003

Building a Business Case Energy bill reduction, event avoidance, O&M improvement Facility management Load management, distribution Power quality Combined BMS Maintenance diagnostics Process scheduling Financial management Benchmark, target Budget forecast Cost allocation, aggregation Burns, 2003

Building a Business Case Benefits, continued Energy management Fuel cost analysis, tariff / contract alternatives, on-site generation Demand response Measurement & Verification Administrative efficiency Automatic collection and reporting of energy usage, emissions, whatever monitored Burns, 2003

Building a Business Case Issues Don’t underestimate deployment costs Project management Installation Integration Training Quantifying benefits tends to be conservative Begin with energy audit Prioritize projects according to payback What-ifs Pilots Scaled or segmented deployments Hardware alternatives Multiple goals Alternative energy contracts, providers Burns, 2003

Deployment Issues Critical: identify members of team Critical: identify goals Type of report Source of data Installation site walk-through checklist One-line drawings CTs, PTs, enclosures Contact information for all entities On-site labor Responsibility for updates Burns, 2003

Deployment Issues Getting the data is hard Integration MV-90, EDI, gateways Interruptions VEE Systematizing use is hard Advanced meter / energy information system is only a tool, not a result Expectations Burns, 2003

Sub-Metering Costs ItemLowHigh Electrical sub-meter$400 $600 Data acquisition and $600$1000 communications Wiring$100 $200 Miscellaneous$100 $200 Totals$1200$2000 Lewis, 2003

Sub-Metering Sample Strategies Install meters only with software for collecting data Metering with cost allocation software Metering with cost allocation and operational analysis and fine-tuning (Building Tune Up) Metering with cost allocation, intensive monitoring of major energy consuming equipment using specialized software and outside review of operations and verification of savings (continuous commissioning) Lewis, 2003

Sample Strategy Savings Lewis, 2003

Sample Strategy Savings Lewis, 2003

Government Case Studies LA Air Force Base Over 50 E-MON D- MON sub-meters 21 I-MON data accumulators CE-MON software Est. Cost $50k Used to verify over $1 million in savings Washington National Airport installed 200 ~ $300,000 Estimated savings from tenant billing 10% Estimated savings from cost allocation 5% Estimated savings from conservation, potential of 10% Minimize tenant/landlord disputes Foley, 2003

All presentations are available at: emp/techassist/operat ions_maintenance/