national tertiary sector analysis - energies 2050
Post on 01-Feb-2022
4 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
1
NATIONAL TERTIARY SECTOR ANALYSIS Fact sheets on best practice tertiary sector EE/RES applications
2
DOCUMENT TITLE Fact sheets on best-practice tertiary sector EE/RES applications
DOCUMENT TYPE Deliverable D2.1 (WP2 – T2.1)
DATE 11/11/2015
AUTHORS Chiara Wolter, Ambiente Italia
Guillaume de Laboulaye, ENERGIES 2050
CONTRIBUTORS CREARA Consultores S.L. (ES), Ambiente Italia s.r.l (IT), Energetski Institut Hrvoje Požar (HR), ENERGIES 2050 (FR), VivaPower-Selfenergy (PT), Technical University of Crete (GR). EDITOR Paolo Michele Sonvilla, CREARA Consultores
Achieving the European Union’s 2020 energy efficiency targets and at the same time reducing its dependency on energy imports is a huge task that requires innovative approaches and tools – such as the ones Trust EPC South wants to provide.
The Trust EPC South project aims to unleash the tertiary sector market potential for energy efficiency investments in Southern Europe by developing a new investment assessment instrument backed by an established building rating methodology (Green Rating™). Such instrument shall support energy service companies (EPC providers and facilitators), financing institutions and tertiary market actors thanks to the application of a standardised methodology to the investment assessment and decision processes, ultimately allowing to reduce barriers to energy efficiency investments.
Trust EPC South, a project financed by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 programme, will pursue its ambitious objectives in Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Croatia and Greece. The project consortium, led by the Spanish firm CREARA, is composed by interdisciplinary experts representing the participating countries and by the international non-profit organisation Green Rating Alliance. The partners are united by the common intent to stimulate investments in the target markets, which are offering great opportunities for energy efficiency as well as energy performance contracting.
PROJECT SUMMARY
3
LIST OF ACRONYMS CCHP: Combined Cooling, Heating and Power: DH: District Heating DH&C: District Heating and Cooling DHW: Domestic Hot Water EE: Energy efficiency ESCO: Energy Service Company EPC: Energy Performance Contract FEDENE: Fédération des Services Énergie Environnement H&C: Heating and Cooling HVAC: Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning IPMVP: International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol IRR: Internal Rate of Return LED: Light Emitting Diode PV: Photovoltaic RES: Renewable Energy Source ROI: Return on Investment ST: Solar Thermal Systems TPF: Third Party Financing
4
Within the scope of Trust EPC south, the project consortium is conducting a thorough market analysis in the six southern European participating countries. This analysis includes an advanced state of the art of sustainable energy solutions for the tertiary sector and the characterisation of the corresponding tertiary sector segments, the assessment of market barriers as well as the presentation of available financing solutions. It also includes the evaluation of the most promising sustainable energy projects or “best practices”, which are presented in this report. These best practices will be used to generate standardised sustainable energy project technical functional models that will be later used to develop the Green Rating™ - based investment assessment tool, one of the main products of this initiative. The 33 factsheets presented in this report show which are the most common solutions used and outline how they are being implemented, how they are financed and what are the other conditions for success. The chosen best practices cover six main tertiary sector segments: Retail, Health, Hospitality, Offices, Sports Centres and Education. Since the purpose of selecting best practices is mainly to highlight the most promising sustainable energy solutions, and due to the challenging EPC market conditions in the participating countries, not all of the projects chosen involve EPC contracts, but also other more traditional arrangements such as energy supply contracts. They also cover a wide range of measures, from boilers’ replacement to optimisation of energy management systems, energy monitoring tools, and the installation of renewable energy sources. The interventions on the building envelope are less represented due to their long investment recovery times. For each factsheet, a set of over 20 indicators is provided, divided into four areas:
• Introductory information including segment of activity and stakeholders involved; • The project’s context, where the facility and initial situation/energy use are described; • Specifications of the contract: including duration, planned savings, contractual details, financing
arrangements and results; • Additional comments have also been added when relevant to further detail the project and its
specificities (elements for success, advantages for the clients, etc.). The choice of the indicators has been made to create synergies with existing initiatives such as TRANSPARENSE and EESI2020, but also to give a comprehensive overview and thus reinforce our analysis on potential EE and RES applications in tertiary sectors. One important criteria used in the selection of the best practice cases is their replicability, as one aim of our work is to stimulate the development of further implementations.
INTRODUCTION
5
OVERVIEW OF BEST PRACTICES
Code Tertiary Segment Client Summary - main fields of action
ES1 Retail CC parque sur de Madrid Efficient Lighting and HVAC systems
ES2 Health Hospital La Paz Various EE measures
ES3 Hospitality Confidential More efficient thermal power
ES4 Education Confidential Efficient lighting and HVAC systems
ES5 Retail Berriak Monitoring, efficient lighting and others
ES6 Health Hospital Virgen de la Poveda
Efficient lighting, monitoring, heat pumps, building insulation
ES7 Offices Stratenergy Optimal energy use, efficient lighting, insulation, heat pumps
FR1 Hospitality Groupe Accor Boiler replacement, hot water exchanger, Building Management System, buffer for iced water
FR2 Retail Carrefour Refrigeration systems, closer management, remote monitoring, training and awareness raising
FR3 Retail Logidis Comptoirs Modernes Evaporators' fans, Refrigerating systems
FR4 Education Sup'Elec and CESAL Heating system management, efficient lighting, rescheduling
FR5 Retail Ubinail Rodamco Regulation of heat pumps, Management of roof top, Ventilation and lighting
FR6 Health Clinic of Saint Priest - Private hospital of Lyon East
Building Management System, boiler, awareness raising
FR7 Health CHU Toulouse - Energy pole PURPAN
Raising awareness, Set point temperatures regulation, ventilation, management of pumps' speed, biomass heaters and heat recovery
GR1 Offices KG Law Firm Efficient lighting, monitoring and energy management, boilers, insulation, heat exchanger for hot water
GR2 Hospitality Mistral Hotel Automatic controls, monitoring and management
GR3 Hospitality Hotel Solar protection, efficient lighting, automatic controls, monitoring and management, PVs, ST, heat pumps
GR4 Health Mpodosakeio Hospital Efficient Lighting
GR5 Offices Administration of Western Macedonia Efficient Lighting
6
HR1 Hospitality Adriainvest Inženjering Solar collectors, Heat recovery, PV systems, building management system
HR2 Offices Crosco Low temperature hot water boilers feed with natural gas
IT1 Retail Conad del Tirreno Efficient refrigeration, lighting, air conditioning, management; structural revamping, internal layout.
IT2 Sport Center Palasport Treviglio Review of lighting system
IT3 Hospitality Confidential Building insulation, solar protection and PV plant
IT4 Sport Center Confidential Centralised heat generation, heat recovery, metering devices, lighting
IT5 Offices/Hospitality Confidential Thermal insulation, windows replacement, lighting, PV plant
PT1 Hospitality Confidential Various EE measures
PT2 Hospitality Confidential PV generation plant
PT3 Health Long-term Care Facilities PV generation plant
PT4 Health Retirement Home and Day Care Center
PV plant, solar thermal panels, biomass boilers, heat pumps, pipe insulation, efficient lighting, monitoring
PT5 Sport Center Indoor swimming pool Pipe insulation, lighting, isothermal pool cover, solar thermal, monitoring
PT6 Retail Hypermarket Lighting
PT7 Health Confidential Biomass boiler and lighting
7
BP1 CC PARQUE SUR DE MADRID ES1
1. Introduction
Name of client CC Parquesur de Madrid (Shopping Center)
Segment of activity Retail
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC project
Service provider / facilitator Efirenova
Location and climatic region Madrid (Mediterranean / Continental climate)
Other operators involved N.A.
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Shopping Center
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 Building: 151,200 m2
Age of buildings Opened in 1989
Description of the initial situation Large building with high level of consumption with old and inefficient equipment for H&C
Main energy use Heating & Cooling
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner EE measures for individual areas and DH for the whole centre
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 15 N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
- Implementation of efficiency measures for HVAC - Design and implementation of high efficiency HVAC with CCHP and DH&C - Implementation of energy efficiency measures for individual stores (e.g. LED lighting)
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 20 %
Corresponding financial savings Confidential
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 196 t
Cost of investment 7.5 M€
Payback period (estimated or real) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty and maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol
Financed provided by (100 % ESCO, mix?) 100 % provided by a third party (Bank)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients DH&C implementation (CCHP system)
Best Practice criteria assessment Representative contract in the private sector with duration of 15 years. Financed by a third party
General comments Energy savings obtained reached 44 %
8
BP2 HOPITAL LA PAZ ES2
1. Introduction
Name of client Hospital ''La Paz''
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EE project (turnkey and energy supply contract)
Service provider / facilitator Dalkia
Location and climatic region Madrid (Mediterranean / Continental climate)
Other operators involved Gas Natural Servicios (energy provider for the duration of contract)
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Number of buildings and surface in m² 17 buildings and 4 large hospitals; approximately 180,000 m2
Age of buildings Built in 1964
Description of the initial situation Thermal installation providing hot water and heating for all the facilities working for more than 40 years
Main energy use H&C
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy efficiency and savings
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 15 2015
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
New H&C installation: - Natural gas thermal power station - Natural gas supply - Improvement of facilities (insulation, lighting and others)
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 30 %
Corresponding financial savings Total of 9 M€ savings
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Confidential
Cost of investment 36.2 M€
Payback period (estimated or real) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty and maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol
Financed provided by (100 % ESCO, mix?) Dalkia and Gas Natural Servicios
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients New installation and immediate savings without financing the project
Best Practice criteria assessment Large EE project for a very important hospital of Spain that offers EE measures and energy supply with maintenance and warranty of equipment
General comments This project could lead to several more in health sector
9
BP3 HOTEL ES3
1. Introduction
Name of client Hotel (the client’s name is confidential)
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator EE Project
Location and climatic region Confidential
Other operators involved N.A.
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 Building
Age of buildings Confidential
Description of the initial situation Thermal installation using diesel oil as energy source
Main energy use Diesel
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Replace the installation and reduce energy costs
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 10 Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Replacement of equipment: -High efficiency heat pumps -Implementation of pilot monitoring & control system
Energy savings guaranteed by contract Financial savings were guaranteed but not the energy savings
Corresponding financial savings 40 %
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Confidential
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) 7 years
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty and maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) EPC provider
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Specialized software establishing set points according to the meteorological conditions in the area helping save more energy
Best Practice criteria assessment Pilot project of high efficiency equipment with new type of monitoring and control system
General comments
10
BP4 SCHOOL ES4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity School
Type of contract (EPC/other) EE project (turnkey solution)
Service provider / facilitator Gese Servicios Energéticos
Location and climatic region Confidential
Other operators involved N.A.
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building School
Number of buildings and surface in m² Mid-size school with primary education and high school
Age of buildings Confidential
Description of the initial situation Old H&C and DHW systems, optimization needed for lighting
Main energy use Electricity
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 700.46 kWh/day (not per m2)
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy efficiency and savings
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year Confidential Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Main implemented measures: - Optimization of lighting system - Management of heating and cooling and DHW
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 27 % (economically)
Corresponding financial savings ~10 k€ /year Daily consumption before: 96.86 €/day and after: 44.06 €/day 57 % savings on energy consumption
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) NA
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty and maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) EPC provider
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients New installation and immediate savings without having to fund the project
Best Practice criteria assessment Small EPC project that promotes EE in the education sector and increases customer’s trust. Strong savings above contractual engagements
General comments
11
BP5 BERRIAK ES5
1. Introduction
Name of client Berriak
Segment of activity Retail
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC project
Service provider / facilitator Gese Servicios Energéticos
Location and climatic region Basque Country (Oceanic climate)
Other operators involved Dexma energy management (management solution)
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Supermarket
Number of buildings and surface in m² 4 supermarkets in different locations
Age of buildings Confidential
Description of the initial situation Berriak supermarkets wanted to promote energy efficiency to reduce their energy consumption and in the meantime their environmental impact, without disrupting their customers comfort and well being
Main energy use Electricity
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 335 k€/year (each supermarket)
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy efficiency and savings
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year Confidential Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
- Monitoring for refrigeration equipment - Lighting system optimization - Energy management system implementation
Energy savings guaranteed by contract Confidential
Corresponding financial savings Confidential
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 34 t/year
Cost of investment 10 k€/supermarket
Payback period (estimated or real) 6 months
Particular safeguards conditions Confidential
Achieved savings (if already implemented) 20.3 k€ in savings obtained the first year
Details on monitoring and assessment Dexma energy management monitoring solution
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) EPC provider
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Monitoring for their food conservation equipment
Best Practice criteria assessment Replicability and scalability of the solution; project developed in 4 different facilities with a single contract
General comments
12
BP6 HOSPITAL VIRGEN DE LA POVEDA ES6
1. Introduction
Name of client Hospital ‘Virgen de la Poveda’
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC project
Service provider / facilitator Creara
Location and climatic region Madrid (Mediterranean / Continental climate)
Other operators involved N.A.
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 Building: 20,000 m2
Age of buildings Built in 1978
Description of the initial situation Low efficiency equipment and diesel heating system
Main energy use Heating (41 %)
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 3,643 TWh (total)
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Renovation of facilities
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 4+2 (contract fixed for 4 years and could be extended for 2 additional years)
2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Main measures implemented: - Led lighting - Monitoring & control - High efficiency heat pumps - Building insulation improvement
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 25 %
Corresponding financial savings 30 %, 102 k€/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 270 k€ + VAT
Payback period (estimated or real) 2.4 years
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty, no maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) EPC Provider (which obtained financing through a leasing from a Bank)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Renovation of equipment and facilities
Best Practice criteria assessment Innovative and replicable pilot. The successful development of this project will lead to several more
General comments
13
BP7 STRATENERGY ES7
1. Introduction
Name of client Stratenergy
Segment of activity Offices
Type of contract (EPC/other) EE project
Service provider / facilitator Creara
Location and climatic region Basque Country (Oceanic climate)
Other operators involved N.A
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Office
Number of buildings and surface in m² 5 buildings: 1 for offices, 1 laboratory and 3 for industrial process
Age of buildings Confidential
Description of the initial situation High consumption facilities
Main energy use Electricity
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 7.4 TWh/year (3.8 TWh excluding industry)
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Optimization of energy consumption
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 7 years 2015
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Some of the measures implemented: - Optimization and control system - LED Lighting - Insulation improvement - Heat pumps installation
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 20 %
Corresponding financial savings Confidential
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Confidential
Cost of investment 500 k€
Payback period (estimated or real) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Full warranty, no maintenance
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP protocol
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Customer
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Guaranteed savings; EE measures for whole facilities
Best Practice criteria assessment Important project for office, laboratory and industrial facilities in one single contract
General comments
14
BP8 ACCOR FR1
1. Introduction
Name of client Groupe Accor
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Siemens Building Technologies
Location and climatic region Paris (Temperate)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² Hotel Sofitel Paris Arc de triomphe
Age of buildings Over 30 y
Description of the initial situation Hotel 125 rooms with boiler 1.5 MW and a refrigeration group of 441 kW
Main energy use Heating
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Pilot project to reduce energy consumption especially linked to heating
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 4 2006
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Boiler replacement, Installation of a hot water exchanger, Building Management System, Installation of a tarpaulin buffer for iced water to reduce groups' uses in peak hours
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 21 %
Corresponding financial savings 40,000 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 175,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4.5
Particular safeguards conditions -
Details on monitoring and assessment Control and analysis of consumption; Regular energy reports; Partnership with ESCO; Training and support
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % Siemens (ESCO)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Could carried out work without the need for investments
Best Practice criteria assessment
Good practice but not followed up because: - Accor Group is more interested in investing itself in EE - lack of visibility over energy use after the end of the contract - issues with monitoring, unable to see if savings were clearly coming from the measures implemented
General comments source: http://www.urbanisme-puca.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/emergence-contrats-performance-energetique-marche-francais.pdf
15
BP9 CARREFOUR FR2
1. Introduction
Name of client Carrefour
Segment of activity Commerce
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Schneider electric
Location and climatic region France (Temperate, Mediterranean and oceanic)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Commercial centres
Number of buildings and surface in m² 16 buildings for a total of minimum 162,827 m²
Age of buildings Various
Description of the initial situation Carrefour aimed at improving the energy efficiency of its commercial centres, the mechanisms for monitoring energy consumption were especially deficient
Main energy use Mainly gas (Heating)
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Carrefour aimed at improving the way energy is managed. They wanted a ROI of 3y maximum and asked Schneider Elec. To launch a process of audits and recommendations for each building
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 3 2005
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Optimization and reconfiguration of systems for refrigeration, Energy Management, Installation of a remote monitoring system, Training and involvement of Carrefour's staff
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 12 %
Corresponding financial savings 800,000 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment Based on energy saving and PB period: probably between 1.5 and 2 M€
Payback period (estimated or real) 2.5
Achieved savings (if already implemented) 14 % achieved
Particular safeguards conditions Bonus or malus (penalties) are subject to a global balance each year
Details on monitoring and assessment Remote monitoring system, follow-up with Carrefour's staff
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % Carrefour
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Schneider carried on everything and the ROI was quite short
Best Practice criteria assessment Savings above guarantees
General comments Source: Ortega (2011), Carrefour et Schneider
16
BP10 LOGIDIS COMPTOIRS MODERNES FR3
1. Introduction
Name of client Logidis Comptoirs Modernes
Segment of activity Commerce
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Schneider electric
Location and climatic region Le Mans (Temperate)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Logistic platform, Offices, Storages
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 dry storage 51,000 m², 1 cold storage 14,000 m² Offices 2,500 m²
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation LCM is part of Carrefour, which has developed projects with Schneider Electric. LCM wanted to sign an EPC to develop energy efficiency of its platform in Le Mans.
Main energy use Energy use at 50 % for Refrigeration. Total energy use 9 GWh
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner The client wanted a solution to reduce its energy bills, while keeping its installations working, producing a refrigeration of quality and easing maintenance
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 3 N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Optimized management of evaporators' fans Optimization of management and regulation of the 2 main refrigerating systems + installation of speed regulator Installation of High Floating Pressure
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 18% including 36% on refrigeration systems
Corresponding financial savings N.A.
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A. Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) Inferior to 2 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Not communicated
Particular safeguards conditions Bonus malus depending on performances
Details on monitoring and assessment Classic monitoring approach – IPMVP, trimestral analysis of results
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) N.A.
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Could carried on its own activities, rapid ROI (2y)
Best Practice criteria assessment Good practice with an integrated approach to EE in logistic platforms and Offices
General comments Private contract, Source Schneider, Ortega (2011)
17
BP11 SUP’ELEC/CESAL FR4
1. Introduction
Name of client Sup'Elec and CESAL
Segment of activity Education
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Schneider electric, EDF
Location and climatic region Gyf sur Yvette (Temperate)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building School premises and students' housing
Number of buildings and surface in m² 60,000 m². The campus is made of 3 sites including one which is older than 30 y.
Age of buildings Over 30 years
Description of the initial situation
Sup'Elec school and CESAL manage the students’ campus. They aimed to modernize buildings and offer greater comfort to users, reduce costs, and minimize environmental impacts. Buildings were becoming old and a comprehensive new strategy regarding energy management was necessary. They could not invest without guarantees on savings.
Main energy use Heating and lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Improve the users' comfort, upgrade the installations to current standards, promote exemplarity and sustainable management
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 10 1998
Sustainable Energy measures implemented New heating system management, Replacement of luminaires, Optimization of external lighting, Integration of practical constraints and specific schedule of the school in the design of solutions
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 15 % per year
Corresponding financial savings 100,000 € HT per year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 100 t/year
Cost of investment 1 M€
Payback period (estimated or real) 7 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Performances guaranteed by Schneider and EDF
Particular safeguards conditions Guaranteed performances
Details on monitoring and assessment Global monitoring and awareness raising campaign provided by Schneider and EDF, Monitoring and reporting of performances, Training of staffs
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Confidential
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Could carried on its own activities, ROI 7 y
Best Practice criteria assessment Performance are guaranteed and despite high investment, the payback period was short
General comments Private contract. Source EDF, Schneider, FEDENE, Ortega (2011)
18
BP12 UBINAIL RODAMCO FR5
1. Introduction
Name of client Ubinai Rodamco
Segment of activity Real estate - Commercial centers
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Dalkia
Location and climatic region Near Melun (Temperate)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Commercial centers
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 commercial centre, more than 50.000 m²
Age of buildings Built in 1997
Description of the initial situation Commercial centre with need for improvement in energy efficiency
Main energy use Cooling, heating, lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Reduced energy use
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 3 2009
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Regulation of heat pumps' differential pressure; Better management of roof top; Hourly programming for fresh air Automatic lighting system in technical corridors
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 5 % for electricity and 10 % for gas
Corresponding financial savings After a year: 60,000 € in electricity (17 %) and 12,000 € in gas (25 %)
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 40,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) Less than 3 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) 17 % in electricity, 25 % for gas
Particular safeguards conditions Performances guaranteed by contract Details on monitoring and assessment Dalkia is in charge of the site exploitation
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % Dalkia
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Short Payback period, no investment needed
Best Practice criteria assessment Savings above guarantees, funding from ESCO, possibilities to extend
General comments Private contract, source: Ortega (2011), Ubinail Rodamco sust. Dev. Report 2008
19
BP13 CLINIC ST PRIEST FR6
1. Introduction
Name of client Clinic of Saint Priest - Private hospital of Lyon East
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Dalkia
Location and climatic region France (Temperate)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Clinic
Number of buildings and surface in m² 12,000 m², 189 beds and places for patients
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Need for energy efficiency improvement in the clinic
Main energy use Gas heating
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Gas consumption: 4,055 MWh pcs/y Electricity consumption: 2,641 MWh/year
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Reduce energy use
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 5 2011
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Optimized energy use: Building Management System was reprogrammed, 3 way-valve installed upstream the boiler Raise awareness of staff towards sustainable behaviours Realization of a guide presenting environmental good practices
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 14 %
Corresponding financial savings N.A. CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 28,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) N.A. Achieved savings (if already implemented) On-going project
Particular safeguards conditions N.A. Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP protocol
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) N.A.
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use and increased comfort for patients
Best Practice criteria assessment Example of good practice in a clinic
General comments Private contract, source: FEDENE
20
BP14 CHU TOULOUSE FR7
1. Introduction
Name of client CHU Toulouse - Energy pole PURPAN
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Dalkia
Location and climatic region France (Mediterranean and oceanic)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Number of buildings and surface in m² 4 Health related buildings – 73,000 m² 1 building for logistic (technical rooms, offices and kitchen) – 5,300 m² Housing building – 1,500 m²
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Goal of the EPC was to reduce energy use in all premises
Main energy use Heating
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 17,190 MWh/y for heating 6,410 MWh/y for cooling and refrigeration
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Reduce global energy use
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 25 2012
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Raising awareness of users Adjustment of heating and cooling set point temperature Hourly programming of offices and common blocs' ventilation, Electronic variation of pumps' speed, Biomass heaters, Heat recovery, Etc.
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 15 %
Corresponding financial savings Confidential.
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 80 % (5,300 t/y)
Cost of investment N.A. Payback period (estimated or real) N.A.
Achieved savings (if already implemented) The contract is still recent Particular safeguards conditions Partnership contract
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP Protocol opt C
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) -
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Regular savings on the long term
Best Practice criteria assessment Long term contract, systemic approach to energy, high reduction in GHGs thanks to RE
General comments Private contract, source: FEDENE, CHU Toulouse
21
BP15 KG LAW FIRM GR1
1. Introduction
Name of client KG Law Firm
Segment of activity Office
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator COFELY GDF SUEZ
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Office
Number of buildings and surface in m² 3 buildings 850 m2
Age of buildings 9 Years
Description of the initial situation High-energy consumption basically associated with the HVAC systems. There was a need to implement energy efficiency improvements, but no funds were available.
Main energy use Main energy use was electricity associated with air conditioning
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 590 kWh/(m²y)
N.A3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy cost reduction, Awareness about environmental issues
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 5 years 2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Efficient lighting, Monitoring and energy management systems, Boilers, Compensation systems, Insulation of boilers and hot water piping, Heat exchanger for hot water
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 18.44 kWh/m²/year
Corresponding financial savings 16 % - 10,000 €
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 9.000 Kg
Cost of investment 15,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 2.5 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Particular safeguards conditions Maintenance contract for 5 years.
Details on monitoring and assessment
The building’s baseline consumption was created through a five-year collection of bills, and by software the energy consumption has been allocated on each of the energy demands (heating, cooling etc.). Counters were placed in order to record the daily, monthly and annual consumption; comparing those levels to the baseline they could calculate the energy savings achieved.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use and increased comfort
Best Practice criteria assessment The financing savings per year (16 %) and the low payback period (2.5 years) make this EPC a good practice.
General comments Private contract
22
BP16 MISTRAL HOTEL GR2
1. Introduction
Name of client Mistral Hotel
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Α&Β Energy
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² 8,800
Age of buildings 25
Description of the initial situation
The main consideration was related to the settings associated with the cooling, heating and hot water production systems, leading to high-energy consumption. There was a need to implement efficiency improvements, but no funds were available and experts should operate and monitor the facilities.
Main energy use Electricity for cooling and lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 112.5 kWh/m²/year
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy cost reduction, Environmental policy of the company Awareness about environmental issues
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 1 2012
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Automatic controls, Monitoring and energy management systems
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 54.000 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 8.5 % 7,400 €
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 15,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 2 years
Particular safeguards conditions Proof with statistical analysis for the energy saving amount
Details on monitoring and assessment
A network, of automatic control systems and energy meters was placed on the boiler room and the hot water production system allowing the ESCO to perform tele-monitoring on the facility and prevent matters associated with maintenance and energy wasting. The energy savings were calculated with the IPMVP.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Mix
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use
Best Practice criteria assessment The financing savings per year (8.5 %) and the low payback period (2 years) make this case a good practice.
General comments Private contract
23
BP17 HOTEL GR3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hotel
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator ETVA VIPE
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² 600
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation The main problem had to do with the set-points, associated with the cooling, heating and hot water production systems, leading to high-energy consumption
Main energy use Electricity
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 240 kWh/m²/year
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy cost reduction
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 10 years 2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Shading, Efficient lighting, Automatic controls, monitoring and energy management systems, Boilers, Compensation systems, PVs for electricity, Solar collectors for Hot Water, Heat pumps
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 48 kWh/m²/year
Corresponding financial savings 21 %, 12.000 €
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 80,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6.1 years
Particular safeguards conditions Letter of guarantee, pledging of equipment, Payment upon completion of the billing period, Equipment warranty, 24 hours troubleshooting warranty
Details on monitoring and assessment Control and regular analysis of consumption
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use and increased comfort for clients
Best Practice criteria assessment The level of financing savings per year (21 %) and the low payback period (6.1 years) make this case a good practice
General comments Private contract
24
BP18 MPODOSAKEIO HOSPITAL GR4
1. Introduction
Name of client Mpodosakeio Hospital
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES Co. (Energeiakes Technologies)
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved Regional Development Agency of Western Macedonia (ANKO) SA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Number of buildings and surface in m² 20,000 m²
Age of buildings 14 years
Description of the initial situation High level of electricity consumed for lighting. Old technology fluorescent lamps operating 24/7 had to be replaced.
Main energy use Electricity for cooling and lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 369.1 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner
EPC contract with Third-Party Financing during the implementation of Pilot Action 2.1: "Mechanisms of Third Party Financing - TPF" of the MARIE project with the participation of Regional Development Agency of Western Macedonia (ANKO) SA
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 5 years 2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Replacing 60 old technology fluorescent lamps Τ8 58W with 60 LED lamps 31W (Master LED tube, PERF 1500mm 31W/865 T8)
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 16,293.60 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 2,085.60 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 4,200 kg
Cost of investment 2,900 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 2 years
Particular safeguards conditions
Client is responsible for the good operational conditions of lighting bulbs and the facility. ESCO is responsible for the replacement and repairing of any problematic bulb or malfunction. In case of not achieving the goals for energy consumption while there is good operation of the lights the ESCO has to bear the cost.
Details on monitoring and assessment Benchmarking was used to calculate and measure the energy savings achieved. Luminance and electrical power were measured before and after the EE applications
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) TPF
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use
Best Practice criteria assessment This contract is one of the 2 first contracts signed in Greece, created to be an example of best practices
General comments Private contract. The contract had reached the final stage but no signatures had been signed.
25
BP19 ADMINISTRATION OF WESTERN MACEDONIA GR5
1. Introduction
Name of client Administration of Western Macedonia
Segment of activity Public Offices
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES Co. (Energeiakes Technologies)
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved Regional Development Agency of Western Macedonia (ANKO) SA
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Office
Number of buildings and surface in m² 11,200 m²
Age of buildings Built in 2003
Description of the initial situation High energy consumption related to 14 high-pressure lamps with Na bulbs that were used for outdoor lighting. Significant energy saving could be achieved by replacing them with Power LED lighting type.
Main energy use Electricity for lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 164.2 kWh/m²
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner
EPC contract with Third-Party Financing during the implementation of Pilot Action 2.1: "Mechanisms of Third Party Financing - TPF" of the MARIE project with the participation of Regional Development Agency of Western Macedonia (ANKO) SA
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 10 years 2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Replacing lighting the perimeter of the building 14 High Pressure lamps with Na bulbs 250W replaced with Power LED type “700mA, 4000Κ Power 110W –13720lm, Disano / 3282 Rolle T3”
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 8,623.81 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 1,136.20 €
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 3,550 kg CO2
Cost of investment 6,200 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6 years
Particular safeguards conditions
The client is responsible for the good operational conditions of the lighting bulbs and the facility. ESCO is responsible for the replacement and repairing of any problematic bulb or malfunction. In case of not achieving the goals for energy consumption while there is good operation of the lights, the ESCO has to bear the cost.
Details on monitoring and assessment Benchmarking was used to calculate and measure the energy savings achieved. Luminance and electrical power were measured before and after the EE applications
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) TPF
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Reduced energy use
Best Practice criteria assessment This contract is one of the 2 first contracts signed in Greece, created to be an example of best practices
General comments Private contract. The contract had reached the final stage but no signatures had been signed.
26
BP20 ADRIAINVEST INŽENJERING HR1
1. Introduction
Name of client Adriainvest Inženjering
Segment of activity Hotel - Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator HEP ESCO
Location and climatic region Biograd na moru (Mediterranean)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² N.A.
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Adria Hotel has 208 modern equipped rooms. All rooms are air-conditioned and have a balcony, shower, toilet, mini-bar, telephone, and satellite TV. Fuel oil is used for DHW and heating.
Main energy use Cooling and DHW
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Project to reduce energy consumption especially linked to DHW
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 8 2011
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Solar collectors for domestic hot water preparation Hot water tanks (2 x 6,500 l) Heat recovery from existing chiller for DHW Installation of photovoltaic system 30 kW Building Management System
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 75 % of Fuel oil consumption (30,000 l) 36,000 kWh of electricity produced
Corresponding financial savings 44,760 EUR/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 78.6 t
Cost of investment 276,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 6
Particular safeguards conditions Client is responsible for the good operational conditions of the installed equipment.
Details on monitoring and assessment IPMVP is used
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Short payback period, no initial investment
Best Practice criteria assessment Integrated approach to EE including installation of RES
General comments One of the few ESCO projects in tertiary sector in Croatia
27
BP21 CROSCO HR2
1. Introduction
Name of client Crosco
Segment of activity Offices
Type of contract (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator HEP ESCO
Location and climatic region Zagreb (Continental)
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Office
Number of buildings and surface in m² N.A.
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Fuel oil is used for DHW and heating.
Main energy use Heating
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Project to reduce energy consumption especially linked to heating
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 6 2008
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Low temperature hot water boilers (2 x 575 kW) on natural gas
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 140,000 kWh
Corresponding financial savings 56,500 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) N.A.
Cost of investment 247,000 €
Payback period (estimated or real) 4
Particular safeguards conditions Client is responsible for the good operational conditions of the installed equipment.
Details on monitoring and assessment Modified IPMVP is used
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Short payback period, no investment
Best Practice criteria assessment High financial and energy savings
General comments One of the few ESCO projects in tertiary sector in Croatia
28
BP22 CONAD DEL TIRRENO IT1
1. Introduction
Name of client CONAD del Tirreno
Segment of activity Retail - Supermarket stores
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator 3EPC
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved Unicredit (financing institution)
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Supermarkets - retail stores for large scale distribution: measures on several buildings with different location
Number of buildings and surface in m² 18 buildings, with an average of 1,000 m2 for about 20,000 m2
Age of buildings 15 years on average
Description of the initial situation The buildings needed a deep renovation, involving the refurbishment of the building and the requalification of the plants, in particular the refrigeration equipment.
Main energy use Heating, cooling and lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Between 600 and 1,200 kWh/m2
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Energy cost reduction, awareness toward environmental issues
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 8 years 2015
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
Revamping of freezing equipment; Installation of low dispersion refrigerated bars; LED illumination; Revamping of air conditioning systems; Advanced Energy Management Service for Energy Efficiency Certifications; Structural revamping; Renewed internal layout.
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 35 ~ 50 % in energy consumption per year Performance guarantee specifically tailored for each single store
Corresponding financial savings 35 ~ 50 % in energy bill per year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Average of 50 ~ 150 t CO2 per year
Cost of investment 33 M€
Payback period (estimated or real) 3 ~ 7 years estimated on technological/structural interventions
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Just implemented
Particular safeguards conditions Special privilege, accounts pledge, transfer of VAT credit
Details on monitoring and assessment Implementation of the system Mætrics® Advanced to enhance energy management: consumption monitoring, system controls, alert and ticketing for maintenance, waste quantification;
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Project finance (Unicredit)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients The realization of the intervention in project financing has enabled the possibility of a deeper renovation, involving energy efficiency and space refurbishment
Best Practice criteria assessment Best practice innovation: combination of a guaranteed savings and a Project Finance structure. Replicability.
General comments Private contract
29
BP23 PALASPORT TREVIGLIO IT2
1. Introduction
Name of client Palasport Treviglio
Segment of activity Sport Centres
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Nesco srl
Location and climatic region Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Sport hall
Number of buildings and surface in m² Around 2,000 m2
Age of buildings 15 years
Description of the initial situation
- High and frequent voltage fluctuations - Continuous generation of harmonics with big impact on all electronic devices - Unbalanced star point - Rephasing needed
Main energy use Lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) 113 MWh/y (for lighting purposes)
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Increase the efficiency of the plant
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 5 years N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Review and optimisation of the lighting system, based on harmonics filtering, rephasing and balancing of the system
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 22 %
Corresponding financial savings 5,400 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 24 %
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) 3.5 years estimated
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Particular safeguards conditions Client is responsible for the operational conditions, which have to be maintained above a contractual limit
Details on monitoring and assessment The performance of the plant is continuously controlled by remote
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients No initial investment needed, a part of shared savings from the beginning of the contract
Best Practice criteria assessment Short duration of the contract by a guaranteed saving of 22 % on the baseline
General comments Source: www.nescosrl.it
30
BP24 HOTEL IT3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator Confidential
Location and climatic region Mediterranean – Central Italy
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 building, 9.000 m2
Age of buildings ~ 30 years
Description of the initial situation The hotel presented a very high H&C energy consumption. The low quality of the outer envelope and the large glazed surface determined a large consumption in both winter and in summer.
Main energy use H&C, lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Costs reduction, energy efficiency improvement
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year N.A. N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented
- Thermal insulation of the building envelope (external walls, roof) and of the heat distribution net - Reduction of the solar gains in summer through shadowing - PV plant 67.54 kWp (covering about 10 % of the yearly electricity consumption)
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 607 MWh/y
Corresponding financial savings 100,000 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 180 t/y
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) 5.3 years estimated
Achieved savings (if already implemented) N.A.
Particular safeguards conditions White certificates go directly to the ESCo
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Partly self-funded, partly public money (incentives)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Higher investment possible, due to the mix of financing. Very short payback for efficiency measures on the building structure
Best Practice criteria assessment Mix funding and short payback period. Use of performance bond
General comments Project is still in a study phase: it is very important to have a good risk analysis, a clear baseline and the complete MV program before signing the contract.
31
BP25 SPORT CENTRE IT4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Sport facilities
Type of contract (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator Confidential
Location and climatic region Mediterranean - Tuscany
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Sport Hall
Number of buildings and surface in m² 3 buildings ~ 5,000m2
Age of buildings Built in 1968; 1976; 2002
Description of the initial situation Several little units for heating purposes
Main energy use H&C, lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Costs reduction, energy efficiency improvement
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year N.A. N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Centralized heat generation, heat recovery, metering devices, substitution of existing lamps with LED
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 120 MWh/y (electricity) + 115,000 m3 (natural gas)
Corresponding financial savings 132,500 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 300 t/y
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) IRR of the project 7.76 % IRR for the investor 12.36 %
Achieved savings (if already implemented) 9.8 years estimated for the project, 8.5 for the investor
Particular safeguards conditions White certificates go directly to the ESCo
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Partly self-financing, partly public money (incentives)
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Strong costs reduction
Best Practice criteria assessment Mix funding and short payback period. Use of performance bond
General comments Project is still in a study phase: it is very important to have a good risk analysis, a clear baseline and the complete MV program before signing the contract.
32
BP26 OFFICES AND HOSTEL IT5
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hospitality
Type of contract (EPC/other) Other
Service provider / facilitator Confidential
Location and climatic region Mediterranean – Northern Italy
Other operators involved A bank as financer; an additional ESCo for the PV plant
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Offices and hostel
Number of buildings and surface in m² 1 Building, ~ 1,700m2
Age of buildings 45 y
Description of the initial situation The building needed refurbishment and the management aimed to reach an high efficiency standard, in order to offer more comfort in a low-cost hospitality premise
Main energy use H&C, lighting
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) Confidential
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Costs reduction, energy efficiency improvement
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year N.A. N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented - Thermal insulation external walls and roof, - windows replacement - LED, PV plant
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 170 MWh/y (electricity) + 25,000 m3/y (natural gas)
Corresponding financial savings 48,000 €/y
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) 120 t/y
Cost of investment Confidential
Payback period (estimated or real) IRR of the project 5.45 %
Achieved savings (if already implemented) 4.3 years estimated for the extra costs
Particular safeguards conditions White certificates go directly to the ESCo
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Partly self-financing, partly financed by a bank
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients The finance contract and the EPC contract will be aligned in time, in order to ease their realization.
Best Practice criteria assessment Very good negotiation of the financing. Performance bond
General comments Project is still in a study phase: it is very important to have a good risk analysis, a clear baseline and the complete MV program before signing the contract.
33
BP27 5 STAR HOTEL PT1
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Tourism
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator VIVAPOWER Showrooms
Location and climatic region Madeira - Oceanic
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building 5-star Hotel
Number of buildings and surface in m² N.A.
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Hotel with casino, fitness centre, pool, spa, restaurants, 379 rooms, common areas, etc. Total electric baseline 2,887 MWh/year; Lighting baseline 407 MWh/year; Pumps baseline 320 MWh/year
Main energy use Electricity and thermal
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Reducing the cost of energy, improving the energy efficiency of the hotel and, at the same time, maintaining the high quality of the hotel
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 6 years Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented 250 kWn PV Plant + circulation pumps + efficiency lighting
Energy savings guaranteed by contract PV Plant 382 MWh/year + circulation pumps 82 MWh/year + lighting 113 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings PV Plant 44,321 €/year + circulation pumps 8,712 €/year + efficiency lighting 12,429 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) ~ 208 t CO2
Cost of investment Circulation pumps + efficiency lighting = 56,500 €; PV Plant = 343,661 €; Total investment cost = 400,161 €
Payback period (estimated or real) Circulation pumps + efficiency lighting = 2.7 years; PV Plant = 7.8 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Performance guarantee of the equipment (PV modules, circulation pumps and efficiency lighting) during the contract period; No energy production guarantee
Details on monitoring and assessment Monitoring the energy production of the PV Plant + Monitoring the circulation pumps and efficiency lighting working hours and consumption
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Mixed financing: 60 % ESCO+ 40 % public
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Part of the financing provided by public funds, which was an added value for the client
Best Practice criteria assessment The combination of implemented RES and EE measures will provide a considerable reduction in the electricity costs.
General comments N.A.
34
BP28 RURAL TOURISM PT2
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Tourism
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator VIVAPOWER Nova
Location and climatic region Portalegre - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Rural tourism
Number of buildings and surface in m² N.A.
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Rural tourism composed by 5 properties
Main energy use N.A.
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Implementing RES through PV plant
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 20 years 2014
Sustainable Energy measures implemented 456 kWn PV plant
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 903 MWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 99,760 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) ~ 325 t
Cost of investment 533,500 €
Payback period (estimated or real) ~ 5years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Performance guarantee of the PV equipment
Details on monitoring and assessment Monitoring of the PV plant through a dedicated monitoring system
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Short payback, no investment
Best Practice criteria assessment Performance of renewable energy is guaranteed and monitored, funding 100 % ESCO and short payback period
General comments N.A.
35
BP29 LONG-TERM CARE FACILITY PT3
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator VIVAPOWER Nova
Location and climatic region Portimão - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Long-term Care Facilities
Number of buildings and surface in m² N.A.
Age of buildings Built in 2011 - 4 years
Description of the initial situation Long-term Care Facilities with capacity for 60 patients
Main energy use N.A.
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Reduce energy cost
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 15 years Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented 30 kWn PV Plant
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 65,805 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 7,752 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) ~ 24 t
Cost of investment 39,311 €
Payback period (estimated or real) ~ 5 years
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions Performance guarantee of the PV equipment
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Short payback, no investment
Best Practice criteria assessment Performance of renewable energy is guaranteed and monitored, funding 100 % ESCO and short payback period
General comments N.A.
36
BP30 RETIREMENT HOME PT4
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) EPC
Service provider / facilitator Energia Própria
Location and climatic region Borba - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Retirement Home and Day Care Center
Number of buildings and surface in m² 2,458.37 m²
Age of buildings 1988 - 27 years
Description of the initial situation
Retirement Home and Day Care Center with a community centre; laundry facilities; social, administrative and services areas; bedrooms; toilets; kitchens; etc. Retirement Home occupation is 61 people and Day Care Centre about 24 people. Average consumption: 171 MWh/y (electricity), 472 MWh/y (propane gas)
Main energy use Electricity (HVAC, lighting, equipment); Propane gas (equipment, DWH)
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner The objective was to implement EE and RES that promote and reduce energy consumption of the building,
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year 15 years (only in the case of the PV Plant) Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented 65 kWn PV Plant + Solar thermal panels + biomass boilers + pumps + pipe insulation + efficient lighting + monitoring system
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 116,320 kWh/year (for the PV plant with EPC); Total savings for EE measures: 26.9 kWh/year (electricity) + 200.7 kWh/year (propane gas)
Corresponding financial savings
12,319 €/year (for the PV Plant with EPC); EE measures: 1,136 €/year (Solar thermal) + 5,795 €/year (biomass boiler) + 155 €/year (pumps) + 2,073 €/year (pipe insulation) + 2,690 €/year (lighting) + 3,195 €/year (monitoring system); Total financing savings for EE: 15,423 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) ~ 42 t (for the PV Plant with EPC) + 30 t (EE measures)
Cost of investment
73,005 € (for the PV plant with EPC) + EE measures: 11,300 € (solar thermal) + 41,815 € (biomass boiler) + 2,260 € (pumps) + 4,840 € (pipe insulation) + 22,990 € (lighting) + 21,900 € (monitoring system). Total investment for EE measures: 104,900 €
Payback period (estimated or real) ~ 6 years (for the PV plant) + 6,8 years (for EE measures)
Particular safeguards conditions Performance guarantee of the PV equipment during the EPC contract.
Details on monitoring and assessment Monitoring of the PV Plant and EE measures
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) 100 % ESCO (for PV Plant) + 100 % national funds for EE measures
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Mixed investment which will benefit the client in terms of energy savings and cost reduction
Best Practice criteria assessment Mixed of investment, EPC and services dealing with RES and EE
General comments PV plant with EPC contract and EE measures implementation without
37
BP31 SWIMMING POOL PT5
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Sport Facility
Type of contract (EPC/other) Implementation of EE measures
Service provider / facilitator Self Energy Engineering & Innovation
Location and climatic region Fiães - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Indoor swimming pool
Number of buildings and surface in m² 2,898 m²
Age of buildings N.A.
Description of the initial situation Sports Complex with indoor swimming pool, with common areas, bathrooms, sports halls, classrooms, technical areas, etc.
Main energy use Electricity and Natural gas
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Implementation of RES and EE measures
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year Confidential Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Pipe insulation + lighting + variable speed drivers + isothermal pool cover + solar thermal system + monitoring system
Energy savings guaranteed by contract
169,741 kWh/year (Isothermal pool cover) + 19,949 kWh/year (solar thermal system) + 4,892 kWh/year (lighting) + 2,355 kWh/year (variable speed drivers) + 32,251 kWh/year (pipe insulation) + 75,939 kWh/year (monitoring system)
Corresponding financial savings
6,000 €/year (isothermal pool cover) + 600 €/year (solar thermal system) + 405 €/year (lighting) + 195 €/year (variable speed drivers) + 970 €/year (pipe insulation) + 3,000 €/year (monitoring system). Total financial savings: 11,170 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total ~ 67 t
Cost of investment
43,500 € (Isothermal pool cover) + 10,000 € (solar thermal system) + 2,000 € (lighting) + 1,260 € (variable speed drivers) + 3,200 € (pipe insulation) + 23,000 € (monitoring system) Total cost of investment: 82,960 €
Payback period (estimated or real)
7 years (Isothermal pool cover) + 16 years (solar thermal system) + 5 years (lighting) + 6 years (variable speed drivers) + 3 years (pipe insulation) + 4 years (monitoring system). Total payback period: ~ 7 years
Particular safeguards conditions N.A.
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Financed by a National Fund
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients No investment by the Client and the Sport Complex will be the main beneficiary of the implementation of the measures
Best Practice criteria assessment Project implementation combining the installation of RES and EE measures dedicated to sport facilities
General comments No EPC in this project. Only implementation of RES and EE measures in order to reduce the consumption of the sport facility
38
BP32 HYPERMARKET PT6
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Hypermarket
Type of contract (EPC/other) Implementation of EE measures
Service provider / facilitator Energia Própria
Location and climatic region Santa Maria da Feira - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hypermarket
Number of buildings and surface in m² 10,532 m²
Age of buildings Built in 1998 - 17 years
Description of the initial situation Hypermarket with shopping gallery, toilets, technical areas, offices, kitchens, parking car, sales area, etc. Baseline 2.910.187 kWh/year (electrical consumption)
Main energy use Electricity, Natural gas and diesel
Energy use per m² before EPC (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Rationalizing the building's energy consumption by implementing energy efficiency measures and, consequently, the reduction of bills
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year N.A. N.A.
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Replacement of the existing lighting
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 231,877 kWh/year
Corresponding financial savings 19,939 €/year
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) ~ 83 t
Cost of investment 47,526 €
Payback period (estimated or real) ~ 2 years
Particular safeguards conditions N.A.
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) Potentially will be financed by a local/national fund
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Combination of local/national fund, with EE measure dedicated to the lighting system with sort payback, maintaining and ensuring the quality of system
Best Practice criteria assessment Short payback period
General comments Project is still in a study phase
39
BP33 HOSPITAL PT7
1. Introduction
Name of client Confidential
Segment of activity Health
Type of contract (EPC/other) Implementation of EE measures
Service provider / facilitator Energia Própria
Location and climatic region Lousada - Mediterranean
Other operators involved None
2. Facility and initial situation
Type of building Hospital
Number of buildings and surface in m² 3,420 m²
Age of buildings 2001 - 14 years
Description of the initial situation Hospital with rooms, technical areas, bathrooms, living rooms, office rooms, observation rooms and consultation, medical operation rooms, bar, changing rooms, common areas, isolation rooms, pharmacy, etc.
Main energy use Electricity and Propane Gas
Energy use per m² before intervention (if available) N.A.
3. Project Specifications
Describe the objective of the building owner Costs savings maintaining the operation of the building
Project Duration (in years) / Starting year Confidential Confidential
Sustainable Energy measures implemented Biomass boiler + lighting
Energy savings guaranteed by contract 106,628 kWh/year (lighting) + 450,635 kWh/year (biomass boiler)
Corresponding financial savings 8,060 €/year (lighting) + 21,982 €/year (biomass boiler)
CO2 emissions saved (estimations) Total: ~ 41 t
Cost of investment 11,956 € (lighting) + 128,571 € (biomass boiler)
Payback period (estimated or real) 1.5 years (lighting) + 6 years (biomass boiler)
Achieved savings (if already implemented) Confidential
Particular safeguards conditions N.A.
Details on monitoring and assessment N.A.
Financed provided by (100% ESCO, mix?) National Fund
4. Additional comments
Innovations and advantages for the clients Financing by a National Fund, ensuring the energy and costs savings for the client
Best Practice criteria assessment Combination with National Fund and simple EE measures with short payback
General comments Project is still in a study phase
40
top related