EMIS ReportDesign-Prelim 2020sep11 - Page 26



7
median savings at organizations with EIS after seven
years and 27 percent median savings at organizations
with FDD after five years, we do not have evidence
to attribute these longer-term savings solely or even
primarily to EMIS.
In addition to helping identify savings opportunities,
EMIS gives owners the ability to monitor their energy
savings progress over time, which is invaluable to
all energy saving efforts. Further, almost 80 percent
of organizations reported using their EMIS to inform
retrofit strategies at their facilities, including identifying
retrofits, sizing equipment, and verifying savings
(Figure 7, page 19).
3.3 EMIS Costs
With cost data from 37 organizations7 implementing
EIS and 35 organizations implementing FDD (or a
combination of EIS and FDD within a predominantly
FDD-focused tool), the sub-cohorts were large enough
to report energy savings separately for each EMIS
type. These 72 organizations encompassed 471 million
sq feet of gross floor area. The results for median
base cost and recurring cost per square foot are
presented in Figures 11 (next page) and 12 (page
27) by EMIS type, with a separate bar for each
organization. Most organizations participating in the
Campaign have large portfolios; therefore, the costs
normalized by floor area reflect these economies of
scale, with lower cost per square foot than would be
typically found for smaller scale implementations.
As stated in the methodology, the base cost includes
the software and installation costs, and the recurring
cost includes the annual software fees and any
MBCx service provider fees that were incurred. The
range of costs observed in the Campaign data reflects
the scope or depth of service provided with the
EMIS installation, as well as the variability in industry
pricing models.
3. SMART ENERGY ANALYTICS CAMPAIGN RESULTS
By the second year of installation, study
participants with EIS achieved a median annual energy
savings of 3 percent ($0.03/sq ft) and participants
with FDD tools achieved a median savings of 9 percent
($0.24/sq ft). Applying these savings across the
organizations participating in the Smart Energy
Analytics Campaign, annual savings are projected to
be 4.1 trillion Btu and $95 million once EMIS use is
established for all organizations. Further, these savings
are likely to increase in subsequent years as additional
opportunities are uncovered.
Second-year savings are emphasized, since in
many cases we found that the EMIS became better
utilized over time, as users gained experience with the
technology and established routine processes to act
upon findings. Taking action also can require a certain
amount of lead time purely for practical reasons.
Second-year savings
Ongoing EMIS use and
are therefore taken as a
operational integration
reliable representation
supports persistence of
of the benefits that
savings and increases in EMIS provide. As
savings over time
previously described,
these savings are not
attributed exclusively to the use of EMIS. However,
owners shared that it was essential to have the data
and analysis readily available from their EMIS to
enable savings from their overall energy management
program. Figure 8 reported the top energy saving
measures identified and implemented through use
of the EMIS; additional measures may also have
been implemented.
The results surfaced a three-fold increase in the
median savings achieved by users of EMIS with
FDD capabilities versus those with EIS capabilities.
This result stems from the nature of the software;
EIS provides big-picture trends in energy use
while FDD pinpoints faults at the equipment level.
Best practice implementation includes both EIS and
FDD capabilities.
Ongoing EMIS use and operational integration
supports persistence of savings and increases in
savings over time. After the second year, other
projects may be initiated, and portfolio or building-level
savings may increase due to the EMIS or due to
other efficiency projects. While we report 17 percent
Base cost
Among reporting organizations, the base cost per
square foot for installing and configuring FDD software
was five times that of EIS. There is significantly more
work required to integrate the BAS data into FDD
software than to integrate meter data into EIS software
EIS cost data were reported by 20 participants in the Campaign and 17 participants (Granderson et al. 2016).
Berkeley Lab | Proving the Business Case for Building Analytics
24





Powered by


Full screen Click to read
Paperturn flip book system
Search
Overview
Download as PDF
Print
Shopping cart
Full screen
Exit full screen